Hello, I started a new job and have to address existing mistakes...here's one that I could use a hand with....In 2008 a former surveyor set his control and calibrated at the 4 corners of a subdivision. He set centerline road monuments but never included them on the recorded plat. We found 3 of the 4 control. We checked in with the worst being out .06.....the roads have many curves....most of the monuments along the road were within tolerance but we found one that was .5 ft out and another close to that. The infrastructure is built and some of the lots are occupied, What would you recommend with the outliers? Any advice would be appreciated, Thanks,
Hold what you find.
original monuments of a subdivision are original, they can't be changed, if that's what we are talking about.
:poop: happens. Run with it.
Leave well enough alone.
rlshound, post: 324722, member: 6800 wrote: ...We checked in with the worst being out .06.....the roads have many curves....most of the monuments along the road were within tolerance but we found one that was .5 ft out and another close to that. ...
Last week I wrote of a story, as did others, of monuments being moved by excavators & landscapers to positions very close to, but not exactly at, their original positions. If somebody working in their garden had dug up this 1/2 foot monument and then later replaced it about where they thought it had been would you feel compelled to hold it as an original? Of course not. Can you say that didn't happen? It depends on the specific circumstances but I think that you could call those offenders "disturbed" and reset them. File records as the law of your state requires.
rlshound, post: 324722, member: 6800 wrote: .... The infrastructure is built and some of the lots are occupied, ...
If the lots adjacent to the offending monument has not yet been sold then I think you are free to make adjustments. Since you are not the platting surveyor a ROS should be filed. Strictly speaking, even if you were the platting surveyor you should still file because of the passage of time. But I would forgive you if you didn't.
MightyMoe, post: 324727, member: 700 wrote: original monuments of a subdivision are original, they can't be changed, if that's what we are talking about.
This particular case has a few things going that may conflict with that statement. If the monuments are short of or into a right of way, most places the crown will get the platted width.
If these rebar are on lots still owned by the developer they can be corrected. If they are against occupied lots the owners have the right to choose to have them adjusted to meet the plat.
I do agree found monuments should never be moved on a Surveyors whim, but the owners have a right to marketable title matching the evidence on the ground. If they choose to have the monument adjusted to match the record so be it..
thebionicman, post: 324752, member: 8136 wrote: This particular case has a few things going that may conflict with that statement. If the monuments are short of or into a right of way, most places the crown will get the platted width.
If these rebar are on lots still owned by the developer they can be corrected. If they are against occupied lots the owners have the right to choose to have them adjusted to meet the plat.
I do agree found monuments should never be moved on a Surveyors whim, but the owners have a right to marketable title matching the evidence on the ground. If they choose to have the monument adjusted to match the record so be it..
Once the plat is accepted and filed (at least in areas I work) new ownership is immediately activated, the public is usually given the right of ways, utility companies rights to easements,,,,,,,
At that point the plat is fixed to the monuments,presuming the monuments are set at the time of acceptance and called for on the plat. The county/city also signs the plat. This also makes them a party is accepting the survey and monuments. The monuments along the right of way will hold over any shown distance, the monuments will hold over bearing and distances along the lot line, the acreages and square footages become fixed and in place. Changing a lot corner from it's original position here would require a replat (if the original surveyor made a gross blunder, he can be held liable for the repalt, I've seen it happen).
Now if you can show it's moved/disturbed then sure, but otherwise don't move it, even if it makes the right of way width slightly smaller than shown.
The original surveyor can't do it, the developer can't do it without permission of each owner even if the lot hasn't sold.
I recently retraced a mile of DOT highway that started life as subdivisions, no where was the 90' wide right of way 90.00' except at a few points where they crossed over from slighty smaller that 90 say 89.78 to slightly larger say 90.35 everywhere else along the row the state did not get it's 90.00 feet. I also retraced a 1907 subdivision where most original iron pipes were recovered, again not one street had a 60.00' (some were 59.6') right of way, and believe me I lost no sleep over it, I'm going with the originals.
Not that it helps in older retracements but it's why I mark the lots on the caps, you will instantly know if the cap has been disturbed.
The original monument has 0 error there is no chi square test that can find any.
If we don't accept originals chaos will ensue.
thebionicman, post: 324752, member: 8136 wrote: This particular case has a few things going that may conflict with that statement. If the monuments are short of or into a right of way, most places the crown will get the platted width.
+1
In modern subdivisions, if there is no confusion whether the public entity (City, County, State) accepted the street dedications, their superior title will hold. A key anno on a subdivision map is the width allocated to the public streets, 60' will hold over all lot corner monuments allegedly intersecting the R/W. I consider them closing corners, accurate for the bearing of the lot line but the lot owner's domain ends 30' from the monumented C/L (however weakly it may be monumented). This is exactly the same issue concerning lot corners which are on the subdivision boundary; the developer cannot sell what he does not own, so all the back lot corners are closing corners against the superior subdivision boundary monuments.
It's not a trivial matter; as time passes the R/W owner inevitably widens the road facilities and pushes closer to the line, lot owners who trusted their front lot monuments build right up to them, a stink develops. Not pretty if there's 5 and 10 foot disagreements on older subdivisions (like 1920s coastal lots that have turned into multimillion dollar parcels, with decades old encroachments on a road that's physically dozens of feet from its original location).
