Where is the line?

What does the monument on the east line represent? Is it a corner of another parcel and if so, how does it fit with other corners of that parcel?

Does the plat show an angle point? Does the plat show the point on line? What was the intent?

JP

The point is just a point on line, set there because of the steep slope, making it easier to find the line.

The intent is for line to be straight.

So it just serves as a reference point? One that doesn't really agree well with what it is referencing? This might be the perfect place for a pincushion. Set your own reference point.

If I could prove that the front and back corners are good, I'd show the straight line between them.

Because, no one has relied (yet) on the "bent line". (heavy woods)

Now is the time to straighten it out. But only if those end points are acceptable to you.

my pennys worth (half a thought)

I'd probably hold the straight line and note the offset and the fact that it's a plat marker.

There is NO QUESTION WHATSOEVER here. If it is indeed an original monument in the interior of the plat, you have an angle point. Positions of original monuments are ALWAYS held. This is the most fundamental principle of boundary retracement. You do not "correct" an original survey, ever. Shame on all who suggested otherwise.

Would the potential angle point create an overlap into property not owned by the subdivider? If so then the intent is to be straight, if not what does the description for that larger parcel state, what does the adjoiner's description state?

This hypothetical is a very common situation. The key to the whole thing is if you accept the corner monuments.

Since the RM is shown on the original plat and you've accepted it as an original monument, then there is a kink in the line. Especially if there is any occupation to support that.

Just show it on your plat as R & M along the true (monumented) line, and note the falling from the original platted (straight) line.

$0.02 based on the provided information

I agree with eddiemoravec.

I would dig it up and move it to where it should be. 😉

Second that. Wayne said essentially the same thing.

Don

> I have a hypothetical situation I'd like to throw out there.
>
> You are doing a survey on a 5 acre parcel in the interior of a 12 year old plat. The plat shows a point set on the east property line and you find what you believe to be an original undisturbed 5/8" rebar and cap. You also find undisturbed markers at both ends of the line. You also find that the point on line is 0.5' west of the line produced between the 2 end markers. The line is in a wooded area with thick brush and the point on line is at the top of a steep slope, the back line is about 200' lower than the front.
>
> So, does the line bend at the point on line or is it straight?
>
> Thanks for your input.
>
> Radar

0.5' west of the line? Well I would definitely reject it. If it were east, well, 0.5 or even 0.7 would be close enough.;-)

Based on your hypothetical parameters, I would say the line bends through the monument.

There is always more evidence, and there are times you might reject a monument, but you need to find enough evidence to justify it.

Think about this? How do you know that it's the middle point that is off line? How about if the surveyor set a monument, worked his way down the line, set the on-line point well, and set the next angle point off-line? How do you know "which one" to move when the measurement doesn't match the call?

I tend toward the presumption that a found monument is correct and look to see if there is enough evidence to disprove that monument.

> I tend toward the presumption that a found monument is correct and look to see if there is enough evidence to disprove that monument.

:good: