J. Penry, post: 331913, member: 321 wrote: I think the argument was that Point "A" was more than 50.00' and the curve took care of that. We are splitting hairs now.
Yes. If it is repugnant to the intent of the deed to have an angle point more than the stated R/W width distance on a line parallel to a kinked line, then what kind of theoretical math do you need to use to keep the R/W line on the inside of the kink a constant width? I used 30' offsets in the example below.
Also, I'm usually dealing with descriptions stating "a 60 foot strip", not 60.0 or 60.00 or 60.000...
Convert this into a subdivision layout which come in very weird configurations. The building set back line, the utility easement, etc. are very commonly described as being X feet from various property lines. That would be parallel to said line and extend or retract, as needed, to reach the sideline of the lot involved. You very definitely have significant jumps along the sidelines.
The 6x6 concrete R/W monument goes at A. DOTs rarely try to establish the sidelines so it shouldn't be a problem. The R/W fence is built ignoring the intersection at B so there is no extra brace.
great example/post.
Rankin_File, post: 331856, member: 101 wrote: - and I'm not buying the curve idea even a little bit.....
I believe the only time I have ever offset a feature with curves at angle points is when creating the 100' buffer we have here from flagged delineation of State wetlands.
Licensed Land Surveyor
Finger Lakes Region, Upstate New York
I find this whole discussion to be amazing. Why do we insist on trying to transfer the words written by others into something they were never intended to mean? The result may look prettier on a plat but it does not conform to the words.
Here's an exaggerated view with more detail than Mike Berry showed. I'm just showing the locus of points that are 30 ft from the nearest point on the centerline, and leave the legal issues to others.
Each document must stand alone. If I'm the owner of the tract on the bottom left in that illustration, I will not stand for anything to be located more than 30 feet from my north line if the description in my document reads, "A strip 30 feet in width along the north line of said tract". I have every right to build a solid wall at that precise offset and no one else had better try to mess with it.
Sorry, Bill, but we disagree on this one.
I just needed a more detailed picture to understand Mike's post.
Bill93, post: 332085, member: 87 wrote: I'm just showing the locus of points that are 30 ft from the nearest point on the centerline, and leave the legal issues to others.
To get into legal issues, I agree with you, given the description you posted.
Do you think your description is the same as "a 60 ft strip centered on the section line" ?
Yes, I do, as a strip is uniformly perpendicular all the way to the limiting edge of the subject property, whether extended or truncated.
Warning: I am not a lawyer, do I wish to appear to be one.
My limited experience with attorneys and legal documents has resulted in learning that one must be able to discern the intent of the document within the "four corners" of said document for it to be a useful and enforceable document. The wording of the easement, right-of-way, etc. must be made clear if the intent is to deviate from the most common example of such intent. The limiting side of any strip defined as being X feet wide from a straight line would also be a straight line. What is being introduced in several posts above takes into account information from other documents for adjoining tracts that is being used to "smooth" the appearance of a right across a specific tract. Each document must be fully understood on it's own wording.
When the intent is to add curves and other departures from the simplest definition, the term strip should be avoided and a metes and bounds type of description prepared describing the true intent for each specific tract involved.
I, for one, do not want to be making an unpaid court appearance to explain why I told a landowner that they could place something closer to a property boundary than what a setback document specified was to be allowed.
LRDay, post: 331961, member: 571 wrote: In my little part of the world the questions is, What Records? So far I haven't been able to locate any, the county officials don't even believe they exist.
So I find it sort of a amusing discussion over this 0.38 feet and whether to add a curve or what. All I usually have is the road where it exists now and new and old fences. Most of our county roads are only easement. Even the ones that are deeded don't have very precise descriptions. Then the next thing is most of the section corners in the valley have no historical record and seem to get up and move with each new surveyors attempt, accept fence corner, proportion, witching, whatever. Thinking about it maybe just having the existing road is a good thing, but it amazes me how many can't see where it is and won't honor the physical location.
