Hello,
A friend asked me if I could plot a parcel of land based on the given description in the land title just to get an idea of the shape. While this should be easy, I don't come close to a closed result or an area matching the 13 Hectare area as described.
Some bearings are not clear, but I tried all combinations with no success (see photo). I was wondering if I could get another set of eyes to help interpret this?
Given the apparent lack of accuracy in the typing, as indicated by strikeovers and obvious uncorrected mistakes, it would not be surprising to find more than one numerical error. That makes it very difficult to have confidence in a reconstruction.
I tried some variations. I was encouraged to find that the closure was very near 100 meters, but the closure bearing is too differend from any side for that to explain it. If you assume two mistakes and change 215.19 to 115.19 and 564.11 to 554.11 the closure is 0.84 m, still too large, and I think the area is too small (not calculated carefully).
Another attempt is to change the 16-13 bearing to 6-13. That gives a closure of 1.6 m, which is too much, and the area may still be too big (not calculated carefully).
I think someone needs to acquire a copy of the plan G-21364, which may have a clearer depiction.
0.84m is better than 100m haha, but of course that's an assumption. I was looking around for some Philippine websites to see if there was any public parcel data like we often have US/Canada, but no luck.
I appreciate your efforts. Thanks
The good thing is that there is a reference to where the drawing can be found and hopefully they got that part correct.
I believe the deed is clear in that it does not include the closing course...........
Paul in PA
Paul in PA, post: 447877, member: 236 wrote: I believe the deed is clear in that it does not include the closing course...........
Paul in PA
Starts at 1 ends at 1, so it says.
It sucks but, try and hit all the surrounding deeds and see what is left in the middle
Doug Crawford, post: 447889, member: 9 wrote: Starts at 1 ends at 1, so it says.
Starts at 1,
goes on to N61-15E 107.44 m. to point 7,
N36-34E to point ?...... (probably 8)
...... m. to point 1
The course from 8 to 1 is missing, and it says along a stream, so the meanders may not be too precise.
Paul in PA
Paul in PA, post: 447912, member: 236 wrote: The course from 8 to 1 is missing,
I don't think so for two reasons.
-It lists the type of monument for 7 points.
-If you assume the values given are 7-8 and allow whatever it takes to close from 8 to 1, the area is far too big.
I think Paul is right, the last course is missing. Looks like it follows the creek to point 7 and then probably leaves the creek and follows a straight line back to point 1, which according to my interpretation of the bearings would yield a forced distance of 99.97 meters.
Barangay Agdao lists a current population of around 800 and GE doesn't show the barangay hall. I would say N15.891141 by E120.323606 is pretty close. The creek is plainly visible, going to see if I can plot it.
Here is my best guess.
My plot above yields 17+ hectares, obviously a lot bigger than the deed....
Paul in PA, post: 447912, member: 236 wrote: Starts at 1,
goes on to N61-15E 107.44 m. to point 7,
N36-34E to point ?...... (probably 8)
...... m. to point 1The course from 8 to 1 is missing, and it says along a stream, so the meanders may not be too precise.
Paul in PA
Look again. the carryover on second page is just transcription garbage carried over from first page, on first page deed makes a closing call from point 7 N 36-34 E 66.74 m to point 1, there is no point 8 the deed summery on page 2 confirms that. Plan G-21364 needs to be investigated as well as the ground monuments and improvements to find the bust. Some issues simply cant be solved from a chair.
Apparently there are 2 Barangays Agdao about 8 miles apart near Malasiqui. The one I mentioned above is the wrong one. The correct WGS lat/long is N15.918384, E120.457172.
I now think all of the calls are there. Possibly the first line is S 16-10 E which almost parallels the west line of N 16-13 W. This would plot at 1:95 yielding 13.3 Hectares. Only the recorded plan will clear it up.
A better closure and area result from keeping the bearing on line 1-2 and changing line 3-4 to be N 6-13 W. It still isn't good enough.
Kevin Davis, post: 447934, member: 6918 wrote: The correct WGS lat/long is N15.918384, E120.457172.
Can you find any lines near there that look like the sketch? None of the features seem to align near the right bearings.
