Record of Survey - excess in street
This is the map in question. The subdivision in 1905 (Bay Street) & the 1907 subdivision (Alameda Street) are both platted as 50 feet. The property northeasterly of the line running through both subdivisions was aquired by deeds based off of this map. And hilarity ensued!! o.O
I understand that occupation should hold along the improved lots, if the evidence shows this it true but is there any case where putting this much excess into the street can be justified, besides as Mr. Karoly put it "common sense"? Because I cannot find anything to justify this action.
There is more to this map and another map by this individual that are questionable.
Thanks,
Brad L
Record of Survey - excess in street
Why wouldn't you put in the adjoiners to the street? Why would the street need or want the property? Has the street already built on that excess 16 feet, is it just dirt, or something else? Unless there is compelling reason for it to be public roadway, it all goes to the adjoining lot(s) in my opinion.
> Just to clarify, are you saying the surveyor put 1/4" of excess into the street, and that resulted in a law suit?
No I don't think it resulted in a law suit, I guess I'll have to search for the case. I don't really recall the details, but there was a heated discussion on the old board when I bought it up.
BTW it was actually 1/2"
I think I found what I was looking for, it had to do with measurement index.
Ralph
Record of Survey - excess in street
Everything southwesterly of the line running through the map was improved the street where the excess is put is partially in a State Highway and partially in a Federally protected habitat.
I am under the assumption the excess goes where it would produce the least amount of damages to occupation of property owners, which is the street. I was just seeing if anyone every came across another situation where this had to be done or if there was an existing case supporting excess in the street so not to disturb occupation.
FYI: The northeasterly line of Bay/Alameda Street is originally platted by the Rancho as being a straight line. It appears the person performing this record of survey assumed that is the subdivision plats were not the same being there was a break, which is not the case.
> My job on this project is to ensure our entities rights are protected and that no future surveys on adjoining properties could potentially lead to litigation.
Wow! Better get in touch with your E/O provider before signing that certificate...
> Except pro-ration is a last resort. Proration should never be used to disturb an entire neighborhood that has established lines in place.
The BLM manual directs us not to prorate except as a last resort but this canon is to be respected when resurveying a government plat. IE All other methods must be exhausted and one must prove beyond reasonable doubt (or is it preponderance of the evidence?) that a corner is lost before engaging in proration (few of us have the resources to do so and end up prorating anyhow).
To exhaust all other methods of procedure before employing a proration is often more hazardous. I disagree with counting out the proration but I will make an attempt to decipher the original surveyor and platters intent first, but that failing, there is nothing sinful to performing a proration.
Jim
> You're right that the streets don't get apportioned, but the reason is due to their sovereign status, not senior rights.
>
> Stephen
I concur. Roads are dedicated to the public and cannot be diminished through a proration. For this reason, I think the flip side of the coin should be looked at as well: Roads should not gain anything from the excess. I would wonder where the physical road is located relative to the RW? Does the additional excess end up on the far end of the physical road? If not, I'd be inclined to look at a proration. As Stated above, if a proration throws 100 years worth of fences and peaceable neighbors to the wind then let sleeping dogs lie. You really need to assess why the earlier survey gave it to the road: was it a quick and easy solution or did he have knowledge or notes? Is the road even there? Was it automatically vacated due to a non-user statute?
Record of Survey - excess in street
> I am under the assumption the excess goes where it would produce the least amount of damages to occupation of property owners, which is the street. I was just seeing if anyone every came across another situation where this had to be done or if there was an existing case supporting excess in the street so not to disturb occupation.
I don't think you can honestly use 'keeping the peace' as justification. That's not what we earn the big dollars to do. That might be what the courts end up doing but our job is to weigh the evidence and provide a defensible conclusion. I have never read any definition of a surveyor's duties in any state which included the term 'damage control'. I also doubt you will see any precedent setting cases in this regard. There might be some lower court conclusions but probably nothing you can or should hang your hat on.
I am betting the excess was put in the road for the wrong reasons (laziness or 'damage control') but it might be seen that that earlier decision to do so became the basis for laying out many of the lots, thus, it would make sense to hold that decision (right or wrong) due to the historic reliance thereupon. But now you need to prove it. One way or another you need to prove your conclusion and justify your decision. One thing I think we modern surveyors tend to forget is the tools and methods available to and employed by the surveyors and platters at the time. There were no calculators and EDMs, no computer aided design or even metal detectors. These guys used trig tables and parallel offsets as a means of simplifying the workload. They were not big on laying out odd angles and performing excessive calculations in the field, they did not perform prorations nor plan for them to be employed. They did not set out to create a plat which needed repairing or reviewing but rather they were creating a simple method of conveying land. (FYI: there is a current trend with municipalities to overlook platted lots in favor of zoning and whereby entire plats are being dissolved under certain circumstances). There is a lot to consider and as I stated in a different post, you have a tremendous burden by taking on the task of certifying that no future survey will create a lawsuit (I think that power is reserved for the deities of the legal profession). you have a lot of evidence to weigh and I think you need to discuss this plat with some long-situated surveyors in the area.
Record of Survey - excess in street
I think the lot owner would own to the edge of the 50' right-of-way. If the municipality has already taken possession of the property at best they have a prescriptive claim to it. But in my mind at the time, the title is clouded on that strip of land. It seems to me, that if the city needs and is using the land, they should clear title by getting a deed to that portion of the land. That might mean offering the adjoiner(s) fair market value for it, but I think it is the best alternative.
Municipalities can adverse possess over private citizens, but even for that to take place (well for there to be clear title), it needs to be proven in court, and lawyers and judges need to get involved, and often courts frown on municipalities taking land from private citizens without just compensation. The cheapest and fairest way for this to be cleaned up, would be for the municipality to write up a quitclaim deed for their needs and offer just compensation for the land they have decided to take over.
In answer to the question, I don't have any case law addressing what you are suggesting.
As you may have gathered, I do have an opinion.
I'm not signing squat! I am reviewing another surveyors work on our boundary
