AI Assistant
Notifications
Clear all

OK, lets talk about the road C/L as a boundary

57 Posts
17 Users
0 Reactions
1,897 Views
jud
 jud
(@jud)
Posts: 1918
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

One way to look at is to think about where you would mark the property line if the road was vacated by the county. I think it is common that the use reverts back to the tract it was taken from, which in this case would be where surveyor "A" placed the line. Don't think that any adverse claims could be made against a public road and regardless of migration, unless new documents were recorded would there be justification the original ownership lines to be shifted.
jud


 
Posted : May 27, 2011 11:18 am
Glenn Breysacher
(@glenn-breysacher)
Posts: 775
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

OK, lets talk about the road C/L as a boundary - Glen

> Once the old road was widened and realigned it no longer would control for the centerline, which is the senior line.
>
> ......You cannot retrace what is not there anymore, so start from other monuments that tied into the original road and work the old road centerline (senior line) back into position.

Correct Paul.


 
Posted : May 27, 2011 12:27 pm
adamsurveyor
(@adamsurveyor)
Posts: 1476
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

> It depends upon what the Deed description says but if it calls to the road as a monument then the courses and distances would yield.

Agreed: but yield to what? I suggest that it would yield to where the road was at the time the description was written. If so, the bearings and distances published may be the best evidence as to where the road was at that time, if it has been improved and/or widened since then.


 
Posted : May 27, 2011 1:29 pm
dave-karoly
(@dave-karoly)
Posts: 11990
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

If someone surveyed the centerline of a dirt road then there is a little play in the centerline location. It's not like splitting curbs.


 
Posted : May 27, 2011 1:36 pm
Paul Plutae
(@paul-plutae)
Posts: 1261
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Dave and Adam

I think that you two may have missed a very informative post that Nate made yesterday...

road is like a river

>by Nate The Surveyor, Thursday, May 26, 2011, 15:41 (21 hours, 15 minutes ago) @ jud
>After survey A, the road was widened, and improved.
>N


 
Posted : May 27, 2011 1:59 pm

adamsurveyor
(@adamsurveyor)
Posts: 1476
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Dave and Adam

Paul,
I have a hard time accepting that the boundary line moves as the road gets improved. That sure seems like one school of thought.


 
Posted : May 27, 2011 2:41 pm
jud
 jud
(@jud)
Posts: 1918
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Dave and Adam

In this case looking at was said, It gets surveyed, and defined, by Surveyor A. Shows curves, and lots of data. Plat is in the courthouse. This survey DIVIDES the original parcel. , The divides the parcel with the C/L description, probably a ROW of a stated width was also noted, that does not move in this case even if the road does. To change the property line more needs to be done than road migration. I read the intent for the property line to be where the road C/L was located at the time of the division of the parent tract. Seldom are ROW's held in fee, when they are at least here it is usually because an owner deeds it to the county for road realignment work.
jud


 
Posted : May 27, 2011 2:58 pm
Paul Plutae
(@paul-plutae)
Posts: 1261
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Adam

> Paul,
> I have a hard time accepting that the boundary line moves as the road gets improved. That sure seems like one school of thought.

Yes..Surveyors B and C seem to think that way. Maybe they missed some research. Who else thinks that way?


 
Posted : May 27, 2011 3:41 pm
dave-karoly
(@dave-karoly)
Posts: 11990
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Adam

I have no particular axe to grind either way.

OR

It is what it is.


 
Posted : May 27, 2011 3:57 pm
adamsurveyor
(@adamsurveyor)
Posts: 1476
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Dave and Adam

Jud,
That's what I say (I agree with you). I don't think a property line moves every time a road does. A river is a natural monument and a different scenario.


 
Posted : May 28, 2011 9:40 am

dave-karoly
(@dave-karoly)
Posts: 11990
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Dave and Adam

I didn't miss anything. Nate said the road was widened and improved, he doesn't say the centerline moved.

My post is not meant to be a lengthy debating point.

Bearings and distances are fallible and Deeds are not holy writ.

Boundaries are 100% human made entities and I haven't found one yet that is perfectly described or perfectly established.

