REDACT The Surveyor, post: 381505, member: 291 wrote: Maybe he reads this forum, and is going to carefully publish his plat. I know i would!
If it was my survey I would carefully publish (redact) too. It would be so sanitized it would be useless to the discussion.
DDSM
(Arkansas...where you can download copies of survey plats)
, post: 381504, member: 424 wrote: OK. Maybe. But in this case the 3rd surveyor is not a disinterested 3rd party. He is being employed by [someone].
The other element to this is that in forensic surveying, the object typically is to present the evidence and conclusions in a way that leaves no room for reasonable doubt. That means a mountain of evidence and almost always involves a report discussing the findings. If the expert's report is not convincing, then the work is incomplete.
,, post: 381520, member: 3 wrote:
The last private job I did 6 years ago was in a subdivision of similar vintage (late first decade of the 21st century). I setup on the centerline control, quickly found the front corners which fit fantastically well, traversed to the backyard, found the rear corner, one fit fantastically well, the other was off a half foot because the fence guys had pulled it and stuck it in the fence post concrete. It was still open enough to see the cul-d-sac behind the client's property (no houses on those lots yet). I turned in the centerline monument in the cul-d-sac and it fit fantastically well. I was there because the client suspected the neighbor's fence was way off, away from him, he didn't want to pay to landscape his neighbor's property. He was right, the fence was about 10' onto the neighbor's property. The neighbor built the fence, not sure why they built it so far off.
Setting monuments before construction in a modern mass graded tract house subdivision is a big part of the problem. Here they are bonded by the developer and set after construction is complete; if the developer skips town then the bonds pay for the monuments to be set. In some places original grade is 10' below finish grade or 10' above, the monuments are either gone or buried.
Dave Karoly, post: 381533, member: 94 wrote: The last private job I did 6 years ago was in a subdivision of similar vintage (late first decade of the 21st century). I setup on the centerline control, quickly found the front corners which fit fantastically well, traversed to the backyard, found the rear corner, one fit fantastically well, the other was off a half foot because the fence guys had pulled it and stuck it in the fence post concrete. It was still open enough to see the cul-d-sac behind the client's property (no houses on those lots yet). I turned in the centerline monument in the cul-d-sac and it fit fantastically well. I was there because the client suspected the neighbor's fence was way off, away from him, he didn't want to pay to landscape his neighbor's property. He was right, the fence was about 10' onto the neighbor's property. The neighbor built the fence, not sure why they built it so far off.
Setting monuments before construction in a modern mass graded tract house subdivision is a big part of the problem. Here they are bonded by the developer and set after construction is complete; if the developer skips town then the bonds pay for the monuments to be set. In some places original grade is 10' below finish grade or 10' above, the monuments are either gone or buried.
Isn't it nice when everything fits fantastically well?
If only it was all like that.
<Partially redacted for reasons of > post: 381533, member: 94 wrote: Setting monuments before construction in a modern mass graded tract house subdivision is a big part of the problem.
In the instant case, I believe that aerial photos would show ungraded natural pasture remaining and lots being individually graded as a house was built on a lot.
Kent McMillan, post: 381520, member: 3 wrote: The other element to this is that in forensic surveying, the object typically is to present the evidence and conclusions in a way that leaves no room for reasonable doubt. That means a mountain of evidence and almost always involves a report discussing the findings. If the expert's report is not convincing, then the work is incomplete.
That would be the ideal. Or, rather, the ideal would have been that such a report would not be necessary.
The whole thing sounds like a rather simple problem of staking lots in a brand new subdivision that someone, perhaps multiple someones, has bolloxed up. It is an embarrassment to the profession and I'm not inclined to be magnanimous. Off with their heads.
, post: 381538, member: 424 wrote: The whole thing sounds like a rather simple problem of staking lots in a brand new subdivision that someone, perhaps multiple someones, has bolloxed up.
I'm sure it's just me, but I think that the answer is probably "What is RTK, Alex?".
Back on topic:
One of those surveys may be 100% correct. We don't know either way.
What I have seen posted here seems a bit vague, but the supporting data could be there, just not apparent... and maybe it is not in the public record.
Joanie now has lots of food for thought, and lots of good "from a distance" perspectives.
Unfortunately this kind of cluster fudge happens too often, and the natural human tendency is to ask others to fix it.
Most people start asking lawyers, title companies, and real estate sales people to fix things.... smart, but actually those people have no motive, and they seldom understand what the real problems are.
This is the realm of the Boundary Surveyor.
No offense, but most Surveyors don't have these things in their skill set, or don't articulate it well. Those that do move slowly, insist on very thorough research, and want to be paid up front.
Best of luck [USER=11920]@Joanie[/USER]
please do report back on your progress (and in this thread, new threads get missed)
[QUOTE="It is an embarrassment to the profession and I'm not inclined to be magnanimous. Off with their heads.
