back-chain, post: 360029, member: 7900 wrote: Warning: a bunch of interpretation and a bit of soapbox follows.
So, your parcel was deeded out of a parent tract without a filed subdivision map ("severed"?).
This happened before regulation of subdivisions by the local authority in your area.
With the above "facts", you believe your parcel is "unrestricted".
Now the regulatory authority (guess: you've applied for some permit or subdivision for/ of your tract) asserts that the tract is not grandfathered because (in their opinion) the lot falls across a right-of-way line. For that reason, something is being severed after 2010 (at the r/w and, this means you aren't grandfathered and can't proceed with the desired action.
Tell them that the seller couldnt sell what they didn't own and you couldn't have bought something they couldn't sell. So regardless of "right" or "wrong deed closure,, it doesn't matter. You are grandfathered and you respectfully request to do what is a "by right" action on your part.
If they assert the r/w is in easement and you do own it (you should ?may? already have a good surveyor on board). Then convey everything, including the area in the r/w easement. Stand firm that the lot is unrestricted and you're doing what the law permits.
I only say stand firm because you believer this to be the case.
Good luck with it.
The 10.002 tract was Surveyed out of a Parent tract, within the 10.002 tract we found a 3.8 acre tract that was recorded in 1961. It met
the Counties 2010 Sub-Division Rules , this would mean, I could sell it separating from the 10.002.. When we had it Surveyed the 1961 metes and bounds ran 3.74 ft. outside the 10.002 ac. tract .. The County said the 3.8 was now a severed tract and did not meet the grandfathered (clause).
Michael harwell, post: 360031, member: 11340 wrote: Keith,
Here's my email ([email protected]) send me yours and I will forward you all the information... or anyone who can assist me in resolving this
costly error..
There was a Survey done 4 yrs. ago on the 10 acre tract for the previous Owners.. It reads on the Survey a (possible gap) along the North Property line.
From everything I've read, this sounds like it would be an easy one for a professional surveyor to answer. I don't know any who would want to do it for free, though.
Kent McMillan, post: 360035, member: 3 wrote: From everything I've read, this sounds like it would be an easy one for a professional surveyor to answer. I don't know any who would want to do it for free, though.
I guess I'm not familiar with Texas jargon, what is a severed tract?
Dave Karoly, post: 360037, member: 94 wrote: I guess I'm not familiar with Texas jargon, what is a severed tract?
It's really just a problem in determining whether a parcel is a legal lot or not. If it appears on a recorded subdivision plat, it's a legal lot. If the lot depends upon having been conveyed in its present shape prior to a cut-off date for being grandfathered, but was sold in pieces after that date without a plat having been approved and recorded, it's not a legal lot.
And if it's not already a legal lot, either by virtue of platting or grandfather status, then there are minimum lot size requirements that kick in, depending upon the nature of water and sewer service, to qualify for platting. If private well and on-site sewage facility, I believe the minimum size is 5.01 acres. If approved public water supply and on-site sewage facility, then 1.0 acre.
Update: I hired a Local Surveyor to Survey the tract with metes and bounds,they followed the 1961 Deed and established the tract did fall within our 10.002 tract.With this good News,I scheduled a meeting with the County Engineer.
After of over an Hour in meeting,he concluded he was not convinced...? Does a County Employee trump a Licensed Surveyor?
Quite frequently, yes.
Holy Cow, post: 369639, member: 50 wrote: Quite frequently, yes.
From my 35 yrs. a Contractor,my experience has been a Civil Engineer does not necessarily
Qualify him as being knowledgable in Surveying and definitely not elevations..As this Engineer.
Michael harwell, post: 369638, member: 11340 wrote: Update: I hired a Local Surveyor to Survey the tract with metes and bounds,they followed the 1961 Deed and established the tract did fall within our 10.002 tract.With this good News,I scheduled a meeting with the County Engineer.
After of over an Hour in meeting,he concluded he was not convinced...? Does a County Employee trump a Licensed Surveyor?
This doesn't sound like a survey matter at this point. Write a letter to the Engineer, County Commissioners, the County Attorney and copy your Attorney or have your Attorney prepare the letter. The County would be very foolish to risk litigation over 45 SF. This may cause them to at least give this matter some serious thought. The Judge trumps everybody in the end.