Riddle me this: A County road, 40' wide the centerline of which is [straight line segments on the north side of a small valley] established by the County Commissioners in the late 1800s, constructed soon thereafter. Come 1975, the County road department decides to by contract to regrade on the same alignment, install culverts and construct a proper gravel base to make the road less of a mud bog in the spring rainy season. The lowly County Surveyor (me) is directed to perform an asbuilt survey of the road for engineering plans and quantities. ROW deed in hand, he quickly discovers the road is on the *south* side of the valley and there's no evidence of a road ever being on the north side! It's a no brainer why, the north side of the valley is practically solid basalt and the south side is easily graded soil. The record ROW is thousands of feet distant from the existing road. The contractor who build the road followed the path of least resistance and selected the best alignment, not some BS Commissioner's numbers.
So where's the ROW now, and how wide is it? Are the northern landowner's properties still encumbered by the original ROW Deed? Kinda makes 0.38' of uncertainty pale in comparison. The sad thing is a few subdivisions of parcels have occurred by deed over the decades (as each farmer dies, the children get their share of the farm) and the (probably written by the owner's lawyers) deeds read "That portion of Section 16 [. . .] , north of XXX Road established per [original ROW Deed]." Talk about clouding title!
The bigger picture here is there's nobody bitching about the situation. The landowners in 1890 were overjoyed a real road finally got punched in to their valley at public expense, and they built equipment yards, hayshacks and ultimately farmhomes next to the road, and ultimately created a bucolic, if somewhat isolated community. The 1975 landowners were overjoyed the County was finally making XXX Road an all weather road at public expense, although rumours around town were that some significant campaign contributions were made to County Commissioners by landowners in the valley in the prior election cycle :-D.
The lowly (and recently licensed) Surveyor railed high and low about the egregious problems in the valley, quitclaim deed exchanges, abandonment of the original alignment, a taking of the new alignment, God knows the complications. He finally got called onto the carpet for a meeting with the County Attorney, where the attorney directed him that he had merely done an asbuilt survey for engineering purposes, it had nothing to do with property rights, and to shut his pie-hole or he'd confer with the County engineer concerning how to fire his ass (actually used the term "college boy" in the conversation). I whimpered "But I'm right about this" and the attorney retorted that there's much more than my little surveyor's opinion involved, State shared funding, huge costs to acquire a new ROW which might involve years of litigation when the landowners smell free government cash for a road, a valley that is in repose, and much more.
The lowly Surveyor became more humble as the years passed; math and courthouse records do not trump reality on the ground if there's no disputes. I agree, an existing road of record, even if thousands of feet from record, is profound proof of intent, and the parcels that are defined by it hold even if their lousy deeds describe land a mile away.
The intent that matters is the intent when the row deeds were written not the intentent of the guys with the shovels a few months latter. The original land owners granted an unambigous ROW.
I cant speak for your area but here the deeded ROW would exist untill vacated at a public hearing and the actual road would be a ditch to ditch persprictive easement. The government doesnt gain a specific width just because they spent money on a building a road.
Mike Marks, post: 332133, member: 1108 wrote: ROW deed in hand, he quickly discovers the road is on the *south* side of the valley and there's no evidence of a road ever being on the north side!
Sounds very similar to the situation in a recent court ruling here, Shotgun Creek Ranch v. Crook County. Our state law has provisions for an old county road to be "Legalized"... the R/W fixed to the location of the actual road. The old R/W is simultaneously vacated on completion of the legalization. It's a public process involving public notice and hearings, remonstrance period and the final determination is made by the County Commissioners. In Shotgun Creek the legalization was challenged up through the state court of appeals. The State supreme court denied the petition for review. To cut to the chase, Crook County prevailed.
Mike Marks, post: 332133, member: 1108 wrote: Riddle me this: A County road, 40' wide the centerline of which is [straight line segments on the north side of a small valley] established by the County Commissioners in the late 1800s, constructed soon thereafter. Come 1975, the County road department decides to by contract to regrade on the same alignment, install culverts and construct a proper gravel base to make the road less of a mud bog in the spring rainy season. The lowly County Surveyor (me) is directed to perform an asbuilt survey of the road for engineering plans and quantities. ROW deed in hand, he quickly discovers the road is on the *south* side of the valley and there's no evidence of a road ever being on the north side! It's a no brainer why, the north side of the valley is practically solid basalt and the south side is easily graded soil. The record ROW is thousands of feet distant from the existing road. The contractor who build the road followed the path of least resistance and selected the best alignment, not some BS Commissioner's numbers.
