The "aerial photography" we have today is simply not near as accurate as in the past. Mapping from stereoscopic pairs of aerial photos tied to ground control and prepared on a stereo plotter is MUCH tighter.
I have read the claims about all of the new equipment and I tend to look at it with a jaded eye. The current" take a dime and the x,y, and z will hit the point within that tolerance."?ÿ is nothing but a salesman's pitch.
I see lidar and scanners used everyday where many quality control checks are not performed. "Make it look pretty".
When the day comes that the crews perform EVERY check for the required time frame, then we might get real results.
Every State I work in requires ambiguity in a boundary for an agreement to be valid. Until you gather and evaluate the evidence the existence of ambiguity is well, ambiguous.
While the lines at the property in question may be obliterated, railroads are best traced by surveying well beyond the subject parcel. I rarely use less than a mile, going further if the evidence warrants. With the tools we have today there is no reason not too.
The photogrammetry angle is intriguing, but I would proceed with caution. Unless you understand the math and science it's best to hire an actual photogrammetrist. Most of us have software that will 'align' the image but you are unlikely to get a result that can be supported mathematically. In short you can get great looking results with distortions in the 10s of feet.
As for the title companies, I use them as an easement research backup. Just like Surveyors the quality of work varies. How many of us like following one of our own who 'turns a blind eye' to an obvious issue? These things blow up and you don't want to be in the 'how deep are your pockets' line when they do. There is also the part of looking in the mirror...
Good luck, Tom?ÿ
While the lines at the property in question may be obliterated, railroads are best traced by surveying well beyond the subject parcel.
This.?ÿ
At this stage I'd be looking for any?ÿold surveys that tied into the railroad geometry (especially old highway plans),?ÿ retracing?ÿthose, tying them into my current project, and?ÿthen "backing" the RR ROW in to see how it looked. ?ÿ?ÿ?ÿ
"Can you have adverse possession against the railroad?"
?ÿ
It would depend on the form of the original grant. In the early days it was fee title, and and changed over the years to the point that it was only an easement.
And if you're in Oregon, there is at least one ORS that addresses this, https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/105.618
"A person may not acquire by adverse possession, as defined in ORS 105.620 (Acquiring title by adverse possession), property owned by a railroad or used for a railroad operation. [2007 c.440 ??1]"
Eli
?ÿ
In Maine, and in many other states I suspect,?ÿ unless you're an attorney, creating?ÿ "a document for the adjacent owners to sign that shows agreement of the boundary line..." would be practicing law without a license.
In Maine, and in many other states I suspect,?ÿ unless you're an attorney, creating?ÿ "a document for the adjacent owners to sign that shows agreement of the boundary line..." would be practicing law without a license.
Thanks Mighty Mo. I would love to learn more about these old maps and how to read them. Do you recommend any good books or web sites??ÿ
?ÿ
I usually start here, you may know someone locally that has gone to one of their seminars and kept the book. If not try contacting one of them, if they are still around.
Locally it's been very interesting to see how close the RR tracks are to the actual geometry shown on the drawings. Locating the CL will usually match the tangent data within a minute or less. The Val maps are for taxation, so they are interested in existing facilities. They are more of an azbuilt, as such they are not always the same as the creation document. And that document might well be a map filed with the RR that got transferred to the national archives in Virgina. You can contact them and they may be able to help also.
Mostly RR ROW curves are simple curves (but not always), the track itself will be spiral curve spiral, if for no other reason than?ÿthat the trains will force the track into a curve with easement transitions. Don't forget how surveys were done over a century ago, doubtful they are state plane bearings. ??ÿ
?ÿ
When I attended the Seminar, one thing that Charlie stated about measurements on Railroad Surveying, was that their measurements were on the slope and not horizontal, so forget State Plane Cornnuts. I think that he said the measurements also applied to their corner tie?ÿdistances also.
Charles,
Can you help me figure out the radius you came up with? I run through the formula and I get 50.1255. What step am I missing??ÿ
I have never computed a curve like this before and cannot find anything online help to learn. I used an online calculator and got 1910.08 feet radius for the original 3 degree curve.?ÿ
Thanks,
Dan
50/sine(d/2)?ÿ = L
where d=degree of curve
3?ø curve = radius of 1910.077501 ft.
