If you don't want to read the entire thread please (especially older surveyors) skip to the last paragraph and hopefully answer my question.
I am working on a survey. It was cut out of a larger tract in 1892. No problems there.
In 1973 a 3.6 Acre lot was cutout around the old home. I can date the homes location back to at least 1905 from old topographic maps. The old house has had several recent additions to it. The house sits in the mouth of a hollow.
The description reads very good and closes within 7 feet. I'm happy with that. I could deal with 20 feet or 30 heck give me a hundred feet. (it would be easier. explained below)
It begins at a 'stake near, a 10" Walnut tree near the outlet of a 30" drain under US 33'. Now this sounds like a great beginning point. I found a 30X60" box culvert made out of cut stone and a 16-18" walnut (haven't measured it yet) just across the creek with some old fence in it. On up the hill the fence starts again and runs along the side of a point. There are fences everywhere as the entire tract I'm surveying used to be a big field. Now it's an overgrown mess.
The description continues as follows.
N-81-E 489'
'stake in the left forks of the hollow behind the house'
S-29-30-W 355'
'stake behind the house'
S-88-30-E 78.5'
'stake'
S-22-30-W 493'
'stake in edge of creek'
N-3-30-W 473'
'16" walnut tree in front of house'
N-38-W 280'
'to point of beginning'
(I wrote the description in hopes you can see what I'm talking about a little better)
The N-38-W line has a 12 foot right of way along it. I found the remains of an old farm road running near the walnut. The area is very over grown but I found old rock with drill holes I'm pretty sure was blasted away when the main road was built and used to make this old farm road. They piled it along the creek bank to keep the farm road from washing out. The rest of this right of way is very faint through a small field along the bank of the creek. Just a level area about a vehicle wide.
PROBLEM 1.
If I say this is the beginning point then in order to get the home on the property I need to rotate the entire 1973 survey about 90 degrees. This then makes all the terrain features in the description match also.
PROBLEM 2.
I have to rotate the ENTIRE SURVEY 90 DEGREES!
If I don't rotate the survey 90 degrees I can make the call for 'stake in the edge of the creek' fit a hollow but it's not a creek and I don't know how it could be mistaken for a creek.
At the original location where I believed the beginning point was, prior to determining the description was 90 degrees off, I found a culvert and a 10-12" Walnut (haven't measured yet). One would think the 10-12" Walnut would have grown a little bit over 36 years. I've done some research on Walnuts in the past and average (I know it varies from soil to soil) is a couple inches diameter every ten years. That of course is a more or less average. Could be much more. I've heard of 16" diamter in 20 years. But are grown on tree farms.
I'm looking for a beginning point that can be 489 feet either direction and wouldn't you know it, the distance from the concrete culvert to the cut stone culvert 498 feet. The concrete culver is old but is small. It's outside diameter is only 24" so I don't see how it could have been mistaken for a 30" drain. As the inside diameter is only 16".
The fence(s) I mention may or may not match anything even if this survey has to be rotated 90 degrees. I haven't located the fences yet as I spent most of the day walking in circles looking at the description, scratching my head, looking through my compass, scratching my head, walking up one hill, scratching my head, down another hill, still scratching my head, while cussing under my breath. 😐
I honestly think this is what has to be done. 90 degrees +/- of rotation based on terrain features and how the house is oriented. Though the house is now 'L' shaped (just as luck would have it) I believe the old main house would have been oriented with the front to the main road and the back to the hollow. I hope the current owner knows but he hasn't been much help. He told me he was pretty sure he owned at least what he kept up. But he didn't have a clue where any of his corners were.
Okay now that I have bored you to tears to my question. (almost)
Many moons ago one of my former employers said there was this one surveyor years before that messed up some surveys because the old instrument he used (when it was new back in the day) had 'west' and 'east' reversed. Now it wasn't really reversed it was how this particular instrument was made so you could read it correctly or something along those lines. (I'm really digging deep in the vault in my mind to try and figure out this problem) I am not familiar with this instrument so, if this is one of his surveys would that cause a 90 degree problem on the entire survey? This might be one of this old timers surveys.
