As one who looks over the recent plats in a broad area it is easy to discover examples of things that make our work appear to be sloppy, even to lay people who don't understand all that much about what it is we are attempting to make clear to everyone else.?ÿ The recent thread about the common boundary between Idaho and Montana had plenty of comments about errors committed by the author that article.?ÿ Our work can receive similar criticism.
Say the client wants a rectangular tract 400 feet by 800 feet and rectangular.?ÿ We present a plat that shows 399.99 on one side with a bearing of north 89-50-45 east and the twin side says 400.01 with a bearing of south 89-50-50 west.?ÿ The other two sides have similar differences from the expected results.?ÿ They know something is wrong because those distances are not identical and 400.00 and may be sharp enough to ask why the bearings are not equal yet opposite.?ÿ Are we not capable of producing a plat showing what the client wanted........precisely.
A similar situation arises on easements and streets where the sides should be precisely parallel by definition.?ÿ How can we screw up such simple work?
The description calls out a bearing of 89-45-36 but the drawing shows 89-45-39.?ÿ Should the reviewer send it back to the surveyor with a nasty note??ÿ Or ignore it.
The correct site address is 2430 Corning Avenue.?ÿ The plat says 2430 Corning Street.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note?
The correct addition is Pleasantview, per the recorded subdivision plat, yet shows up as Pleasant View on the survey being reviewed.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note?
The correct addition is Murphy's 2nd Addition but shows up as Murphy's 3nd Addition.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note.
The easement document reads the affected area is for ingress/egress purposes but the survey plat being reviewed says it is a Utility Easement??ÿ Ignore or nasty note.
The description begins at the northwest corner of something but the plat labels the northeast corner as the P.O.B..?ÿ All distances and bearings are in agreement but the location of the beginning differs.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note.
Everything else is perfect.?ÿ Rare, but it can happen.?ÿ Then the description says the wrong County or City or has no mention of the P.M. or other common identification or has the wrong anything whatsoever.?ÿ A nice note is guaranteed.
?ÿ
The statement I sign on subdivision maps by others states "I hereby certify that I have examined this map and am satisfied that it is TECHNICALLY correct."?ÿ All of the above examples are technicalities and need correcting.
The description calls out a bearing of 89-45-36 but the drawing shows 89-45-39.?ÿ Should the reviewer send it back to the surveyor with a nasty note??ÿ Or ignore it?
Goes back. Creates an ambiguity.?ÿ
The correct site address is 2430 Corning Avenue.?ÿ The plat says 2430 Corning Street.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note?
I'd probably let this slide if was the sole transgression.?ÿ?ÿ
The correct addition is Pleasantview, per the recorded subdivision plat, yet shows up as Pleasant View on the survey being reviewed.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note?
Goes back. There may be a plat of Pleasant View. If not now, maybe later.
The correct addition is Murphy's 2nd Addition but shows up as Murphy's 3nd Addition.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note.
Goes back. Just clearly f'd up.
The easement document reads the affected area is for ingress/egress purposes but the survey plat being reviewed says it is a Utility Easement??ÿ Ignore or nasty note.
Goes back. With prejudice. Creates a serious ambiguity.?ÿ
The description begins at the northwest corner of something but the plat labels the northeast corner as the P.O.B..?ÿ All distances and bearings are in agreement but the location of the beginning differs.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note.
Goes back.?ÿ?ÿ
I've had things come back because I forgot to put a period at the end of a sentence. I'm now one of the city staff doing the reviewing and I try to be understanding. But I would send most of these things back for fixing.?ÿ?ÿ
The petitioner's name is Greg, he's filing a right conveyed by the Gregg Ditch, guess what happens?
Yeah, that was mine.
Anything involving people's names is a train wreck waiting to happen.
Johnathon Bradberry will be listed as Jonathan Bradbury.?ÿ Saw a new, to me, name today, Nautianna.?ÿ I ready that as Naughty Anna.?ÿ Why tell the whole world your daughter is naughty?
Surveyors should know better than to say meets an bounds, Southwest Courter, site vs sight, angle vs angle, straight vs strait, distance vs distant, hole vs whole, prescription vs perscription, etc.
Anyone ever calculate a volumn?
When did acres become acers?
Moor or Les?
