|
MCSR 39518
<br />BOUNDARY SURVEY NARRATIVE
<br />DENNIFOR This survey is a continuation of my prior survey, the map of which is filed with the Marion County Surveyor as
<br />S KOENIG MCSR 39438. In this current survey, the northeast lines of the tract of land described in Reel 3509, Page 380
<br />in the SE and SW 1 /4 of SECTION 26, T. 9 S., R. 2 W., W.I. (Parcel IV) were addressed. The reason for the current survey is to investigate the location of a recently
<br />MARION COUNTY, OREGON constructed fence and a previously existing irrigation riser as compared to the line as described by deeds.
<br />AUGUST 4, 2021 Prior to this survey, part of the northeast lines of Reel 3509, Page 380 (Parcel IV) were surveyed by Benjamin
<br />Stacy, a map of Stacy's survey is filed with the Marion County Surveyor as MCSR 39347. After that survey, an
<br />adjoining property owner (Stacy's client) erected a fence. Stacy's survey and the fence seemed to indicate that
<br />LEGEND my client's irrigation riser was located northeasterly of the northeast boundary.
<br />Both of the deeds, Reel 3509, Page 380 (Parcel IV) and Reel 3418, Page 230 agree upon the location of their
<br />• = Found Monument as noted, flush common lines. Both Stacy and I agree that two surveys, a Barnes Survey (Survey No. 13630) and a Gorman
<br />with ground surface and in good Survey (Survey No. 26606) are pertinent in identifying the location of the lines in question. In view of the deed
<br />condition unless otherwise noted descriptions and the two surveys, I disagree with the Stacy's apparent conclusion for one segment of the line.
<br />o = Set 5/8"X30" Iron Rod with Yellow Stacy's narrative indicates which monuments were used, but he neither indicates why they were used nor which
<br />Plastic Cap Marked "AZIMUTH elements were controlling. Because his narrative lacks information required by ORS 209.250 that would tell me
<br />SURVEYING", set flush unless PAMFEFIED the "why" of the conclusion evidenced by his monuments and map, I inquired with him about his reasons for
<br />otherwise noted PROFESSIONAL not surveying the property as described in the deeds. His response was as follows: "You are correct in the fact
<br />( ) = Data of Record LAND SURVEYOR that the deeds seem to be lacking the call for that section of the line. I held the survey which you are stating as
<br />being characterized as a boundary agreement, due to the fact the properties to the southeast seem to be based off
<br />= Data Computed from one or more of this survey and subsequent others. This tends to backup the fact that the property owners at this time had
<br />Record Sources as noted 94e**-<d.4S- /-vv� agreed to the new line established per the survey."
<br />[ ] = Surveyor, File Number for survey in OREGON
<br />which monument probably originated JULY 25, 1990 According to Powers Ranch Company v. Plum Creek Marketing (243 Ore. App. 371, 2011), "There are three
<br />I.P. = Iron Pipe JAMES S. HEPLER elements to boundary by agreement: First, here must be an initial uncertainty or dispute as to the true location of
<br />I.R. = Iron Rod 2451 the boundary. The stated purpose of this requirement is to prevent the agreement from falling within the statute
<br />1. B. = Iron Bar EXPIRES: 6-30-23 of frauds or violating other real property conveyancing requirements, for it establishes that the parties are
<br />resolving a dispute by mutually fixing an unknown boundary rather than by making a conveyance of land.
<br />SCALE 1" = 50' Second, the uncertainty must be resolved by an agreement, express or implied, to recognize a particular line as
<br />the boundary. The boundary recognized must be mutually intended as permanent, not as a tentative or
<br />temporary boundary or as a mere barrier. The parties must intend to resolve the uncertainty, an attempt to locate
<br />the true line cannot change the boundary described in the deed. Finally, the parties must evidence their
<br />p,R�oN agreement by activities. If the agreement is memorialized in writing, it may be recorded in the chain of title to
<br />�9S•R•?w establish the recognized dividing line. If there is an express oral agreement, courts have required occupation to
<br />the boundary line in question." In view of prior surveys, most importantly a mistake somewhere in the Barnes
<br />1/16 Survey, and the difficulty in retracing prior surveys, there is no difficulty in seeing that there is objective
<br />0 uncertainty. Gorman's survey indicates an agreed line. Thus, it must have been his understanding from
<br />speaking to the parties that there was an oral agreement. Subsequent actions in the form of recording
<br />COR. conveyances more akin to a property line adjustment provide the evidence of their agreement. However, this
<br />was not done for all of the boundaries. As described, one segment of the boundary remains as it was originally
<br />described. Until the recent fence construction there was no visible indication of the agreement. In fact, the
<br />cOUN� irrigation riser indicates that occupation remained at least partially to the original line as surveyed by Barnes.
