California Surveyors Forums

A simple one liner. Set the front, mid point and rear corner. I quote a prelim cost, client is agreeable but needs to sleep on it a few days. Tells me he will give me a go ahead Monday. No contract went out, was waiting until I got a firm verbal from him this Monday.

Anyway, I decided to run some record calcs and relate that to the current c/l tie information. The record block closed within 0.01'. Then I got into the tier of lots.. everything then blew apart.

I did some further checking on the record map. Calc'd west and east of my block. Four foot bust exists somewhere...

Anyway..take a look at my lot tier. I did not see it at first, but there are big errors quite apparent just looking at the tier...

It's the tier of Lots 43 to 48..

I had to run calcs to see it. You have something going on alright.

Since you have probably taken the time to look at the calcs, were you able to isolate a single bust? Seems like there is something more going on than that here though. I have a feeling the original surveyor may have forgotten to fix some lot lengths when he played with different iterations of the map at the time.

I have been bitten by an old map in East Sacramento like that.

I did the R/S under the contract and luckily the client agreed to pay the checking fees.

I had planned to do a CR but the CS said looks like an R/S to me and I had to agree, dagnabit.

I have linked the tract map, 1924 I believe. I agree with Bryan that the lot line dimensions were not corrected after that map came back from a city check.

What is very noticeable is the arc lengths along Valleyheart Drive for the 593.54' radius. With parallel lines and how the south RW curve is oriented to the rear lot lines, the arc values should be very close to the rear lot line dimensions. Another blatant visual error is how the lot depths jump up and down in length starting from 43/44 to 46/47.

Errors abound and the whole survey was to be about where a conc block wall was placed near a lot line.

I left a message with the client today and told him that a situation has surfaced where I will not be able to do the survey as far as what we initially discussed.

The upper tier of lots in this block are also out of closure. The east line of lots 24 to 31 also have big problems.

To cap it all off, the City of Los Angeles had set well monuments around 1940 or so and anything laid out by surveyors since the tract was done, using just record angle and distance will also add to the mix since old improvements would have been built from those survey points.

I see this as a full occupation survey for the entire tier along Valley Heart between Glendon and Willow Crest.

I wonder Paul, if it is still not as tough as it initially appears IF your issue is lot depth only. The bearings may work out, since the block and lot lines in your area are all parallel. It is possible that different map iterations only changed those lengths.

It would still be an ROS of course, but in terms of how lot lines line up things may work out better than it seems. I am curious what you find should you get the job.

It's not just depth Bryan. That frontage is all screwed up as well.

Last week when I was first contacted by the owner, he told me that a wall was built that came within 2 inches of his garage. He also spoke to the guy building the wall and the next door owner who was having it built. The wall contractor told him that the wall was so close to his garage because "the garage was built at an angle to the property line".

There was no surveyor involved at the time of the wall construction. It was relayed to me that the contractor measured from something at the rear of the lot and at the front of the lot and sighted between them and determined where to place the wall. All this took place four years ago.

It's a detached garage with a sloped roof. City code way back in 1930 or 40 when the garage was built allowed a detached garage with a sloped roof to be one foot offset property line.

It's more than just lot depth Bryan.

I would get the map copied to a usable scale and a google earth pic to the same scale and start with a ruler. And the east sideline of 44 look ng. but I didn't calc anything.