My advice? Don't worry, be happy. "Adjusting" lot corners on a R/W line will not affect the location of the king's R/W, they only control the lot line's bearing between adjacent owners. Do not f**ck that up by moving monuments *unless* you can prove that monument is disturbed.
OTOH I've seen ancient dedicated road R/W in high rise downtown situations where because it was just useless dirt in 1880 turn into a situation because of judicial decisions over the decades turn into "Hotel 1" encroaching into the R/W by 5 feet getting that ground. So what was a 30' R/W is now 25' R/W; parking has become a bitch.
While I hold found monuments in high esteem, policies that force a new plat rather than allowing owners to correct an issue that impacts no other party seem over the top. Cluttering the record with a plat showing 2 lots as they are on an existing plat serves no purpose.
We absolutely should hold undisturbed original monuments of record. There are however times we can solve a problem for an owner or owners by correcting an obvious error. I wouldn't work anywhere that wasn't allowed.
I don't think anyone here will argue that original undisturbed monuments hold, but there is some wiggle room for the definition of original monuments. If the monuments is question were not shown on the play, there has been no public notice. In order for thereto hold I would want some pretty strong evidence that they were relied upon.
I think the "king gets his due" philosophymust vary by jurisdiction. It seems to apply everywhere when proportioning lost monuments, but I've never seen a ROW width as marked by original monuments not hold. Boundary lines are established where the original surveyor set them. Property owners have just as much right rely on the monuments on their front line as there back line. Are they expected to somehow know where there property lines are based on distant monuments marking a center line or some kind of average of distance based on monuments across the street?
Here everyone holds existing original monuments, including DOT.
With rights of way you have a few things to think about.
The courts will shy away from allowing adverse possession or acquiescence against the crown. Most operations of law that impact private owners are simply not available.
In cases where a holder of a right of way does agree to allow variation from record, we better be sure that actually have the authority to do so. It amazed me how many Surveyors will show the assertions of a Clerk as gospel in the face of clear records and ordinances.
The core ideas supporting our methods are founded in good logic. In the end the local laws will tell us what to do.
I've found both extremes in action. On newer subdivisions (1940-current) it seems the platted street right-of-way is fairly well respected. Not always. Most of the time. On anything older than that pretty much everything depends on where monuments have been set by various surveyors over the many decades. Many of these streets are really little more than low-traffic lanes. Most of the rest can function quite well with or without a few inches or a foot or two here and there.
It just seems to me that a route survey through a number of sequential conveyances isn't necessarily an apples-to-apples comparison to a subdivision plat accepted and filed for record. that's all.
R.J. Schneider, post: 324867, member: 409 wrote: It just seems to me that a route survey through a number of sequential conveyances isn't necessarily an apples-to-apples comparison to a subdivision plat accepted and filed for record. that's all.
You seem reticent, but in a nutshell how are they different? I've got my own ideas but suspect they are wrong.
R.J. Schneider, post: 324867, member: 409 wrote: It just seems to me that a route survey through a number of sequential conveyances isn't necessarily an apples-to-apples comparison to a subdivision plat accepted and filed for record. that's all.
A route survey of an existing ROW is certinaly a completly different thing from a subdivision survey, its just a retracement. The orignal survey for a ROW should be held just like a subdivision survey. In fact, here the creation of a public ROW is by law a subdivision, and all subdivision requirments are applicable.
MightyMoe, post: 324727, member: 700 wrote: original monuments of a subdivision are original, they can't be changed, if that's what we are talking about.
I agree.
Mike Marks, post: 324871, member: 1108 wrote: You seem reticent, but in a nutshell how are they different? I've got my own ideas but suspect they are wrong.
reticent? yeah. In a nutshell?
Remove all the interior control and monumentation from either and try and recreate them. That should cover it.
rlshound, post: 324722, member: 6800 wrote: He set centerline road monuments but never included them on the recorded plat. Any advice would be appreciated, Thanks,
Depending on the State this work was done in you may be required to report this to the Board. If it isn't a state requirement, it should be. With that said you should at least call the surveyor in question and ask him about how this happened. I used to work under the assumption that all roads received there full platted designated width, but have since changed my thoughts on this, especially in newly platted subdivisions. Original monuments hold, if the pins set at the row happened to be set 58.8 feet apart....the city has 58.8 feet or right of way.
rlshound, post: 324722, member: 6800 wrote: Hello, I started a new job and have to address existing mistakes...here's one that I could use a hand with....In 2008 a former surveyor set his control and calibrated at the 4 corners of a subdivision. He set centerline road monuments but never included them on the recorded plat. We found 3 of the 4 control. We checked in with the worst being out .06.....the roads have many curves....most of the monuments along the road were within tolerance but we found one that was .5 ft out and another close to that. The infrastructure is built and some of the lots are occupied, What would you recommend with the outliers? Any advice would be appreciated, Thanks,
So, out of a ton of lots, you found two corners out? Well, lawnmowers are hell on them and you just may need to rehab them and go on to the next project.