maybe it's speedy, but it's crap when they just show lines in the table and they're not even consecutively numbered-
lines are 3 inches long on paper and could easily by dimensioned, but they use?ÿautomated line tables---?ÿif the user has to constantly remove their eyes from the drawing to reference the stupid table for every stinking line-?ÿit isn't?ÿhelping with clarity of the drawing - it's just helping the drafter complete the letter of the recording statute with no concern for the spirit of the statute and the owner has NO Idea that they're getting a crappy product.
so screw you fast eddy and your crappy $3,?ÿ?ÿquick and dirty drafting attempt too....
/rant off
Agreed!
There is a time and a place for everything, but taking the path of least resistance (work) EVERYTIME, is just STUPID (and lazy).
I find myself PRINTING the Line Table(s) and using it to WRITE the data on the print of the Plat by hand.
?
Almost forgot.... GET OFF MY LAWN.
I work for a dot. The district surveyors doing eminent domain surveys all use line tables. Drives me nuts!!! This is a Court Exhibit going in front of a Judge, and lawyers. Are you going to interpret what your survey means to the Judge? Give me a Break!
Ugh, I hate line tables, even if they are necessary because of short line segments.?ÿ A leader to the line is usually so much more descriptive, but river meanders can make a line table a evil I cannot avoid.?ÿ And Turn that music down!
?ÿ
I've hated line tables since the first time I saw one.?ÿ The places I worked always used leaders, arrows, etc, if a label couldn't reside on the line itself.?ÿ I've continued that with my own drafting, and I've never had a problem fitting everything in.
Anti-line table party member here. ?ÿVery rarely necessary in our work.
Rankin
You forgot to mention the subdivision cadd monkeys that place a pc 0.2 away from a pi. I have subdivision plats we are working with for production builders that have line tables from 1-200, and curve tables up to 300. As far as I am concerned only Surveyors should prepare multi lot subdivisions.?ÿ ??ÿ
?ÿ
And add non-radial lines ans non-tangent curves to the list.
If we took a finger for each offense these problems would go away...
"If we took a finger for each offense these problems would go away..."
We used to have a cad tech, Gary, who had been a carpenter, but hurt his back in a fall.?ÿ Somewhere along the line he also took the ends off 3 fingers with a skill saw.?ÿ When the latest "new kid" was being instructed on some horrible cad infraction, I'd tell him this time it is not a big deal.?ÿ Next time, you lose a finger, then turn to Gary and say: "show him what happens,"?ÿ and Gary would hold up his hand.?ÿ Got some intense looks.
Boy, you'd have a field day with some of the dumba$$ municipalities around here that actually require a line table?ÿfor every line on their plats. We've had to argue with them before, citing poor drafting standards and legibility, before they'd give up and let us do it?ÿthe right way.
I am in the middle of a drawing that after ownership and headright and north arrow will absolutely have no room along the boundaries to place any text large engough to read without super magnification.
Line tablels it is and I will be screaming all the way.
And add non-radial lines ans non-tangent curves to the list.
If we took a finger for each offense these problems would go away...
I have never understood objections to this. If the cord bearing and length are provided, whats the problem??ÿ
Non-radial lines are counter-intuitive for owners and result in numerous unintentional setback violations. Non-tangengent curves create issues when offsetting. Yes you can compute both, but why make things complicated when there is zero benefit?
A good plat can be retraced with an 11C and a scratch pad using 2 formulas.
My .02
And add non-radial lines ans non-tangent curves to the list.
If we took a finger for each offense these problems would go away...
I have never understood objections to this. If the cord bearing and length are provided, whats the problem??ÿ
Because it leads to some very sloppy cogo on final maps (by some practitioners).?ÿ Lots of broken back curves on new land divisions.?ÿ When I see this sloppy geometry?ÿ as a plat reviewer (and it is not easy to see sometimes when everyone is using the chord bearing and distance as elements defining curve) I always think of the future problems being created for the retracing surveyor.?ÿ Pretty easy when the original geometry is concentric but how do you pro-rate against original broken geometry(?).?ÿ ?ÿWhy make this stuff harder than it needs to be.?ÿ
My 2 cents, Jp
'Xcuse me but doesn't professional grade drafting software perform automated parametric based annotation of lines/curves??ÿ Set up the parameters, push the button, and long lines/curves will be annotated alongside, shorter ones will be annotated stacked or over/under, still shorter ones as blocked text, and even shorter ones numbered and tabled.?ÿ Sweet is you can parametrically annotate the record lines (with their linework not visible) with additional symbology such as "(Nxx?øyy'zz"W abc.de' per ROS123)"?ÿor in a different font, one character height above the line/curve.?ÿ After the automated annotation is in place it can be edited with leader lines,?ÿ moved around, tabled or untabled, etc., for legibility issues.?ÿ And linework can be parametrically dependent on other entities,?ÿ a 5' utility easement that is associated with the back lot lines which will move if the back lot lines move, or if you change the parameter to 6' the line will move and it's orthogonal?ÿ " 5' " annotation will change to " 6' ".?ÿ Best of all is it's parametric,?ÿ so if you move an endpoint the annotation automagically changes to the new values.?ÿ Very handy if design decides to tweak a tier of lots, etc.