3?ø12' curve = radius of 1790.725842 ft.?ÿ
Bear in mind that?ÿRailroad curve STATIONING is measured along a series of 100 ft. chords (and fractions thereof @ the PC & PT).
Loyal
Degree of Curve = 3?ø12'
?« Degree of Curve?ÿ= 1?ø36'
Sin 1?ø36' = 0.027921639
50 Divided by ?ÿ0.027921639 = 1790.725842 rounded to 2 decimal places = 1790.73'
As Loyal said, Railroads are based on?ÿchord length and not arc length, a 1?ø Railroad Curve subtends a chord of 100' where a Highway Curve subtends an arc of 100'.
Back in the old days in order to simlify calculations most curves were figured basing a 1?ø curve having a radius of 5730' for both?ÿRailroad and Highway Curves.?ÿSome of the older books on curves had tables that aided in performing the calculations for the curve
?ÿ
Thanks guys. I didn't have my trusty old HP48 GX. I was able to the math to work with this calculator. I'm going to have to go over the TI-85 manual to figure out why I was getting the wrong answer.?ÿ
Dan
Thanks for all the help and advise. I've learned a lot with this survey.
Last week I was not able to re-create the removed railroad that was described in the deed. On Friday I proposed, to the adjoining land owners, to create the new parcel with the south line along the existing cultivated field. The field has been farmed by the same family for the past 25 years. This boundary line would include a non-spiral curve. The southerly land owner thought they owned another 50' north from the edge of cultivated field because they believed the old railroad was centered on the berm which follows the crop line. After the meeting with the south land owner he pointed out some old bridge piles I did not see in the creek west of the parcel. This bridge was agreed upon as the remains of the old railroad. With this new discovery and the concrete culvert I found the week before I was able to re-create the removed railroad with a 3 degree curve as mention in earlier post. Both land owners wanted my to layout the boundary line as described in the deed.
Yesterday afternoon I laid out the south boundary line as described in the deed (all land south of northerly right of way line 50' perpendicular and parallel to the center line of railroad?ÿ (Removed)). The land owner to the south lost 8'-10' of cultivated land. Of course this did not sit well with the southern land owner.
I discussed with both land owners I can create parcel?ÿ that follows the occupied line (the cultivated field line) which I proposed last week before the Friday meeting. This line was agreed upon by both owners. I think adverse procession would be involved anyway.?ÿ
My question is, what document do I use to note the agreement between owners so I don't cloud the title??ÿ
Dan
Another thing, is soil compaction. RR uses ballast, and ballast compacts the soil.
It sounds difficult, but combine old photos, with a tractor, and 6" auger, and you are going to have quite a bit of info.
?ÿ
I discussed with both land owners I can create parcel?ÿ that follows the occupied line (the cultivated field line) which I proposed last week before the Friday meeting. This line was agreed upon by both owners. I think adverse procession would be involved anyway.?ÿ
My question is, what document do I use to note the agreement between owners so I don't cloud the title??ÿ
Dan
I'm not licensed in Iowa, but having a little spare time I browsed through the state statutes. There is a statute that specifically allows for boundary-line agreements. It doesn't give sample language, though, and it doesn't say who is allowed to draft this or other real-estate documents--
As Daniel Ralph and Cee Gee pointed out, it wouldn't be a good idea to draft a document if state law doesn't allow you to do so. It also would not be good to draft a document and then find out later that it wasn't legally correct.
You could talk to your own attorney and get advice on what should be done and who should do it. That could prevent a good deal of trouble.
If there's a mortgage on either or both of these parcels, the mortgage lender(s) would most likely have to sign off on the boundary agreement. It's possible to get that done, but sometimes a lender will refuse.
It can take a long time and many phone calls to get hold of the right person when dealing with mortgage lenders. Also, lenders will often pass mortgages around, so the original lender may not be the one to deal with.
?ÿ
?ÿ