Sometimes when surveying a boundary I may disagree with what my predecessor did but IT??S NOT ABOUT ME!
If more Land Surveyors understood this we would have a lot fewer problems. If something was done a long time ago EVEN IF INCORRECTLY then leave it alone. It is not about me and my ego.
There was a conflict between two surveyors here 15 years ago. 20 years before that surveyor 1 found some evidence in an old area and monumented his client??s lot (call it A) and filed the required documents. Then he surveyed another lot in the block at the time of the conflict, call it B. Surveyor 2 enters the scene to survey the neighbor of B and disagrees on whether to use the split of improvements on an intermediate street (admittedly Surveyor 1 treated 2 blocks as one but in my opinion he had good reasons to do so). ?ÿSurveyor 1 says the curbs are different physically and of different vintages. Surveyor 2 doesn??t care. This results in about a 1 foot conflict.
If surveyor 2 could stop being an overly rigid technocrat for 5 minutes he could see there is no need to disturb the peace of the neighborhood like that.
The appellate courts call this ??The Substantial Evidence Rule.? If substantial evidence supports a judgment, even if substantial evidence supports the opposite conclusion they will not disturb the judgment unless there is no evidence supporting the judgment. ??Good? boundary surveyors can apply the wisdom of this to their decisions.
This is known as the art of surveying.
Who the hell is this guy talking to??ÿ Random landowners aren't going to understand 95% of what he's babbling about.
It seems pretty obvious to me the purpose of this video is to scold surveyors that he thinks are bad, and that's it.?ÿ What's ironic is his list should contain a 6th item titled "Surveyors that do what I'm doing".
What a clown...
In most cases described as 'both guys did it right and came to different locations' it simply isn't true. This type of conclusion can usually be traced back to an unhealthy attachment to old wives tales, rather than properly gathered evidence ananyzed under the correct law.
Now get off my lawn..
Who the hell is this guy talking to??ÿ Random landowners aren't going to understand 95% of what he's babbling about.
It seems pretty obvious to me the purpose of this video is to scold surveyors that he thinks are bad, and that's it.
That's a pretty common surveyor trait. I've had colleagues call me up just to tell me they thought I was wrong about something or other, sometimes for projects/tasks they weren't even involved in.
It wasn't that I was actually right or wrong - they just didn't understand what I had done, or the course of action I was recommending, and because they didn't understand it I had to be wrong. 99% of the time the conversation includes the phrases "well that's not how I learned to do it XXX years ago" or "well I've always done it differently" without any sort of coherent explanation as to why they would do it differently.
It's like an aggressive, proactive version of the Five Monkeys phenomenon.
First I've heard of the 5 monkey thing; pretty funny.
It doesn't actually address whether the reason for the behavior is legitimate though.
I've never farted in a crowded elevator, and I don't plan to because all I hear about it is that it's bad.?ÿ Do I need to do it once to confirm the theory?
???
Have an issue currently where the only survey ever filed in a 1927 subdivision appears to be wrong..........in my opinion.?ÿ The first issue is the angle between the east section line and the lot lines running to the west is not in agreement with the plat.?ÿ The major issue is placing the west end of the lot 30 feet too far east.
So, if I follow the plat and correctly locate the deeded tract, the west end will be 30 feet further to the west and about 9 feet to the north of where the surveyor in 2000 put a bar.?ÿ Issue one is that surveyor has been deceased since the early 2000's.?ÿ Cancer at a youngish age.?ÿ He may not have been mentally strong at the time of this survey.?ÿ Issue two is that the buyer and seller should have seen the results of his work and, therefore, what was actually conveyed was within the monuments he set, even though that location does not agree with the intended plan of action.?ÿ The seller owned on all sides of the tract?ÿ in 2000.?ÿ However, the tract to the north, the tract to the south and the tract further west are now owned by three different people who were not a party to the action in 2000.
There are about 40 lots total in the subdivision.?ÿ Perpetuating this error is not the proper method for locating other lots.
@bstrand You should try it sometime. It can be hilarious.