The vernier was read incorrectly, in the wrong face.
I forgot to mention the property is situate entirely inside the tract I'm surveying. There is no reference as to where exactly it sits. Only the mention of being near the main road. Other than that it is wher it is, I guess.
No plat of the 1973 survey exists and no ties to any outside lines in the description.
Some might ask. The Tax Map is drawn wrong and has the lot sitting right up against the outside line. The Tax Map drawing is not rotated 90 degrees as I, at this point, believe it should be. I'm the first person to try and figure this one out. No adjoiners except the property I'm surveying (the parent tract).
Also I have no idea who surveyed it originally. If it doesn't state it in the deed and unless there is a plat, there is just no way to know. Thats how we do things around here. 😉
> The vernier was read incorrectly, in the wrong face.
Does that mean the entire survey is off by 90 degrees when this happens? Could you accidently do an entire survey with that particular style instrument and keep a constant 90 degree error?
> The description continues as follows.
>
> N-81-E 489'
> 'stake in the left forks of the hollow behind the house'
> S-29-30-W 355'
> 'stake behind the house'
> S-88-30-E 78.5'
> 'stake'
> S-22-30-W 493'
> 'stake in edge of creek'
> N-3-30-W 473'
> '16" walnut tree in front of house'
> N-38-W 280'
> 'to point of beginning'
How would it fit if all the E was W and all the W was E?
N81W
S29-30E
S88-30W
S22-30E
N3-30E
N38W
That is what it would be if he read a sight compass backwards...
DDSM
This is why all land surveyors are rich with lots of dark hair left on their heads. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Isn't it great when you question yourself over and over, first supporting a theory, then badmouthing it, then re-supporting the theory, then..........?
I am not sure of all the problems that may be here, but this picture may help in understanding the compass on the transit.
It does look like the E and W are reversed, but when you are looking NW, like the picture, it reads correctly.
Maybe was confusing to the surveyor?
Keith
> How would it fit if all the E was W and all the W was E?
>
> N81W
> S29-30E
> S88-30W
> S22-30E
> N3-30E
> N38W
>
> That is what it would be if he read a sight compass backwards...
>
> DDSM
Nope tried that. It won't work that way either.
I can't for the life of me figure out how you could get an entire survey off by 90 degrees. And that is why I am having trouble swallowing it.
But everything says that is what has happened, I just don't know how.
Even the orginal road to the property, and to the old farm house makes sense for the N-38-W line to be a N-52-E. It all falls in place if I rotate the entire 3.6 Acres 90 degrees.
I checked I know I'm not off 90 degrees google earth said north was headed toward the top of my monitor and I believe it.
here is a google map of it. Ain't north up?!?!?:-D
google
You know you get a nice pretty flat piece of property (by West Virginia standards) and something like this is waiting for you. There's only two areas along the boundary that are lung busters.
Most surveyors compasses and transits with compasses have the E & W "reversed". Why - OK let's examine this a little.
Imagine you are pointing North and the needle is at North.
OK - rotate the instrument 45 degrees to the right so that you are looking N45E. Now look at the compass face with the reversed E & W. The needle will be pointing to N45E on the left side of North.
Whys does this work - remember that with a surveyors compass the needle never moves. It always points North. Everything else moves.
Would this explain a 90 degree rotation - NO. because when bearings were near N or S, the rotation would only be a few degrees. When the bearing was near E or W, the rotation would be near 180 degrees.
A more likely scenario is that he took a single magnetic bearing and then turned angles with the transit. When he took the reading on the compass something was pulling the needle.
Sometime when you get a chance you need to take my history workshop. Will explain this and a whole lot more.