<br />SIXTEENTH CORNER While Robert Gorman's survey ma probably indicates he believed there was a verbal agreement, I do not agree
<br />3" BRASS DISK IN 6" DEEP IN MONUMENT BOX Y P P Y 9
<br />MARKED AS SHOWN that all of the elements required for an agreement to fix the location of all of the lines were completed. For the
<br />[WILLIAMS, 2676] segment of the line where I disagree with Stacy's professional opinion, Barnes survey matches what is
<br />described in both deeds and there is no visible evidence that the parties otherwise acted on the agreement for
<br />FRANKE this segment. Therefore, I have accepted Barnes' monuments for that part of the line. Elsewhere, descriptions
<br />REEL 3418, PAGE 230 for both sides of the line match the Gorman survey. Whether by agreement or by property line adjustment, the
<br />y deeds on each side of the line agree. Therefore, I have accepted Gorman's survey for the other lines.
<br />Ate.
<br />AXLE DOWN 12"
<br />[UNKNOWN]
<br />3/4 I.P. FLUSH
<br />S11'31'31 "W 0.37' NORTHERLY LINE MERLE CRANE [BARNES, 13630]
<br />VOLUME 476, PAGE 773
<br />ps, 1 I.R. DOWN 12" N37'15'09"W 18.54'
<br />[UNKNOWN] N88'16'20"E 401.29' OR 6.08 CHAINS FROM STACY'S I.R.
<br />N29'31'34"W 0.39' R89'02'E
<br />89'32'E 5.980 CHAINS - BARNES, 13631)
<br />5.980 CHAINS HEPLER,S39438) )
<br />1/2 I.P. DOWN 12" (N88 -16'20"E 401.29CIV
<br />[BARNES,13630] -----------------— — — —— —� cRq �
<br />1 I.R. [UNKNOWN] "SAVE AND EXCEPT" 1 - REEL 3509, PAGE 380 LINE SURVEYED BY BEN STACEY
<br />N00'16'46'W 0.21' .29' 46"E FORMAN, 239347)
<br />5/8 I.R. WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP o O,Q RECENT FENCE • BY FRANKE -3-7'E 32 2613 CYC
<br />9 95 _ SZA 5/8 I.R.
<br />MARKED "AZIMUTH SURVEYING" " rS i S57 55 29 E 124.39 (N-�� ,4a"W 3 [GORMAN, 27959]
<br />[HEPLER, 39438] N88 45 21 E 433.10 29
<br />(S88'45'39"W 432.92' - STACY, 39347) f-^ - a=cy) '� RF s�' S77
<br />(S89'O6'10"W 432.22' - GORMAN, 26606)
<br />o M ,� U r%.,* F� `3S 3°; 6�, LINE BY DEED
<br />a ,°�° o � rn °9 F
<br />BASIS OF BEARINGS 3 A0q p00
<br />NAD 83 2011), EPOCH 2010.00, o w oZ 0 J co F 3 A 9, PAGE 380)
<br />OREGON COORDINATE REFERENCE SYSTEM.il� w o to a M BOJ - REEL 350
<br />SALEM ZONE = Ix 0 N 3:0M 810, , 30 OO'
<br />S88'45'21 "W 445.01' O rn O `�u 577.37 W
<br />(S89'06'10"W 443.58' - REEL 3509, PAGE 380) Ix (0 Z W -Jr
<br />* KOENIG �ho� \
<br />U- >- w a IRRIGATION RISER
<br />o = w ON LINE p� �L� (SSSB SSS MUNOZ
<br />PARCELw J oJ��P�, 33 Sq ��Ssj ��'�,F S`2�8F REEL 4174, PAGE 473
<br />REEL 3509, PAGE 380 z 9gs, q,�,p \�F68j
<br />�< \�. S°' s. �SSg3 c'-I.cFATy� gs`jsr2ygitiFF� pR 6
<br />S 3s 8
<br />Z u' w h\� � �°' , 930 � 2 . � � AFR e, °9 A cy �
<br />� , 5 cS tiFs cF 3S
<br />ST� >, �' \ `�S°9 \ 1S8 363 O
<br />A� 99J
<br />AZIMUTH SURVEYING 393�j F� 3S cF 38 M pe) 0
<br />2015 Market Street, NE J °s ° N. V-3
<br />Salem, Ore on 97301 ' 'Oq°F \ a w in Z
<br />Phone (50� 364-0026 a
<br />PM
<br />Project No. 21-067 38°J \ N �a o0
<br />Z0
<br />•
<br />RECEIVED 10/13/2021 BY
<br />MARION COUNTY SURVEYOR.
<br />APPROVED FOR FILING ON
<br />11/17/2021.
<br />MCSR 39518
<br />o
<br />KOENIG
<br />IRRIGATION RISER
<br />5/8 I.R. DOWN 20"
<br />[GORMAN, 27959]
<br />
|