For you Mass Guys

Always depends on all the details of course. Since the bounds were generically set after the math was calculated, I would tend to preserve the layout math. If the differences were large, I would see if I could find the field notes from the district office and track where the error may have been made. Perhaps end run the abutting research out a little to see if anyone else had the same issue. Also do have "closed loops of math to make sure their curves all check out? I haven't run across the 495 lately so I don't recall if those sheets have the baseline and the sideline tied together.

I wouldn't hesitate to break the math if I could back it up with some reasoning. You can find some anomaly bounds that were not set correctly just after construction. You can also find some areas where the original baseline crews had some error and placed it right where your project is. Surveying farther up or down the layout may yield some backup to this decision.

I have found most of the MHBs were set well but they were all set after the math and not before it.

Either way it sounds like a fun one!

Always perplexing question.

I used to hold the math and show the bounds as "good" if they were within a foot (or so). Rumor is that those were mostly set "approximately" by a laborer with a shovel and no guidance.

Now, well I may do the same, but reference the bound to the corners......

I used to hold the math and show the bounds as "good" if they were within a foot (or so). Rumor is that those were mostly set "approximately" by a laborer with a shovel and no guidance.

Wow, did not hear that one before. Good to know. I did figure these were set with a steel tape using stationing which is why the tangents check and the curves are where the problems are.

We have run about 4,000 feet of the highway which is our direct abutter and I'm finding bounds out around 0.5' from certain sections on the layout. I'm hesitant to detail them because they agree "locally" with each other but not with other tangents separated by curves.

Maybe I'm overthinking this, 0.5' over 4000 isn't too bad I guess.

-V

Since the bounds were generically set after the math was calculated, I would tend to preserve the layout math

I agree. There just isn't a nice solution here by holding the math, so I'm thinking, how can I make this nice? They cant all be works of art I guess.

Thanks for the input.

-V

I heard that the "fence guys" set them. In our area there are places on the Mass Turnpike where they are off 6' & 7'.

T.W.

It is extremely unprofessional to be spreading rumors about others' survey methods. If you do not have verifiable information then you do not know. You may visit the District Survey Office to ask questions about the methods used. If you do not know then you have no business saying what amounts to slander.

not mine either

Set a bunch of them bounds yourself, didja?

VH,

I was a crew chief on a contract mass hiway crew, now massdot, for many years. When laying out a baseline, or anything, we were told to hold the math. I always found monuments that worked to hold, and then yes on curves +/-. Sounds like you're in my old stomping grounds which would be district three. Their offices are in Worcester, the guys in the survey dept. are good guys, if you need them.

Bob

Thanks for the input. Ended up holding the tangent bounds and preserving the math. Bounds on the curves are either long or short, but still land close to the layout lines. Will put a call into the Worcester office.

-V

No one is "spreading rumors". Just trying to find out why the monuments don't check the record. No one has been mentioned by name, nor accused of poor survey technique.

-V

For you Mass Guys>Not spreading rumors

I'm not spreading rumors, just repeating what a former boss of mine told me about the layout of Route 6 on the Cape, of which he was on the field crew cutting line and running the stationing.

Kind of like when he told me that the old timers in Harwich used to plow the lines when they conveyed property, therefore the ditches were the property lines, not the ridges.....

Let's call it Parol evidence.

Dtp

I always held the math, and was told by Mass Highway to do that. There were a few companies who fit to the monuments on their plans, which annoyed the state people somewhat.

I was just out in western Mass last week, tying into some MHB's, and they checked great with record. But that was only a 700' straight section, with bounds on both ends.

The bounds were concrete, no drillholes, so I pulled tape across the street to check, and it appears that they're back-center. I'm trying to remember, but I thought that was just the old method for state roads, and only with stone bounds. Seems like most concrete road bounds were county, and were center or had drillholes. Been a while, maybe I'm mis-remembering.

I'd say that it isn't a rumor, but a verifiable fact that in most states, the right-of-way monuments were set by low skill laborers.

In Tennessee the contractor, or contractor's sub, sets a stake at the monument location. Then the monument subcontractor comes along, bores a hole, and sets the monument. Those people have been known to set monuments at reference stakes, slope stakes, any piece of wood that looks like it was machine cut, etc....

> I always held the math, and was told by Mass Highway to do that. There were a few companies who fit to the monuments on their plans, which annoyed the state people somewhat.

I have a hard time believing that a court would back what the DOT is saying, which is basically, "Those monuments may or may not be right. We'll come along every few decades and correct them."

Not a rumor in my state that the fence contractor set many of the ROW monuments. Sometimes at an offset point sometimes who knows where...