So where's the ROW now, and how wide is it? Are the northern landowner's properties still encumbered by the original ROW Deed? Kinda makes 0.38' of uncertainty pale in comparison. The sad thing is a few subdivisions of parcels have occurred by deed over the decades (as each farmer dies, the children get their share of the farm) and the (probably written by the owner's lawyers) deeds read "That portion of Section 16 [. . .] , north of XXX Road established per [original ROW Deed]." Talk about clouding title!
The bigger picture here is there's nobody bitching about the situation. The landowners in 1890 were overjoyed a real road finally got punched in to their valley at public expense, and they built equipment yards, hayshacks and ultimately farmhomes next to the road, and ultimately created a bucolic, if somewhat isolated community. The 1975 landowners were overjoyed the County was finally making XXX Road an all weather road at public expense, although rumours around town were that some significant campaign contributions were made to County Commissioners by landowners in the valley in the prior election cycle :-D.
The lowly (and recently licensed) Surveyor railed high and low about the egregious problems in the valley, quitclaim deed exchanges, abandonment of the original alignment, a taking of the new alignment, God knows the complications. He finally got called onto the carpet for a meeting with the County Attorney, where the attorney directed him that he had merely done an asbuilt survey for engineering purposes, it had nothing to do with property rights, and to shut his pie-hole or he'd confer with the County engineer concerning how to fire his ass (actually used the term "college boy" in the conversation). I whimpered "But I'm right about this" and the attorney retorted that there's much more than my little surveyor's opinion involved, State shared funding, huge costs to acquire a new ROW which might involve years of litigation when the landowners smell free government cash for a road, a valley that is in repose, and much more.
The lowly Surveyor became more humble as the years passed; math and courthouse records do not trump reality on the ground if there's no disputes. I agree, an existing road of record, even if thousands of feet from record, is profound proof of intent, and the parcels that are defined by it hold even if their lousy deeds describe land a mile away.
The state supreme court has addressed this issue, the road is where the physical road is, now that can get complicated, fences, roadbed, ect. However, if there are differences between the record and existing road then the existing road prevails, and it isn't something you really need to sweat over, which is good. Sometimes the road can be located quite a distance from the record.
I did get involved in a dispute where the county claimed a road 3/4 of a mile west of it's record location, problem was that the road was constructed at the correct location, with no maintenance it fell into disuse, the ranch cleaned up the fences, the road almost disappeared and then the county claimed rights to the nearest ranch road to the west. That one didn't fly, it was just a hunter wanting access and complaining and an aggressive code enforcement officer.
There is one state I work in where a road doesn't need any formal document for it's creation as a county road, basically if it's a historical access road it becomes a county road.
If the road conforms to the record, and there are CR stones, then it gets pretty easy, of course then the right of way width is thrown out the window, finding CR stones doesn't happen all that often anymore, but they sure are fun to find. And no there are no curves in the old roads or the right of way.
If you are locating an existing road that isn't conforming to the record, then you can throw in all the curves you want, and I do, cause it fits the road much better.
Mike Marks, post: 332133, member: 1108 wrote: Riddle me this: A County road, 40' wide the centerline...a mile away.
A book written in the 1950s to simplify boundary resolution for subdivision engineering mills doesn't work very well in rural areas with 10+ decades of repose.
😀
The situation you describe in no way changes the need to apply sound practice to the smaller problems we face. The lesson to be learned in that case is more along the lines of problem solving and guiding soluions. A measured reaction could have generated a good bit of work....