Nate, of course, will know best based on actually seeing the evidence in person. All I can do is blather on from here 🙂

I would suggest to Nate that once he makes his determination he put an explanatory note on his map explaining why he determined what he determined. It is possible that the original data did not accurately describe the location of the road and Nate is able to correct the original data then explain why he did what he did. Or Nate determines the original data is accurate but I think he should explain why the later data is not used.

For example, Dan Robinson published a link to this map:
ftp://ftp.geostor.arkansas.gov/Monthly_Plats/Pike/216805.pdf

It looks like perhaps the radius of 125' might possibly be in error, it should be longer. That is if the intent was to follow an existing road. But if the road was described then built later it appears that the road was built with too long a radius versus the plan. Another possibility is the road curve was lengthened to the maximum possible but still keeping the road inside the right-of-way. I can't say either way because I don't have enough information.


 
Posted : May 28, 2011 10:05 am
dave-karoly
(@dave-karoly)
Posts: 11990
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Dave and Adam

The general presumption is that roads don't move. This places the burden of proof on the theory that the road moved. The default is the road didn't move unless it can be convincingly proved otherwise.

Centerline data along an informal dirt road is not very convincing without monuments. It is expensive to move roads particularly in foothill type rural situations. Generally those roads are built to follow the terrain in the first place (cheaper) and the owners aren't out there on D-9s randomly moving the road around because the road is in the best spot for the terrain to begin with. Note I am talking about informal rural roads, not improved subdivision streets in hilly urban areas; that is a different story as far as evidence goes although the general principle is the same.

The thing is the evidence will tell the story or if it doesn't then the road didn't move.

We are talking about evidence, not rules or principles. A subdivision street generally has monuments and the ownerships are not tied to the road so much as the monuments in the road. If the road is realigned the local agency will have improvement plans on file. Evidence will be abundant as to whether the road moved or not. If the owners wanted their property lines to follow the new road they would've processed lot line adjustments through the local agency. But in the case of an informal dirt road in a rural area there won't necessarily be plans, if the road moved then the evidence will be things such as tree cutting or fresh cuts in the hillside or the testimony of the residents. If none of these things are present, it looks like the road has been where it is for a long time and all you have is some bearings and distances in a Deed then I would say they would not likely overcome the physical location of the road.


 
Posted : May 28, 2011 11:06 am
dave-karoly
(@dave-karoly)
Posts: 11990
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Kris

California has a lot of rural County Roads and State Highways which are just as you describe. These are rural roads that grew up from use. Sometimes the County has 19th century surveys which are very rough surveys of the centerline, no curves, just nearest quarter degree in bearing and chains in distances. You don't go out there and try to lay those out; the road is where it is.

If you ask Caltrans for the right-of-way map on a rural prescriptive highway (if they have one) you may receive a topographic map which shows the physical road, ditches and fences but no right-of-way lines like on a freeway map.

Believe it or not, there are parts of Los Angeles County that are just as rural as the most rural backwater in Arkansas.


 
Posted : May 28, 2011 11:26 am
dave-karoly
(@dave-karoly)
Posts: 11990
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Paul

the Surveyor gets $3 per day!


 
Posted : May 28, 2011 11:33 am
nate-the-surveyor
(@nate-the-surveyor)
Posts: 10538
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Dave and Adam

As an added explanation on the above posted plat, (Thanks for posting it) the PREVIOUS plat was done by me, yrs ago, and signed by dad. It is filed at the county, but not the state.

Maybe I can figure out how to post it later.

N


 
Posted : May 28, 2011 11:35 am

dave-karoly
(@dave-karoly)
Posts: 11990
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Dave and Adam

Dan Robinson posted the link, I just repeated it. I am assuming this is not the same case you posted about here (or maybe it is).


 
Posted : May 28, 2011 11:46 am
ddsm
 ddsm
(@ddsm)
Posts: 2222
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Nate

ftp://ftp.geostor.arkansas.gov/Monthly_Plats/Pike/179284.pdf

Nate,
I would like see the S.A. Pintado plat (Pike County Plat Book C, page 50)

DDSM


 
Posted : May 31, 2011 8:04 am
Page 3 / 3