I'm muddling my way through an interesting boundary problem, which I will post in steps over the next few days. We'll argue the simplest part first. The tricky part will follow in a few days.
In 1982 a surveyor was hired to prepare a legal description for the acquisition of a new right-of-way. It's a long site, one mile N/S and half a mile E/W. By 1986 the road had been built and I located the ADOT monuments in the centerline and along the R/W lines, all of them substantial monuments.
The legal description starts at the Southeast section corner and works its way clockwise, eventually tying in to a point 75 feet South of the Northeast section corner, then working its way back South.
First problem is the description calls out the East line of the section several times, but the writer assumed the section line is straight. It isn't. That makes the rotation a little more complex, but that's the easy part.
Mathematically, the tie to a point 75 feet South of the Northeast section corner calculates to 75.76 feet. Comparing the distances from the Southeast section corner to a few of the monuments, the distances are (M)vs(D): 1121.30' vs 1121.12', 4049.87' vs 4049.36', 4533.90' vs 4533.26', and 5424.23' vs 5423.47'. The average proration is 1.000138, and it is consistent, sort of indicating the legal description was written on grid, or something like that.
The distances in the legal description are all smaller than the stationing on the highway plans. For example, 535.54' (plans) vs 535.41' deed.
Question: Does it seem reasonable to rotate the deed to best fit the monuments, and stretch it by a factor of 1.000138?
On the surface...
I'd say yes to both parts of your question. Keep in mind reasonable may not be correct.
I take it he (the original surveyor) makes no mention whether he was writing the legal on a grid vs. ground correct?
Anyway, I'd would think the mons would hold, since they are original to the r.o.w.
Joe
On the surface...
No mention of grid or ground anywhere.
One would think the monuments would hold, especially since they are substantial and firmly set, but we'll get to that part tomorrow.
On the surface...
> No mention of grid or ground anywhere.
>
> One would think the monuments would hold, especially since they are substantial and firmly set, but we'll get to that part tomorrow.
Was one of the section corners by any chance the corner that you posted about a month or so ago where the monument had been disturbed, the monument for which you were looking for some private surveyor's tie data in order to reconstruct its previous position?
On the surface...
something from 1982 and 1986 and the distances don't match? Hold your found monuments and best fit as well as you can. Remember this work was surely not done with gps, and possibly with transit and steel tape. If your scale factor works fine then go with it. Found monuments show the intent of the previous surveyor's work. show measured and record distances. Another thing to consider, is this was possibly done in 27 state plane coordinates.
hope this gives you some help.
Doug
What DOOGLE said
I had typed out just about the same response and somehow lost it. I know a number of people that worked for highway design firms during that time that used a transit and 100' steel tape.
What DOOGLE said
Too Funny!
Surveyors of today thinking that those old surveyors back then didn't do good work with their guns and chains. Haven't you ever seen a GPS job that was really messed up? Most of us have and yes, there were some bad surveyors back in the 80's that did poor work.
Stay with Bruce and you will find the answers.
What DOOGLE said
We've heard for years that the world is getting smaller every day. Maybe this is proof of that saying.
On the surface...
Yes, but I know the answer on that one. The ACP in a handwell in a block of concrete (the whole shebang) was disturbed during construction and pushed sideways, which explains why the monument inside the handwell was sideways. The brass cap a foot away was set from references and is where the ACP used to be.
Good memory, Kent.
Tomorrow's post will be a lot more interesting.
What DOOGLE said
GPS never makes mistakes 😉
What DOOGLE said
> GPS never makes mistakes 😉
That reminds me of the construction foreman on a job 30 years ago who told my party chief that the grade on the 200 feet of sewer his construction crew had laid and buried the previous day couldn't possibly be flat because "them lasers don't lie." We soon learned that he had taken the slope of -0.002 from the plans and dialed it into his laser, which unfortunately was graduated in percent rather than rise over run.
Oops.
What DOOGLE said
Hey, I have seen plenty of work done with transit and chain measure very closely to what we are able to measure today. I also have seen distances being off by several feet. It all depends on the crew doing the work. I have all the respect in the world for those surveyors who came before us. I understand that our tools today allow us to measure more accurately, but monuments should always hold over distances.
Doug
What DOOGLE said
There was a surveyor in the 1930s in Tucson, I think his last name was Marx, and I've retraced two of his lines. One downtown about 300 feet long I matched by a hundredth, and a quarter section line out in the boonies I matched by a tenth. He knew how to measure with a transit and chain.
What DOOGLE said
There are a couple of Engineers that practiced in Sacramento in the 1930s that set some really substantial monuments. RE46 and RE53. The current generation could learn something from those guys.
What DOOGLE said
The beauty of GPS is you can know to eight or so decimal places where you are not. 😉
