Topic: Working with old plats

[Swift]

Is this question asked to help figure out how this property would be surveyed?

What monuments were found? Are any of them mentioned in any recorded documents?

Other than that the road should get it's width first, then the distances prorated into the blocks.

I'd have to review some Florida law and history (I'm not licensed in FL) but here in VA I'd almost consider lot 80 as being a remainder lot, reason being in 1925 depending on the surveyor the math may not have been worked. It could be a guess, however at the same time he's given the distance to the hundredth of a foot so I'm a little skeptical of that. However it could also be likely that the "68.25" is the chord distance from corner of 79/80 to the corner of 81/80, reason being that it was an easier calculation to make in 1925.

At the very least I'd look for corners on the three blocks that form this intersection.

[Dinosaur]

I hate to say it DinØ, I like something on the order of what LE has done as the relationship of the arcs, is nearer the original image, FWTW.  

No need to hate saying it . . . I wasn't sold on mine . . . just too tired to keep going.
My reasoning on things like this is that most of the time the more simple you keep the procedure the more likely you are to be correct.  On a plat that old, the surveyor would not make very complex geometry.  They weren't able to pull out the HP and do cogo to solve a perfect curve for a given situation.  Anything irregular in the geometry meant notepad and pencil time working through the trig tables.  Lines were parallel and perpendicular whenever possible and nonsense like a very short tangent or curve segment in a lot line and non-tangent curves were avoided.  At a minimum the interior geometry would be square with wedges absorbed at the boundaries.  Many times, a single lot will be annotated defining squared corners and by extension forcing all other corners to be squared also except where dimensioned showing otherwise.  Another old trick was to define a 90 degree corner without calling it out would be to dimension a 3-4-5 triangle in the geometry.  As Michael pointed out earlier, often the information NOT given can carry significant weight in the solution.  Those curves are likely absorbing most of the error in the survey because it would be the most likely area to make a mistake and the most difficult to prove exactly where any error was made.