EDIT: I am getting ready to start a survey on Lot 2 tomorrow and both the Lot 2 and 3 are owned by the same person. What do you think the bearing is?ÿ between Lots 1 & 2.
Incidentally the distance 418 goes to the middle of the road.
?ÿ
Few of the bearings or angles are readable.
what is it or what does it say??ÿ my guess is somebody got confused and turned N balls 30 E into N 89 30 E.?ÿ As it's clearly the same bearing as the east line of Lot 1, which is fairly legible (as well as the lots north of lee drive).?ÿ based on the north arrow and the south line call, i think that's what i'd likely assume.?ÿ at least until i started digging up rods, pipes, and fence corners.
By looks and age of the plat, the bearing between lots 1 & 2 would somewhere between what looks like 2 section corners, and whatever has been monumented and relied on. I would expect a plat and found bearing discrepancy, however that is based on my regional findings. The image is difficult to read but here's to hoping you find original corners. Cheers
I dunno, I'd guess it was supposed to be N1dE so they were perpendicular to the section line and the north boundary of the sub.
Well at least the subd is properly named.
My first guess is N03-30E, then I'd assume Lee Dr is E-W (or maybe N89W) and then I'd comp it up and see how it closed. IF the closure suggested that N03-30E was incorrect, I'd try to find a bearing that worked and looked representative of the blobs of ink on those lines. Initially I'd limit my search of potential bearings to 30' increments since most lines created by the subd look to be 00' or 30' (there may be some 10' increments but I can't see that well.) - I wouldn't sweat it too much until I'd gone out there and searched diligently for those "iron pins placed at all corners".
You might just contact Thos Williams as the plat is only 48 years old and if Mr. Williams wasn't charging enough (as I hear is the norm in those parts) he probably couldn't afford to retire or to die.
Wow that map looks like pre-1920s, by 1972 the subdivisions were much more sophisticated that that.
Just A. Surveyor??
You have the map; and the bearing between lot 1 and 2 is printed on it. Can you NOT read it?
JOHN NOLTON
Yes, but the written bearing is nearly perpendicular to that which one would guess from the direction of the lines.
if the same person owns both lots, it doesn't matter.?ÿ Use the distances along the south and north lines of the lots.
The same person owns Lots 2 & 3 with the creek the dividing line. Gonna have to locate the wrested vegetation line as well as the centerline and banks.
Very poorly drawn considering it is from 1972 but this crap is surprisingly quite common.
No I cannot. The photo is far better than a copy and it vaguely apprears to read N 89-30 E for 418 feet.
I know the bearing is wrong and possibly could be N 0-30 E. Doing some rough checking and it looks like all the side line distances go to the center of the road.
Unfortunately that is far from the worst plat on record from that time period. Tom Williams did do some decent measuring, he just didn't draft it very well. I usually had decent luck finding his iron pins also.
Andy
It appears to be parallel to the other interior lot lines, except the ones running along the creek. These lines all look to be running a little to the right of a 90 degree angle from the southerly perimeter boundary, so I vote for N 23-30 E.
Yeah you have fun with that. I am looking at that plat on a 27" monitor and I couldn't tell you what any of the bearings are.
I am going there tomorrow to get started so time will tell, pray for me.
Is that the best copy in existence, or is that just what is easy to grab??ÿ If that's a scan from on-line records it would be worth finding out if the courthouse can pull the original.
If you could read all the numbers, it could be a worthwhile endeavor to put all of them into a least squares program and see what fits and how well.?ÿ That should confirm or reject the N 0^ 30' E interpretation.
It looks to me like there is some detail loss due to focus or low pixel count and the original could be clearer. Look at the ragged edge of the page - it isn't any sharper than the lettering.
