When retracing a Right of Way conveyed via strip description, is it standard practice to recreate the center line alignment (based on best fitting the best available evidence) and offsetting the conveyed distance to the sidelines? It seems that many Department of Transportation agencies do not regard the early Right of Way monuments set as original monuments because they were either set by contractors who were non-surveyors or were simply set inaccurately. Does anyone have any pertinent case law regarding this best fitting procedure vs. holding the ROW and acceptable adjoiners' monuments? I am particularly interested in California case law, but am curious how said subject is handled in general.
Pertaining to the situation above, If the Right of Way monuments were set by the ROW agency's surveyors shortly after the ROW was conveyed, is their any reason said monuments' status would be elevated?
Thanks
*starts popcorn
Rankin_File, post: 439483, member: 101 wrote: *starts popcorn
Like any other retracement survey, it depends upon how well the monuments fit the plans.
BTW, it is good to locate r/w monuments way beyond the limits of the property being surveyed or segment of highway being checked.
HICALS, post: 439480, member: 6788 wrote: When retracing a Right of Way conveyed via strip description, is it standard practice to recreate the center line alignment (based on best fitting the best available evidence) and offsetting the conveyed distance to the sidelines? It seems that many Department of Transportation agencies do not regard the early Right of Way monuments set as original monuments because they were either set by contractors who were non-surveyors or were simply set inaccurately. Does anyone have any pertinent case law regarding this best fitting procedure vs. holding the ROW and acceptable adjoiners' monuments? I am particularly interested in California case law, but am curious how said subject is handled in general.
Pertaining to the situation above, If the Right of Way monuments were set by the ROW agency's surveyors shortly after the ROW was conveyed, is their any reason said monuments' status would be elevated?
Thanks
I think it would be case by case in California... every possible scenario has it's own fans, but Caltrans has the deep pockets.
at one time I did right of way work under contract for Caltrans. Every right of way officer seemed to have a different theory, and on the next project that same person would expound a different theory. Caltrans has the deep pockets.
I don't know of any case law, but these days I just kibitz and avoid facts.
PS: I am going out for popcorn, it seems we ran out last week. Kent! How you doing dude?
In Georgia you trust the location of R/W monuments at your own risk. They are good evidence that the right of way is "around here somewhere". Even the DOT only trusts them so far. "The biggest monument is the highway" is their belief. Sub-sub-subcontractors set the majority of the monuments somewhere in the vicinity of where they were staked.
Andy
Sometimes these kinds of questions beg the "it depends" response, but when talking about ROW Monuments, "it REALLY depends."
😉
"ROW" = "Right Or Wrong" WRT highway R/W monumentation. Just my opinion.
Loyal, post: 439508, member: 228 wrote: Sometimes these kinds of questions beg the "it depends" response, but when talking about ROW Monuments, "it REALLY depends."
😉
Loyal, post: 439508, member: 228 wrote: Sometimes these kinds of questions beg the "it depends" response, but when talking about ROW Monuments, "it REALLY depends."
😉
I had a feeling "it depends" might be the prevailing sentiment 🙂
Peter Ehlert, post: 439497, member: 60 wrote: Caltrans has the deep pockets.
An important point, unfortunately. On the positive side, monstrous bureaucracies often have a few reasonable individuals sprinkled in for flavoring. Identify one of those individuals through whom you can obtain an official response. I recommend framing your situation in such a manner that the path of least resistance for the bureaucrat is a "Concur" response. Then that letter stays in your file, or, if you're addressing some real ambiguity, is referenced in your plat notes.
Bureaucracy. Reasonable Individuals. Official Response.
You can often get 2 out of 3, except for the last two. That's just setting too many conditions on the problem.
I'm of the opinion, that, in Texas, the Type I ROW monument (standard 4' pyramidal 6"square base to 4" square top), marks the ROW, except in extreme cases. The reason I maintain this is that (A), they're everywhere across the state, (B) the highway department even call for them on some of the old maps, (C) it is common knowledge that they were set at the time of the construction.
Whether or not they were set by buzzard flopping a 90?ø off the base line and using a rag tape is irrelevant, for me, to the fact that 99% of the time, the highway lines are "senior lines", i.e. created by the highway department, and those monuments were set. They are, with extreme exceptions, no different than any other original corner.
Most of the highway surveys around here were CL and offset and those that claim (I know a few) that the only way to replace it is to replicate the baseline, get an argument from me about how to do it. Their standard argument is that the monuments were set with rag tapes by contractors. Every item that folks claim is requisite to replace the centerline is something that was also placed by a contractor (i.e. culverts, bridges, et cetera), so there really is no good reason not to use the monuments (if they exist) and not back up to using 8k feet of highway that has 7-10' of error between culvert stationing just to replace a line that was never put on the ground in the first place.
