I am working on a hornet's nest.
I have found at least 5 plans that were created erroneously. Wrong locations, overlapping etc. One was based on a fraudulent deed with salted monuments, others were just based on the salted monuments. Some were based on nothing at all.
I am using a phantom for abutters, solid for locus and roadways, dotted for legitimate lines dissolved by changing title / merger. I may have an easement or two to show with dashed lines. Now I need a good linetype for a bad property line.
This is just a draft. I still have to go run the survey (most of this is based on RTK) but the lawyers won't let me run the total station until they see what the plan will look like. This is the sketch based on the interim judgment.
Most of the lines in red are wrong and I have 2 more plans to north to show that are frozen. This area is a real cluster____!
I'd recommend a bold line dollar symbol for "property corner set", AFTER you re-plat the area. Assuming they sign that ever present dotted line that accompanies their nice retainer.
Good luck
Annotate the lines heavily, keeping in mind that most of those who use our plans never look at the legend (If they even know what one is).
i may not have room for a legend... perhaps i will create a linetype with dots and dashes based on morse code.
>... perhaps i will create a linetype with dots and dashes based on morse code.
Now that is one of the best ideas I've ever heard. I wonder what a degree symbol is in morse code. Let the lawyers figure that one out.... 😉
:beer:
oh the profanities i could add to the plan in code
-... .- -.. .-.. .. -. .
LOL:-D
DDSM:beer:
You could place the text in the line itself.
Here are a couple of tutorials on custom line types.
Hope that helps.
Larry P
Thanks Larry,
I would consider myself advanced with the custom linetypes, see my standard block below. Unfortunately, the recording requirements include all text >0.10' and legible. Those custom linetypes are great for engineering oriented plans, but fail the registry standards unless you use wipeouts everywhere. Plus these bad lines are going to be broken.
Thadd
PS, I do use Reverse Polyline (REVPLINE) all the time with these.
PPS, For those of you without Carlson, do a google search for REVPLINE. It's a script from Eastern Europe (Czech Republic I think). Appload and try it out. I cannot recall when Autodesk added a revpline type function, but I know Carlson has had it all along.
The bigger the scope the bigger things get. You're dealing with a 1"=30' or so scale, multi-sheet deliverable. Do it right and make it look good IMVHO.
Looks like a fun survey. You could have some real fun and do it all in metric..... no law against that is there?
😉
We have the same 0.10" font size requirement too. That's a good rule.
With a map as complicated as you describe, I don't see how you could get by without a legend. make room for it.
A line type with some manner of text or symbol seems like a good idea. Since the lines your asking about are no longer, or perhaps never were valid, can you use shading to differentiate them from other lines and de-emphasize them as compared to valid lines?
If this is to become a recorded map, many jurisdictions won't accept shaded lines for legibility concerns when making copies or scanning. If it's not for filing, shading may work well.
---------NFG-----------NFG----------
😀
If it was just going to the attorney...
>Now I need a good linetype for a bad property line.
I like the idea of using a heavy dotted line to represent the bogus lines in contention. I assume that the dominant features of the map, what the viewer sees first, ought to be where the boundaries of record ownership are and where the conflicting claims are. So making the record ownership a heavy, solid line and the bogus line one with dots of about the same weight as the former would show the two main alternatives claimed and indicate by the dotted nature of the second its status as a sort of illusion or phantom.
> ... the lawyers won't let me run the total station until they see what the plan will look like.
Huh?
> > ... the lawyers won't let me run the total station until they see what the plan will look like.
>
> Huh?
Translation (my best guess): My contract is for initial research and a few field ties only; once the clients decide on how to proceed, I may be retained to perform a full boundary survey of the subject properties.
my contract was loosely worded
i was engaged to completely research the titles, then create a compiled study plan and take the stand.
there was too much missing information, so I fired up the GPS and went into the woods. the compiled study plan worked great - i landed within 9' of one ring of stones not recovered by anyone in the past 30 years, maybe even 100. i tagged everything and highlighted fixed vs. float solutions. i tagged everything more than once as there are legitimate limitations of the gps in the woods.
the client has been advised to not move forward with a formal survey until negotiations with the other side are completed.