I'm working through the agreement to solve problems with an existing subdivision, essentially a complete redo with some changes and additions, about 150 acres, 15 lots and common space. The problem has built up over time due to non- surveying, some bad surveying, aliquot descriptions, 1330 club "aliquot" descriptions, non maintenance of PLSS corners, and proportioning PLSS corners.
Here is the first three items of the client agreement prepared by an attorney/owner.
a. Review our recorded deeds and chain of title to the ********** property and compare the legal descriptions on those deeds with the existing fence lines so that we can identify and reconcile any differences.
b. Create legal descriptions, as needed, for us to use to create boundary agreements to resolve any fence line conflicts with our bordering neighbors. We are hoping to use the existing fence lines as our permanent boundaries.
c. Stake the exterior boundaries of the ********** once all boundary agreements (if any are needed) are signed and place permanent (easy to locate) stakes marking the same. Remove any past erroneous stakes.
This is basically the service a great many of my boundary clients need, resolve their virtual deeds to the established boundaries and solve their problems. In a way it's fence line surveying, what they want is what they already have and been living by for decades, the fences are the established boundaries, always have been. It's just pure application of their deeds and descriptions that is a problem. Working this kind of survey is my future.
Just make sure that the exterior boundary is OK with all the adjoiners.
I do a lot of fence line surveying, but all of mine is before the fence is in place!
LRDay, post: 340640, member: 571 wrote: Remove any past erroneous stakes.
That is the part I would have an issue with.
Or they are existing, made of stone, we call them walls, they have variable width, and have been in place for 200+ years.
vern, post: 340647, member: 3436 wrote: That is the part I would have an issue with.
Living in a recording State makes this less worrisome. We often track each other down and work through issues. Sometimes we end up removing 'erroneous markers'...
You might consider reviewing http://legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2001/H0163.html&apos ;">House Bill 163.
I seriously doubt the Board would attempt to discipline someone for removing an incorrectly set monument, especially with the permission of the person who set it. This change was pursued to address folks destroying marks.
As a land owner, I'd be pissed if I relied upon a corner set in good faith..years go by...a new neighbor has a problem with the location of a buried waterline I constructed while relying upon said corner...A new survey is performed to settle the matter...I walk over to where the corner used to be and kick around in the duff to show the surveyor the corner I relied upon...SURPRIZE the corner has long since been removed by either the surveyor who made the mistake or another surveyor working in concert with the erroneous surveyor.
This could be especially problematic in non-recording states if the surveyor does not share the survey results with all potential adjoining land owners.
Should be some sort of public record involved if corners are going to be pulled.
The removal of erroneous markers is something the client wants, not something I proposed.
I suppose It has sparked some comments here.
I don't believe that just because a licensed surveyor sets a marker that it is some sacred cow. A monument a surveyor does not make. It's the property owners that make and establish corners. If a landowner hires a surveyor to mark off new boundaries in his land, and then he sells his land based upon these markers, then yes they are monuments and/or corners and gain the status of a monument. Did the surveyor thru his license make these monuments, I say no ÛÒ the landowner(s) did through their actions and division of the land.
Now lets look at retracement surveying where a surveyor is tasked to retraced some previous boundary. The surveyor is supposed to find the original boundary and it's monuments or more properly find the boundaries. Most of the old deeds I deal with don't even mention any monuments just distances and bearings around a parcel. How do you find what isn't referenced to in the document. How can a surveyor set a new marker that is legally the corner? I say you can't, but if the markers set are adopted and used by the landowners, over time and via the law these markers may become corners/monuments with legal status. The landowners do it not license of the surveyor. In Utah even the original markers will lose their control as the boundary if the landowners don't use them and treat some other physical object as the boundary for a long period of time (20 years or more).
I'm not really concerned about the clients request, the only erroneous markers I expect will be ones previously set in error for their subdivision, my record of survey of the boundary and their final agreed too boundary will be filed at the county, I'll probably note any erroneous makers that do get removed (a filed location of where they where ÛÒ just in case). They want the redo plat completely remonumented and all the original makers replaced and the documents required to make it stick will be recorded. They don't want any of the old stuff to remain. A clean new start.
I worked on this a couple of years ago and located a blunder that placed the whole thing about 75 feet from where the record plat has it. Once I got onto it I started digging up almost every marker many of which the lot owners had no knowledge. No houses are affected but some roads are not wholly in the easements. I consider the markers to be the lot corners, even 75 feet at odds with the record. The big problem is they bought a stip on one side of the project to get back to the fence, which they already owned. Then they overlapped 75 feet into the adjoiner on the other side and fenced it off, which they ended up buying when the adjoiner put up a fuss due to the overlap into his land.
So they have decided to correct it to their liking and they want the old stuff removed when we are done. I don't really have any problem with it. The old corners won't be the corners anymore and shouldn't remain as a source of confusion. It can be a lot easier to relocate a boundary than move a road or a fence. They want the fences they have built and honored be be the boundaries ÛÒ makes perfect sense to me! It's not really the established boundaries that is the problem, it's the screwed up record!
If it's property owners that make and establish the corners, then why do we need licensed land surveyors?
J. T. Strickland, post: 340745, member: 246 wrote: If it's property owners that make and establish the corners, then why do we need licensed land surveyors?
In a new subdivision of land, it is the surveyors job to assist the landowners in creating the boundaries - we can't do it for them. In a retracement survey, it is our job to find their established boundaries, as we are supposed to be the experts that understand how boundaries are established.
This Court held in Campbell v. Weisbrod, 73 Idaho 82, 245 P.2d 1052 (1952), that:
Where the seller and the buyer go upon the land and there agree upon and mark the boundary between the part to be conveyed and the part to be retained by the seller, the line thus fixed controls the courses and distances set out in the deed executed to effectuate the division agreed upon.
73 Idaho at 89, 245 P.2d at 1057. And, as we further ruled in Paurley v. Harris, 75 Idaho 112, 268 P.2d 351 (1954), "such an agreed boundary would also be binding upon a successor in interest of the seller, who purchased with notice of the agreement." 75 Idaho at 117, 268 P.2d at 353.
I agree that occupation and acquiesced boundary lines are sometimes ignored by surveyors. We're hardwired to ignore possible evidence that doesn't fit with the scheme we believe we're retracing. I can't count how many times I've been hired to survey a piece of property and eventually wound up disturbing a wonderful harmony among the property owners that had existed for a good long time.
How we handle such conditions is truly a "case-by-case" factor. And as I stated, occupation and acquiesced boundary lines should probably be a little higher on the "order of calls" to which we all attempt to adhere.
Monument removal? It is not that uncommon historically. Almost every "resurvey", dependent or independent, of record by the GLO, USGS or BLM I have worked off of has either ignored or obliterated one or more of the existing corners. I realize resurveying in a populated area of "entrymen" is a completely different horse than a lawful cadastral survey by an authorized agency, but our theory on both is the same....Something that possibly could be considered or weighed case-by-case with owners' consultation.