What would you do?

fattiretom

I was incorrect about that being directly in statute. See above.

fattiretom

If you survey along a state road you are expected to research at DOT to determine the ROW lines.

Keith

At least you are absolutely correct on this one:

I'll give you a hint - it is not a specific number or a number derived from a formula.

One of our favorite sayings with many of us in BLM, "if it could have been stated, it would have been stated" , in regards to how far is too far!

Keith

Ding Ding Ding, we have the correct answer...

> So to save time and money they don't bother to monument the boundaries of the taking (no called for monuments). So nobody knows for sure what has been taken. So decades later they decide to survey it and if it goes through the middle of your house it's just too bad. Is this the way it was intended to work.

That's how I keep seeing it done. Regardless if by eminent domain or simple purchase.

Its why the deed/acquisition descriptions are based on the engineered alignment, not the actual parcel boundaries. The right of way people know it takes work to actually survey the boundaries of the parcels they're crossing. By far easier to simply write a strip description than to actually do boundary determination.

Almost a crime you would think.

fattiretom

If you survey here you know that highway monuments yield to the station and offset because they were probably not set by surveyors. This concept is taught in review classes and is written in books. From all sources I have contacted it's been this was for a VERY long time in NYS.

If you are surveying along a DEP line you know that the blazes are approximate and are often set by maintainers not surveyors and if they were set by surveyors there were set as general guides for the maintainers, not indications of the actual line. When I worked for DEP we were not allowed to set blazes other than for control because that fell under the job title of the watershed maintainers so we would go flag the line and they would come through and blaze/post the line after. DEC monuments and DEP monuments have always generally been set by surveyors so we do hold them when called. A call for blazes generally along the line does not mean that the blazes make the actual line, just that they are generally along the line. In the case of the DEP blazes they can be three feet either side of the line and are not set by surveyors.

Again, you have to weigh all the evidence and knowing how/why marks were set is a part of that.

I just don't understand the blind acceptance of any monument found in the field. Who set it? Was it a home owner who was just trying to take more land? Was it a homeowner who put a post there because that's where he thinks his line is? Did the neighbor agree on that line? What other evidence corroborates that monument? Was it set as blunder? Does it agree with the rest of the monuments? Is it called? What is the character of that monument to others found? Monuments are not the only evidence to weigh, especially if they are uncalled and the origin is unknown.

Yes monuments hold a lot of weight...more than almost anything else...but they are not indisputable and there are exceptions to those rules based on additional evidence in order to arrive at the intent of the parties involved.

I make decisions based on the evidence I have...sometimes I survey to the deed, sometimes I hold an uncalled monument, sometimes I throw out a called monument or show an overlap or gore, sometimes I change the deed, sometimes I hold possession for a line, sometimes I find evidence that proves some monuments wrong and others right, sometimes I find monuments that prove other evidence wrong. It all comes down to a preponderance of all the evidence.

That's all I'm saying here...look at everything, all types of evidence to reach your determination of a line.

Keith

I'll try your old standby discussion technique:

How far off is too far?

Keith

Besides being a smarta$$ with my previous reply, I'll also provide you with an instance when I would see no problem with someone making another punch mark on a disk -

Condensed Version:
Out of town company comes in and surveys an area where the buildings were built on a zero side line setback. It is well established that the lines run with common walls. They measure around the block and find all they can. They set a pretty, shiny, 3-inch brass disk and center punch it based on whatever evidence they relied on.

Someone down the road who is not only an expert measuring technician, but also a pretty good surveyor finds that their disk is set at a distance such that it disregards the physical evidence of a hundred year old building. He discovers that a point on the disk actually runs with the original line as run on the ground (and perpetuated by the existing building) and punches a point (since it is a 3" disk) somewhere from 0.001' to 0.125' over from the original punch. I would not fault that expert measuror in the least.

An instance when BOTH aspects of the profession have to go hand in hand - as they always should.

Keith

> If that surveyor had been proficient with both professional analysis and professional measurement, then we wouldn't even be discussing the situation he created. Instead we could focus solely on the more interesting ideas of the actions of the property owners.

