So I'm doing a survey for a large city tract, the original survey was done in the 40's and the owner sold two lots in the northeast block of a 9 square block subdivision, then he vacates all the streets and alleys. He has all the lots except the two sold ones which get 1/2 the street and alley that they abut against.
We are surveying the se block and along the west side a house is 1' into the vacated street, the original owner sold that lot without mention of the street, since he owned everything he kept the street for himself and the deed to the large parcel includes the entire street, we are discussing this and trying to see if the encroaching house should have 1/2 the street. The title company says emphatically no! Because title transferred the street to the large tract more than 40 years ago the 40 year rule applies.
So I knew that the GIS had build dates for most houses and looking up they show 1918 for this house, 20 some years before the subdivision!! (how can a house that predates the subdivision be put into conflict?) They also mention an addition, then digging deeper into the GIS they not only have a floor plan but also show which portion was the addition, yeap it is the new part built in 2007 that is over the line. And looking at Google you can follow the old photos and see it appear. The GIS has pictures of all four sides of the house. Lots of data in there. Saves going through the building department records like I usually do. But, clearly someone dropped the ball on this one.
That's awesome. Nice that the GIS department is utilizing the abilities of the program. One thing I try to emphasize to people is that GIS is not a mapping program, it is a database that shows you where the data is located. The data is what makes the program useful.
A lot of towns and counties are not capturing this old data, a waste.
Thanks for sharing.
It would be interesting to know if the builder/owner in 2007 relied on a different survey for the addition construction, in which the surveyor assumed they were getting 1/2 of the vacated right of way, as would normally be the case. I would agree with the title company, though, that if both sides of the vacated right of way were owned by the same owner, then it would be their option to keep the entire right of way when they sell the opposite lot.
Well, further research shows the addition predates 2007 by quite a bit, research at the city building department will be necessary, the 2007 date must have been the discovery date, looking closer at grainy old photos show that the addition was there but covered by a large cottonwood which was removed around 2009.
Anyway, I have a survey by a local surveyor now that shows the same encroachment in the 1990's, so the building dept did not mess up, the addition has been there quite a while. On we go, see what more treasures are out there, but you sure don't stop research at the courthouse.;-)
There lies the largest danger of GIS - misuse or misinterpretation of the data.
There should be metadata for the field you are querying that would describe what the data represents and how it was collected and when it was collected.
Another big problem with GIS is that because people are so impressed by the massive volume of data, many decisions are made from behind a computer monitor rather than benefiting from actual field inspections or phone calls.
Good for you to investigate further.