Sometimes in life there is no good answer.?ÿ Try using the following question on a female friend by inserting the words of your choice for the two blanks.
"Does your Mama know you XXXXXX XXXXXXX men?"?ÿ The impulsive answer is "NO!!!".?ÿ The ensuing attempt to find a good answer can be hilarious.
About 12 years ago, the State department I worked for was overseeing on an acquisition for a flood control project. Resolving the parcel boundaries was quite a puzzle. Landon worked for the consulting firm representing the local reclamation district. One of my senior staff was charged with overseeing the boundary work/acquisition documents from the consultant. We attended a meeting where Landon presented his solution to the boundary puzzle, which included a Quiet Title Action. After he was done, my senior guy said something like "that is all very interesting, but why don't we just go recover all the evidence available to resolve the boundary, which I am certain we can do." We sent our crew out and found the "missing" monuments that solved the puzzle. The wise Old Bull (our guy) quietly trumped the animated Young Bull.
I will reserve any further comment out of professional respect.
?ÿ
Have an issue currently where the only survey ever filed in a 1927 subdivision appears to be wrong..........in my opinion.?ÿ The first issue is the angle between the east section line and the lot lines running to the west is not in agreement with the plat.?ÿ The major issue is placing the west end of the lot 30 feet too far east.
So, if I follow the plat and correctly locate the deeded tract, the west end will be 30 feet further to the west and about 9 feet to the north of where the surveyor in 2000 put a bar.?ÿ Issue one is that surveyor has been deceased since the early 2000's.?ÿ Cancer at a youngish age.?ÿ He may not have been mentally strong at the time of this survey.?ÿ Issue two is that the buyer and seller should have seen the results of his work and, therefore, what was actually conveyed was within the monuments he set, even though that location does not agree with the intended plan of action.?ÿ The seller owned on all sides of the tract?ÿ in 2000.?ÿ However, the tract to the north, the tract to the south and the tract further west are now owned by three different people who were not a party to the action in 2000.
There are about 40 lots total in the subdivision.?ÿ Perpetuating this error is not the proper method for locating other lots.
I came across two idiots surveying in the most expensive city in North America (a famous red colored bridge is on its north approach), they both had a house built in 1898 2 feet over the line. Crazy. Some digging revealed a County Surveyor??s 1941 Plat of the block which fit all the deeds to the numerous buildings built very close together. The 1898 building was right in the middle of the lot. It seems a famously giant earthquake and fire destroyed a lot of evidence and records in 1906 and the current ??control? may not correctly relate to the block lines. The 1941 CS actually used common sense and produced a harmonious solution rather than a stubbornly technical one.
@dave-karoly?ÿ part of being a good land surveyor is understanding when what was the wrong boundary location has become the right boundary location.
Except for me.?ÿ LMAO
"Most" , but that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of good ones around.
Based on......?
Experience and judicial review.
If you can't explain to me why that magnail you accepted as the section corner is the corner of the parcel you surveyed how do you expect your client or their assigns to rely on your boundary. Our job isn't to roll the magic dice and tell everyone where the boundary is, and hope that enough time passes before another surveyor does the same thing. It is to provide a defendable boundary opinion.?ÿ
I don??t agree with his assessment.
I??ve encountered a few but not most.
He is overstating his case, in my most humble opinion.
I??ve encountered a few major disagreements in the past couple of years but I don??t say the other surveyors are ??bad.?
I'd agree but I are one and I am still learning. The solution is to sit in the back of the bus and put oneself in everyone's shoes.
The fact that he tries hard doesn??t give him the right to trash most surveyors. ?ÿI doubt he knows most surveyors and I??m of the opinion he should take down his video before karma raises it??s head and bites him in the a??. That is not a good attitude for a surveyor to have.
@aliquot?ÿ
Neither your "review" nor your personal experience is so expansive that you can come to that conclusion about the profession, and make that kind of false statement that the true facts wouldn't back up.
No idea where you and the video guy get that kind of ego to make that type of false assumption about the rest of us, and then have the balls to announce it to the world.