I have been asked to create a new parcel that abuts an existing parcel that was created and commenced from a section corner location with two accepted monuments roughly 16' apart. One falls in the road centerline intersection, the other is 16' east and 5' south of said intersection. The off-centerline monument has the oldest tracts tied to it. Depending on which direction you are surveying from said corner, you hold the appropriate monument to match the surveys relative to the quarter you are working in. Said corner is also on a city limit line and going east out of town, the off-centerline monument hits GLO 1/2 mile distances within 0.4'. However, going into town and using the road CL monument, the measured 1/4 mile distance is 1317' +/- and hits the next road intersection. My new parcel will be coming into town, and I know using the CL monument will match the found pins on the parcel I'm abutting and tying in to; I am having a hard time disregarding the older monument that hits the out of town GLO distance and matches the oldest tracts. Do I hold the off-CL monument and follow the footsteps of the GLO surveyor/tracts or hold the CL mon. and follow the footsteps of the parcel I'm abutting/other surveys in town? The only experience I have with this situation came up EARLY on in my career before I really knew anything and that engineering firm chose to use both depending on direction of survey because the undertaking of changing subdivisions and surveys would be nearly impossible. I fully understand doing so and keeping the peace, but a judgement, case law, or personal experience addressing the issue would be appreciated.
Whatever you do, whichever one you choose, DOCUMENT it. Tell why you did it. ie, leave footsteps.?ÿ
If this multiple corner problem persists, for 500 yrs, with no resolution, your documentation, reasoning, and showing what you did, and why you did, will get you respect. No matter what.?ÿ
leave footprints.?ÿ
nate
Maybe I am misunderstanding your dilemma, but if you are creating a "new" parcel aren't you just tying it to these two section corners. Won't these corners only be a reference to your new parcel? And if so what is wrong with referencing both of them to your new parcel.
Yes, I will be tying it to the 1/4 1/4 section line and will pick one of the two in question. The section line is a road into town and using the off CL monument will move the R.O.W. lines south a few feet which misses all the existing monuments of the surveys on both sides of the road.?ÿ
Work from the one that has been used for the tracts in the area where you are working.
I am aware of such a case where it is a section corner but has two monuments about 30 feet apart.?ÿ Another case is a quarter corner with a difference between the two monuments of something on the order of 65-70 feet between them.?ÿ A third case is a quarter corner with about 30 feet between the two monuments.?ÿ All three are in different counties.
This is coming from a student. The tract is new and is being located by the adjoining parcels. Do what the adjoining parcels do. "When in Rome, do what the Romans do." Reference all monuments found and show record dimensions. On jobs we tend to show the records of the adjoining parcels as well as our parcel's record dimensions and lead-ins.
I'd reference both on the plat and describe them in the new description to something similar to this...
Commencing at a 1/2" iron pin referenced as being the northeast corner of Section X, Township X North, Range X East, recovered from beneath the asphalt at the centerline intersection of North 40 Road and West Levee Road, said 1/2" iron pin being 16.5' west and 5' north of a found 2" iron pipe that aligns with evidence collected from the west and south as being the accepted true NE corner of Section X established by the GLO survey of Township X North, Range X East dated August 1857; thence run....
Thank you all for the feedback!
This is easy, use the CL monument which if I understand what you are saying correctly best harmonizes with the existing surveys around the tract you are surveying.
Sometimes the ??wrong? answer is the ??right? answer.
@roostera OK now I understand. Like the others said use the CL monument because it is in harmony with the adjoiners.
This is easy
@kevin-hines I occasionally find myself using more passive-aggressive language...
Beginning at the long accepted corner of x, from which some dufus set a two-bit rebar (incorrectly and in the face of superior evidence) a bearing of....
In this neck of the woods, you follow many members of the "1320 Club" where the only resolution is crafty language in your description and on the Plat of Survey.?ÿ Unfortunately, my language is often more aggressive then passive-aggressive.?ÿ I have to re-read what I've written an hour or so after I've written something, as a self-check, wouldn't want to alienate a client or fellow surveyor....?ÿ
You can use the C/L monument without calling it the section corner. Just explain why.
