A friend has a deed that calls ÛÏto the centerline of the roadÛ thence a brg/dist. The next 6 or 7 brg/dist combinations say ÛÏto a pointÛ. The 6 or 7 calls closely follow the road. My friendÛªs question is can he use the road as the boundary or do the brg/dist calls control.
My opinion was that the road becomes a natural monument by virtue of the call to the centerline and controls over the 6 or 7 brg/dist calls. I would think differently if the brg/dist calls didnÛªt closely follow the road. There are no departing the road calls.
What do you guys think? Anybody know of any similar case law?
I am BY curious about the deed. Are those 6-7 courses "by" the road or is the centerline of the road simply mentioned in that first course? Is there a plan that shows tie lines where some savvy attorney wrote a description and saved his client the trouble of hiring a surveyor? Are there older deeds that just called for the Road?
I'm sorry but I really don't know much more. I do know that there are no "by" calls. The centerline is only specifically tied to one brg/dist call but the following brg/dist calls closely follow the road.
I would view the bearing/distance wording as being representative of the apparent location of the road center line, but are only one person's interpretation as to where the road center line appears to be on the date of survey. The call to the center line controls even though it is practically impossible to nail that down with a micrometer.
This falls in line with the challenge of a call to the center of a ditch or very slowly meandering stream or a railroad track (especially once the rails have been removed). I suppose those ancient stone walls in New England would have this same difficulty. The mythical center line of the wall is the true boundary but there is no way to determine that specific location along every inch of the wall.
If the deed reads N45E 256.0' to the centerline of the road,
And the something along the lines of "thence along the centerline of the road the following courses and distances, S45E......."
It would then be a call for an artificial monument which takes control over the B/D
However, on the plat I would typically just hold/show the deed bearings/distances as long as they are close to the centerline of the road as I locate it to avoid confusion. If it really really differed then I would first look into why it is differing before just throwing new b/d on the lines.
Like someone said if the call is for the centerline of a stone wall, you cannot locate the centerline to the T at every inch. I locate the approx centerline and most of the time the B/D comes out very well along where I locate. But in a loose rough stone wall 2' wide plus or minus, I'm not going to make new bearings/distances to move a line over 6 inches here or there to meet my shots. Especially if the deed B/D match that in the deed of the adjoiner
If the B&Ds are generally along the C/L of the road, the present road C/L would appear to represent the intent of the deed. If there is a significant difference between the present C/L & the B&Ds, the road may have shifted location over time. This may be evident on the ground with an old roadbed. The definition of significant is subjective.
John1Minor2, post: 351879, member: 404 wrote: A friend has a deed that calls ÛÏto the centerline of the roadÛ thence a brg/dist. The next 6 or 7 brg/dist combinations say ÛÏto a pointÛ. The 6 or 7 calls closely follow the road. My friendÛªs question is can he use the road as the boundary or do the brg/dist calls control.
My opinion was that the road becomes a natural monument by virtue of the call to the centerline and controls over the 6 or 7 brg/dist calls. I would think differently if the brg/dist calls didnÛªt closely follow the road. There are no departing the road calls.What do you guys think? Anybody know of any similar case law?
If they fit the road that is there now, then why not mirror them and take away any perception of conflict? While the call to the road is a call to a monument, the B&D down the road, presumably, define the line and arbitrarily using the road over them COULD create a conflict.
I had this conversation with another surveyor about a month ago and he maintained that the road was the monument and as it moved, so did the line. I asked where the case law was that defined a road as a natural boundary? If the road moves, and you can replace the B&D, and they are senior in the creation, then wherever that line is should be located, and not the road. In the absence of that, then where ever the road is the line should be put.
Or, to say it another way, it depends.
Road alignments change, Brg/Dst's don't.
How many roads have you come across that EXACVTLY follow the centerline of the right-of-way?
Unless the centerline is physically monumented with pins or mag nails, you are in a definite "more or less" situation.
Unless you are paying to maintain and/or re-paving the road out of your own pocket, you do not really "own" half of the road.Proscriptive easements??
Assume the deed is correct. Set up an umbrella and card table and collect a toll for the use of your half of the road. You'll never have to work again if their is good volume along your road.
cptdent, post: 351895, member: 527 wrote: Road alignments change, Brg/Dst's don't.
How many roads have you come across that EXACVTLY follow the centerline of the right-of-way?
Unless the centerline is physically monumented with pins or mag nails, you are in a definite "more or less" situation.
Unless you are paying to maintain and/or re-paving the road out of your own pocket, you do not really "own" half of the road.Proscriptive easements??
Assume the deed is correct. Set up an umbrella and card table and collect a toll for the use of your half of the road. You'll never have to work again if their is good volume along your road.
By 'road' I think the r.o.w. is meant and not the actual paving. Or at least in my case....
I view this as a question of fact.
What monument controls the location of the boundary?
The Deed calls for the road then has bearings and distances which approximately follow the road. It isn't too much of a stretch to say the road is the intended boundary especially since it makes sense to use a road for a boundary and it fits the common law rule that properties extend to the centerline of the adjoining roads.
The contrary may be shown.
There has been case law that established a road as a 'natural ' monument since it was considered to be a permanent object by a judge. I can't fetch it for you but I aware that it exists.
Of course in this case it would be essential to research the intent of parties and the establishment of the bearings used on the description.