Michael harwell, post: 369638, member: 11340 wrote: Update: I hired a Local Surveyor to Survey the tract with metes and bounds,they followed the 1961 Deed and established the tract did fall within our 10.002 tract.With this good News,I scheduled a meeting with the County Engineer.
After of over an Hour in meeting,he concluded he was not convinced...? Does a County Employee trump a Licensed Surveyor?
Well, this is a problem that sometimes comes up. In a case where the local agency has "final say" on whether a particular document is approved/accepted (like a Certificate of Compliance or Parcel Map or whatever), the official at the local agency ends up with "final say" on a lot of things. And this has the potential to cause conflict when that official disagrees with another licensed professional. It allows the official to essentially "trump" any other surveyor (or engineer) in some matters, even if the official is incorrect.
Fortunately, I haven't ran into that very often around my parts. But it has happened before.
According to the most recent Survey,the tip (45s/f)is no longer an issue..The tract is inside the 10.02
Kent referred to as Keith.... :good::good::good: DAY. MADE.... (Welcome to the PLSS, brother...)
Thanks! All I need is a Licensed Surveyor to validate that the 1961 Deed with metes and bounds is one of the same as the recent Surveys I received
"Bureaucrats doing what they do best, making simple stuff implausible"
Metes and bounds descriptions should contain a clause similar and relating to "and being all the same property as conveyed and described in deed from Joe Smith to Jim Jones" to connect the sequence of owners and blatantly state what property it is and it can go so far as for example "being the same property known as Geographic ID No 08450002963 on the county tax roll".
Have the last surveyor make a revision to feed the troll acting as a County Employee.
I would tend to believe that this County Employee has some underlying deception in play. Being ignorant of the facts is not a good defense to hide behind.
0.02
I provided 2 Surveys of the tract both within the 10.02.The County Employee insisted they were severed.
[INDENT]I explained,that to severed a tract another one has to be created or established this was not the Case. Because the new Surveys show a smaller tract 3.3 not 3.8.It's because of a 10 foot mis-closure .This was all copied to the DA and County Commissioner. I explained,there is no wording in the 2010 sub-division rule about severance only that a tract had to be Deeded and Recorded pre 2010.You can make this stuff up.He has intimated all the Professional Surveyors in the area.[/INDENT]
On one of the Surveys,the Wording is 3.32
Called 3.8, with vol.and pg.
The other Survey says 3.32 part of the 3.8
with Vol and pg
I meet with the County Engineer and asked him if he was a structural Engineerhe said there's no such thing,he said he is a Civil Eng. There is no Licensed Surveyor representing the CountyHe has total jurisdiction in determining what he wants to do.He is uncontested ..
When we Purchased the 10.02 tract,there were 7 individual tracts all with size and Prop.I'd all being taxed by the Appraisal District for the past 75 years.He terminated their existance,saying they were abstracts.
He said,if I could find a tract within the 10.02 showing a Deed being Recorded pre 2010 he would acknowledge it.Thus,I found the 3.8 Deeded 1961.He is saying it is severed?
Michael harwell, post: 369709, member: 11340 wrote: I provided 2 Surveys of the tract both within the 10.02.The County Employee insisted they were severed.
[INDENT]I explained,that to severed a tract another one has to be created or established this was not the Case. Because the new Surveys show a smaller tract 3.3 not 3.8.It's because of a 10 foot mis-closure .This was all copied to the DA and County Commissioner. I explained,there is no wording in the 2010 sub-division rule about severance only that a tract had to be Deeded and Recorded pre 2010.You can make this stuff up.He has intimated all the Professional Surveyors in the area.[/INDENT]
I have not seen to many Surveyors intimated by a County Engineer.
I have 2 that will not sign an affidavit and one that is reluctant to get involved just saying.
Michael harwell, post: 369724, member: 11340 wrote: I have 2 that will not sign an affidavit and one that is reluctant to get involved just saying.
I would not sign the affidavit that is what my Survey stamp is for. I am signing the survey work I performed, what the boundary is.