I'm working on a survey and having trouble deciding between two interpretations to the point where I'm spending my weekend working on it.?ÿ What I am considering is the radical option of holding the description which has the beginning at a point 872.55 feet south of the 16th corner. Doing this would line up with the fences within a half foot or so and get 4.5' setback from the house to the property line at the closest point so its not a great fit but better than the other option.?ÿ The alternative is to ignore the beginning of the description and start from the nearest intersection (offsetting for the 30' ROW). This shifts everything ~1.5' south and now the fences are 2' off and only 3' setback.
I believe that I understand what is going on. While the legal descriptions of this property and the adjoining lots to the north as well as the adjoining plats all measure from the north side of the SW 1/4, the city built the roads at the subdivision lines of the section, making each distance slightly longer. Where 660 feet is called for the section breakdown equals 660.75. It seems for this area all of the surveys are accepting the city monuments, for the platted lots each lot gets a little bit extra.?ÿ
I have been able to determine that the original property was split into 4 parcels with similar description,?ÿ each parcel has the same house on it.?ÿ I went ahead and located all 4 houses when I was out there and can see how holding the descriptions has them all fitting on the lots with ~5' on the north side. I can infer that the original property was the south 264 of north 924. It all works mathematically
?ÿMy doubt is that I haven't found any other modern survey which has held the dimensions from the north line, I will be the first.?ÿ
Some background, the client is getting the survey because a developer is putting in townhouses on the neighbors property and their surveyor used the second option.?ÿ The developer tore out the existing fence and all of the trees which were along the property line. I originally didn't want the job but started chatting with the client and stupidly agreed to do it. It would be easy to agree with the other survey and say that it's a problem that needs to be resolved in court.
I think I know too much about this situation and also not enough to be certain?ÿ
Damned if you do and damned if you don't.?ÿ That is one of the hardest points for surveyors to grasp about our work.?ÿ We want things to be perfect and unchallengeable.?ÿ Too many times, that is impossible.?ÿ This is why you are arguing with yourself.?ÿ You want to provide the BEST AND CORRECT solution.
We, here, can offer you stories of similar instances but no definite solution.
Are you saying holding the Deed dimensions over the breakdown fits better?
@dave-karoly yes, it fits better. It helps me to write it out, my mind is made up now even though when I started writing the post I wasn't certain. The city monumented/built the street along the 1/5th line of the quarter section but the legal description describes the street shown on the plat to the east. It's a coincidence that the two are even close. But the platted lots have been surveyed from the monumented streets by many different surveys, they end up being a little bit larger than as platted. the platted lots are oriented n/s so 1-2' along the front or back lines vs these lots which or are e/w . The other surveyor started at the monumented street intersection. It could be that the city engineer assumed that the right of way was based off the subdivision in front of these lots when the legal description suggests otherwise.?ÿ It also could be that the ROW was never deeded so that doesn't help
I??m having trouble getting the picture but based on what you are saying it sounds like your solution harmonizes better with the possession lines. So I think you are correct. You have a distance in your deed which fits versus a centerline monument with no record connection to your deed other than maybe the other surveyors may find it more convenient.
If you were to agree with the other surveyor then there would be no dispute and the issue would be settled.
If you go ahead then this could be an expensive court battle for your client including your expert witness fees to persuade the court that you are correct. The developer next door could possibly agree to settle so that their project doesn??t get delayed by litigation.
I was out setting the corners for this project yesterday.?ÿ I may have started something and I don't know if it's going to work out for my client.?ÿ He is getting steam rolled by the developer who tore out the existing fence and cut down trees that were on my his side of the fence. I called the other surveyor mid week and let him know but that may have got the developer moving forward to have a fence built next week along the line per his survey.?ÿ
?ÿ
I wanted to agree with the other surveyor but their survey is lacking. The other survey puts the property line 2+ feet south of the fence but they failed to dimension the fence to the line, they did not set rebar/cap property corners (someone did set wood hubs), they did not locate my clients improvements which would be encroaching per their survey, they did not locate my clients house which would be less than 3' from the line, per their survey, they show the distance per the legal description but failed to measure from the existing monument. After ignoring the first call in the description they held all of the other distance calls (but not the bearings) and didn't consider the whole block and how the other properties would fit. They did a survey that doesn't work for the lot I am surveying.?ÿ When I considered the two choices it was clear, one is a smart logical survey, but the other choice, to agree with the other surveyor, I would have to make a survey that I would not agree with.?ÿ
?ÿ
I am going to record the survey first thing on Monday and go from there. My fear is that the contractor is going to put the fence up on the incorrect line and force this to go to court,?ÿ instead of negotiating a resolution.?ÿ?ÿ
@sean-r-m your client needs a real estate attorney pronto to put a stop to this.
yeah he had an attorney out yesterday also and he is writing a letter to the developer so hopefully they will listen to that.