RS and Monuments
Yes please. This city needs RS's done and monuments set like you wouldn't believe. Also (another request), if you don't find any CL monuments and have to establish them (by ties, or intersection, or improvements, or whatever), please set a monument at the established point.
Miguel
In this case, I would think that the buildings WILL represent the boundaries when it's all said and done.
We have a few cases like this in EVERY downtown area I've ever worked in. The blocks are either long or short depending on the buildings but angle relationship is generally spot on and so is street width, for the most part.
Ryan
> Yes please. This city needs RS's done and monuments set like you wouldn't believe. Also (another request), if you don't find any CL monuments and have to establish them (by ties, or intersection, or improvements, or whatever), please set a monument at the established point.
Ryan..I will do my best but centerline in this area is one of the biggest problems there is..
Some examples
DUELING CENTERLINES
5.74 difference
2.4 difference
That 2.4 foot one is directly related to the site. The street was supposed to be straight, no offset. It appears to not have a jog in the improvements south but that is still to be seen.
I don't see any fences. Isn't that y'all do it in the PLSS??
Foggy
I have one wood fence and one block wall..piece o cake, two lines already monumented and I have not even left the house 😛
Foggy
good thing it's not out here, I don't see any stone walls either! We wouldn't know what to do if we didn't have a stone wall with a drill hole in the base stone!
Your state law, either ss 321 or 322, will define the landowners rights.
Standard survey methods dictate recovery of all necessary physical evidence, especially occupation, then analysis, and then resolution with the land owner getting what he occupies and controls and the municipality getting what is left.
If there is a significan difference between record and recovered, be sure the record is changed to reflect the existing legal boundaries. If you won't furnish the correction to the record, who else can? Why leave a problem in place when you can get good money to provide a complete survey that resolves any problems?
Richard Schaut
> Yes, I see many monuments in place for evaluation, even some further out that could be used to reconstruct your area of interest. You seem to have existing street and many very old buildings to work with. Gather the building footprint data and street data and evaluate it. Bet you will find some order in that data you will have confidence in.
> jud
Me too. The first thing that caught my eye was the age of some of the buildings.
SJ
Ryan
Paul,
Why are the Parcel Map and the Field Book references redacted out?
SJ
Ryan
Unfortunately I know all too well. Good luck with this job. Post the results if you would.
Ryan.
nopey nope RS......not at all....marketable title would only occur after an action to quite title..... not some whimsy placed upon a map expressing te opinion of a land surveyor.....
Steven
> Why are the Parcel Map and the Field Book references redacted out?
>
> SJ
That was my weak attempt to disquise the area 😀
Occupation Surveying Sorry Ince
California law gives the adjoiner, (not some future surveyor or title insurer), 5 yrs to object to any trespass and, after that 5 yrs passes, no objection is allowed. Check ss 321 & 322 CA law.
Check the CA surveyors web site for the text of Curtis Brown's 1979 talk about the surveyor's liabilty to unwritten rights; he says, in part:
In my early writings, I generally advocated that surveyors should locate land boundaries in accordance with a written deed; all conveyances based upon unwritten rights should be referred to attorneys for resolution. Within recent years there have been cases, and one in particular, wherein surveyors have been held liable for failure to react to a change in ownership created by prolonged possession. The purpose of this paper is to re-examine what a surveyor should do in the event title has been altered by a legal transfer of title by prolonged possession.
No court action is allowed unless commenced by an entity who has standing to do so and, in the matter of land law, only the owner of adjoining property has that standing, not surveyors and certainly not title insurers.
Richard Schaut
"...and then resolution with the land owner getting what he occupies and controls and the municipality getting what is left."
Uh, no Schaut. Adverse possession or unwritten rights don't run against a municipality. While there are exceptions to every rule, this concept is well settled. If there are encroachments by the private property owner into municipal property, then a license agreement is called for. However, that also depends on how the municipality acquired their property, fee simple title or easement? If the private property owner is encroaching into public right-of-way that was acquired as an easement estate, then one must decide if the encroachment is interfering with the use and enjoyment of the right-of-way. If it isn't, then there is no problem. If the converse can be shown, then you get a license agreement. Much of this also depends on the language in the conveying instrument to the municipality.
Occupation Surveying Wrong Breysacher
Check CA law.
Surveyors are not unpaid, unauthorized enforcement officials for lax municipalities, and the law applies to the municipality as well as the adjoiner.
Richard Schaut
Occupation Surveying Wrong Breysacher
Well RS. In Okie municipalities get a pass on their being lax. The state and feds get the same pass. They are not expected to beat the bounds every year nor to check for encroachments as they may happen.
But when they do and they impact a project then the encroachments will get removed. If just found and they have no impact then often a use permit or other means will be invoked but the property lines will not change.
Adverse possession in WI
I believe what Richard meant to post was that in Wisconsin, statutes of limitation on adverse possession do run against the state and political subdivisions of the state. Naturally, he erroneously assumed that has to be the case everywhere else.
Delusions of Wisconsin Schaut?
Nopie Nopie Schaut...As much as you don't want to recognize the role of the surveyor here, you must realize that the surveyor must be cognizant of common law. Common law dictates dictates that possession does not run against the government, except in very, very limited circumstances. Therefore, the surveyor, by recognizing and applying these common law principles and case law, then conducts his survey accordingly and becomes an "unpaid, unauthorized enforcement officials for lax municipalities". That's about as simple as it gets.
Let's think about that logically. If, as a rule, adverse possession ran against the government, do you realize what chaos would ensue, with people trying to squat on government land knowing that there would be no way to possibly enforce eviction with the sheer numbers of people squatting? We wouldn't have any national parks, lakes, preserves, green spaces, etc. The government wouldn't get much done spending all their time policing their land.
BTW, why do you continue (like all of your other posts) to post one paper, by one man, from 1979, and try to foist it upon professional surveyors to get behind? One paper from one surveyor, common law it does not make. It's one man's opinion, not a lineage of case law built upon and recognized by competent courts of law.
When you recognize that you are on an island with your surveying ideology/hallucinations, that's when you'll have a real breakthrough.
Occupation Surveying Wrong Breysacher
I'm not going to take the bait and argue about CA ss 321-325 again today. I would just urge any CA surveyors to try to stay awake long enough to read all five sections and maybe research some of that "unreliable" case law before jumping on any old occupation line as a boundary.
Adverse possession in WI
Correct Kent, note my header. You beat me to it while I was typing my reply.
