I'm going to ask an unfair question.... how close is close enough? Suppose you have a line described by a 200+ yr old deed ... courses and/or distances here and there appear to be missing. Evidence on the ground (in this case a roadway) appears to very generally follow the description... some places right on the button and other places up to hundreds of feet and/or 10 degrees different from the roadway today. Do you hold the width described for several miles regardless of how far off the description varies or only where it is close?
Is this a public road, or just some driveway?
Does the description call to the roadway? Did you research all of the adjoiners' properties, and are there any property descriptions that would fit between your subject property and the road?
My presumption based on what you said in your post, is that the road and the boundary you are resurveying have a common boundary line. The call, or at least the implied call to the roadway right-of-way would mean that the roadway has senior status to me. The fact that courses "here and there" appear to be missing also buttresses the need to conform to the adjoiners' deeds. all the boundary lines are against other boundaries of sorts and you need to resolve the ambiguities in the differences in the deeds and the ownership evidence in the field.
Have you checked the adjoining descriptions?
Are there any other answers?
Are the other local descriptions just as messed up?
It all depends.
My CYA statement is in my report of survey, where I tell WHAT I DID so that others are sort of warned, and told where the assumptions are.
N
Yes, we need more info. But this is a great example of what Nate posted yesterday,
"
1.) By the book surveying. ie, Record Title. ie, Deed Staking. Literally. The deed on the ground.
2.) Freedom for a professional surveyor, to yield to found monumentation, especially old monumentation, even if it does not fit the deeds.
A surveyor is literally what connects #1 and #2 above. And, it is HIS interpretation, and methods, that determine which end of the spectrum he is at, or somewhere in the middle. That is what a surveyor is.
N
How close is close enough? Can you stand atop the rod you just set and EASILY see the actual corner marker that your rodman just stumbled over?? If so, you're good to go. :-X
> I'm going to ask an unfair question.... how close is close enough?
When you start out by asking the wrong question, you can't expect much other than a wrong answer. The answer will never have anything to do with "how close" or "too far." Neither should the question.
Go back to the fundamentals. What is the right of way? Fee or Easement? How was the right of way created? Written description; dedication by plat; prescriptive use? And, Where is the right of way? Has its location been established on the ground through representation, mutual acceptance and reliance? Once you've reasoned your way through that analysis, you'll have your answer to exactly how wide it is and whether it varies in width or not.
JBS
It is an "unfair" question."
I once accepted a monument that was ± 145' "out of position." It was called for in the deed description and it was in its original location (parole evidence from the surveyor who set it.) The title agent, attorney for the purchaser, and attorney for the lender all agreed with me.
The calls in the description were in error...
Half a gnat's patutie is good enough.
Do you not think that if it could have been said, it would have been said!
Many years ago!!
OK - its a road. So we have two seperate and distinct survey descriptions (prior to 1800) establishing a roadway. One description calls for a 66ft wide R.O.W. The other (and later) for a 99 ft R.O.W. Around the 1930's the EXISTING ROADWAY on the ground is surveyed and 24.75ft either side of the centerline is shown by statute to be the R.O.W. For all practical purposes the 1930 centerline and the current centerline of the travelled way are the same.
Portions of the 66ft, 99ft, 1930 survey, and the current roadway on the ground run on top of one another... sometimes 2 of the 3 agree and so on. Other parts very greatly (100's of feet and/or 10+ degrees). It is my position that where the existing road follows it is obviously in the wide ROW. It is also my position that when you have to add several distances to a description and adjust angles to such a great degree (pun intended) to make it fit the existing conditions on the ground that you are no longer following the original description. In short where it varies to such a great extent, I feel you should use the width that most closely fits the ground. Not to assume that the intent was to survey a 99ft wide strip centered on the existing road.
Depends upon the wording of the descriptions, depends on whether the road has been moved since either of the descriptions.
Do the descriptions call for the road? Do they call for a survey? Do they call for an alignment "as staked"? Whether or not they call for a survey, was there a survey performed in connection with either of the RW deeds? Did a road exist when the descriptions were written? Do the descriptions reference any other documents?
These are the questions you need to ask yourself and then find the answers to. You are asking us a location question and you should be figuring out what the boundary is. The bearings & distances, and how close or distant you are finding the existing road don't mean much until you have determined what the controlling elements in the descriptions are.
What does the County claim?
County Surveyors have the benefit of being involved in resolving these right of way issues over and over.
Many questions probably remain unanswered.
The construction of a road back in the day consisted only of clearing brush and boulders. Typically there was a route survey performed which was presented to the commissioners. Then it was constructed (in an alignment better suited for travel). The road would move back and forth due to ground conditions. I could envision a lazy surveyor simply reciting the original route description, which would neither match the as constructed alignment nor the current location. "Modern" improvement projects probably changed the alignment slightly to confirm to design standards.....on and on. Not a unique situation.
You need to answer some of the questions asked.
It sounds like you don't know how wide the road is. (1 chain, 1.5 chains, or 3/4 chains.) I am not sure what is meant by "by statute". Is there a statute stating that 49.5 feet is the width of the roads? Was the roadway acquired by a fee-simple acquisition? If it is a corridor for roadway purposes it is most likely an easement, and the adjoiners possibly own to the center of the road corridor with the road being an encumbrance across their land. (I say possibly, but the adjoiner property could be to one place, and the road easment centerline might not be along the same property boundary).
Regardless, and with the lack of more information, if there are no properties between your subject property and the roadway, I think your primary goal would be to determine where that fee-simple corridor, or that right-of-way easement, is and your subject property would be "along" it. Again, are there calls to the road on the description? Do you want to post a copy of the description?
I think you need to do more research. Depends on where you are though. In NY I would be suspecting that you have an old turnpike. These mostly went bankrupt and title is "presumed" to lie with the state. The 1930 survey would determine the boundary of town or county maintanence responsibility maybe, but the state might own a full 99 feet wide per the turnpike description.
:woot:
