Retracement with an Excess North Line and a Possible Older Stone
You are retracing a 40-acre rectangular parcel created by a 1978 recorded plat. At the north line, you recover two 1-inch iron pipes with caps stamped 'RLS 1234' at the northwest and northeast corners. The plat distance between them is 1,320.00 ft; your total-station measurement, reduced to ground, is 1,322.64 ft. The adjoiner to the north has a 1991 deed that calls for those same two pipes as its south corners. At the northwest corner, a weathered stone lies 1.8 ft east and 0.6 ft south of the pipe; it has faint markings that could be '1874.' The south line is controlled by two monuments that agree with record within 0.03 ft. The client wants a boundary survey and a legal description 'matching the deed' so he can sell 10 acres on the north side. He asks why you can't just prorate the 2.64 ft.
1. Do the pipes or the record distance control the north line, and what is the significance of the stone?
Read the worked answer
Found original monuments control over record distances. If the two capped pipes are the corners set by the 1978 plat surveyor - supported by the caps, the adjoiner's 1991 deed calling for the same pipes, and their positions at the line ends - they fix the north line, and the measured 1,322.64 ft is the distance between the true corners. Distances in the plat are evidence of the original survey, not a command to ignore the physical corners. Proportionate measurement is a tool for lost corners; it is not used to shorten or lengthen a line between found original corners.
The stone complicates the picture. If it is a genuine older corner - supported by the faint 1874 marking, its position relative to the plat geometry, and any bearing-tree or historical record - it may be the original government or earlier boundary corner, and the 1978 pipe may be a later perpetuation or a misplaced monument. That question requires research, not a snap decision: check the plat's monument notes, the adjoiner's chain of title, historical records, and the stone's condition. Until resolved, disclose the stone and do not treat the pipe as conclusive.
2. How do you handle the 2.64 ft excess and the client's proposed 10-acre split?
Read the worked answer
The 2.64-ft excess is about 0.2% of 1,320 ft - within the range of ordinary survey variation and not, by itself, evidence of a blunder. It belongs where the evidence puts it: along the north line between the found corners. Do not prorate it away, and do not force the north line back to 1,320.00 ft to make the deed close.
The client's request to sell 10 acres 'matching the deed' has to be handled carefully. If the north 10 acres is split by a new line parallel to the south line, the new line must be set from the actual boundary, and the resulting area will reflect the true geometry. If the deed calls for a distance that conflicts with the monuments, the legal description should describe the parcel by reference to the monuments and the measured line, not by a record distance that cannot be found on the ground. A 10-acre split may also trigger subdivision or zoning review; that is outside the surveyor's control.
Explain to the client that the surveyor's job is to locate and describe the boundary as it exists in law and on the ground, not to manufacture a deed match. Offer a survey and a description based on the found evidence, and disclose the excess and the stone.
3. What should appear on the survey and in the legal description?
Read the worked answer
The map should show the found pipes with their cap stamps, the measured distance and the record distance, the stone with its offsets and a note about the markings, and the adjoiner's deed reference. A discrepancy table or note should state that the north line measures 1,322.64 ft versus 1,320.00 ft record, an excess of 2.64 ft, and that the found monuments were held. If the stone remains unresolved, show it as an uncorrelated monument and explain the conflict; do not omit it because it is inconvenient.
A legal description for any split should begin at a found corner, run by bearing and distance along the measured line to the next found corner, then describe the new division line, with area computed from the actual geometry. Include the basis of bearings, the monument ties, and a statement that the description is based on a survey and that the north line is controlled by the found 1-inch pipes, or by the stone if it is resolved. If the jurisdiction requires a record of survey or corner record for the discrepancy, file it. The wording should be precise enough that a later surveyor can retrace the same evidence and reach the same conclusion.