Of course it ain't perfect,?ÿ you have to create sublength lines/curves and use a different set of parameters (distance only or delta/distance only for curves) to generate the sublength annotation all below instead of above for example, the generating linework not shown on the final plot.?ÿ And of course your COGO linework must be absolutely clean,?ÿ the point for the end of one segment must be the same as the begin point of the next segment, no duplicate segments, no "junk" points or lines,?ÿ all entities properly attributed as record/search coord/found/sublength/boundary/lot line/r/w line?ÿ etc., but you've got to do that so field staking and everything else goes smoothly, right?
And other map symbology can be parametrically generated,?ÿ north arrows/scalebars,?ÿ grid tics with coordinates, radial lines with anno as above on non tangent curves,?ÿ found monument notes, solid circle for found, hollow for set, etc. By attaching attributes to linework,?ÿ boundaries can be bold, lot lines thin, centerlines skip dashed, etc.?ÿ Setting it up right can make 90% of the annotation automatic.?ÿ But you still gotta generate mapchecks by actually reading (with your eyes) the annotation text off the map; it's not an error-free process.
The bigger picture is if the boys upstairs are also working parametrically and everybody's in the same software (with proper permissions so you can't modify their work and they can't muck up yours)?ÿ a whole world opens up,?ÿ building location setback requirements dynamically linked so if a lot line moves an alarm goes off upstairs,?ÿ wet utility conflicts are alarmed (sewer line within 5' of a building footprint for example)?ÿ and grading considerations which are beyond my comprehension.?ÿ EVERYBODY has to be real good at what they're doing and management has to aggressively monitor lost sheep and cull problem children, and actually comprehensively understand how all the machinery works.?ÿ Also have to have a good IT team onboard?ÿ (server side data stores,?ÿ coherency issues, credentialing, rock solid hardware redundancy, etc.).
My pet peeves concerning agencies dictating the map format are:?ÿ map must be a standard scale no matter the size or complexity of the project,?ÿ north must be orthogonal up or to the right (what if your project is primarily NW-SE?),?ÿ not to scale blowup details not allowed, and the ultimate absurdity, all linework anno must be tabled.?ÿ I'll not get in to?ÿ plan checkers who are wanna be land surveyors and come up with lame arguments concerning your boundary resolution or demand vicinity maps,?ÿ indexing text outside the map border line, etc.
My pet peeves concerning recorded/filed map author stupidity are:?ÿ excessive tabling,?ÿ tables and/or blowup details and notes on a different page,?ÿ ridiculous 0.2' line segments and unnecessary brokenback curves, non radial side?ÿ lot lines in cul de sacs, non orthogonal side lot lines in lot tiers,?ÿ back lot corners 0.2' from angle points in the back lot lines,?ÿ lot lines in the middle of side slopes instead of the tops or toes of slope, 30?ø driveway slopes, substandard drainage,?ÿ etc.?ÿ Oh, and pure and simple illegibility, either patent (can't understand what that anno is referring to),?ÿ or latent (if you calculate closures/areas/sublengths things don't add up).?ÿ I mean, people/agencies are going to occupy the parcels,?ÿ and illogical/obscure locations for their boundaries, monumented or not, will over time generate occupation encroachments.
OTOH, maybe it's just me;?ÿ have a good time typing in your 100% tabled annotation by hand in AutoCad, may your client compensate you for all the time you're wasting and I pray you're retired before it hits the fan concerning the misery you've inflicted upon the ultimate client,?ÿ the residents of your subdivision.?ÿ
With the lack of desire for tables, someone needs to create an un-table tool to copy the calls back to the tag locations, maybe leader'ing if it's short.
depends on the work.
I do tidelands claim line surveys. This may require showing bearings and distances on:
Former MHWL per deed
Former MHWL per FM
Former MHWL per Riparian Grant (Littoral rights for those not in NJ)
Present MHWL along face of bulkhead, if any
Present MHWL by elevation
?ÿ
All this info must be shown on the plat. If the line is one straight shot, then it will be labeled on the line. If the line has many angle points in it, all differing in number depending on the specific line, it may wind up with a line chart to delineate secondary information outside of the main labels to define the outbound.
depends on the work.
I do tidelands claim line surveys. This may require showing bearings and distances on:
Former MHWL per deed
Former MHWL per FM
Former MHWL per Riparian Grant (Littoral rights for those not in NJ)
Present MHWL along face of bulkhead, if any
Present MHWL by elevation?ÿ
All this info must be shown on the plat. If the line is one straight shot, then it will be labeled on the line. If the line has many angle points in it, all differing in number depending on the specific line, it may wind up with a line chart to delineate secondary information outside of the main labels to define the outbound.
Yeah, that seems like a special case, not a normal boundary plan.?ÿ I'll give you a pass there.
If its complete and accurate you will get no sniveling from me as to presentation style.?ÿ