Every now and then one of the Brand X surveyors in Tucson thinks up a new scheme to avoid filing the mandatory record of survey when a new monument is set. One misguided soul thought setting wood stakes as boundary monuments would do it, but that just compounded his infractions. Today I was surveying the boundary of a high end commercial site and noticed paint dots where survey monuments ought to be on hard surfaces. When I set my monuments they all fell on the paint dots, which means the surveyor who set the paint dots was technically skilled, if professionally challenged, so to speak.
Is that what a "point" looks like after error analysis is used to estimate its uncertainties? Interesting concept, if not terribly useful over the longer term.
Don't get me wrong, I believe in monuments most places EXCEPT office park subdivisions other than some control monuments throughout. There is one in Folsom that must have 600 rebar/caps on various iterations of the lot lines that are adjusted every time some office developer calls the sales agent. And then they disk the vacant lots every year so 2/3rds of the rebars are missing caps/bent/loose in the ground. It seems like a waste of time, effort, and steel. 6 different surveyors will set them within a 0.05' circle from the well monuments nearby.
I had a young man who left my employment to seek his fame and fortune with another surveying outfit...one that Kent is somewhat familiar with. It was one of those Okie firms with a catchy name like The Red Plains Pirates (or something like that). They somehow got purged from Oklahoma (no doubt because it is so easy to survey in a PLSS region) and the gypsy winds blew them to downtown Austin where surveyors who cannot understand the PLSS system can apply their trade within the M&B of Texas...where you can set new corners on every survey and disregard existing monuments because they don't fit the StarNet printout. (I digress...sorry)
Anyway, this young man stopped by the house not long ago to visit and tell me all the wonderful stories of completing 3 ALTAs in two state in one day. Really. And it was their official protocol to only set paint spots (amazingly similar to the pics above). This was to expedite the crew (the ones with actual instruments) and not waste valuable crew time in setting monuments. The final monuments would be set by the licensed surveyor (who traveled alone) when he returned a few days later with the finished drawing to "field check" everything. The monuments would to be set "exactly" where the paint spots were located.
I wish I had recorded the conversation.
paden cash, post: 438087, member: 20 wrote: I wish I had recorded the conversation.
But would you still have to set monuments if you had a copy of a map of some actual survey that had been performed earlier (by others, of course) that indicated that monuments had been previously set? I mean, does what the typical Oklahoma client wants ever really amount to more than just a paint spot to show them where the corner might possibly be?
"Customer-oriented" covers so much ground as an adjective that one has to ask.
monuments are overrated
Peter Ehlert, post: 438097, member: 60 wrote: monuments are overrated
It depends on the application.
In Forestry work or large lot residential subdivisions monuments at the corners are essential but in situations where the project is being staked such as offices and shopping malls and the lot lines run down the middle of the common driveways the owners can clearly see which parking lot is theirs, their building is 150' from the boundary.
Whenever I visit my Optometrist I can visit 15 or 20 of my rebar/caps set in the middle of AC driveways, ridiculous but the City required it. I rented a big hammer drill to drill holes in the asphalt because chiseling holes would've taken a long time and looked ugly.
years ago an existing client had a rather large Business Park that had been created less than 10 years before...
Most of the lots were fully developed and buildings rented out, several had single lot condominiums that consisted 2 or three small office buildings (2000 sq. ft. +/-) and a common parking lot in the middle.
Now they wanted to sell parts. Condos were not selling well, but individual lots were.
To market test they wanted wanted to subdivide one condo into three lots. The occupants wanted to buy, but they did not want condos.
The local subdivision ordnance said all exterior boundary corners had to be monumented.
I prepared a Parcel Map (maybe it was a Final Map, I forget) with new lot lines going thru the parking areas, including enough regular and handicap parking spaces to serve the individual buildings and meet the codes. Easements were depicted around the sinuosities of the islands and driveways and walkways... showing how the individual buildings would share them. A Mapping exercise.
We went out and recovered the existing exterior monuments (actually worthless because of obvious existing improvements).
I submitted the new map for processing. It was a spider web with full dimensions, the checking package included lot closure cals, and closure calcs for all of the sinuosities of the easements.
The city returned it with tentative approval and ONE comment: "monument all interior lot lines and easements".
How would a hundred pounds of 30"x1/2" tagged iron pipes scattered about a quarter acre lot benefit Anyone?
(end result: the city backed off and none were set)
Peter Ehlert, post: 438106, member: 60 wrote: years ago an existing client had a rather large Business Park that had been created less than 10 years before...
Most of the lots were fully developed and buildings rented out, several had single lot condominiums that consisted 2 or three small office buildings (2000 sq. ft. +/-) and a common parking lot in the middle.
Now they wanted to sell parts. Condos were not selling well, but individual lots were.
To market test they wanted wanted to subdivide one condo into three lots. The occupants wanted to buy, but they did not want condos.
The local subdivision ordnance said all exterior boundary corners had to be monumented.
I prepared a Parcel Map (maybe it was a Final Map, I forget) with new lot lines going thru the parking areas, including enough regular and handicap parking spaces to serve the individual buildings and meet the codes. Easements were depicted around the sinuosities of the islands and driveways and walkways... showing how the individual buildings would share them. A Mapping exercise.
