I recently picked up a map, it had all these different symbols types for different types of monuments, a solid circle indicating a 3/4" pipe, a solid square showing a centerline monument, etc. But when you looked closely, most all of these had a small note saying SFNF "Searched for not found" then gave reference to an older map that did show a monument there.I found this strange. Do we need to show a symbol when there isn't actually anything there?
roger_LS, post: 424953, member: 11550 wrote: I recently picked up a map, it had all these different symbols types for different types of monuments, a solid circle indicating a 3/4" pipe, a solid square showing a centerline monument, etc. But when you looked closely, most all of these had a small note saying SFNF "Searched for not found" then gave reference to an older map that did show a monument there.I found this strange. Do we need to show a symbol when there isn't actually anything there?
I would not show a monument. If I am using record data from a previous survey that shows a monument, I would show that data but not use a monument symbol. If I thought it was necessary to call it out, I would note it as "No monument found".
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Strange...can't say I've ever seen that. Would be interesting to see. Care to post it?
roger_LS, post: 424953, member: 11550 wrote: I recently picked up a map, it had all these different symbols types for different types of monuments, a solid circle indicating a 3/4" pipe, a solid square showing a centerline monument, etc. But when you looked closely, most all of these had a small note saying SFNF "Searched for not found" then gave reference to an older map that did show a monument there.I found this strange. Do we need to show a symbol when there isn't actually anything there?
Not a survey if you haven't been there. Why would a surveyor do that?
Washington allows similar practice. I personally wont do it.
I guess I see why someone might clarify somewhere on the survey that certain monuments had been searched for but not found. The idea of showing monuments on the plat with the note seems really weird to me. We limits such markings to be things that were found or things that were set at the time.
I can not count the times during a survey that the client said they would still pay, just give me my paperwork and to not set any monuments because they were satisfied and did not want anyone to know where the monuments fell.
Had to tell them that I had to set them according my BOR, so they were set.
I set them below the surface, buried and did not leave a stake behind, just disturbed ground.
These monument also received more witness references than normal also.
roger_LS, post: 424953, member: 11550 wrote: I recently picked up a map, it had all these different symbols types for different types of monuments, a solid circle indicating a 3/4" pipe, a solid square showing a centerline monument, etc. But when you looked closely, most all of these had a small note saying SFNF "Searched for not found" then gave reference to an older map that did show a monument there.I found this strange. Do we need to show a symbol when there isn't actually anything there?
I'd say that your first impression/reaction as an expert user of survey maps would indicate that the practice is either intended to deceive or at best highly questionable.
I know surveyors who do something similar, I have no problem with it, seems clear to me. Once you understand the note.
roger_LS, post: 424953, member: 11550 wrote: I recently picked up a map, it had all these different symbols types for different types of monuments, a solid circle indicating a 3/4" pipe, a solid square showing a centerline monument, etc. But when you looked closely, most all of these had a small note saying SFNF "Searched for not found" then gave reference to an older map that did show a monument there.I found this strange. Do we need to show a symbol when there isn't actually anything there?
Absolutely not. Don't show what you didn't find.
On occasion I will indicate on record of survey when a monument of record was searched for but not found (SFNF). I think that the information helps inform future map users of my process. That being said, I do not use the same symbols used to depict actual found monuments.
John Putnam, post: 425016, member: 1188 wrote: On occasion I will indicate on record of survey when a monument of record was searched for but not found (SFNF). I think that the information helps inform future map users of my process. That being said, I do not use the same symbols used to depict actual found monuments.
I'm maybe reading it wrong, but I think the map showed a symbol for monuments of record from the original plat. Then the surveyor added the SFNF note to the ones he couldn't find. So he has a symbol for a record monument and a note that it wasn't found during a search. That is very reasonable to me.
On many subdivisions we would end up with more monument symbols for ones not found than we would for monuments actually found and used in our survey.
If a monument for a corner or controlling corner is missing I reset it. If the location is uncertain I'm not done Surveying.
Every monument I find or set gets a detailed note on the face of the map with the appropriate symbol.
If I searched for a monument but did not find it and didn't reset it then I mark SFNF next to the dimension point symbol. SFNF is explained in the legend so that Surveyors in future generations know what it means.
Kent McMillan, post: 424982, member: 3 wrote: I'd say that your first impression/reaction as an expert user of survey maps would indicate that the practice is either intended to deceive or at best highly questionable.
For once, I completely agree with Kent.
Kent McMillan, post: 424982, member: 3 wrote: I'd say that your first impression/reaction as an expert user of survey maps would indicate that the practice is either intended to deceive or at best highly questionable.
Kent, you're gonna love this...it actually did initially deceive me and I didn't notice this subtlety until I had the job under a fixed fee contract and was reviewing this six-month old map with my party chief on the morning of the survey. Luckily, there were 4 actual found monuments on our lot which we recovered. Whew! and the escape-route note on my contract wouldn't have gotten me out of that one! Not my finest hour but it all worked out and the topo got done.
But, WTF? Eleven monuments symbols shown on the map, then in the legend a description of what each one is (but doesn't say it's not there anymore), then next to the symbol on the map another description of that particular monument, then only after that a small SFNF. Is that supposed to be helpful to someone?
Out of the eleven, only four are actual monuments in place.
roger_LS, post: 425099, member: 11550 wrote: Kent, you're gonna love this...it actually did initially deceive me and I didn't notice this subtlety until I had the job under a fixed fee contract and was reviewing this six-month old map with my party chief on the morning of the survey. Luckily, there were 4 actual found monuments on our lot which we recovered. Whew! and the escape-route note on my contract wouldn't have gotten me out of that one! Not my finest hour but it all worked out and the topo got done.
That would have been a two-fer, too. Is there something about California practice that would encourage a surveyor to camouflage the fact that he or she had SF, but NF a whole series of monuments upon which the location of the boundary of the subject tract might depend?
I see mostly the, "Monument to be set", variation of this. And very rarely do I find that any were set.
I despise abbreviations like this on plats. I've been surveying a while now and I've never seen SFNF. I would have had no idea what it meant before now. If I don't know what it means, then I'm guessing that the public has no idea what it means. Dave Karoly at least explains the abbreviation on the plat, which is good. I see way too many plats with 1/2IPF. Is this clear to the reader? Rant off.