Chaos--OK or not
Love hearing how other seasoned professionals deal with this stuff!
In many ways Lot/Block surveys are similar to Section surveys.
The 4 types of Section monuments are a valid way to think of urban evidence.
Much like Iowa section corners it will be very rare to find any existing monuments in an older subdivision.
Existing monument being an original in place monument.
There isn't any chance for an existent monument in any old subdivisions I've worked in.
So that leaves obliterated and lost monuments.
As we all know an obliterated monument has a far higher level of importance in Sectional surveys than a lost monument which is the lowest level. Much of evaluating lot/block surveys come down to that; is the evidence sufficient to declare a position an obliterated corner or are you going to declare it lost. We all know courts will favor obliterated monuments over lost ones, so it pays to be very careful rejecting evidence.
Interesting question and I've run into this scenario many times. If I can hold the block geometry per the original plat and get the calculated ROW width(s) to match the plat call within a tenth or so, I call the ROW width as per the plat. If trying to hold the platted ROW width(s) lead to chaos as you point out, I will typically hold the block geometry per the evidence I find and label the roads as "Reported as 60 foot right of way per [insert record document recording info here]". In these instances I graphically show all of the found supporting monumentation that supports my conclusion.
I run into this scenario much more frequently with in town subdivision plats created +/- 50 years ago (or more), and IMO you have to take into account the methods of Surveying at that time and the instruments in use. We are great "button pushers" today with the advancements in the technology, an advantage our prior brethren did not have at that time.