A track beginning at the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Corner; thence Southerly to degrees forty-for minutes twenty-to seconds East a distant off 999. 99 foot to a spike
?ÿ
A slight change in an addition name can make it much harder to find in a deed registry or GIS.
The correct site address is 2430 Corning Avenue.?ÿ The plat says 2430 Corning Street.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note?
I'd probably let this slide if was the sole transgression.?ÿ?ÿ
In my neighborhood there is a "Drive" and a "Court" with the same name... not the only place like that, and I would require the correction.?ÿ
Everything you stated needs correcting and should not have been submitted. Clearly the mistakes are minor but wrong. ???? If you want to see some confusing street names look at any subdivision plat of Palm Coast. It??s insane and drives fire and police crazy. ?????ÿ
The review process is there for a reason.
I'm up to four times that real estate agents have sold the wrong lot after showing the adjacent lot to the buyers.
Yesterday I informed a potential client that they were conveyed Lot-13 when they should have been conveyed Lot-16.?ÿ
I'm not advocating a, "Good enough for government work" approach, but I don't view the examples here as evidence of an industry wide problem with surveying.?ÿ?ÿ
Strive for perfection but never expect it from others.
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
I am fortunate in the fact my rural co-op client has six (yes, count them...six) sets of eyes that review my work.?ÿ This is before it makes it to the registrar of deeds which is another ball of yarn all together.?ÿ Any one of the discrepancies listed above would be kicked back.?ÿ?ÿ
@bill93?ÿ
I live on Smiths Court which is turns off Smiths Drive. To complicate it some official records show Smith Court and some show Smiths Court, I use Smiths since that's what's on the plat and it seems to work more often, but the street sign says Smith.
Pet peeve
89?ø45'39"?ÿ Really??ÿ
State law
Measurements as placed on plats shall be in conformance with the capabilities of the
instruments used.
Bearings and angles shown shall be given to at least the nearest minute of arc
?ÿ
Part of cleaning up our act imo is reporting measured bearings on our plat in conformance with the capabilities of the instruments used.?ÿ
If you have 0.04 certainty at 95% on each end of a 400 line at what precision should you report your calculated bearing to be in conformance? IMO it's not the nearest arc second.?ÿ
The petitioner's name is Greg, he's filing a right conveyed by the Gregg Ditch, guess what happens?
Yeah, that was mine.
That is funny! ?ÿMy favorite local surveyor named Gregg actually does spell his name with three ??g??s?.
@norm?ÿ
If you choose to show bearings to the nearest 5 seconds or minute or whatever that is your business, but whatever you choose make sure your map and your legal description agree.?ÿ Different issues.?ÿ
The correct site address is 2430 Corning Avenue.?ÿ The plat says 2430 Corning Street.?ÿ Ignore or nasty note?
Around the Atlanta Metro area you could get in deep doodoo with the name "Peachtree" anything.?ÿ The must be, at least, a hundred Peachtrees (Road, Street, Circle, Avenue...) in the area, sometimes they intersect.
Andy
There was an episode of WKRP where some fellow was at the station who bragged about everything and said his name was (?????).?ÿ He explained that names were an indicator of future success in life.?ÿ Then he turned to Les and said, "For example, what is your name?"
Can't remember what (?????) was but it was something suggesting powerful.
It is good to hear support for sending problems back for correction, when they matter, and many really do matter.?ÿ No one enjoys being told they did not do as well as they thought they had.?ÿ Many times, by the time I see the survey the client has already received a final copy or copies.?ÿ Then the surveyor has that awkward job of notifying the client that they will be sending a corrected final.
It would be wonderful if the final in-house review would catch mistakes similar to those mentioned.?ÿ No time to do it right, but always adequate time is available to make corrections as requested by the out-house reviewer.
Out-house:?ÿ As Foghorn Leghorn would say, "That's a joke son.?ÿ Get it?"
A long time ago; in a State Far Far Away, my boss gave a client a drawing that showed his lot as being 99.90' wide. The plat showed 100', and the client was not happy; what the Heck is going on here!?!? Why did you make my lot shorter that what it is supposed to be!?
Every measurement, from then on, that was within a tenth of record, was "Record and Measured" in your notes.?ÿ
?ÿ
Not really what Cow is talking about; but still an issue for most surveyors. Being precise, is much more important than being exact, sometimes.