If the street was not laid out at the time of the original "plat", then it is just part of a "plan". The "plan" was to have a street running through in that general location. If no lots were staked first whose monuments place the street in another location, then the street monuments should be held as the final expression of intent of the developer.
This is a pretty typical problem in areas of rolling, uneven, or mountainous terrain in my experience. What they did was a careful (relatively speaking) survey of the exterior, then a traverse through in an area that seemed likely for a road, based on the terrain. In the office then, the lots were protracted using the exterior boundary and the road traverse. Many of these outfits did not sell any lots for many years, and some went bankrupt a few times before eventually, years later, there becomes a market for them. At this point a different surveyor comes in and begins staking based on the plan, but without any of the original control. Things don't end up exactly where the original surveyor might have put them. But these later surveyors are marking the original interior lines. To change these lines many years later to how one may have interpreted them differently is not doing anyone any favors. If monuments are in the ground you can bet that someone at some time relied on them for something. One can search for months for that someone and not come up with anything. Then, six months after your change the lines someone pops up that relied on the old ones and a court case begins.
> If the street was not laid out at the time of the original "plat", then it is just part of a "plan". The "plan" was to have a street running through in that general location. If no lots were staked first whose monuments place the street in another location, then the street monuments should be held as the final expression of intent of the developer.
Good point as regards the need for the street to have been laid out and dedicated as a part of the subdivision for the plat of the subdivision to control. Naturally, had the street been dedicated by some separate instrument, the description used in the dedication would be what one would want to look to first to determine the location of the street.
Paul,
Hypothetically speaking, did someone look for the original street improvement plans? If the original tract map did not monument the street centerline, the civil engineer that designed the streets may have needed to set monuments along the BC and EC points of the RW to tie his design to the ground. If the license numbers match up between the street plan civil engineer and the pipe tags, that may help explain their origin. Tracts back then were not mass graded like they are today, so setting monuments on a RW line may have been the best option if street construction would daylight with existing contours within the dedicated RW.
In Los Angeles County, a 2" IP (30" long) is pretty synonymous to subdivision map monumentation (by local ordinance). Private surveys under the PLS Act don't tend to set such substantial monumentation.
What controls the street? - Dennis
> Paul,
>
> Hypothetically speaking, did someone look for the original street improvement plans?
No. I have used those before, original street improvement plans, to solve a very difficult job in Pasadena, but hypothetically speaking :hi5: , it was not necessary to resort to the old plans.
Please explain
WHY?