@larry-best I got it.
I first would have heard that from the great Albert King, but he wasn't the first.
THRAC ALERT
I hate to be the bearer of bad news for you music aficionados.
300 W. 12th is the home of the Folly Theater.?ÿ It was renovated and reopened in 1981.?ÿ I took in a play there in 1982 featuring Cloris Leachman.?ÿ In the crowd was Marvin Kaplan, who played Henry on the TV show "Alice".?ÿ Us hicks from the sticks thought we had moved uptown.
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0438322/?ref_=tt_cl_t_7
I think 9th street was the one to be avoided by good boys.?ÿ Plenty of friendly females who would offer to shine more than your shoes for you, at a price.
What has been identified here is that textbook questions are aimed at educating one thing, not the 50 other things that come about with experience in the field.?ÿ Thus, as you say, no thinking outside the box.?ÿ Take the limited data given in the textbook question, apply what has been asserted in lecture or in reading assignments.?ÿ That is the answer being sought.?ÿ One question, one answer.
I disagree with this.?ÿ I think the poster should answer the question to the best of his knowledge and experience, and explain his answer.?ÿ The answer should be the real-world answer, with the given evidence and data (no assumptions.)?ÿ If the course is being taught by a licensed surveyor, I cannot imagine he/she would want to see anything but a competent decision, as one would see in the real world.?ÿ
If the textbook question was aimed at only one thing, it would be phrased as such. For instance, "only taking into account priority of calls..." or something like that.
I had this on a homework assignment a few weeks ago. I would like to see what the community thinks.
"A call in a description reads; from a #5 rebar at the corner of 5th and Vine streets; thence 10 degrees West 250 feet to a 2 inch iron pipe. You recover the rebar and determine it appears to be the original; however, when measuring from the rebar you find nothing at the called bearing and distance but do find a badly corroded pipe that measures N 9 degrees W 248.95 feet. Would you accept the pipe or set a new monument at the called bearing and distance? Explain your decision."
Explain the decision, which should be a well-reasoned corner decision, one that would hold up in court, and one that you would sign off on in the real world.
If you are wrong, better off being wrong in school than in the real world.
This is an easy question to answer, the monuments are found the dimensions match well to record, a slam dunk. Not sure what might be argued about.
@bill93?ÿ
I was a good boy, so never learned the price.?ÿ Anywhere, ever.?ÿ Not even the drop dead gorgeous ones working outside the Waldorf-Astoria in downtown downtown New York New York.
This test question is similar to some that appear on the tests required to get the LS after one's name.?ÿ It gives you only two options, A or B.?ÿ Explain why you chose the one you chose.?ÿ Logically, the #5 bar found is of equal value relative to the pipe found.?ÿ Perhaps the correct answer is to go to the pipe and set a new monument at the correct bearing and distance from it back towards the #5.?ÿ The question did not allow that to be an answer.?ÿ Therefore, setting a new monument is not the answer.
?ÿ
"A call in a description reads; from a #5 rebar at the corner of 5th and Vine streets; thence 10 degrees West 250 feet to a 2 inch iron pipe. You recover the rebar and determine it appears to be the original; however, when measuring from the rebar you find nothing at the called bearing and distance but do find a badly corroded pipe that measures N 9 degrees W 248.95 feet. Would you accept the pipe or set a new monument at the called bearing and distance? Explain your decision."
The question states the found rebar appears to be original. Measuring northerly at 248.95 feet a badly corroded pipe is found. Incidentally 1?ø is about 4 feet in 250 feet. I would attempt to measure the diameter of the found pipe.
The bearings in old deeds and surveys are often repeated from old records and don??t reflect what was done in the field. Many times I have occupied a PI, sighted down one line of arrow straight monuments and turned the angle calculated from the record bearings and missed the other line of arrow straight monuments by a substantial amount. It seems like surveyors trained before the 1960s resisted reporting bearings different from record as if a fissure would open up under their feet if they did that.
If the pipe is reasonably close to 2? diameter and seems to agree with the possession lines then I would accept it. If it is substantially different in size, especially larger (possible old steel fence post) then set a new monument.
1970s??county surveyor sets 1? iron pipe at section corner from huge oak BTs about 5?? west of fence (as depicted on his map). 1980s Record Of Survey??surveyor finds 1? pipe reports B&D to QSC half mile north. 2016 Surveyor finds 1-1/2? iron pipe with different LS tag in fence, distance to QSC very close (less than a tenth) but off bearing by 4 feet. Okay this is odd. I swing out distances from 2 remaining huge oak BTs, falls about 4 feet west of 1-1/2? pipe and west of fence as shown on 1979s map. I concluded the 1-1/2? pipe was probably cut off steel fence post (there are others in use nearby). The distance match is just coincidental. So it happens.
@bill93 Bill, that's the principles I learned. However, through painful personal experience I learned that's not how a Judge thinks. In my case the Developer and his brother testified that he and his brother had set spikes in concrete filled coffee cans as the corners for parcels that abutted against a GLO government Lot line. He mentioned that Surveyors didn't set suitable monuments, so he paid for and set the monuments himself. He found an Engineer/Surveyor that prepared and signed Certificates of Survey for the parcels who was a retired State Highway Engineer and earned his Surveyor license by checking the right block, so the Clerk & Recorder would file the Certificates of Survey. In his Legend the Engineer/Surveyor indicated that he had set 3/4 " pins. The Judge has ruled the Buyer's Dad was shown the monuments by the Developer, who also owned the Land. A Rancher who knows how to do anything and will tell you so. His monuments are 280 feet and 18?ø off from the record his Surveyor showed on his 8-1/2" X 14" Certificate of Survey from a set GLO stone (still in existence) and over 100 feet from the properly surveyed Government Lot line. The Judge ruled those monuments are the monuments for the Parcel of record and has ruled against us.
@peter-lothian Send me your email. I'll send you the trials transcript, the Judge's Findings of Fact, and bot Lawyer's Closing arguments.