If you're surveying residential lots, and you label the acreage to the nearest hundredth of a square foot, you should have your license suspended until you figure out why those areas are BS.
If ... you label the acreage to the nearest hundredth of a square foot..... those areas are BS.
True, but why is it troubling you today? Expiring minds want to know.
Lot 1, Block 1
5521.3265465432131654651321654 squ. ft.
I forgot to add: "FOUND 3/4" REBAR TAG LS1234, 0.215'N AND 0.547'W OF TRUE NW CORNER"
Property Owner: Yeah but where do I hook the string line for my fence?
Dave: Can't you see the dimension point on the ground right there?
Property Owner:
Dave:
Property Owner:
Dave:
Dave: Hey, I can't hold your hand all day.
I read a description of a commercial property in Tacoma that carried the distances out to four decimal places. I declined the project.?ÿ
How is it possible that a found original lot corner is north and west of anything, wouldn't it be the corner.
?ÿ
You are correct. @dave-karoly is being sarcastic about hyper-precision.
You declined it because the distances were carried out to the ten-thousandths?
I had opened a CAD file of a 15 lot subdivision and every single one of them had the offending areas.
That's even worse. A good friend of mine works for a federal agency and one of his duties is to review contract surveys. He absolutely will not accept anything with that nonsense on it. He got into an argument with a surveyor from Ohio that told him that Ohio statutes required him to do that.
Tommy - that would thin out the ranks considerably in my State...
I declined because it is in Tacoma and I am in Kenmore. Very good client but too far from home base for me to be efficient. I did the research in order to identify someone who might be a better fit for the neighborhood.
Most probably these things happen because the C3d parcel or line label style in use is set that way. It is evidence of poor CAD work, quality control,?ÿ & quality assurance, but not an intentional thing.?ÿ?ÿ
Courtesy of one of the great sages of the 20th Century: ??Stupid is as stupid does.? ?? Forrest Gump
A few years ago I was asked to review a preliminary plat being prepared for a nearby city.?ÿ The first red flag was noticing that every bearing had arc-seconds to five decimal places, e.g. 47.12345"?ÿ This was on block lines in a small subdivision.?ÿ As I recall I figured a line would have to be roughly 50 miles long before the difference between 47.12345 and 47.12346 would be a quarter of an inch.?ÿ Forget curvature of the Earth and all sorts of other things.?ÿ BTW, the plat was provided to me by the city, so obviously the surveyor didn't see anything wrong with such crap.
Not sure what the problem is with over precision of units? So what if he computed out to 10 decimal places? You just round it off to whatever decimal places your instrument is capable of laying out right? Problem solved, you get paid, on to the next client/
One of the problems is that non-surveyors assume reported over-precision means superior work when it actually means something far different.
There are things that I know that some other surveyors and most non- surveyors don't know.
There are things that other surveyors and non- surveyors do know and that I don't know. ?ÿ
Get over it.
I think in Oregon its a statute that acreage be shown to the .000 Ac
There was a rash of insignificant digit requirements that made little sense; one agency infected has been the DOT.?ÿ
Scale factors for a project area needed to be shown to 9 places, even though anything after the sixth place is meaningless. So when we figured out a scale for a project area that might be 1.000201 it had to be shown as 1.000201000. Of course 1.0002 would have been fine, that 1PPM isn't going to affect anything. Meter coordinates were required to be carried to 3 places while it was required to carry feet coordinates to 4 places. Try and make sense of that!
I've also noticed some correction mile markers showing up, there are a number of these, I really need to take pictures of them. One set has a marker of 127.32 AH next to a 127.33 BK (not sure about the mile, but the difference is .01mile), this along a divided interstate highway. Maybe there is a good reason to do that, but I can't think of one.?ÿ
Also getting coordinates as lat long with 7 or 8 places for the second. 4 places gets to .01', I would imagine that should be good enough for anything. I even saw that on a plat where the requirement was to place a latitude, longitude?ÿ on a section corner tie point. 8 places for the second was shown, that was not a requirement, only the lat, long for a monument tie.?ÿ
It's our computer age, when we calculated by hand and wrote everything down we all understood significant digits better.?ÿ