Some young guy like me (in 1973) pulled his nice, solid-steel work truck right up next to the set-up, so he wouldn't have to carry that heavy old transit.
> Maybe was confusing to the surveyor?
>
Keith
That is what my former boss told me. This particular surveyor did get confused for a while. I don't know how long or how many surveys he did confused. This won't explain the 90 degrees though. Unless he was trying to 'fix' the problem by adding or subtracting.
Thats just a compass with a scope what the heck. Where does the bluetooth hook in? 😉
I have seen one many years ago. My former employer had one as a display. Thanks for the pic it refreshed my memory on those old guns.
Those old guns also came with a nifty magnifying glass for burning ants.
Vernier? What's that?
Hehe...
In some ways it it is too bad that descriptions were always written with NxxE bearings. When they started out depending only on compasses, that was appropriate. When transits made the practice taking one bearing and then turning angles, they should have written the descriptions with one bearing and angles. That way you would know what was really done.
As I understand the question:
1) The deed closes within 7 feet.
2) If you accept the walnut and the hold the old road location as being the N38W line (ignoring what the bearing is magnetic for right now) then the deed would fit around where the house is sitting.
3) Your issue is that the magnetic now does NOT agree with said bearing by approximately 90 degrees.
OK, lets assume that it was an assumed bearing. Basically you have found one line that you agree with, then you turn the angles from the deed and it fits the terrain called for in the deed. Deed calls to natural monumentation holds over bearings. Show record and actual, add a note that DBXXX@PGYYY appears to be on a different bearing system and that the call N38W was held for orientation.
I think if your monumentation works, the bearings are much less important than the interior angles which do appear to work. The deed works within itself, it never says the method for reaching North, you presume it to be magnetic but what if it was Goofy North instead?
If everything works out like I believe it will then all is good.
It was just A LOT of head scratching.
I almost put it the other way.
The concrete culvert as the beginning point fits pretty good to where I originally mapped it on the topo. I found that culvert there because that is where I thought it was supposed to be according to the deed. It was the wrong size though.
The next corner would hit on the creek bank but right near where the next cut stone drain goes under the road at a forks. See what I mean. There is a fork at the next call just like the deed says. Only it's not behind the house it's more in front of the house or at the side of the house.
The next call would just miss the house and hit behind the house.
the next one calls for a stake.
After that the next call says at the edge of the creek and it hit at the edge of a drain in another hollow.
The next was a Walnut in front of the house. Now depending on how the house is positioned it would have been more to the side of the house.
Then back to the culvert.
With the current orientation it just about fits, but the terrain features are the issue. Was it not for those extra descriptions I would have put it the other way without question and most of what this person believed they owned wouldn't have been and no surveyor would have disagreed with me not to mention the client stated he didn't know what he owned. He basically moved in and kept up the same yard as the last guy.
Now I might run in to defending what I am probably going to do. There will be plenty of notes on this plat explaining. Everybody will be happy.
3.6 Acre owner will own at least most of what he mows. My client wont have a long skinny triangle through his property. When I first drew that description up I wondered why in the world they would cut out a piece of ground to where a good portion of it is just out there in the middle of nothing. I guess they didn't. 🙂
It just didn't sit right so I rotated the entire description 90 degrees, overlayed it on a topo and all started to feel right with the world. I still need to verify of course but my percentage that this is the solution is going up the more I work with it.
I think all the calls for House are key. The front, side, back are all open to discussion. The house is obviously added on to since the 1909. As such, without having records of the config of the house in early 1900's (say pictures or a witness who lived there then even if she was 2 yrs old) then you cannot say definitively that the current front is the front from then. I know of many old houses, including my inlaws house where the front and back have actually switched over the years (theres has switched 3 times in 20 years with additions being added). So the hollow, the walnuts the general house location of the old part of house , the creek location all become key to laying on the ground. If those fit, you must acquit.
I still use a compass at every setup. Gives me peace of mind mostly.
