California Surveyors Forums

There is a square shape 1000'X1000' lot. The owner sells the E. 500' to someone. The W. part will be sudivided into 5 lots. Now you find all 4 corners of the orig. lot, but you find shortage on the N. and S. line.
How will the frontage of the 5 lots be determined? Will the shortage be prorated between them and subtracted from the 100' showing for each lot frontage on the Tract map? or the lot adjacent to the senior property will take the whole shortage?

surveyingnoob wrote:Was the shortage discovered before the West 500' lot was divided into 5 lots? If its before it was divided then the owner can decide if he want the shortage to be divided equally among the 5 lots or take it from just one lot so the remaining 4 will still have 100'.

The shortage is discovered after the subdivision of the W. part of the orig. lot.

It depends upon how the five parcels were described and conveyed. You need to be looking for intent.

For example:

1) The northerly 200 feet of the westerly 500 feet of...
2) The northerly 400 feet of the westerly 500 feet of...excepting therefrom the northerly 200 feet...
3) the northerly 600 feet...
etc.

Likely the southelry lot get shorted.

1) The northerly 1/5 of..
2) The northerly 2/5ths of...except the northerly 1/5
etc.

This would probably be "share and share alike".

Nothing is cut and dried in boundary surveying. One needs to look at ALL the details and weigh the evidence appropriately. The decisions we take should be taken with the idea of what can best be supported by current judicial thinking.

Construction surveying is often a subset of engineering and math.
Boundary surveying is almost always a subset of law.

Oh...I've seen both examples above in real life...and a whole lot more!

Ian Wilson wrote:It depends upon how the five parcels were described and conveyed. You need to be looking for intent.

For example:

1) The northerly 200 feet of the westerly 500 feet of...
2) The northerly 400 feet of the westerly 500 feet of...excepting therefrom the northerly 200 feet...
3) the northerly 600 feet...
etc.

Likely the southelry lot get shorted.

1) The northerly 1/5 of..
2) The northerly 2/5ths of...except the northerly 1/5
etc.

This would probably be "share and share alike".

Nothing is cut and dried in boundary surveying. One needs to look at ALL the details and weigh the evidence appropriately. The decisions we take should be taken with the idea of what can best be supported by current judicial thinking.

Construction surveying is often a subset of engineering and math.
Boundary surveying is almost always a subset of law.

Oh...I've seen both examples above in real life...and a whole lot more!

Ian,
The 5 lots are Lot 1 through 5 on certain tract map (simultaneous conveyance).

Are all lots monumented? Are the irons found those of the original 5 lot subdivision? If you have original, undisturbed monumentation, do you ever use proportionate measurement to overcome the physical location of the original, undisturbed monumentation?

As I read it, of the 5 lots, only one is adjoining the senior parcel (E 500' of the 1000' x 1000' parent parcel of the 6 existing parcels).

If you have monumentation fixing the lots of the subdivision, how many of those lots can now be affected by the senior rights of the E 500'?

Another way to consider it: Suppose the subdivision wasn't of 5 nice, straight lots which seem to lend themselves well, geometrically, to proportional adjustment, but rather was one of those with all the aesthetically pleasing roads that curve this way and that with micro lots lining them on each side of each street.

Would you then endeavor to recalculate the entire subdivision based upon shortage due to the senior rights of one of the parcels adjoining the subdivision? Or would you consider only the effect upon the subdivision lots adjoining this senior parcel?

No real difference between your scenario and this one. The principle is the same.

Missed mention of the Tract Map in the OP.

OK. Now, you’re telling me that all four of the original monuments are in for the original 1000’ x 1000’ square parcel but there’s not a single remnant of a monument from the Tract Map filled later?

First question: How much is the “shortageâ€￾?
Second question: Why are there no monuments left from the Tract Map?
Third question: Is there any other evidence of occupation? Fences? Walls? Mow strips? Anything?

My first reaction would be: look again…and use the shovel this time.

If all else fails, depending upon the wording of the original grant deed for the E’ly 500’ feet, I would give it full benefit of being senior in rights to the parcels in the Tract Map. Then, assuming no other evidence, I would have to proportion the remaining part of the original W’ly parcel, treating each lot in the Tract as being equal in rights.

The fact that the lots were created by a Tract Map implies that they are all equal in rights. However, they are all subordinate to the E’ly 500 parcel.

Remember to prorate BETWEEN found, original, undisturbed monuments or their accepted replacements. Do not prorate OVER found, original, undisturbed monuments or their accepted replacements without some very good, defendable, compelling reason.

Sketch attached

Ian,
Thanks for your drawing.
The northeasterly and southeasterly monuments of the Tract 12345 are lost.
Doesn't this make the situation same as the one on the problem 2, LS exam 2005, the one published in the CLSA Exam Guide ( I think we could discuss about the 2005 exam since it was published by the Board).
It's the problem with the simultaneous conveyance adjacent to the senior property (U.S. Air Force Base).
I said similar situation, but lets make it similar, let's say the monuments on the northerly line of Block "M" were lost (like the lost points of easterly line of Tract 12345), then would all Lots except the one(s) adjacent to the senior property get their record frontage?

sako wrote:Ian,
Thanks for your drawing.
The northeasterly and southeasterly monuments of the Tract 12345 are lost.
Doesn't this make the situation same as the one on the problem 2, LS exam 2005, the one published in the CLSA Exam Guide ( I think we could discuss about the 2005 exam since it was published by the Board).
It's the problem with the simultaneous conveyance adjacent to the senior property (U.S. Air Force Base).
I said similar situation, but lets make it similar, let's say the monuments on the northerly line of Block "M" were lost (like the lost points of easterly line of Tract 12345), then would all Lots except the one(s) adjacent to the senior property get their record frontage?

Anybody has any comments on this?

Dear Paul,
All lot dimensions are given in Tract 12345 (all 100'). The discussion in our study group is about Section 12.41, Brown, 4th edition. It talks about "Subdividing another's land in error". Didn't the owner of the Tract Map12345 pass the senior line in showing the frontage of his land being 500' ( not 490')? If so, and considering the fact that no monument was found on this senior line, should all Lots but Lot 5 get their record dimension?
Paul Cuomo in his seminar in 2003 described this situation as 2 cases:
1. The monuments on the senior line are found, the distance between found monuments will be prorated, but the abutting Lot's boundary cannot pass the senior line.
2. No monuments are found (like our case), all Lots except the abutting Lot get their record (100') dimension, and the last Lot absorbs the deficiency.
I personally don't think we have exactly same case as in (2), because no monument was ever set on the senior line (E. line of Tract 12345). The conveyance of the E. 500' was never recorded in any Map.

Paul,
Cuomo gives all the shortage to the last Lot in case 2 where no mon. were found.
Sorry about the confusion in the original post.
Another clarification, there is a deed for the conveyance of the E. 500', but no recorded map.