California Surveyors Forums

I have been asked to resurvey some old lots in a subdivision which once had very long blocks.

a while ago, the Public agency purchased 2 fifty-foot wide lots back to back, in order to open a street near the middle of the long block.

Original block corners (still in) fit closely to record, and the wooden lot stakes cannot be found.

Question, Should the "street-lots" be prorated along with all other lots ? or do I pro-rate to a would-be centerline then hold 25 feet each side of that line, then prorate lots accordingly on each side of the street.

In other words, the prorated lots calc to be 50.20 feet each, so is the street 50.2 feet wide ? or is now the intent to only allot the street 50 feet and distribute the remaining excess into the lots???

"Feeling better" "Good"

I think it depends on the ROW legal description. If the legal says “all that portion of “ the two lots, then the ROW is 50.2 feet wide.

If the ROW legal gave a strip centerline description where the centerline was described as being the center of the lots and being 25’ wide, then technically, the agency still owns a 0.1’ strip of land on each side of the ROW.

I can’t think of a situation where the other lots in the block get the excess while the street gets the full width.

If they bought the RW as Lots X and Y, then survey Lots X and Y as you normally would. The lot configuration does not change just because a PA bought them.

I agree with what Evan said. I would just add to just be sure that proration is your last resort.

Interesting, this is the same situation I was in back in 2007.
See the thread I started under the title"Canal crossing blocks in tract map (Palo Alto)".
Evan, are you saying I have to oversee the canal and it's improvements and do the proration over the entire block?

sako,

"oversee the canal and its improvements"

I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you clarify the question? Also, give me a link to the thread so that I can put your question into context.

My stand has been that the street "lots" are treated as lots. The PA purchased them as "lot 11 and lot 27 . . . being 50-foot wide lots . . . .for purpose of a public right-of-way"

As far as proration, there are no clear-cut occupation lines (including buildings) as well as NO monuments which could give me a clue to do anything other than pro-rate. the Proration works out well enough with properties so as not to cause any disputes
Many of the old lots are simply vacant and there are few fencelines worth hanging a hat on.

The Public agency "Engineer" is leaving the decision to me.
I dont want to see "ugly" if some other surveyor disagrees. But that would be his perogitive I S'poze.

. . . . "being 50-foot wide lots" . . . . still bugs me a bit

E_Page wrote:sako,

"oversee the canal and its improvements"

I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you clarify the question? Also, give me a link to the thread so that I can put your question into context.

Evan,
By oversee I meant treating the canal as a lot as any other lots in the block and not as a street which gets full width.
Here is the link:
http://www.californiasurveyors.org/clsa ... php?t=2052

Sako,

Same answer for your canal, if the RW was purchased as lots of a block in a subdivision, you survey it as you would any other lot in that block. By giving it its "full width", you are potentially unjustifiably shorting or giving excess to the adjoining lots.

I like the "treat the road as lots" philosophy, as that was what was created, althogh now it is a road. I suspect that a very careful search was done for the original wooden hub lot stakes. Perhads additional search is in order? I've found that taking shallow slices at the calculated search locations with a shovel works well to locate remnants of woood stakes, and even a rust ring of an original pipe... Thanks for posting an interesting question!

I do not see the "being 50' wide lots" as affecting your resolution. You can still establish the lots they way you want and go from there. As for someone coming up with their own resoltion in spite of this, from my experience people these days like to do that anyway, so that is somewhat of a moot issue.

Rob,
Thanks for that "slice" of information. I've personally done a lot of that and it's very exciting to actually see the dark redwood post image against a lighter earth. This method works very well in heavy nonalkaline soils where the posts arent eaten away by time and moisture.

This sandy area was also subject to a massive redevelopment project. Many if not all of the original 2x2 surface posts were gouged out for sidewalk placement. Oddly enough, the original surveyor set his block pipe down a foot or two. Nice !!!

I'm hanging my hat on a 50.2-foot wide street and treating these traveled lots as "lots"

My Christmas wish list . . . . a monument finding x-ray machine (portable)