Mike Marks, post: 332133, member: 1108 wrote: Riddle me this: A County road, 40' wide the centerline of which is [straight line segments on the north side of a small valley] established by the County Commissioners in the late 1800s, constructed soon thereafter. Come 1975, the County road department decides to by contract to regrade on the same alignment, install culverts and construct a proper gravel base to make the road less of a mud bog in the spring rainy season. The lowly County Surveyor (me) is directed to perform an asbuilt survey of the road for engineering plans and quantities. ROW deed in hand, he quickly discovers the road is on the *south* side of the valley and there's no evidence of a road ever being on the north side! It's a no brainer why, the north side of the valley is practically solid basalt and the south side is easily graded soil. The record ROW is thousands of feet distant from the existing road. The contractor who build the road followed the path of least resistance and selected the best alignment, not some BS Commissioner's numbers.
nt cash for a road, a valley that is in repose, and much more.
I ran into a similar situation in my home county. My survey of some very old property turned up a reference to a roadway declared a public road by the County in 1861. The only extant copy of the road document was a very, very poor quality microfiche image. Most of the courses were not that easy to read. There was a road existing on the ground, but it didn't seem to match the courses that we got from the deed. Fortunately for us, the first part of this project was a Parcel Map of the large tract of land (several hundred acres) and on the map we vacated the right-of-way from that old document and dedicated a new right-of-way centered on the road as it existed on the ground. Not all projects get that kind of a lucky break, for sure.
This project did have a lot of discussion with the County Surveyor, though to decide what the best course of action would be. Everyone was agreeing that the deed, as written, described the clear intent of the original land owner(s) to dedicate a public roadway to access the farms back in this particular valley. And wherever the roadway was actually constructed may or may not agree with the courses on the face of the deed. Since the roadway had been in continuous use AND maintained by the County in that particular location for over 100 years, everyone also agreed that there were prescriptive rights to the use of that roadway where it sat on the ground. It was an interesting project and I learned a lot from it as well.
Mike Marks, post: 332133, member: 1108 wrote: Riddle me this: A County road, 40' wide the centerline of which is [straight line segments on the north side of a small valley] established by the County Commissioners in the late 1800s, constructed soon thereafter. Come 1975, the County road department decides to by contract to regrade on the same alignment, install culverts and construct a proper gravel base to make the road less of a mud bog in the spring rainy season. The lowly County Surveyor (me) is directed to perform an asbuilt survey of the road for engineering plans and quantities. ROW deed in hand, he quickly discovers the road is on the *south* side of the valley and there's no evidence of a road ever being on the north side! It's a no brainer why, the north side of the valley is practically solid basalt and the south side is easily graded soil. The record ROW is thousands of feet distant from the existing road. The contractor who build the road followed the path of least resistance and selected the best alignment, not some BS Commissioner's numbers.
So where's the ROW now, and how wide is it? Are the northern landowner's properties still encumbered by the original ROW Deed? Kinda makes 0.38' of uncertainty pale in comparison. The sad thing is a few subdivisions of parcels have occurred by deed over the decades (as each farmer dies, the children get their share of the farm) and the (probably written by the owner's lawyers) deeds read "That portion of Section 16 [. . .] , north of XXX Road established per [original ROW Deed]." Talk about clouding title!
The bigger picture here is there's nobody bitching about the situation. The landowners in 1890 were overjoyed a real road finally got punched in to their valley at public expense, and they built equipment yards, hayshacks and ultimately farmhomes next to the road, and ultimately created a bucolic, if somewhat isolated community. The 1975 landowners were overjoyed the County was finally making XXX Road an all weather road at public expense, although rumours around town were that some significant campaign contributions were made to County Commissioners by landowners in the valley in the prior election cycle :-D.
The lowly (and recently licensed) Surveyor railed high and low about the egregious problems in the valley, quitclaim deed exchanges, abandonment of the original alignment, a taking of the new alignment, God knows the complications. He finally got called onto the carpet for a meeting with the County Attorney, where the attorney directed him that he had merely done an asbuilt survey for engineering purposes, it had nothing to do with property rights, and to shut his pie-hole or he'd confer with the County engineer concerning how to fire his ass (actually used the term "college boy" in the conversation). I whimpered "But I'm right about this" and the attorney retorted that there's much more than my little surveyor's opinion involved, State shared funding, huge costs to acquire a new ROW which might involve years of litigation when the landowners smell free government cash for a road, a valley that is in repose, and much more.
