"Waste" Parcel on Subdivision Plat

I have not seen one described that way. I have seen parcels described as uneconomic remnant meaning that they are not suitable for development, in other words wasted.

Maybe it's a [designated] place for the neighbors to dump their waste (garbage).

😎

I'm thinking it might be a community lot where there are dumpsters.

Never seen 'Waste', but I've seen unbuildable remnants in subdivisions designated as a "Park". In fact, I have one in my subdivision done in the mid-70's, but if you send a child out to play in this particular 'Park' during our summer months, I'd strongly suggest they take chest waders and be prepared for leeches.

If I were doing that sub and knew that parcel wasn't buildable, I would have included it with lot 50 and 51. I guess the question is, who owns it, the public or the developer? The way the pins are set puts even more doubt in my mind.

In a similar situtation, I've seen a 1' retained by the developer between the end of the street and the boundary. I assume it is so that the next developer has to come to the current developer with check in hand in order to get that 1' strip dedicated so the street can be extended.

Most places discourage leaving strips of ground to stop streets being extended, I've heard them called spite strips.

And who owns between the creek and the distinct property line? Sorry for changing the topic but I have one like that going on now. Original descriptions were common to the center of a creek. Owner on north side of the creek subdivides into a subdivision but creates a distinct boundary 30-50' from the creek ( land was unusable for the most part at the time) and says nothing about the gore left in his declaration. I believe the gore would go to the lot owners, but now the city is looking for a route along the creek for a bike path. Engineers don't understand very well when you tell them that where they want to put their trail is no mans land and they have a time frame on providing a route. Good luck on "waste land", I have never heard that before. Jon

Jp7191, post: 425942, member: 1617 wrote: And who owns between the creek and the distinct property line? Sorry for changing the topic but I have one like that going on now. Original descriptions were common to the center of a creek. Owner on north side of the creek subdivides into a subdivision but creates a distinct boundary 30-50' from the creek ( land was unusable for the most part at the time) and says nothing about the gore left in his declaration. I believe the gore would go to the lot owners, but now the city is looking for a route along the creek for a bike path. Engineers don't understand very well when you tell them that where they want to put their trail is no mans land and they have a time frame on providing a route. Good luck on "waste land", I have never heard that before. Jon

In this case, unless the subdivider owned the other side of the creek also, or something different is indicated on the plat, ownership of the lots goes to the creek (bank, ohw, centerline, thread, or something different). The plat shows the creek and the lots having a shared boundary, so the intention is clear. In your case it sounds less clear.

As for the waste area, my guess is it is part of the ROW that was not planned to be constructed. One of the reasons I suspect that is the extension of the centerline. Pre 1980's plats are full of this kind of lazy platting. I guess the thinking was that no one would care, or that everyone would think exactly like the platting surveyor or be able to read the minds of the deceased.

A lot of modern platting requirments seem like an unnecessary hindereance, but what seems perfectly clear now can lead to massive confusion in the future.

Has anyone out there in survey land ever seen this type of designation on a plat? If so, what does it represent?

No to your question but..............................
Even though it doesn't seem likely because of the creek that is shown, it is possible that it provides the possibility of the street continuing?

Robert

Looks to me like something purposely not conveyed, or maybe included in dedication deed, for the future to potentially continue the road

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

In most areas it is unlawful to leave a strip of land as a barrier to keep from connecting to another exit or allow excess to the neighboring land when the road dead ends on a boundary.

One way to get around that is by leaving a usable sized parcel at the end of a road, say for mail box location or dumpster location or other possible community use.

I would imagine the owner would expect an inflated amount for that property to the neighboring develops or owners for access to cross the creek.

It is clear that the developer does not want to retain it, but the County probably does not want to accept it. If the County accepts it they may be required to extend the road at public expense at some future date.

The owners of lots 50 & 51 will probably cut the grass, but why pay taxes on it? It is essentially a designation of right of way for future use.

Paul in PA

Bizarre. Such a plat should never be accepted. I've seen some stupid things in my day but this is a doozy of a stupid thing. It needs to either go with one lot or the other or be split between them in some convenient location.

One thing I've seen that I really didn't like but couldn't figure out how to fix it was a situation where a street had to be located along one side of the tract but then there was a twenty foot jog ahead. They built a curve into the street to get it to adjust for that twenty foot jog. Of course, that left a somewhat triangular shape with a concave curve instead of a hypotenuse that had to appear as being part of the street area outside of the standard uniform width from the street center line..

Could it be some sort be some sort of acronym;

Water Access s(?) t(?) easement

Water and sewer t(?) Easement

I swear I saw this once ago and it was an acronym for an easement that was labelled completely somewhere else on the plat.

JBStahl, post: 425920, member: 427 wrote: Found this designation on a subdivision plat from 1969. There are no notes on the plat which define what a "waste" parcel is. Has anyone out there in survey land ever seen this type of designation on a plat? If so, what does it represent?

The Owner's Dedication reads:

[INDENT][INDENT]‰ÛÏI have caused said tract to be subdivided into lots to be known as the __________ Subdivision, and that I hereby dedicate and relinquish to the public for public use all streets or roads shown thereon.‰Û
[/INDENT][/INDENT]
The acceptance reads:

[INDENT][INDENT]‰ÛÏThe County of _________ Approves this subdivision and hereby accepts the dedication of all streets, easements, and other parcels of land intended for public purposes for the perpetual use of the public.‰Û
[/INDENT][/INDENT]

I own lot 48 and know that area was for fishing access for lots without creek frontage. Been fishing there for years, try and stop me.

Have never seen that before. In Florida areas such as those are called "conservation areas", or if it will hold standing water for 6 hours a "Lake".

Terminus-NC, post: 426002, member: 11581 wrote: Could it be some sort be some sort of acronym;

Water Access s(?) t(?) easement

Water and sewer t(?) Easement

I swear I saw this once ago and it was an acronym for an easement that was labelled completely somewhere else on the plat.

..

maybe...Wilderness Area: State Tax Exempt...;)

Terminus-NC, post: 426002, member: 11581 wrote: Could it be some sort be some sort of acronym;

Water Access s(?) t(?) easement

Water and sewer t(?) Easement

I swear I saw this once ago and it was an acronym for an easement that was labelled completely somewhere else on the plat.

I think you're onto something...Water And Sewer Transmission Easement.

Water And Sewer, Telephone, Electric easement.