Client owns Lot 4 and N1/2 Lot 5, Block 4 and I need to find or set the corners. I talked with the lady that owns Lot 6 and the S1/2 Lot 5, but didn't learn much. Lot 4 and most of Lot 5 have recently been scraped by the big yellow machines, so there is no occupation line on the ground. I made a search for monuments all down the west side of Block 7 and all lot corners of Block 4 and all corners of tracts to the south of Lot 4 and found monuments as shown. The monuments were set by at least 4 different surveyors over the years (none original), but all fit with each other and with the plat and with the improvements/occupation remarkably well. Within a tenth or two. I see no reason not to accept any of them as marking their respective corners. The only exception is the SE corner of the 77x140 tract which is about 2 feet too far east, but its northing fits the tract line nicely. This monument is the only one that has no cap, just a smooth bar possibly set by the landowner(s) at the end of a concrete wall.
So assuming this is just a math problem, how would you go about calculating the south corners of the N1/2 of Lot 5?
I have calculated it several different ways and they all come out pretty close, but I wonder what the collective mind here thinks is the best way to do it.
A few more details. Lots are nominally 50'x140' with 20' alleys and 60' streets. Block 7 and the street between Blocks 4 and 7 are part of a subdivision platted in 1902, and Block 4 is part of a subdivision platted in 1906 that refers to the 1902 subdivision and appears to be an extension of the same pattern. The exception is that Lots 6 and 7 have some excess and the tracts to the south are described by metes and bounds. The plat doesn't specifically say, but it looks like all angles are right angles except the south line of Lots 6 and 7 and the tracts to the south. Monuments and improvements validate that assumption.
?ÿ
but I wonder what the collective mind here thinks is the best way to do it.
I did not realize that was possible.
Go review a few thousand surveys, and tell me they have a "collective mind".
I'd trust cheech and chong to have a collective mind, for a few hours at a time, until they woke up!
Far out!
N
So the north-south coordinates are not significantly at issue.?ÿ The only question is whether to extend the lot lines from the?ÿ north to the SE corner of the half-lot versus putting it on line to the southern monument that doesn't seem to fit??ÿ With the monuments on the east side of the street fitting, it would seem appropriate to call that one off and disregard it.
I kind of go with @bill93 above.
And / Or, go find more evidence to the south of your survey.
What about those south block corners?
N
Bill93 is doing things correctly in my book.
It's a land boundary, so not a math problem.?ÿ You have retraced the street line, alley line, and lot 3 block 4 with a fair degree of certainty.?ÿ The intent of the plat is clear that lots 1-5 are 50 ft. with parallel lines, followed by some odd lots.?ÿ Offset the southerly line of lot 3, 75 ft. south, trim and/or extend result to street and alley lines.?ÿ The uncapped might hold as between the lots with the stone wall, but not the street line, but don't have to decide unless/until you survey one of those; for now it (and improvements built at or nearer time of original conveyances) corroborates the above solution according to your post.
The term 'half' sounds really neat until you try putting it on paper. There are any number of ways to do it. Your job is to try and figure out which one was intended. That gets tough when possession and monuments are gone, but that's what we do.
The deed research needs to extend back to parcel creation. You may find things started as 'the north 70 feet' or some such. These were often changed by title wizards during later transactions. Even without a clear discovery, you will find the original grantor. While you are at it pull original permits (if available). They often contain a copy of an old survey.
As was said above, boundaries are not math tests. They are evidence based investigations. Our conclusions should be professional opinions based on that evidence and founded in law.?ÿ
?ÿ