The above statement completely distorts the role of a retracement surveyor. We are supposed to recover the evidence necessary to prove the location of the boundary where it IS, not where it SHOULD BE. We have no authority to judge a prior survey, declare it null and void, and disregard the actions of the landowners made in reliance upon the "BAD" survey. Our job is to consider all the evidence, determine the facts, and apply the appropriate rule of law to determine the boundary location.

If the survey lacks "proficiency," was "blundered" or was a result of gross negligence on the surveyor's part, and the boundary, if found to have been established in the wrong location as a result of the surveyor's error, then the surveyor is liable for the damages caused by his survey. The landowner should be compensated for the loss of their property and for the costs of the survey. The question of negligence and damages is a matter for the civil courts. It's not the retracing surveyor's job to declare them guilty.

The questions of liability, negligence and compensation don't affect the boundary location. It's been improperly established (meaning it's too late to fix).

JBS

JBStahl

What would your opinion be with a retracement surveyor marking an existing brass cap with a second dimple? 😉

2 pole is far enough

> I'll try your old standby discussion technique:
>
> How far off is too far?

I read in a 1880's Surveyor's Society paper on setting 'offset' monuments that this particular surveyor would set his stone at least 2 poles, online, so they wouldn't be confused with the 'true' corner. I guess if I was following his footsteps it would be 33 feet is 'too far'...

DDSM;-)

2 pole is far enough

Excellent answer!!

How far is too far and how close is close enough - depends on the situation.

Keith

Either -

I did not communicate that thought as well as I should have,
You misinterpreted what I meant,
or
You have a expressed two contradictory ideas.

In what you quoted, the "If" indicates a hypothetical and the "had been" indicates past tense.

Sherman, set the Way Back machine to the day of the 200' lot surveys.

Let's go back home Sherman.

Did the past surveyor not have an obligation to follow the line as it was at that time? You have indicated that is a re-tracement surveyors duty.

Since he did not, the current surveyor has to dig a little deeper. I give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he has followed the paper trail and field evidence prior to the 200' lot surveys and knows that at that time the line was a straight line with no other markings. Does that mean that the line is still a straight line? Maybe, maybe not. As I previously responded to the original poster, he needs to start by speaking with the neighbor to the north.

There are really about two reasons that a line is in question by property owners or surveyors.

1. There is a difference between the written record and markers on the ground.
2. There is a difference between the written record and what a property owner wants to use.

Surveyors only have a very direct affect on item one. The way they accomplish that is by recognizing their professional obligation to perform their measurements in a professional manner. If there was less of this BS of measurements have no meaning, then a good deal of the boundary disputes would never even come into being.

JBStahl

Ouch, That almost feels like a jab at me. That really hurts. Makes my chest feel a little constricted...........

BURP

Oh never mind, it was just a little indigestion.

If on that world you have rocketed off to there is actually a one size fits all solution to everything - more power to you.

In the world I occupy (won't call it mine because there are others in it as well), there is a possibility of as many different solutions as there are problems. That very well may mean punching a second mark in a brass disk.

DWoolley

I get your sarcasm.

A legal analysis that uses irrelevant source material is worthless. Land Surveyors (Engineers) are inveterate cherry picking word parsers.

The B&P Code is not Boundary Law.

If we are going to use Statutes and Common Law then let's use them as the Judge would, that is interpret the entire thing as a whole keeping in mind it's purpose and intent.

Keith

The funniest thing I saw was an engineer's lead and tag indicating an old building is encroaching 2'. This is a 19th century townsite. The building has the year printed right on the front "1865."

I guess approaching 150 years of acceptance and repose is not enough for some geomatricians.

Keith

In other words, IT'S NOT AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM!!!

"When a man has had a training in one of the exact sciences, where every problem within its purview is supposed to be susceptible of accurate solution, he is likely to be not a little impatient when he is told that, under some circumstances, he must recognize inaccuracies, and govern his action by facts which lead him away from the results which theoretically he ought to reach. Observation warrants us in saying that this remark may frequently be made of surveyors." -Justice Thomas Cooley

Just pull the pins and start over

All said tongue in cheek of course