How would you survey this tract? It has never been surveyed on the ground. No monuments. It is a paper legal description written up by an attorney.
Few would disagree that the EAST direction would be on the line between the NW Corner and the N 1/4 Corner and the NORTH call would be on the line between the NW Corner and the W 1/4 Corner.
Where would you place the east line of this tract where the SOUTH call is made and where would you place the the south line of this tract where the WEST call is made?
Most surveyors in this area, myself included, would place the east line parallel with the west section line and the south line parallel with the north section line. This is a case where "NORTH" means very little, but only a general direction.
> This is a case where "NORTH" means very little, but only a general direction.
>
It MEANS north, as defined by the original surveyor of those Section Lines.
That is how I'd take it.
N
Id' probably start by making the south call parallel with the north call, and the west call parallel with the east call, and then see how well the 187' feet fills the gap.
After you choose (of course) to follow the the section lines for two sides, and hold 5 dist, there is one degree of freedom left.
For 5 points you need 10 coordinate values. You have 2 from the POB, 2 section line bearings, and 5 distances. That's 9 variables in 10 unknowns, and only one free to choose independently.
The description won't close mathematically with the easterly and southerly sides parallel to those two sides, unless the NW corner angle is just right. Likewise, if you used geodetic north and west for 2 sides, you have the same issue. So it is an interesting problem.
How close is it to closing with the actual section line bearings and parallel sides? If there is no evidence on the ground to fit to, a good first attempt might be to hold the distances tight and the non-section line bearings loosely in an adjustment and see what happens.
The first questions I'd think about was what was the purpose of creating this lot and is there any evidence on the ground of use, occupation, or purpose? Then I'd start worrying about the distances. And I would allow a pretty good variance from the dimensions and any evidence to answer the above questions.
Run Easterly along the North Section line 550 feet, Then run Southerly parallel with the West line of the Section 309 feet. Then to an intersection with a line parallel to the West line of the Section along a 420 foot offset Easterly to that Section line and a line running parallel to the North line of the Section beginning 444 feet Southey of the NW Section corner along the West Section line 444 feet. That would get me the corners and I would let the diagonal line be what ever the intersection made it to be.
Believe that would satisfy intent, with no evidence of occupation, all you have is the Section lines and the description.
jud
:good: :good: :good:
Jud, that is exactly what I intend to do. The diagonal line distance will float and become whatever it becomes based upon the other four lines established parallel with section lines and by deed distances.
How do the adjoiners' description(s) read?'
Just about every one of those types of deeds I've ever retraced had evidence on the ground.
Putting direction above distance?
I'm betting that the house and buildings were carved out from the parent parcel when they sold the crop/pasture land, and the adjoiner description reads 1/4 section less the same description of the small parcel.
The diagonal is probably near a creek, but that won't be precise enough to resolve the ambiguity.
:good:
If this is one of those sections that has interior angles of 88deg/92deg then the biggest variable in my mind would be the east line. Is it parallel to the west line or perpendicular to the north line? Obviously, I'd use whatever fits evidence on the ground (or in) the best.
Steve
444 ft, 309 ft, and 187 ft lead me to believe the distances were at least chained/taped. Bearings are obviously more iffy.
Steve
The remaining tract or adjoiner is the NW 1/4 except the tract cut out around the farm buildings.
You state it has never been surveyed. Does that mean that there is nothing, no fences, roads, nothing to indicate what has been occupied? How old is the original parcel? Is there any indication that somebody measured something such as the owner of the original parcel. Just because there is not a survey on record doesn't mean it was never "surveyed" by the owner(s). And sometimes you have a clean slate and are truly the original surveyor, nobody ever measured anything or marked or occupied the space.
If you are the original surveyor and the parcel has been in existence for some time then you are surveying for both adjoiners of every line, it's not the same as cutting out a new parcel from only one owner. It may be like a deed stakeout except all adjacent owners need to be in the loop and accept the survey. You would be doing the survey for all of them even if only one is paying the bill.
Also, that is about a standard metes without bounds description in my parts. There are thousands of them and there are no record of them being surveyed. Yet they all have been measured somehow, marked with something, fenced and occupied for decades. Why the majority of surveyors think they need to be disturbed and resurveyed with all the gaps, overlaps and other confusion put into the record is nothing short of a disaster. Its like a dog chasing it's tail. It's not perfect, never will be.
I only posted this to see what varying responses I might get. This type of situation is VERY common around here and we see them all the time. Nine out of ten surveyors in this area would agree with me exactly on procedure.
Cardinal directions when expressed in these types of deeds written by the ignoramus such as attorneys only mean to go in that general direction and is not meant to be literal. The entire previous discussions about "NORTH" means little to us surveyors working in these situations. The 187' is actually 187.42' if you use cardinal directions. You could never hold this deed exactly as written.
The drawing below is exaggerated, but can show what happens if you take something such as EAST, WEST, SOUTH, or NORTH to be literal as in a true direction. You will not be on the section lines and thus will create all sorts of problems. The red lines and text is a hypothetical example of reality on the ground. A new legal description will be written accordingly to accompany the plat. I will refer to the Deed by book with a note that it was poorly written.
No fences, no occupation lines. The deed was created in 1980. The owners stated the attorney wrote up the deed after they did some rough measuring to include the existing buildings. There was no survey performed. Nebraska is a recording state and the courthouse where the records are filed is always my first stop regardless of what the landowner states.
I agree with you. I have just seen way to many surveys where the surveyor did his work exactly cardinal and then showed all the problems where the sections lines or adjoining deeds didn't match and thus the gaps and overlaps come into existence where none really should exist. So instead of solving a problem the surveyor creates a problem and even bigger mess. Once the public experiences this they never want to see a surveyor again much less ever trust one.
I do not disagree with what you've done. Your area, you know best the what's, why's and wherefores, but round here...
...North and NORTH are two different animals. When you see all caps surveyor was involved 95% of the time and a surveyor from 'round here should know how to proceed. North probably means an attorney wrote it.
We've been a recording state for +/-20yrs, so there's a little bit of both out there.
The third option involves hiring a Texas surveyor.
Just kidding Kent if it works for you then do it.
Steve