Unmonumented highways are, of course, a different animal and the centerline and the culverts and bridges are about the only way to put them in. I really hate having to use the center of the painted stripe that I know was recently painted by the lowest bidder 60 years after installation.
FrozenNorth, post: 439520, member: 10219 wrote: An important point, unfortunately. On the positive side, monstrous bureaucracies often have a few reasonable individuals sprinkled in for flavoring. Identify one of those individuals through whom you can obtain an official response. I recommend framing your situation in such a manner that the path of least resistance for the bureaucrat is a "Concur" response. Then that letter stays in your file, or, if you're addressing some real ambiguity, is referenced in your plat notes.
to be fair, the vast majority of the Caltrans people are awesome. I worked for several districts up and down the state (contract), they were different from each other, but the People were very good.
the deep pockets comments was about them having resources and not being bashful about using them
I always make a point of looking closely at the document that created the strip. I've run into instances where the strip is identified by aliquot parts in the description but the conc ROW monuments were laid out off project centerline with a big difference between the two. If in doubt I'll run it past our DOT to see what they have. Push comes to shove the location of the physical centerline is sometimes the best evidence of the strip, sometimes not. Just depends. In either case I have a couple folks at our DOT on speed dial. I'm always seeking some agreement as they have way deeper pockets than my clients and I'm not looking to get them dragged into court. Quite the opposite.
In my State the DOT does not accept any existing monument as being on the easement (or parcel) line. All monuments found are noted as to how many hundredths of a foot they lie from where the offset a reconstructed, usually unmonumented centerline lies. As a private surveyor I can not do this, I must follow State statutes - I must set my new monument based upon the location of the nearest accepted monuments, whether they fall on the theoretical DOT line or not. The DOT sets their monuments on the theoretical line. Makes for interesting discussions...
The answer lies in the proper understanding of "retracement"-- What best reflects the footprints you are retracing? If the original evidence of the controlling call in your deed- the centerline- all left the scene in the back of a scraper 70 years ago, what is the best available evidence now? ROW markers that measure 0.2' off from been the record distance that were placed at the end of the construction or a best-fit rama-jama brand new alignment that's 10 seconds old with no- previous pedigree? Another good reality check is to dig out a 1 minute transit, if you have access to one, and a 100 ft steel tape- and take a good long hard look at them. Hopefully, these may be of assistance in making your determination and may the odds be always in your favor...........
The intent of the DOT is always to acquire the full described width. To that end Oregon DOT descriptions carefully avoid making any direct reference to monuments
Kris Morgan, post: 439523, member: 29 wrote: I'm of the opinion, that, in Texas, the Type I ROW monument (standard 4' pyramidal 6"square base to 4" square top), marks the ROW, except in extreme cases. The reason I maintain this is that (A), they're everywhere across the state, (B) the highway department even call for them on some of the old maps, (C) it is common knowledge that they were set at the time of the construction.
Whether or not they were set by buzzard flopping a 90?ø off the base line and using a rag tape is irrelevant, for me, to the fact that 99% of the time, the highway lines are "senior lines", i.e. created by the highway department, and those monuments were set. They are, with extreme exceptions, no different than any other original corner.
Most of the highway surveys around here were CL and offset and those that claim (I know a few) that the only way to replace it is to replicate the baseline, get an argument from me about how to do it. Their standard argument is that the monuments were set with rag tapes by contractors. Every item that folks claim is requisite to replace the centerline is something that was also placed by a contractor (i.e. culverts, bridges, et cetera), so there really is no good reason not to use the monuments (if they exist) and not back up to using 8k feet of highway that has 7-10' of error between culvert stationing just to replace a line that was never put on the ground in the first place.
Unmonumented highways are, of course, a different animal and the centerline and the culverts and bridges are about the only way to put them in. I really hate having to use the center of the painted stripe that I know was recently painted by the lowest bidder 60 years after installation.
[SARCASM]but if you'd use a least squares best fit, it would appear to be more professional....[/SARCASM]
R/W monuments are not the only available evidence along road right of ways. There are corner ties, stations, structures with stations, centerline geometry, ect.
imaudigger, post: 439537, member: 7286 wrote: R/W monuments are not the only available evidence along road right of ways. There are corner ties, stations, structures with stations, centerline geometry, ect.
Yes, but considering Right of way monuments were specifically set to delineate the Right of Way, one should be a bit hesitant to disregard them, in favor of some other feature/ object/ evidence without SIGNIFICANT/ overwhelming argument to do so. (third tier, cube-dwelling bureaucrat's opinion and mathimagic vs 70 years of occupation doesn't cut it.)
