Lot 14, Block 3: Where Does 3.20 Feet of Excess Go?

Ranking: original monuments (and the record of their setting) > occupation (fences, improvements) > courses and distances shown on the plat > area. The plat distances are computed statements to hundredths; they were never intended to override the monuments the subdivider actually set.

Front line. Both front corners of Lot 14 are original, capped rebars. The lot's front line is therefore the measured distance between those two monuments, whatever it is - report the measured value and the difference from 50.00 ft. The 3.20 ft of block excess does not get distributed into Lot 14 by proration, because Lot 14's corners are monumented; proportionate measure is a fallback for corners that were never set or are lost. The excess belongs to the unmonumented lots and, in the usual scheme, is pushed outward to the exterior block line - the last line created absorbs the discrepancy. Say explicitly in the notes: "frontage held between original monuments; 3.20 ft of block excess not prorated into this lot."

Rear corners. With no rear monuments and no rear block line evidence, the interior lot lines are run from the front monuments on the plat bearing for the plat distance (130.00 ft) - parallel side lines, perpendicular rear - and the rear block line is where the plat puts it relative to the front monuments. Do not move the rear line to the fence. If you find any rear block monument, it controls and the depth distance yields to it.

• Refuse to force the geometry. Drawing 50.00 × 130.00 when the monuments measure otherwise is a false statement in a signed document; the lender's closing checklist is not evidence of the boundary. Offer instead a map that shows both the record and the measured values so the lender's title people can see exactly what they are getting.
• Explain the reasoning in writing: the plat distance is subordinate to the original monuments, and the deed/plat area is a computed value.
• On the map: basis of bearings; every found monument with cap, condition, and ties; the held front line with measured vs. plat distance; rear corners with a symbol showing "set" or "calculated"; the fence as occupation with ties; the shed with ties and an encroachment note; area by record and by measured; a location note stating "Lot 14 front held between original monuments; rear corners computed per plat bearing and distance; no original rear monument found."
• Notes/disclosure: the 1.4 ft fence discrepancy and 2 ft shed encroachment are disclosed as physical evidence. Whether either has ripened into a right is a question of law and title, not of measurement - tell the client to consult counsel.

Then the hierarchy shifts, and so does the answer:

• Unidentified caps are not automatically original. A rebar with an unknown cap may be a later surveyor's, a utility stake, or a disturbed original. Investigate: cap legibility, position relative to the plat geometry, ties to other original work, the subdivider's monumentation pattern, and any record of later surveys.
• If the front block corners are original and those two rebars are not, the block corners govern. The block frontage is then held between original block monuments, and the 3.20 ft excess is distributed - proportionate measure among the unmonumented interior lot lines, so Lot 14 would take slightly more than 50.00 ft rather than the rebar-to-rebar distance.
• If the rebars appear to be original but are offset 0.8 ft inward, that is a classic disturbed/offset monument scenario; a monument set in error and subsequently relied upon is still a monument, and its weight depends on whether it was the subdivider's original or a later replacement. Get the record; if a remonumentation filing exists, it controls.
• Either way, the deliverable changes in its basis of location note, and the client must be told in writing that the lot width is now derived from proration rather than from found monuments.