Sorry to see this deteriorating to this extent. I'll step out of this discussion I think. No whining, just moving on to more civil discussions.
rfc, post: 397051, member: 8882 wrote: Francis H.:
Please provide us with a reference for a recent Singapore 20 story (or more), apartment or office building that was torn down and re-built because it was constructed erroneously .5 meters (or .05 meters, or .005 meters---you pick the number), over the line drawn between two of these inviolable monuments you have there? Give us a good recent example of this...perhaps something close to Marina Bay. Thanks in advance.
The case is too long and if you have a hard time understanding the concept of trespassing, just read this portion of the decision since I believe this is what you were asking for.
43 As for the damages sought in prayer (8) of OS 678/2012, in light of my findings above, I ordered that if the present defendants failed to vacate the encroached area within one month of the date of this order, Fragrance Realty was at liberty to pursue a separate claim against them for damages for trespass.
Does this answer your question?
FrancisH, post: 397064, member: 10211 wrote: well an idiot that can do his job as against idiot that blames other people for their incompetency .
FrancisH, post: 397064, member: 10211 wrote: well an idiot that can do his job as against an idiot that blames other people for their incompetency .
You do funny
You blame everyone 4 incompetent
Create angry responses
And attest to correcting everyone's errors
All I've seen is all balls and no brains
You actually believe what you dish out without understanding how deep you have missed. the fact that you are out of your element
Apparently what works in Singapore is a singular concept not shared by the rest of the world
Óá¼¼?Ê?Ñö¡?ãüÏ´À?ÎüÄ?¾?Ⱦãö
You do funny
You blame everyone 4 incompetent
Create angry responses
And attest to correcting everyone's errors
All I've seen is all balls and no brains
You actually believe what you dish out without understanding how deep you have missed. the fact that you are out of your element
Apparently what works in Singapore is a singular concept not shared by the rest of the world
Apparently, US surveyor can dish out barbs & insults yet can't take it themselves huh?
By the way, I am not blaming anyone. I am calling out incompetent work based on the sample that was posted here.
Yawn.
Done with this conversation.
You think we're all incompetent crooks. Many have tried to respectfully explain the differences between our systems. As others have said, until you understand our system you have no standing to critique it.
I appreciate the insight you have provided into your own local system and the vast differences between our two countries.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
Francis,
You first responded to this thread with the perception that land surveyors here in the U.S. routinely accept found monuments as representing boundary corners without further investigation into their provenance. In practice, competent retracement does not work this way.
A pertinent quote is from Justice Colley:
"In Diehl v. Zanger, 39 Mich. 601, the controversy related to the line between adjacent lots. There were forty-eight lots in the subdivision. A resurvey was made, and the surveyor testified that "the fences and building on all the lots are not correctly located." Cooley, J., after stating that the surveyor reached his conclusion by satisfying himself what was the initial point of Campau's survey, and then proceeding to survey the plat anew with that as his starting point said: "Nothing is better understood than that few of our early plats will stand the test of a careful and accurate survey without disclosing errors. This is as true of the government surveys as of any other, and if all the lines were now subject to correction on new surveys, the confusion of lines and titles that would follow would cause consternation in many communities. Indeed, the mischiefs that must follow would be simply incalculable, and the visitation of the surveyor might well be set down a great public calamity. But no law can sanction this course. The surveyor has mistaken entirely the point to which his attention should have been directed. The question is not how an entirely accurate survey would locate these lots, but how the original stakes located them. No rule in real estate law is more inflexible than that monuments control course and distance -- a rule that we have frequent occasion to apply in the case of public surveys, where its propriety, justice, and necessity are never questioned. But its application in other cases is quite as proper, and quite as necessary to the protection of substantial rights. The city surveyor should, therefore, have directed his attention to the ascertainment of the actual location of the original landmarks set by Mr. Campau, and if those were discovered they must govern. If they are no longer discoverable, the question is usually to be found in the practical location of the lines, made at a time when the original monuments were presumably in existence and probably well known. As between old boundary fences, and any survey made after the monuments have disappeared, the fences are by far the better evidence of what the line of a lot actually are."
This was written in 1878, and has been cited with approval by countless other jurisdictions and survey texts as relevant to the application of retracement principles in the United States. This country is a republic, consisting of 50 unique state governments, united for the purpose of mutual benefit. Competence as a land surveyor is defined under statutes in each state, and is based upon knowledge and application of the historic origin of title, and the placement of those first grants or patents upon the ground. Public domain land was transferred to the federal government upon the granting of statehood for disposal into private ownership, and the existing rights of land grants from prior sovereign governments upon cession to the United States by treaty are honored as to the location of those boundaries by the federal surveyors. Factor in the original colonies and the Crown grants, Louisiana, Texas, Hawaii, and Alaska, and you will realize that this country is not a homogenous system of retracement surveying.
This is now number 3 in the top threads for this forum. Definitely has sparked discussion.
I think there are a lot of surveyors in the US who would like to work under a "move the monument where it's supposed to go system".
MightyMoe, post: 397131, member: 700 wrote: I think there are a lot of surveyors in the US who would like to work under a "move the monument where it's supposed to go system".
The "Pincushion Effect"
Warren Smith, post: 397133, member: 9900 wrote: The "Pincushion Effect"
well, no, there wouldn't be a pincushion if you just picked it up and moved it, one corner, one monument just were it's "supposed" to go:cool:
Imagine how much trouble it would avoid doing it that way
Yeah, that's why it is termed an Effect. Virtual pincushions included.
Well maybe we can finally get that pesky 4-Corners Monument (Arizona/Colorado/New Mexico/Utah) moved over where it BELONGS!
😎
NOT!
Loyal
I'm thinking we should all start doing what FrancisH does, run the raw data through some program then just plot a little uncertainty circle. Where's my corner? I don't know... probably somewhere in that circle, at least that's what my computer says anyway.
Earlier I focused on how insane it would be to attempt to redraw everything in the PLSS based on a single perfect point, wherever that might be. I suppose before that can be attempted there would be a need to settle every last border of the US and the individual States first. Down to less than the Singapore range of acceptable error.
Maybe Denver would end up back in Kansas where it started out.
One area that the Singapore model does work is in modern subdivisions - particularly in urban areas. That is a function of local control over development. When the PLSS and Grant boundaries were being established in the Western states, it was a matter of expediency to patent the public lands into private hands. The revenue derived by the federal government obviated the need for federal income taxes. Military scrip stood in the stead of veteran's benefits. Homestead entries provided for settlement and facilitated the payment of property taxes to fund local agencies.
Studying (and understanding) history is paramount to understanding those whose footsteps we follow.
Nope. Won't work in modern subdivisions either. That's because the outer boundaries are based on faulty data to begin with (according to FrancisH) because it all goes back to work not meeting the Singapore standards. Since every section and township is in the wrong place everything done within a so-called specific section is already erroneous and unfit for perpetuation (per our buddy from Singapore).
Faulty data by any other name would smell as sweet.
That is, by understanding what those exterior boundaries are really comprised of.
Bit like lighting candles for the blind. I'm working on a big project right now involving GLO sections laid out in 1911-1912. All of our land base mapping (tax maps) are based off of protracted township values, or in other words 'Singapore' mathematically perfect township breakdowns. Of course the section corners I've tied in this week need to be moved about 90' or so on average because those 'incompetent' 1911 surveyors couldn't get it right. Suppose I'll go out tomorrow and start digging them all up and move them to where they 'belong' and to Hades with all the subdivisions and homes built off of those wretched 'wrong' positions.
