MorePosted By Mike Turnrose on 4/27/2010 at 3:27 PM
See the attached image.
This is a portion of a recorded sub. map. The property in question is Lots 26 and 27, Block 5 and the northerly 10' of the southerly adjacent lane. I am looking at providing the client an estimate to do the boundary.
I have drawn in a c/l of Beaumont Drive where there are two monuments that have been shown on nearby record of surveys and other record maps. Generally, the railroad spike marks the C/L intersection of Bonnie Lane and Beaumont. This mon has been accepted by other surveys as such. Also you will see I have drawn in a street monument that marks the C/L BC of Beaumont. This has been accepted as such by other surveys as well. The problem is that the measured distance between the mons. is 222.03 feet, but the record dimension per the original sub. map is 216.53. A survey across the street concluded that there was a problem in Block 9. These monuments are not original monuments as per the sub. map. If you were to accept these monuments as marking their respective positions, you would have an excess in the lot frontages on Block 5 of 5.5 feet. In your opinion, how would deal with this excess? There are no closure errors in the record dimensions in Lots 21-27, Block 5. If you hold the mons., then you would have to place that 5.5 feet somewhere. I'm not sure if proration would apply since these are not original monuments. It appears from research that the location of the improvements (curbs) seem to support the location of the mons. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
To read the rest of this thread go to www.i-boards.com/bnp/pob/messages.asp?MsgID=1565517&ThreadID=147363&IsResponse=False#1565517 .
See the attached image.
This is a portion of a recorded sub. map. The property in question is Lots 26 and 27, Block 5 and the northerly 10' of the southerly adjacent lane. I am looking at providing the client an estimate to do the boundary.
I have drawn in a c/l of Beaumont Drive where there are two monuments that have been shown on nearby record of surveys and other record maps. Generally, the railroad spike marks the C/L intersection of Bonnie Lane and Beaumont. This mon has been accepted by other surveys as such. Also you will see I have drawn in a street monument that marks the C/L BC of Beaumont. This has been accepted as such by other surveys as well. The problem is that the measured distance between the mons. is 222.03 feet, but the record dimension per the original sub. map is 216.53. A survey across the street concluded that there was a problem in Block 9. These monuments are not original monuments as per the sub. map. If you were to accept these monuments as marking their respective positions, you would have an excess in the lot frontages on Block 5 of 5.5 feet. In your opinion, how would deal with this excess? There are no closure errors in the record dimensions in Lots 21-27, Block 5. If you hold the mons., then you would have to place that 5.5 feet somewhere. I'm not sure if proration would apply since these are not original monuments. It appears from research that the location of the improvements (curbs) seem to support the location of the mons. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
To read the rest of this thread go to www.i-boards.com/bnp/pob/messages.asp?MsgID=1565517&ThreadID=147363&IsResponse=False#1565517 .