We went out and recovered the existing exterior monuments (actually worthless because of obvious existing improvements).
I submitted the new map for processing. It was a spider web with full dimensions, the checking package included lot closure cals, and closure calcs for all of the sinuosities of the easements.
The city returned it with tentative approval and ONE comment: "monument all interior lot lines and easements".How would a hundred pounds of 30"x1/2" tagged iron pipes scattered about a quarter acre lot benefit Anyone?
(end result: the city backed off and none were set)
In my case the Engineer didn't want to fight the City on it so I was out there with a generator, big roto-hammer and a bucket full of rebars. Somewhere on the order of 55 were set total, about 15 or 20 around the Optometrist's office building.
Dave Karoly, post: 438123, member: 94 wrote: In my case the Engineer didn't want to fight the City on it so I was out there with a generator, big roto-hammer and a bucket full of rebars. Somewhere on the order of 55 were set total, about 15 or 20 around the Optometrist's office building.
The client was always in the loop. They saw the requirements and made a phone call to someone higher on the food chain. I assume the Bureaucrats were told to comply with the laws and regulations in effect.
I had no personal involvement. I got a call from the client and was asked to wait a bit. Shortly after I received a request from the "agency" for signed mylars and it was done.
It makes me sad that political power needs to be exerted to accomplish simple things.
paden cash, post: 438087, member: 20 wrote: I had a young man who left my employment to seek his fame and fortune with another surveying outfit...one that Kent is somewhat familiar with. It was one of those Okie firms with a catchy name like The Red Plains Pirates (or something like that). They somehow got purged from Oklahoma (no doubt because it is so easy to survey in a PLSS region) and the gypsy winds blew them to downtown Austin where surveyors who cannot understand the PLSS system can apply their trade within the M&B of Texas...where you can set new corners on every survey and disregard existing monuments because they don't fit the StarNet printout. (I digress...sorry)
Anyway, this young man stopped by the house not long ago to visit and tell me all the wonderful stories of completing 3 ALTAs in two state in one day. Really. And it was their official protocol to only set paint spots (amazingly similar to the pics above). This was to expedite the crew (the ones with actual instruments) and not waste valuable crew time in setting monuments. The final monuments would be set by the licensed surveyor (who traveled alone) when he returned a few days later with the finished drawing to "field check" everything. The monuments would to be set "exactly" where the paint spots were located.
I wish I had recorded the conversation.
3 ALTAs in 2 states on the same day is suspect enough, let alone setting paint dots as corners. The PLS them comes to the sites to do a map check, by himself, then sets the corners? We all know some ALTA surveys are different than others but 3 of them in one day? I wonder who is making the field calls on where to set these paint dots and to what extent that they are being checked before the corners are set. What do they do, just pound something in at the center of the paint dot? That seems shady at best.
I'm guessing here, at one time the positional tolerance for a monument, as defined by the MTS was a +/- 0.10
wouldn't that fall in an average paint dot ? Does that MTS even still exist ??
R.J. Schneider, post: 438265, member: 409 wrote: I'm guessing here, at one time the positional tolerance for a monument, as defined by the MTS was a +/- 0.10
wouldn't that fall in an average paint dot ? Does that MTS even still exist ??
These are ALTA surveys. 7 hundredths plus 50 ppm rpt. You cant get that with paint dots.
Chris Bouffard, post: 438260, member: 12313 wrote: ..That seems shady at best.
This particular outfit far exceeds what most of us would consider even "sloppy". And they still seem to find work....
thebionicman, post: 438269, member: 8136 wrote: These are ALTA surveys. 7 hundredths plus 50 ppm rpt. You cant get that with paint dots.
paint the size of a quarter would work
thebionicman, post: 438269, member: 8136 wrote: 7 hundredths plus 50 ppm rpt. You cant get that with paint dots.
The survey firm of Seurat, Signac & Associates would beg to differ. 😉
James Fleming, post: 438281, member: 136 wrote: The survey firm of Seurat, Signac & Associates would beg to differ. 😉
It took me a few minutes to "get the drift" on that one!
I have to credit Google for my "awakening."
James Fleming, post: 438281, member: 136 wrote: The survey firm of Seurat, Signac & Associates would beg to differ. 😉
We all know folks with a model built on risk analysis rather than relative position tolerance testing. The local practitioners should work with the Board to flush them from the Profession.
Bruce Small, post: 438082, member: 1201 wrote: noticed paint dots where survey monuments ought to be on hard surfaces
Thanks for the idea.
I spend $500+ a year on monuments.
That'll cut it in half!
N
Our Ethic Code is to self police our profession.
Many times I have heard and been told "who is gonna follow me around to see if my monuments are there and accurate" from a former hand of other surveyors.
Some of the surveyors did that and others just did not know that is what their crews were doing.
A few companies simply never returned to the site to set monuments.
It is rare that I find any new monuments, those set recently or within the last 10 years and for the most part they were set much longer ago.
Most violators play the odds of never being found out and if so it is beyond the time limits of their being liable or accountable.
I can remember many surveyors that would set wood stakes, sticks or put a rock in the vicinity of a monument.
I say vicinity because they used a cloth tape and pulling a couple of distances and perhaps using a compass or some offset method to arrive at the location rather than taking time to actually use an instrument, chain or prism and TS.