Nice attitude! I'm assuming this one is actually a joke. To continue w/ your melodramatic unprofessional garbage, let's pray you never make a simple mistake, get turned into the board, lose your license, miss your mortgage payments and end up on the streets because someone made an accusation without knowing all of the facts. Where is your common decency, respect for fellow professionals, due process and professional courtesy? You are disgusted by the pincushion effect, I'm a bit bothered by this holier than though attitude.
Kent McMillan, post: 381536, member: 3 wrote: In the instant case, I believe that aerial photos would show ungraded natural pasture remaining and lots being individually graded as a house was built on a lot.[/QUOTE
If one were to follow the available information, one would find per the FEMA site that the house has been constructed, but a simple Google search of the street and town shows the lot and some others vacant. It is easy to understand that permanent monuments may not be in. From the filed map a surveyor understands that the project has been phased, and in this economy the last lots have not yet sold.
I completed a survey last month of the last house on one street in Phase IV and no monuments had been set, Filed Map from 2005. I had to tie into Phase I monuments and some outbounds of the unapproved remainder. Zoning has changed since phases I to IV were approved and the next phase has been resubmitted with larger lots. The next phase surveyor was not the previous surveyor, since retired, and the new guy has not been paid by the developer. He did share information with me and agreed that he had find some reference markers out of place, exactly where I found them (2.5' vs. 2.6' off). I set an iron pin where a concrete monument eventually goes. I was on the losing end of a quite a lot for a lump sum lot survey that turned out to be almost a tract survey. I had two rear pins in on the outbound of the phase, and a rear for a Phase IV lot across the street. (corner to corner, 0.01' off). Agreed very well, but the sideline of the phase was along my lot, slight angle, across street, slight angle to found rear. Concrete Monuments not in place at street there, nor at the nearest intersection. I had previously traversed down my frontage street into Phase 1, concrete monument at one intersection and a second on a tee street. Prior to setting both front pins I sat on the rear corner, shot across the next phase, thankfully in soybeans to that monument on the tee, 626' to a 12' rod, 0.01' off, no adjustment proposed, 806' to an ancient concrete monument and 931' to a line iron off the far road.
Too much time over intended, but you have to leave it done right.
Paul in PA
, post: 381556, member: 236 wrote: If one were to follow the available information, one would find per the FEMA site that the house has been constructed, but a simple Google search of the street and town shows the lot and some others vacant. It is easy to understand that permanent monuments may not be in. From the filed map a surveyor understands that the project has been phased, and in this economy the last lots have not yet sold.
As I read the subdivision regulations of that jurisdiction, though, I don't see any provision for other than marking all of the lot corners with permanent markers at the time of platting. If so, one would begin with the presumption that the corners were in fact marked.
Kent McMillan, post: 381536, member: 3 wrote: In the instant case, I believe that aerial photos would show ungraded natural pasture remaining and lots being individually graded as a house was built on a lot.
The Google Maps are not up to date.
It's wide open.
I now agree with Mark Mayer...this is nuts. A brand new, wide open subdivision and they have a 1' hiatus. Wow.
RTK should work fine there unless there is some operational issue going on like multiple "here" locations or some other "nut behind the wheel" type of stuff going on.
'Kent McMillan said: Ô
"In the instant case, I believe that aerial photos would show ungraded natural pasture remaining and lots being individually graded as a house was built on a lot."
(I have no clue how my reply above got mushed into Ken's quote. Hopefully this makes it more readable.)
If one were to follow the available information, one would find per the FEMA site that the house has been constructed, but a simple Google search of the street and town shows the lot and some others vacant. It is easy to understand that permanent monuments may not be in. From the filed map a surveyor understands that the project has been phased, and in this economy the last lots have not yet sold.
I completed a survey last month of the last house on one street in Phase IV and no monuments had been set, Filed Map from 2005. I had to tie into Phase I monuments and some outbounds of the unapproved remainder. Zoning has changed since phases I to IV were approved and the next phase has been resubmitted with larger lots. The next phase surveyor was not the previous surveyor, since retired, and the new guy has not been paid by the developer. He did share information with me and agreed that he had find some reference markers out of place, exactly where I found them (2.5' vs. 2.6' off). I set an iron pin where a concrete monument eventually goes. I was on the losing end of a quite a lot for a lump sum lot survey that turned out to be almost a tract survey. I had two rear pins in on the outbound of the phase, and a rear for a Phase IV lot across the street. (corner to corner, 0.01' off). Agreed very well, but the sideline of the phase was along my lot, slight angle, across street, slight angle to found rear. Concrete Monuments not in place at street there, nor at the nearest intersection. I had previously traversed down my frontage street into Phase 1, concrete monument at one intersection and a second on a tee street. Prior to setting both front pins I sat on the rear corner, shot across the next phase, thankfully in soybeans to that monument on the tee, 626' to a 12' rod, 0.01' off, no adjustment proposed, 806' to an ancient concrete monument and 931' to a line iron off the far road.