Dave Karoly, post: 351897, member: 94 wrote: I view this as a question of fact.
What monument controls the location of the boundary?
The Deed calls for the road then has bearings and distances which approximately follow the road. It isn't too much of a stretch to say the road is the intended boundary especially since it makes sense to use a road for a boundary and it fits the common law rule that properties extend to the centerline of the adjoining roads.
The contrary may be shown.
Unless the deed says, "with the meanders", then the B&D control.
Too many unknowns to be sure about anything. You need to know how the parcel was created, what are the calls to the deed on the other side of the road, I just can't say without more info.........
This has always bothered me.
In North Carolina, a road is considered a natural monument, like a creek.
Now we all know that creeks move and take the boundary line with them... over time and as a natural effect of accretion and avulsion. Roads creep around too, again over time, but by the actions of man. If a creek were re-located to accommodate a drainage improvement, a call to the creek would be null and void. You might be able to use some old aerials or even the plans for the drainage improvement to evidence where the creek was, but you wouldn't run to it's new location during a boundary retracement.
So, if a lane gets added to just one side of a road for a few miles, are you going to hold the new centerline of pavement? Bear in mind that many old boundaries don't mention a right of way, just the physical location of a road.
One thought might be that the bearing/distance call from a recoverable monument to the center of the road, at the time the line was laid on the ground, might just be best evidence you have as to where the road was at the time of the survey. In which case, the argument could be made that the bearing/distance trumps the call to the "natural" monument.
Kris Morgan, post: 351901, member: 29 wrote: Unless the deed says, "with the meanders", then the B&D control.
The California Courts have refused to apply the rules that rigidly.
If the Trial Court rules that the road controls and the case is appealed, one of the complaints on appeal might be the Judge added calls to the Deed in violation of the Parol Evidence Rule. The Appellate Courts have responded that we aren't adding calls to the Deed, we are just locating it on the ground.
The contrary may be shown.
If the call is to the centerline of the road it represents a time in the past. Roads get widened at chance times and it may be to one side or the other as ditches are widened or filled in for paving. The road crew may swerve to avoid a stone wall, a tree or trees.
Let us assume the current roadway centerline is several feet away from the property in question's deed line. You cannot automatically assume the property line has now moved. It cannot be by "use" or "adverse possession", because the lot owner has not possessed or had exclusive use. Wherever the road is, it is used and possessed by the public at large. It is not wrong to offset the centerline to show a right of way, but that is an acknowledged easement and not a fee line.
Here in Colonial Pennsylvania surveyors do not get upset when a described centerline crisscrosses the described centerline of the parcel across the roadway as long as the lines are within the right of way, no extra concern is given. The lines are in fact meanders and it was probably never intended to physically describe the road in detail. In reading ancient road returns the calls are always to angle points, even though, even with horse and buggy, there were actual curves along the road.
At the time of actual road abandonment, then one becomes concerned with senior lines and an absolute agreeable line is required, but that day seldom comes.
The problem mostly exists in states that pass laws ignoring "equity". Here in PA, statute says no matter what the deed says a right of way easement exists for a common road and fee title exists for limited access roads. This recognizes that part of the compensation for the taking of a right of way is access to and use of the road. Were a common road to be abandoned the municipality could not sell it in fee to the detriment of the adjoining landowners, as that would be a further taking from the landowners. The level of compensation for a limited access road far exceeds any amount offered, if at all, for a common road.
Paul in PA
Find out how the right of way was dedicated. If that matches your description - voila!
If not, you then compare the differences, calls to bounds on the remaining courses, adjust as necessary, and savor a retracement well done.
I agree with JB on this one. This also bothers me when someone says, the road is the boundary period... If the road is the monument no matter what, then why do we even bother with R/W deeds and maps.
Working with road R/W, we as surveyors, need to determine where the road was surveyed when the property was acquired and a remainder left to the private owner. Of course, as mentioned, sometimes the road as exists is all we have for evidence. But if we have maps, deeds, Bearing and distances, then find out where it was and make the best determination to protect the public.
Which came first? A boundary between two parcels could be where they placed the road. I would hold to the b& d "to a point" calls unless I could find a higher level of evidence to prove the road. Maybe look @ other parcel descriptions along the same road, and see if there is a pattern.
I don't think there is a pat answer to this question.
I can shed some light on these questions as I am the friend John mentioned.
An attorney asked me to survey the north line of his clients property. The south line of the adjoining deed reads the same. The question arose from the fact that the deeds reference the center of a 60' wide roadway, which is actually a 20' wide gravel driveway serving houses on both parcels. The deeds read "...to a point in the center of a 60 foot roadway; thence along said centerline (bearing and dist) to a point; thence (bearing and dist) to a point; thence (bearing and dist) to a point;...to the point of beginning." The reference to the centerline was only in that first course, and there was never a call that read leaving said centerline. The line closely follows the road, better in some areas than others, of course. Large trees and a bridge at one end indicate the road has not moved much, if at all, over time.
The problem came up because both deeds reference an easement 30' wide on the adjoining parcel, creating the 60' wide roadway. As others have mentioned, a road rarely follows the center of a right-of-way. But in this case, the center of the easement, may or may not be controlled by the center of the road. Hence the question.
For what it's worth, the attorney thinks the road only defines the first call, not the rest.
