What could possibly go wrong?
In 2005 I surveyed a vacant commercial site in Tucson for my favorite client. For the coordinate base I called a found iron rebar near the Southwest corner of the site 200.00 North and 500.00 East. I used my Leica GPS system for the survey work with local initialization near the middle of the site, and from that I derived a bearing for the quarter section line. The procedures I used were standard for Tucson and local sites. As the various parcels were developed I subsequently monumented the boundaries, filed record of surveys, and wrote legal descriptions for the sites and for utility easements, all still on the same coordinate system.
In 2011 I surveyed a larger vacant commercial site across the street (northward), maintaining the coordinate system from the first site. Different client, but exceptionally nice. A large parcel within that site was subsequently sold, and as usual I monumented the boundary, filed a record of survey, and the national engineers for the developer had me write legal descriptions for the many easements, all still on the same coordinate system. The only thing unusual was all of the easements were complex and convoluted, exceptionally so. I had to use a colored point map to keep it all straight.
In 2019 the same national engineers asked me to provide them with state plane coordinates (SPC) for the parcel because they prefer working in SPC. I told them switching coordinate systems mid-stream was a bad idea, and the governmental entity reviewing the plans could be very difficult. I was quite clear on that. They insisted on SPC for the boundary over my objections, which I documented and preserved.
Year 2020. Governmental entity is not happy all of the complex easements are on one system and all of the plans are on another system. They don??t match. Well no, of course they don??t. Neither is wrong, but they certainly don??t match. And we haven??t even gotten to the staking crews yet.
Log in to reply.