OK - since the P&R bomb throwers have all been sent to Romper Room, let's stir things up about surveying.
Over the years there have been several discussions concerning the location of a corner. Specifically, the concept that once a surveyor sets a pin for a corner the location of that corner is fixed there once and forever. And that leads to the idea that a surveyor is perfect and never makes a mistake.
Now I'm not talking about an original GLO corner, I understand that. What I'm talking about is a modern subdivision.
So, for an example, let's consider a string of 10 lots that the plat says are 80' X 125' and this is where zoning regulations say that minimum lot size is 10,000 square feet and minimum lot width at frontage and setback is 80'.
For the sake of simplicity, the string of lots runs North/South. And we'll number the corners along the road 1 - 11 for sake of reference.
We are all in agreement that the pins we find are the original pins set by the surveyor (or employees) that signed the subdivision plat.
Here are the results of your field location:
Corners 1,2,6,10 & 11 agree with the plat both North/South with each other and are 125' from the rear corners.
Corner 3 is 1' to the West of plat location into the right-of-way of road. Can you take land from the road and say it is now part of lots?
Corner 4 is 1' to the North of plat location. This makes one lot wider, but now makes one lot is too narrow so it violates minimum lot width.
Corner 5 is 1' to the East of plat location thus making the road wider. But more importantly, it makes 2 lots too small and they violate minimum lot size.
Corner 7 is 0.2' to the West of plat location into the road right of way.
Corner 8 is 0.2' to the North of plat location.
Corner 9 is 0.2' to the East of plat location.
So where do you stand on these findings and how do you justify your position. In my case I'm not afraid to say that the surveyor made a mistake and I'll put corners where they belong. I do not believe a surveyor's mistake creates title.
And for those of you that will not correct the mistake, how do you deal with taking land from the road and having non-conforming lots?
Have at it guys and gals. I hope this gets interesting.
The time component is crucial in these situations. Also, reliance and occupation play a major role as well.
Not enough information.
Surveying isn't just a math problem.
As a wise man taught me, "Every situation is unique and requires investigation" So my answer, is there is not catch all answer. I would have to sit down and manipulate what I could. If I could determine that "intent" was to subdivide as shown on the plat, then that is probably what I would hang my hat on rather than the pins that have been set in the field (which sometimes grow legs)
Sometimes you cannot change the street width, to accommodate the pins. But, the pins, being original, DO determine the lot lines, BUT have to be moved BACK from the street, to or towards the street, to maintain correct street width. (Well, not "Moved" but a fresh new one set!)
🙂
N
Lawyer hat on. If all of your lots are 80 x 120 that makes them on paper 10000 sq ft exactly. Therefore, if you are dealing with actual acreage you have absolutely no room for error. As a surveyor you know there is always some error, and that a monument being even a hundredth short of position will result in the acreage being a small amount under 10000 sq ft. So technically won't at least 1/2 maybe more of the lots be non conforming? And, as our surveys become more accurate we may have additional lots that become nonconforming, or nonconforming lots that become conforming. (Of course this leads to a different discussion of how close is close enough to 10,000 sq. ft.) If we use the nominal acreage of the subdivision plat the minimum acreage is met. One of the definitions of nominal is " in aerospace & engineering - according to plan or design". Therefore, the logical and practical solution is to use the nominal acreage not actual acreage. Lawyer hat off.
Depending on how far out they are. Sometimes, I will call them existing and label a "Deed" distance and a "Survey" distance as well rather than setting another 1' away. Other times, I simply "trip" over the pin to get it in it's "correct" location. Like I said, every situation is different.
It has always been my contention that pin to pin surveying is only slightly above fence line surveying. The plat states what the surveyor intended to do, the pins only demonstrate his ability to do it.
Everybody makes mistakes and moving a property line to match pins which may or may not be set where intended, or may have been relocated by some person for whatever reason is a big one. I don't think I have ever done a survey where I wanted to "hold" every pin found.
Rules and procedures for land surveying are written and some will say they are law, but they can be a mistake too.
Lawyer, smowyer!!!
Who cares about the legal principles anyway??? I mean, surveying is about being an expert measurer and the best surveyor is always the one that can prove that those that went before them "can't measure for sour owl crap".
Remember, the true intent of the plat or deed is the EXACT measurements shown within the four corners, nothing more, nothing less. Title follows the measurements.
The subdivider intended the lots to be 80.0000000 ft by 125.0000000 ft. didn't he?
Didn't the buyers buy lots that are supposed to be 80.0000000 ft by 125.0000000 ft?
The street MUST have its stated width, not one ten thousandth of a foot more or less than record.
Surveying isn't difficult, heck there are even engineers that can survey. Bitter ole' man hat off.
