Farm 215 Ptn 3

3/215 on the cadastre · on record 2006 · show on the map

The farm's own history, the grant, the original survey, sits on that page.

Farm number: No. 215
Portion: 3
On the cadastre: 3/215, portionregistered as FARM
District: Prince Albert
Extent, as the diagram states it: 295,9807 hektaar
Modern surveyed area: 296.4 ha

The historic extent and the modern surveyed area are two separate measurements and are not presented here as confirming each other. The first is what a surveyor wrote on a diagram, usually in morgen. The second is what the modern cadastre draws.

Why this farm is here

A piece of a farm already in this model. 39 km from Klaarstroom.

parcel Cut out of Farm 215
border Shares a boundary with Farm 222 Farm 222
document A document in the collection describes this ground DOC-0267

What the record holds, in order

October 2006–November 2007 document SG diagram 3658/2007

Bordered by, as the diagram names them

W Caroluspoort Nr 105
NE Restant (Farm 215)
E Die Plaas Nr 222

Also bordered by, as the modern cadastre draws it

Ground that touches this farm on the Surveyor-General's current polygons and that none of the diagrams held here names. Derived from the geometry, not read off a document.

N Farm 215
SW Farm 241

Documents

catalogued, no scan held

Surveyor-General diagram, 3658/2007, October 2006–November 2007
11531196 215 3.jpg

Cadastre

Surveyor-General diagram index for this parcel

Surveyor-General diagram index for the whole farm — where the original survey of this ground sits.

Research notes

[10 Aug 2026, SRC-355/DOC-0267] From L.G. 3658/2007, surveyed October 2006 and November 2007 by W M van den Heever PLS 0633, approved 17 September 2007. 295,9807 hektaar, which matches the cadastre's 296.6 ha. Its face named Caroluspoort Nr 105 to the west, the Restant of 215 to the north-east and Die Plaas Nr 222 to the east. The sheet is stamped 'goedgekeur mits registrasie van kaart 3659/2007, synde Plaas 224, gelyktydig plaasvind', so a farm 224 was being created at the same moment. Like the rest of 215 it carries no name of its own.

[13 Aug 2026] Renamed to the one form this model uses for every portion - the portion's own name, then the parent farm, its number and the portion in brackets - so that a name is legible in a list, a search result and a map popup without the reader having to know which farm number is which. It read "Farm 215 Portion 3" before. Nothing about the ground changed.

The research behind this page, kept separate from it: dated working notes, open questions, and what is not yet settled.

What the record is missing

“Caroluspoort Nr 105” is named as a neighbour 4 times and we hold no parcel for it second order · B3 unheld-farm
4 separate surveys in this model put Caroluspoort Nr 105 on the boundary of ground we do hold (PAR-000134, PAR-000136, PAR-000184, PAR-000185). It has no parcel of its own here, so nothing is known about who held it or when, while it borders farms at the centre of the project.

What would settle it The Surveyor-General's farm index for the registration division will give it a farm number and a diagram; the cadastre pull in `data/fetch_cadastre.py` then places it on the map.
“Restant (Farm 215)” is named as a neighbour 2 times and we hold no parcel for it third order · B3 unheld-farm
2 separate surveys in this model put Restant (Farm 215) on the boundary of ground we do hold (PAR-000184, PAR-000185). It has no parcel of its own here, so nothing is known about who held it or when, while it borders farms at the centre of the project.

What would settle it The Surveyor-General's farm index for the registration division will give it a farm number and a diagram; the cadastre pull in `data/fetch_cadastre.py` then places it on the map.
Nobody is on record as ever having held this third order · B8 never-held
Farm 215 Ptn 3 is in the model and drawn on the map, and carries no ownership record of any kind, not a grant, not a transfer, not an occupation.

What would settle it The Surveyor-General's diagram for the farm number names the grantee and the date; the deed reference on it opens the transfer chain.

Found by breaks.py reading the model against itself, not written by hand, each one is a shape of missing record, not a fault in the data. The whole set is on the questions page.