A subdivision was created by my plat in the early 90's. The lots are 60' front by 100' deep. A home builder bought four of the 60' lots and wants to build spec homes, but they won't fit on a 60' lot. He asked me to assist him in getting these 4 lots changed into 3-80' wide lots which I did.
All the origional monuments are in so I only had to set four new monuments for the interior 80' lot. The six origional monunents for the interior 60' lots are either 20' or 40' away from these new corners.
Should the origional monuments that are not identifing a new lot corner be pulled to avoid any confusion or leave them in and show them on the new plat.
Leave and show on new plat..... my vote.
If they were set by someone else I'd probably leave them in, but if they were mine I'd pull them out. In either case, I'd document what I did on the public record that I'd file.
Here you would need to replat those 4 lots to get the underlying lot lines out of the picture. you couldn't do what you did to create 3 lots where there once was 4 without a replat. So until action is taken to vacate those 4 lots as platted, leave the monuments, they still represent the existing original plated lines. A Plat as I am using the term is a recorded document that has gone through Planning and the Approval process required by Statute, it is much more than what we used to do to subdivide property not needing new streets or other ROW's for utilities and access.
jud
Too true, and here in Oregon it's more likely to be the planning and approval process that is likely to cost as much or more than the actual field time, calculations, and drafting for the re-plat !
I probably wouldn't pull them, but I don't think that I'd be against it. They no longer mark the lot corners. I'd leave it to the client/landowner.
Lamon-
Absolutely pull them.
An Ontario case on the very point (almost) is Richmond Hill Furriers Ltd. v. Clarissa Developments Inc.
I don't have a link or your E-address to send it to you.
Cheers,
Derek
I'd pull them also. It must be easy going around here, you can sell parts of lots all day long with the deeds as long as you meet the setbacks.
Is there any possibility they may have been referred to in an adjoinder's deed or plat that was written after your original survey?
If you do that here, the owners still have that right, doing so would make both parts of that lot into non-conforming units of land. That can lead to problems down the road when the temporary win over Planning would not look so good. Any surveyor who is charged with knowing the law that might be involved in such divisions of land, may end up paying more than the lot is worth, and still not own it.
jud
Is there any possibility they may have been referred to in an adjoinder's deed or plat that was written after your original survey
The subdivision has over 75 lots with one long street. Block A on one side of the street and Block B on the other. Both adjacent deeds refer to a lot number on my origional plat. On the plat for the three lots I am showing the origional lot lines using a light dash line and in the title block I put everyone on notice lots 23,24,25 and 26 are now lots ?? ?? ?? so anyone will be able to follow what is going on.
Too true, and here in Oregon it's more likely to be the planning and approval process that is likely to cost as much or more than the actual field time, calculations, and drafting for the re-plat !
It took 30 minutes to fill out the application and 15 minutes at the P & Z meeting.
Things are easy here.
Not sure if you have new lots, a drawing with new intended ownership lines and additional monuments at their exteriors, yes. Each new unit being made up of all and or parts of the original underlying platted lots. Only way to keeps order in the chain of title.
jud
> ... here in Oregon .... the planning and approval process ... is likely to cost as much or more than the ... re-plat !
I think you are underestimating the planning and approval time.
I would pull them, noting that I had done so on the new plat.
Leave all found monuments
and show everything on the new drawing.
They are the original control and bear witness to anything done afterwards.
0.02
Leave Them
Several times I have surveyed large lots created by joining smaller filed map tracts. The original interior filed map corners were always in the correct positions oe at least close, while the exteriors got moved, removed and/or replaced for walls, driveways and or sidewalks. In one case it was two adjacent lots for two different owners and besides those lots got interiors on adjacent lots in both directions.
The best way to preserve them is set them below grade so only a surveyor would find them.
Paul in PA
> A subdivision was created by my plat in the early 90's. The lots are 60' front by 100' deep. A home builder bought four of the 60' lots and wants to build spec homes, but they won't fit on a 60' lot. He asked me to assist him in getting these 4 lots changed into 3-80' wide lots which I did.
>
> All the origional monuments are in so I only had to set four new monuments for the interior 80' lot. The six origional monunents for the interior 60' lots are either 20' or 40' away from these new corners.
>
> Should the origional monuments that are not identifing a new lot corner be pulled to avoid any confusion or leave them in and show them on the new plat.
Our policy is to pull them. There should be original corners at the boundary where the lots didn't change, so for a surveyor there is no mystery created by missing pins. On the other hand, leaving pins could create all sorts of problems.
In this state, at least, part of our mandate is to protect the public, and that is the basis of our reasoning.
I would have to say to leave them, some other surveyor may have located them for a use do the street.
just my 2cents
I would certainly not pull them. They are part of the record and are evidence. You never know when they may be the only evidence remaining of the original monumentation for several lots in either direction.
Echoing the sentiments of others, here you would have to get a boundary line adjustment approved by the planning board for something like this.
Echoing the sentiments of others, here you would have to get a boundary line adjustment approved by the planning board for something like this.
See my post above. It took 30 minutes to fill out the application and 15 minutes at the P & Z meeting.