What do you do here?
I've probably made my picture WAAAAY too complicated for the question that I'm about to ask, but here it is anyway.
I'm working on the Subject Parcel (SP). It's a 0.80 acre parcel created in 1967. I found some good and bad monuments to work with and have shown both. The good monuments are in green (g: good = green = $) and the questionable monuments are in blue (b: blue = bad). I did a closed field traverse around the area (1/100k+) and input all the plat information available. After looking at everything I decided to split the distances and put my field stuff between A and B (347.823' platted -vs- 347.786' field). Yes, I know... I'm probably overthinking it.
I will have to set C and D for my parcel corners, but my question is at E. My parcel (SP) is a straight line and is monumented at both ends. The locations aren't perfect, but well within local tolerance (±0.2'). The locations of the irons to the north and south of B are well out of position (north one is 1.75'± and the south one is about 4'±). Would you take an extra set up and set that corner at E? I think I have the best information available to reset the corner, thus making it easier for everybody to live in harmony. I'm concerned that another surveyor might come in and only do their subject lot and not spread out and find the good stuff that I did. Should it be on my client to pay for a line monument, when I know that it doesn't actually affect the parcel at this time? However, down the road should somebody come in and only use a small number of monuments (common here) the location could affect the SP and create a small overlap.
What do you do here? What do you instruct your crews to do? Does the size of the parcel come into play? 0.8 Ac -vs- 8 Ac.? Do you ever do it? Do you never do it?
FYI: I'll be setting E, but I'm not sure that I would every time. This situation seems to dictate that I do it for all involved.
Carl
Difficult to say about the corner Carl. I've set adjoining corners when I've worked all the kinks out, and didn't want the next guy mucking up what I already did, so you can and it's not without precedence; however, is your client going to be upset you were "surveying his neighbors land" and he paying for it? If the answer is yes, set the corner and don't report it, or don't set it. Only you can make this call.
He knows the situation, and he agrees with me. I HAD to survey all 5 lots to figure out what was going on... and I'm very glad that I did.
Carl
Set the corner, that's all.....
If you set it, it leaves evidence for another surveyor to find and probably accept. Especially if you record your plat showing everything you found and how you computed your parcel.
It is a point on your clients East line.
Set the corner!
That corner may be an important reference mark for the NE or SE Corner some day. Set the corner and show it on your plat. If the client complains about the bill, explain to him that he got a point on line free.:-)
Set the corner!
> That corner may be an important reference mark for the NE or SE Corner some day. Set the corner and show it on your plat. If the client complains about the bill, explain to him that he got a point on line free.:-)
:good:
FWIW, since you already have a point on the line on the other side between "C" and "D" (which you appear to be holding as good), it is logical that you set a comparable point on the other side.
Why leave the only other point left to be set, "un-set"?
> FWIW, since you already have a point on the line on the other side between "C" and "D" (which you appear to be holding as good), it is logical that you set a comparable point on the other side.
>
> Why leave the only other point left to be set, "un-set"?
There is a green ball there, thus the corner iron is in place and within tolerance.
🙂
A different option might be to set the true midpoint on the line rather than trying to set corner E. In that fashion you are further monumenting your clients line and making no statement as to the location of an ajoinders lot corner.
Either way I can see how setting a marker is in your clients best interest.
Set the corner!
Good answer. An extra point on line is often handy and getting one for virtually "free" that also helps stop a problem from arising at a later point is a great deal for the client.
Since you don't show the street ROW lines extending on to the east, I don't know if the street goes on or there is an abutting street to the east of the parcels to the east of your subject area of interest.
But in either case, it appears from the questionable monuments you found, that the issue appears to more in terms of the ROW width than the lot width per se. If that is the case I wouldn't sweat it particularly.
On the other side of the issue of whether to set a monument in the east line of your parcel that harmonizes with your interpretation of the other evidence, there's probably an even chance that another surveyor's crew following you will not even look for your pin and simply set their own without looking. But you cannot control that. You should do what you are most comfortable with.
I would also add that if the parcels were all created at the same time by plat, or perhaps especially if the parcels to the east were created before your subject parcel, you need to set the pin because it is a part of your boundary even if the line is supposed to be straight. That's how I see it FWIW.
Jerry, funny that you mentioned some of the "little fuzzy things" that I didn't even touch on here, but will now.
> Since you don't show the street ROW lines extending on to the east, I don't know if the street goes on or there is an abutting street to the east of the parcels to the east of your subject area of interest.
Street extends both ways on both of the streets
> But in either case, it appears from the questionable monuments you found, that the issue appears to more in terms of the ROW width than the lot width per se. If that is the case I wouldn't sweat it particularly.
ROW width is not an issue at all here. Funny that you said that though, the ROW on HIGH STREET is not platted as a particular width, it runs along the spine of a ridge and everything was "parceled" out back then. It seems to be about 35'±, but is not uniform at all.
> On the other side of the issue of whether to set a monument in the east line of your parcel that harmonizes with your interpretation of the other evidence, there's probably an even chance that another surveyor's crew following you will not even look for your pin and simply set their own without looking. But you cannot control that. You should do what you are most comfortable with.
Most crews around here would look for the iron at a minimum, we're not that bad... they may just not survey the whole neighborhood like I did. To the east of lots 3 & 4 is a really, really old subdivision that has a bunch of 20' x 100' lots, so they wouldn't get any resolve there
> I would also add that if the parcels were all created at the same time by plat, or perhaps especially if the parcels to the east were created before your subject parcel, you need to set the pin because it is a part of your boundary even if the line is supposed to be straight. That's how I see it FWIW.
Parcels were created at 3 different times. My parcel first. Then lots 1 & 3 (yes 1 & 3) by the same surveyor as mine a couple of years later, then lots 2 & 4 about a year later by a different surveyor. There's lots of little quirks here, as with any survey, but I was trying to hit the high points.
Carl
I would set the corner. You don't want a surveyor in 5 years down the road to set it in the wrong locaton "into your clients property" based upon limited evidence.
Set the corner!
are you retracing a single subdivision or is this based on a compilation of different plans/different surveys?
> are you retracing a single subdivision or is this based on a compilation of different plans/different surveys?
Three different divisions/subdivisions.
how about the roads? do they have layouts? do they show any of these monuments?
to answer your real question: set the corner. detail the monuments. makes it so easy to show how things are fixed, though the plans do get a bit more complex.
> how about the roads? do they have layouts? do they show any of these monuments?
Layout per the subdivisions that I'm working with. That's par for the course here.
> to answer your real question: set the corner. detail the monuments. makes it so easy to show how things are fixed, though the plans do get a bit more complex.
Thanks. Again, that is my plan. I was just seeing what others would do. I never really planned on not setting it.
BTW: The later two divisions/subdivisions do vary just a little bit from the first two, but not enough to get into a real twist about (about 0.06'± on like 4 monuments).
Basically, I think the 2nd surveyor/3rd plat was a newbie trying to assert that he knew how to measure better. He did not. All he did was create some annoying little gaps in the record, and a headache for modern times.
Carl
Sarcasm on! You say you closed your traverse 1:100k? According to the posts I read the other day this doesn't mean crap. I'd rerun my traverse and make sure that pin you report as being out 0.20' isn't actually only out 0.18'. Sarcasm off!
