Working on a job and am in a bit of a quandary.
I'm doing the lot with the blue marker. As you can see from the screen shot, the road r/w as shown is irregular, to say the least. The screen shot lot lines are trimmed to the alleged r/w. I suspect the GIS operator just backed them up by 30'. My deed calls for the "center of the 60' r/w". Other deeds call for "a point within the r/w" and "to the centerline of the road". No monuments were found in the road for my lot as the road has been repaved recently. I have good monuments at the rear of the lot and a couple of monuments in the front for the adjoiners. One is in the pavement but not the c/l and one is off the pavement. The pavement isn't even close to being in the center of the r/w called out in the various deeds. Except for the 4 lots across the street, these are metes and bounds descriptions.
The thin lots across the street are a recorded subdivision. I was happy to find this because the PLS had located the road , paralleled the centerline and had the owner dedicate the portion of the property in this newly located r/w to the City, which would seem to give me some precedence to hold the pavement as the center of the right of way. Unfortunately, the irons at the front of the subdivision lot don't agree with the plat by around 4' so I'm not going to rely on that work. He may even have a serious overlap on his hands. Below the GIS screenshot is part of my plat that shows the road wandering around.
So, bearing in mind that in North Carolina a road is considered a natural monument but my deed calls for the center of an poorly defined "r/w" would you:
a) show the r/w as called for in the deed by paralleling the deed lines, and show the difference between the thread of the road and the deed line r/w.
b) use the centerline of the road to establish a r/w line and show the difference to the deed lines.
I'm leaning toward a).
Thanks for your thoughts.
Yes, A is the way to go. So your lot is a metes and bounds description that closes and you have it set on some back irons that you are confident in? Then I think you are on the right track. Yes I would offset the front lines back 30'. Not your problem, or anyone's really, that the road isn't centered in the R/W nor parallel. It doesn't need to be.
Stephen
JB
I don't know squat about NC and r/w's. My first question is how is the r/w created? Deed, County takings, state takings or subdivision plat. Next would be the verbage in the creating document. To the centerline of the road, etc. At this time I would not go with option b.
Pablo
I am thinking "a", as the centerline of roads with curves tend to move over the years. Would be nice to know more history about the road, but "a".
What you should do is show both the r/w per deed (plat) and the apparent r/w as established by the physical road location. Be sure to not show a preference between the two by not darkening either line. Thats the official version, since this is a real situation.
Where is the right of way? ''It Is Where It Is!''
Since there appears to be no problem with adjacent lots, then it is easy as 1,2 3.
1/ Show the lot lines per the deed, show the lot area per deed.
2/ Show physical centerline and a line 30' from physical centerline, (call it the apparent right of way line if you must, but do not call it the "Right of Way" line), show area of same.
3/ Subract 2 from 1 and show Net Lot Area. This is what one pays taxes on.
Your job is to show conditions as of November 30, 2012, so you are done.
The gross lot area becomes very important at times. Assume you have a gross 1.05 acre lot, with 0.95 acre net and are in a 1 acre zone. State law around here says it is a conforming 1 acre lot.
Conversely on the other side of the road you would show the Filed Map lines and the physical centerline of road 30' or 50' or whatever from it. It is necessary to show access/frontage on a road, but why pay taxes on excess land that you are free to mow and landscape?
Paul in PA
> What you should do is show both the r/w per deed (plat) and the apparent r/w as established by the physical road location. Be sure to not show a preference between the two by not darkening either line. Thats the official version, since this is a real situation.
Given certain specifics of the history of the relevant deeds and plats and with North Carolina state law, neither of which I am familiar with, I may or may not show the apparent RoW line based on the physical centerline of the asphalt. In most of my experience and in the states that I am licensed in, AND IN SITUATIONS SIMILAR TO THIS, the offset physical centerline would have little to do with the determination of the RoW line. Therefore, I would not at all favor that line, and probably would not even show it. I would of course show the outline of the edges of asphalt, and it would be readily apparent that the road was not centered in, nor is it straight with, the RoW.
But, I have to completely disagree with your statement about not showing a preference for either line. That is entirely antithetical to the reason that the surveyor was hired for.
Stephen
You seem to have done an excellent job of reviewing adjacent deeds and surveys, however... I don't see any evidence regarding the creation of the right of way itself. Without first determining the nature and extent of the right of way, you can't even begin to properly construe the intent of the deeds you are working from.
JBS
Well, the client says that there should not be a problem. There never should be a problem, and you charged too much anyway.
So, the client says just get er done.
And, refund 1/2 the money!
🙂
N
