Well, I did a survey in December and set 2 corners. Submitted a CR for filing and the Deputy County Surveyor asked that I prepare a RS based on material discrepancy.
I had place a note on the CR which prompted the CS request, no problem.
Attached are 2 PDF
One is the 2nd page of the CR I submitted, the second PDF shows the layout of the material discrepancy between a record establishment of lines
and existing occupation.
Not sure what happened here, but the divisions along Cutter are PM done by record data. The S/W at Cutter/Exchange is really new, 2007. It's suspect to me, but there is nothing else out there or to the east, so use it, note it, file an RS and forget it.
Material Discrepancy CR
-
LS 4722
- Posts: 479
- Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 8:42 am
Material Discrepancy CR
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
Warren Smith
- Posts: 1006
- Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 6:41 am
- Location: Sonora
-
LS 4722
- Posts: 479
- Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 8:42 am
The interesting thing about this is that material discrepancy is not confined to monuments and map values. I was actually a bit surprised how occupation fit the picture and became a part of 8762 (b).
When it comes to concrete tilt up and concrete block buildings, the definition (amount) of material discrepancy is less than 6" (in this case).
When it comes to concrete tilt up and concrete block buildings, the definition (amount) of material discrepancy is less than 6" (in this case).