Original Rebar vs. Plat Curve Data and a 23-Year Fence
A 1978 plat of Prairie View Subdivision, Lot 14, in a central Indiana county shows the west line as a 300.00-ft radius curve, delta = 24°30'00", arc length 128.24 ft, and chord N 12°15'00" E, 127.34 ft. At the northwest corner the surveyor finds a 5/8-inch rebar with a plastic cap stamped with the subdivider's surveyor's license number, 0.38 ft west and 0.22 ft south of the position computed from the plat curve data. The adjoining Lot 13 owner has maintained a split-rail fence for 23 years about 1.4 ft east of the rebar and claims the strip. The client wants the line 'put back on the plat' so a proposed driveway clears. Plat area of Lot 14 is 0.342 acre; area using the rebar is 0.347 acre. No monument is found at the other end of the curve. The county requires a signed boundary survey plat and a legal description.
1. Which position should the surveyor hold for the northwest corner, and how should the evidence be ranked? Address the rebar, the plat curve data, the area, and the fence.
Read the worked answer
Rank the evidence: original called-for monument, then plat courses and distances/curve data, then area, then a possession line. The rebar carries the subdivider's surveyor's cap and sits at the platted corner; if its identity and original placement are established, it is an original monument and controls over the plat's computed chord and arc. That does not mean the entire curve is discarded. The monument fixes one terminus; the curve must be fitted to the monument and the controlling straight line, with the residual distributed rather than forced entirely into the last chord. Area is the weakest call and cannot move a monument; the 0.005-acre difference is consistent with the 0.44-ft offset. The fence is not a record boundary. Twenty-three years of maintenance may support a claim of acquiescence or adverse possession, but that is a title question for a court, not a decision for the surveyor. Show the fence as a possession line, note the discrepancy, and do not move the boundary to it. Tell the client the pin controls unless a court or a written agreement establishes otherwise.
2. Suppose the rebar is later documented as having been set in 1994 by a different surveyor at a computed position. How does that change the analysis, and what would you do?
Read the worked answer
It changes the weight substantially. A monument set in 1994 by a later surveyor is not an original monument of the 1978 plat; it is a later surveyor's monument, usually evidence of that surveyor's opinion, not of the original corner. If original evidence survives at the other end of the curve, the 1994 rebar does not control the plat; it may be a witness or a reset corner. Check the 1994 survey record, the cap license number, and whether the rebar was intended to mark the same corner. If no original monument survives and both owners have accepted the rebar as the corner for decades, it may be evidence supporting a boundary agreement, but it does not become the original corner by label. Hold the plat geometry fitted to surviving original evidence, show the 1994 monument, and explain its status. Do not adopt it merely because it is physical.
3. What must appear on the plat and in the survey report, and what should the surveyor tell the client about the fence?
Read the worked answer
Show the found rebar with its cap and ties or coordinates, the platted or computed corner, the curve data, the fence and its offset, all bearings and distances, the area, the basis of bearing, and a note that the fence is a possession line and not a boundary of record. State the measurement quality and the source of the controlling evidence. The report should explain the hierarchy, the 0.38-ft and 0.22-ft offsets, the area difference, and that the rebar is held as an original monument subject to verification. Tell the client that the surveyor can locate the record boundary but cannot quiet title or decide adverse possession; the fence discrepancy should be resolved by agreement with the neighbor, a boundary line agreement, or court action before construction. If the client insists on a line that ignores the evidence, decline to sign a plat that misstates the boundary. Check the county recording and Indiana minimum-standards requirements for the plat and report.