OK Nate .....
so you're saying where the surveyor set the pin wrong the lot dimensions change. But how or what do you explain to your client that bought the lot that is now too narrow or too small that he can't get a building permit because it is a non-confroming lot. At least in my corner of the world a non-conforming lot can be unusable.
This one is easy
"I, Jack Chiles, hereby certify that this plat was prepared from a survey made on the ground by me or under my supervision and that all corners set by me are 3/4-inch iron rods with caps 36-inched long......"
So what came first? Well, the rods did. The original, undisturbed, rods hold over a plat every day and twice on Sunday. Lot Corner 3 defines the right-of-way, which is no longer 60-feet wide (or whatever) at that point. It is certainly a mess, but the rods always hold, since adverse possession, etc. has not been established, them there rods.
Value of the opinion = $0.02.
Original corners hold absolutely, until the cross the senior line (street right-of-way) even though it's a new subdivision. It should be held for line, and a new corner set at the intersection of the lines.
If one of those front corners that you found to be off has two water meters by it then the answer is obvious.
The water department took great care to keep the original marker and place it back half way between the meters after they finished their tap and plumbing. AND, they are probably real proud of themselves for being so considerate.
James
This one is easy
That survey "made on the ground" was of the boundary, the plat states that you intended to set the pins as shown on the plat. Making the certification that all the pins were set before they were actually set is a whole different issue.
For reference to our discussion:
Brown's Boundary Control and Legal Principles, Fourth Edition Chapter 12 "Monuments, as placed by the original surveyor of a subdivision, represent the true location of the lines as run by the original surveyor, and as such have prior rights over any informative call for angle, distance, or surface. Errors in the measurements of distance, angles, or surface occur, but the location of original monuments, if undisturbed, is certain and conclusive as to the original location of the lines run by the original surveyor. Calls on plats for distance, angles, or surface are informative terms to aid in the location of monuments; the monuments mark the lines as run." (Brown, Robillard, & Wilson, 1995)
Please don't "Trip" over monuments :-O even if your measurements are absolutely perfect (which they are not).
"The street MUST have its stated width, not one ten thousandth of a foot more or less than record.'
This is incorrect - if the street is created simultaneously with the lots then proration of excess and/or deficiency occurs across ALL of the parcels created by the subdivision plat.
I mostly agree with Kris Morgan.
The physical marks on the ground should constitute the survey as that is what will be used by property owners. There are many Kentucky cases indicating the importance of honoring the survey as ran on the ground.
However, there are some Kentucky cases that indicate holding the monument is not an inflexible rule.
I guess my answer would be the wishy-washy one of - it depends.
This one is easy
"...the plat states that you intended to set the pins as shown on the plat."
My plats don't! In conformance with hundreds of years of surveying practice and legal principles my plats/maps are records of what was done on the ground. I son't seal a plat/map until the field work is complete.
This one is easy
> My plats don't! In conformance with hundreds of years of surveying practice and legal principles my plats/maps are records of what was done on the ground. I son't seal a plat/map until the field work is complete.
Sadly, the most recent revisions to our standards of practice had to spell that out in black and white for some folks.
Everything is relative; thus, it depends on intent.
As the subdivision planner you first determined the outer boundaries of the tract to be subdivided. How perfectly did that go? Are you positive no one can challenge that solution? Then, within those limits, you design a plan....the intent of your work. Then you go to the field again and set monuments to represent the intent. This work will not be as perfect as your intent regardless of how carefully you attempt to do things. As time passes, and numerous freeze and thaw cycles occur as well as other natural processes, each monument will move slightly relative to all others. Meanwhile some may get "adjusted" by humans, a little or a lot. There are no perpetual cameras focused on each monument to record movement or lack thereof over eternity. Someday, someone with a different set of survey equipment, knowledge and skills will recover a few of the many monuments set and attempt to determine the intent of the original surveyor. That lucky person is YOU, the one reading this today. Your work will indicate differences from the intent of the original work. That is a guarantee. Does that change the intent of the original work? No.
First off, I doubt any city or town is going to deny a lot owner a right to build over a few square feet of lot area. The intent was there, so good enough for me.
Second, except in rare cases, I would not set any new pins, unless I thought the originals had been moved. How do you know the originals have been moved? You really don't. The only way to know if they have been disturbed is if they are a different kind of monument, or if one monument is clearly out of position by several feet.
Third, I draw up a plat that shows platted and measured. Its not like the city is going to come running up to you the next day and start yelling at you about how they lost a little bit or right of way. In most cases, they would never know the difference. There is a good chance the pins were put in, people used them for building improvements, and they should stand in their current locations.
4th, the only hard and fast rule of surveying is that there are no hard and fast rules.