The lowly Surveyor became more humble as the years passed; math and courthouse records do not trump reality on the ground if there's no disputes. I agree, an existing road of record, even if thousands of feet from record, is profound proof of intent, and the parcels that are defined by it hold even if their lousy deeds describe land a mile away.
:good::good:
Mike Marks, post: 332133, member: 1108 wrote: Riddle me this: A County road, 40' wide the centerline of which is [straight line segments on the north side of a small valley] established by the County Commissioners in the late 1800s, constructed soon thereafter. Come 1975, the County road department decides to by contract to regrade on the same alignment, install culverts and construct a proper gravel base to make the road less of a mud bog in the spring rainy season. The lowly County Surveyor (me) is directed to perform an asbuilt survey of the road for engineering plans and quantities. ROW deed in hand, he quickly discovers the road is on the *south* side of the valley and there's no evidence of a road ever being on the north side! It's a no brainer why, the north side of the valley is practically solid basalt and the south side is easily graded soil. The record ROW is thousands of feet distant from the existing road. The contractor who build the road followed the path of least resistance and selected the best alignment, not some BS Commissioner's numbers.
So where's the ROW now, and how wide is it? Are the northern landowner's properties still encumbered by the original ROW Deed? Kinda makes 0.38' of uncertainty pale in comparison. The sad thing is a few subdivisions of parcels have occurred by deed over the decades (as each farmer dies, the children get their share of the farm) and the (probably written by the owner's lawyers) deeds read "That portion of Section 16 [. . .] , north of XXX Road established per [original ROW Deed]." Talk about clouding title!
The bigger picture here is there's nobody bitching about the situation. The landowners in 1890 were overjoyed a real road finally got punched in to their valley at public expense, and they built equipment yards, hayshacks and ultimately farmhomes next to the road, and ultimately created a bucolic, if somewhat isolated community. The 1975 landowners were overjoyed the County was finally making XXX Road an all weather road at public expense, although rumours around town were that some significant campaign contributions were made to County Commissioners by landowners in the valley in the prior election cycle :-D.
The lowly (and recently licensed) Surveyor railed high and low about the egregious problems in the valley, quitclaim deed exchanges, abandonment of the original alignment, a taking of the new alignment, God knows the complications. He finally got called onto the carpet for a meeting with the County Attorney, where the attorney directed him that he had merely done an asbuilt survey for engineering purposes, it had nothing to do with property rights, and to shut his pie-hole or he'd confer with the County engineer concerning how to fire his ass (actually used the term "college boy" in the conversation). I whimpered "But I'm right about this" and the attorney retorted that there's much more than my little surveyor's opinion involved, State shared funding, huge costs to acquire a new ROW which might involve years of litigation when the landowners smell free government cash for a road, a valley that is in repose, and much more.
The lowly Surveyor became more humble as the years passed; math and courthouse records do not trump reality on the ground if there's no disputes. I agree, an existing road of record, even if thousands of feet from record, is profound proof of intent, and the parcels that are defined by it hold even if their lousy deeds describe land a mile away.
Time to bring out the following:
Jp7191, post: 332200, member: 1617 wrote: Time to bring out the following:
That is an interesting read. And there is a great deal of it with which I agree, particularly discussion of re-establishing R/W as a constant distance from some ethereal centerline (that only briefly existed at the time of construction) as a poor practice. In my mind the only way to establish a R/W line is from deeds and conveyances of record.
What I don't agree with is the use of R/W posts as boundary monuments. In Oklahoma the concrete R/W posts were usually placed near the completion of construction. Placed by station-offset methods from an almost obliterated centerline. Some were even "ragged" in with roll-up tapes. I know, I've watched it done. And the 'surveying' was only done to establish a wooden stake point. The actual placement was done later by even less knowledgeable personnel. While these posts may 'delineate' the R/W line, I do not believe they 'monument' the line in a boundary sense. And I realize there are arguments to this opinion.
