I have a re-CSM of a 5 acre hand-drafted CSM in the (rural township) PLSS country.
It was done in the 1970s, times were different then, especially around here. More casual.
The 2 lots are bounded on the east by a section line.
The road ROW is clearly represented by dimensioning 33' on either side of the section line, which is within a few feet of the existing road pavement. On the legal description on page 2, it says "Also subject to a public right of way over the east thirty three feet and the south 8.25 feet thereof."
However, on the lots themselves, there is an iron clearly dimensioned at 35.00 feet from the east (section) line. It shows up twice, both top and bottom of the lot. There is no note to explain the discrepancy of 2 feet, but the irons are drawn outside the 33' line. The labeled total of the "road easement" is 66', 33' each side of the section line.
All irons are found, and the ones by the road measure at 35' within a few tenths.
First, what is the meaning of the "35.00 feet" rather than 33.00 feet? I can't make it work with anything, other than that's the measurement off the section line, like I said.
Second issue:
A subsequent surveyor found better evidence for the SE section corner, and that moves it about 2.4 feet west. From the section line to the irons now is 32.24 feet.
So will the real road ROW please stand up? Is it at the 33' from the old section line, as established (I think) from the 1975 CSM? Or did it move against a recorded CSM of that vintage, consuming more of the client's lot and 33' from the new section line?
What do you guys think?
It sounds like the road corridor is a right-of-way easement. Could it be that the monument is an offset stake on the boundary line at an even distance from the centerline/section line?
If I were doing the boundary, I might set offsets to the property corner so I don't have to occupy or set a monument in the centerline of the road.
> First, what is the meaning of the "35.00 feet" rather than 33.00 feet? I can't make it work with anything, other than that's the measurement off the section line, like I said.
>
Generally, if there are no other issues, I would treat the 35' mon as a witness corner to both the 33' r/w line and the centerline/section line.
> Second issue:
> A subsequent surveyor found better evidence for the SE section corner, and that moves it about 2.4 feet west. From the section line to the irons now is 32.24 feet.
>
> So will the real road ROW please stand up? Is it at the 33' from the old section line, as established (I think) from the 1975 CSM? Or did it move against a recorded CSM of that vintage, consuming more of the client's lot and 33' from the new section line?
>
The road centerline and right of way has probably been established at the 1975 section line location.
What evidence of the original corner was found to move the corner a measly 2.4 ft?
If the section line is truley located to the west of the 1975 location, the best option may be to treat the 1975 location as the road centerline and the section line is where the best evidence says it is.
Portable/mobile corners ...... you just gotta luv 'em. Wouldn't it be great if we could cut the legs off all the corners and treat them with some chemical that would prevent them from growing new ones??????????
What is a CSM? Continuous Shuffling Machine?
What is the opinion of the agency responsible for the road?
EDIT: never mind I see it is a Wisconsin specific term for what we call a recorded survey.
What evidence of the original corner was found to move the corner a measly 2.4 ft?
Dug down and found the original stake; pretty conclusive. The older surveyor didn't do it. I can't argue with it the original post tip.
> It sounds like the road corridor is a right-of-way easement. Could it be that the monument is an offset stake on the boundary line at an even distance from the centerline/section line?
>
> If I were doing the boundary, I might set offsets to the property corner so I don't have to occupy or set a monument in the centerline of the road.
Yeah, I've done that, but there's no compelling reason I can see for him to have done so.
The main purpose of a drawing is to COMMUNICATE your information to others, and this one has been a failure in that regard.
> What is a CSM? Continuous Shuffling Machine?
>
> What is the opinion of the agency responsible for the road?
>
> EDIT: never mind I see it is a Wisconsin specific term for what we call a recorded survey.
Certified Survey Map.
It's a formalized subdivision of a parcel subject to review by authorities ( a mini-plat). It imparts color of title in 7 years under Wisconsin's law regarding adverse possession.
What does the opposite apparent ROW line indicate? The ROW C/L may now be fixed even if the Section Line has now been proven to be elsewhere. The 35 feet thing probably originated from someone who knew nothing about chains and the 33 feet had to be an error in their mind, so now it's in the record to ignore, unless there is a deed or easement 2 feet wide found to support that number. The Section line is where it has now been discovered to be and the ROW C/L is somewhere else. The ROW line will be 33 feet from the original C/L. How many tracts does this effect? If not many, maybe there can be an agreement made that the RD C/L is common with the newly discover Section line, otherwise on one side useful lands will be lost and the other will be a gain. Those are the possibilities I would be looking at, but you are there.
jud
Doesnt Wisconsin have a statute that declares all right of way at 66' total? Isnt it 88.25? I do believe that it only applies when there is no other record to be found though.
It is unclear to me from the post if this survey was for new parcels or a retracement. Is it possible the irons were found?
Yes, we do have such a statute, but it's not that simple.
Not all roads were laid at 4 rods; some were 3, and a few were 2. Most over 100 years ago.
In urban areas, it makes sense, but through the woods as an old wagon track, it makes less sense. I get a lot of complaining about that from clients.
New parcels from 1975 parcels, irons were found.
If the 33' ROW predates the 1975 survey then it is probably tied to the original section line as evidenced by the original post. If it was created by the 1975 survey or after then that answer could change.
The irons at 35' just mark the sidelines and not the ROW as indicated on the map. Maybe the 1975 surveyor wasn't sure he had the ROW in the right place so he wanted to be sure to be outside of it.
The irons FD in 75 seem fairly well related to the 33 ft offset from section line using the older corner monument. I don't see a good reason not to accept them as monumenting the ROW.
Except the surveyor clearly marked the road ROW at 33' from the Section line, and then dimensioned the irons at 35.00 feet.
It can't be both.
Agreed - it isn't both. The point being that if those irons were marking the ROW when the 1975 surveyor arrived and no one has relied on the 1975 33 ft offset since, the irons still mark the ROW. The fact that the irons are noted to be outside that ROW in 1975 is one part of evidence. The irons preceding the survey is another part of evidence. The old section corner monument that more closely agree with the irons is more evidence. Weigh all the evidence and determine the ROW that is supported by the best evidence.
The 1975 surveyor set the irons. There were no irons prior to that.
He is the one that is responsible for the confusion. There are no fences.
Well, alrighty then. In my opinion the senior section corner monument controls the ROW. My opinion might change if there were more reliance on the 1975 corner but that does not seem to be the case since a following surveyor was drawn to the senior corner. I may still be confused however. It seems like old line means new to me and found means set.
Maybe just poor draftsmanship? Still makes for a sound decision making. Hard existing ground evidence is hard to dispute!