Odd Plot Plan Problem ??

[keithhe]

A Plot Plan 101 drawing is exhibiting something odd I've never seen before. On attached plan, just a plot plan CAD detail, two of the legs are displaying wrong dimensions. First time I thought perhaps I'd entered them in wrong, so deleted and quickly did it again. Same result, exactly. Starting at the origin 0.0 temp point (x) I went clockwise and it closes at the end. But somehow it is forcing the first leg and last leg to lengthen to close. Too far away for snaps, I think, and I suspect it should not have closed, meaning I think PLAT is wrong? So line just below "X" is being added, and the last westerly leg, which should be the close is lengthened to meet the added line??

 

First Line Leg should be 388' (ends up 417.56')

Last Leg should be 72' (ends up 97.74')

Everything else is correct for length and azimuth

 

I had to attach a photo of the PLAT as it was too big to scan as an old blueprint type.

 

Thanks in advance if anyone has any ideas??

 

 

 

 

 

Lucas Cove House.plan

[Chopsaw]

Looks like there may be an issue as I have found on several of other surveys I have plotted.  Could you post all the bearings so I can be sure I have them correctly as they appear on the blueprint.

[keithhe]

Hi Chopsaw,

 

They are on the PLAT (attached photo on original post)

 

I have never seen this large an error, if in fact that is what is happening. I've seen some minor discrepancies, but this would be really huge by comparison.. 

[Chopsaw]

Ok I downloaded and enlarged while I was waiting...  Still figuring.

[keithhe]

These are the 8 legs

 

N61 00 00E

388'

 

S00 45 00W

96'

 

S09 30 00W

96'

 

S36 30 00W

335'

 

N62 30 00W

50'

 

N34 15 00W

72

 

N08 45 00W

92'

 

N30 45 00W

72'

[Chopsaw]

Sometimes I import the PDF and place it under my work in situations like this but it is hard to tell with the distortion of the picture what the issue may be but from my experience surveyors do make mistakes sometimes.  I would suggest politely contacting them and ask for help.  Maybe iron the blueprint and take another shot as square as you possibly can but it looks to me like this will not be easy to resolve with the numbers provided.

[keithhe]

I listed the 8 on post just above your last post. They are very legible, but understand photo was hard to see.

[Richard_Morrison]

This parcel apparently has 10 legs, two of which are not dimensioned. (The two short ones near the road.) This was probably drafted by someone who took the information from somewhere and drew it, and it is not complete. I'd suggest trying to look at the original of the subdivision plat, or get a legal metes & bounds description from the owner. Other than that, you are just guessing. I don't know how important accuracy is on this project, though.

[Kbird1]

Actually I was thinking the same thing Richard.....I drew the the (southern?) PL as a separate polyline and then move it towards the house 30'-35' and it seemed to fit pretty well.

 

I have a Client with a similar lake Front Property and the PL is actually 10m (approx 33') from the Waters edge , which is what made me think of trying it....

[Chopsaw]

1 hour ago, Richard_Morrison said:

This parcel apparently has 10 legs, two of which are not dimensioned. (The two short ones near the road.)

 

I also noticed this but did not mention it as I did not see any way that it would fully correct the situation.  However Richard is correct that it may indicate that this copy is not an official survey and that should be checked.

[keithhe]

Richard, Mick and Chopsaw. Thanks for your replies. I agree that there "might" be ten legs as they show two seemingly unaccounted for pins. The odd thing is that they appear on a straight leg of the two (north and south) longest legs? I had not noticed prior to original post, but there is a note on this PLAT referring to the fact that this was taken from a "deed description" and original survey dated Aug 10, 1949. This survey was done in 1986. I guess I'm curious that if there is a known error, they simply say, "oh well"?? Why would it not be resolved at that time? This is a sealed engineered survey (1986) by a professional company.

I think the only way this "might" be resolved is via another survey. I found several of the pins, so at least some still exist.

Given when this first survey was done (1949) the accuracy of the survey was questionable when I saw all the very round numbers, and seemingly "convenient" bearings that are too low accuracy. No seconds, for example on any leg. Last, given this is a water front property, and tidal too, the water bearings may always have been guesses. Way easier for the guys in 1949 that way.

 

Thanks again guys !!!

[Chopsaw]

Taking a look at any available neighbouring surveys may answer some of your questions but officially you may need a new survey.  Good Luck.

[keithhe]

Thanks Chopsaw. I'm already trying to track down the neighbor surveys but expect that this entire area was initially surveyed at the same time (1949) and my bet is they contain exact same information. Will be interesting to see.

 

Thanks again !!

[Richard_Morrison]

Usually the legal property description is in the Preliminary Title Report that the Title Co. prepares at a sale. (Real estate customs may be different in VA than they are here in CA, though.) You might ask your client if they have a copy of that report. Otherwise, it's usually no big deal to go to the Assessor's office, or wherever these records are kept, and check the actual original survey.

[keithhe]

Thanks Richard,

 

The original survey was in1949 and that seems to be the case with all the lots on this peninsula. I have spoken to the county land management person and she has nothing. Very back woods here in S. Maryland. The most recent survey was 1986, but they noted that they were providing this per original deed description. I'll try to get neighbors plats quietly as no sense in getting them stirred up thinking there is a property dispute. There isn't. That and get owner to get another survey done.  

[Alaskan_Son]

My first thought was that the surveyor or draftsman simply made a mistake and dimensioned to some sort of setback or easement...forgetting to actually include the setback information.  I would check to see if there is possibly an easement or setback that coincides with the discrepancy.

[keithhe]

Thanks Michael,

 

 Don't think that is the case here. My best guess is that the water edge is/was a guestimate. Google Earth shows the side lines and street frontage are pretty close. This property has changed hands only 3 times since 1949 and it appears nobody bothered to get an accurate survey done.    

[Chopsaw]

I always get so frustrated with this stuff because there really is now way of knowing where the error is without survey field notes or GPS data.  It could be just one error or multiple cumulative errors or even worst case scenario of a major error looking not so bad by another error that compensates for it.  If the lot is relatively flat you could measure between the pins you have located and maybe find a few more to verify with or rent a metal detector and try and find them all.  Where my lines overlap in not necessarily any indication there is an error at that particular corner.  Or just let the surveyors do their thing as it may be required in the end anyway.