contributor author | Andrew C. Kellie | |
contributor author | A. Essant Radwan | |
contributor author | Dewey R. Houck, II | |
date accessioned | 2017-05-08T21:00:56Z | |
date available | 2017-05-08T21:00:56Z | |
date copyright | March 1983 | |
date issued | 1983 | |
identifier other | %28asce%290733-9453%281983%29109%3A1%2814%29.pdf | |
identifier uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/35457 | |
description abstract | When boundary evidence of record is vague or uncertain, the intent of the parties to a grant may be inferred from physical evidence which witnesses this intent. In the retracement of boundaries abutting a railroad physical evidence is of two types: (1) Evidence of the location of the roadbed proper; and (2) evidence of the limits of the right‐of‐way as witnessed by fences, ditches, and other objects which would tend to indicate the extent of ownership. Direct evidence of roadbed location can be obtained by mathematically locating the center of the existing tracks and taking into account the necessary geometry of railroad curves and spirals as presented herein. While this allows the surveyor to mathematically define the location of the track, there is no assurance that the roadbed is located at the center of the right‐of‐way. Evidence of the boundary in the form of fences, ditches, or similar markings can serve to collaborate or contradict right‐of‐way location as inferred from the roadbed. In reconciling such situations the surveyor must resort to the appropriate case law and statutes which deal with the subject of the practical location of uncertain boundaries. | |
publisher | American Society of Civil Engineers | |
title | Location of Railroad Boundaries | |
type | Journal Paper | |
journal volume | 109 | |
journal issue | 1 | |
journal title | Journal of Surveying Engineering | |
identifier doi | 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(1983)109:1(14) | |
tree | Journal of Surveying Engineering:;1983:;Volume ( 109 ):;issue: 001 | |
contenttype | Fulltext | |