Too much time over intended, but you have to leave it done right.
Paul in PA
Paul is there some local agency overseeing the constitution and monumentation?
Statewide Municipal Planning Code allows for the bonding of future setting of monuments and final asphalt layer. Problem is when a development goes for a long time it is more economical for the developer to walk away and forfeit the bond. Inflation has probably overcome the bond value. The municipalities may choose to spend all bond money on the paving to their benefit since they gain nothing at their level by having proper monumentation. The same developer comes back on the balance of the parcel under a different Co. name and readily moves on. Individual municipalities rarely look past their own interests. The majority of homeowners want finished streets. I believe there are 67 counties and 2562 municipalities in PA.
Paul in PA
Dave Karoly, post: 381566, member: 94 wrote: The Google Maps are not up to date.
It's wide open.
I now agree with Mark Mayer...this is nuts. A brand new, wide open subdivision and they have a 1' hiatus. Wow.
RTK should work fine there unless there is some operational issue going on like multiple "here" locations or some other "nut behind the wheel" type of stuff going on.
Oh...we've learned it's a new subdivision and wide open, I've changed my mind too. Let's chop off his nuts for doing whatever it is that we don't know he's done.
[USER=11920]@Joanie[/USER]
I've been following this thread with interest: we get concerned property owners here from time to time; seeking free advice about a particular problem they're having. I try to stay out it, for the most part. Some people seem to think that free advice is worth more than what they paid for. You've received lots of advice here; 7 pages of it; some of it's good; most of it's vague; there's even 1 or 2 that's condescending...
But I digress; I wanted to offer you a little more free advice, something that I haven't seen anyone mention yet:
The number 1 thing to remember, as you go into this; you only own what your deed says you own. Nothing more, nothing less. What the person you bought the property told you, you were buying, that's it. It appears that more than 1 surveyor has given their opinion as to where the property boundaries are situated on the ground and there is a conflict.
My first advice would be talk to the neighbor and see if you can't come to an equitable solution. It doesn't have to be an even split, that's not what I mean by equitable. It could mean you accept the first survey because you've relied on it to make improvements to your property. It could be to accept the second survey because it's more accurate; I don't know, you will need to work with new neighbor to resolve.
If that doesn't work, I would suggest you hire your own surveyor. Find one that's credible and don't be surprised if he doesn't give you the answer that you want to hear. Also, most surveyors can act as a mediator; helping you find the equitable solution.
Good luck with what ever you decide to do and try not to spend to much money...
Please keep us updated.
Thank you,
Dougie
, post: 381566, member: 94 wrote: RTK should work fine there unless there is some operational issue going on like multiple "here" locations or some other "nut behind the wheel" type of stuff going on.
RTK has been a magnet for this sort of thing, which is why "What is RTK?" is my final answer, Alex.
I'm showing up late to this little chat, but I read through the whole thing, and figured I'd go ahead and throw my thoughts in, since whats another post when you already have 7 pages, right? I don't leave the State of Texas, so anything I say could be way off for how it is done up in the NE. But I specialize in boundary retracements, mostly for large ranches, but I will do smaller properties. 1st off, I won't load a battery into my truck for $350. I make more than $350 worth of copies to do my research on deed history, plats, etc. Being a new subdivision, maybe there aren't that many copies to be had (since hopefully the city or muni doesn't write new code each time someone builds a new block of houses), but my point is, there is, or should be, lots more to a good boundary survey , the group been calling it a forensic boundary survey, when there is a disagreement, than just showing up, measuring between 4 points, looking at 1 plat, and going home. I agree this is not something you really need an attorney for, yet. The surveyor you want won't have the biggest ad in the phone book, and he won't get the job done in a few days. Your community facebook page will be talking about him, because they will see him all over the subdivision, checking the lot corners along your street, the street corners, curves, and other block corners in your part of the subdivision, and most likely even checking the outer limits of adjoining subdivisions, just to make sure. He will send a huge bill, because he will spend hours you don't know about in the office calculating the hows and whys of what his research and his field work showed him (or her, I don't mean to sound like I'm leaving the ladies out) He may dig up your yard in 10 places, digging up 9 pieces of trash metal while he looks for the IRS (iron rod set) that might not even exist. He very well may not give you the answer you or your neighbor wants, because he will give you the facts he finds, wherever they land, based upon all the evidence he can find. He will talk to the other surveyors involved, ask them questions, study their plats, and any notes they will share with him. He may agree with one, or the other, some of both, none of either, but if whoever you hire won't explain why he came to his conclusion, in a way you understand, and will also explain to your neighbor, and to the previous surveyors, you are not getting what you paid for.
Monte is talking about a PROFESSIONAL surveyor, in PRACTICE, not theory.
He just described the guy you want to hire. And, as far as his bill is concerned, That's the COST of the truth.
Nate