Rich., post: 349219, member: 10450 wrote: Same property I was working on last week. Drawing up the plat now.
Attached is said plat and a closeup of the line in question.
I found the three Monuments as called for in deed however can find nothing else along Weaver Street as most of it is just a rough tall ledge outcropping.
Should I show the lines per the found monuments and put the bearing on the small line (55.73') to make the closesure? I chose to do a new bearing rather than hold bearings as the distance is the exact distance called for in deed from angle point to monument found. And note deed bearing as well as I have on plat...
or
Should i just use the lines as per the description and just note the measured distance along the line with said monuments? (the 226.22' line)
Maybe a dumb question but did you look for monuments across the street to prove up bearings along the roadway? If possible I would locate those and use the row width to prove up the East line of the property.
MY survey 2015-083 is not near Hwy 213. So you must be looking at something else. But.....
Roads don't always follow section lines like they do in Oklahoma. They often follow the lay of the land. The legal descriptions, from the 1860's or so, typically read "thence brg distance to a 12" fir tree, thence brg distance to a 14" alder, ... and so on a few hundred feet per leg. And, of course, their true course should be properly legalized. But there isn't funding available to do them all. And when the county surveyor does get around to it the only thing he may have to go on is the physical roadbed. So, yes, sometimes the road is the best evidence of the legal right of way.
I'm curious, I notice that the difference between the record and measured bearings along the road at the SE corner makes a difference in the Southerly endpoint 0.76', exactly the difference in the length of the South line. Was the monument at the SE corner possibly disturbed, possibly by the construction of the wall?
Looks like the NY surveys that I remember, when I started working in OR it was a verrrrrrrrrrry different world, and had to learn how the PLSS works.
Cyril Turner, post: 349252, member: 159 wrote: Maybe a dumb question but did you look for monuments across the street to prove up bearings along the roadway? If possible I would locate those and use the row width to prove up the East line of the property.
There is a an old wall along the roadway on the other side. According to the neighboring plat the road is not parallel. The property jogs in.
I can locate this wall and see how it does for the straighter part of the property. However I would also feel as though I would be surveying the property at that point and not retracing the original survey. Maybe I shouldn't be thinking like that?....
Richard Germiller, post: 349260, member: 499 wrote: I'm curious, I notice that the difference between the record and measured bearings along the road at the SE corner makes a difference in the Southerly endpoint 0.76', exactly the difference in the length of the South line. Was the monument at the SE corner possibly disturbed, possibly by the construction of the wall?
Looks like the NY surveys that I remember, when I started working in OR it was a verrrrrrrrrrry different world, and had to learn how the PLSS works.
The deed closes perfectly.
However the 3 monuments work great for angle just this distance is slightly off. I went back and took a look at that but it really seems to me as being undistured. It's tucked away as well atop an outcropping and is guarded by ledge and woods on the side facing the house. I was figuring that whoever did the measurement for the deed didn't measure down the slope through the wooded area great as that would result in a slightly longer measurement.
So that is basically what is bugging me. Hold the deeded line, or the monuments found.
Agree with others. Very nice plat.
Again, I'm not sure what the rules are for NY but in TX monuments have a greater dignity than bearing or distance calls unless they can proven to have been placed in error. What is the bearing of the wall at the Southeast corner and how well does that match the record bearing?
Doesn't appear you have a specific ROW width to maintain along the road, or do you? The original undisturbed monuments would hold over a distance and bearing in a deed around here, with the exception of a ROW that is due it's full width. If the corner were not an original I feel I'd have more leeway to accept some alternative.
N/F to me is shorthand for Not Found.
Me .02'
Wasn't this scenario on the exam you just took and passed? 😀 Welcome to the world of licensure!
Cyril Turner, post: 349266, member: 159 wrote: Again, I'm not sure what the rules are for NY but in TX monuments have a greater dignity than bearing or distance calls unless they can proven to have been placed in error. What is the bearing of the wall at the Southeast corner and how well does that match the record bearing?
Absolutely. Monuments have a way greater priority...if original and undisturbed...
Warren Smith, post: 349272, member: 9900 wrote: Wasn't this scenario on the exam you just took and passed? 😀 Welcome to the world of licensure!
Yep! But as you know nothing in the real world is as cut and dry as multiple test questions haha
1) I meant regardless of how the bearings are labeled, the street R/W line per your map goes from bearing generally south to bearing S19W and S18W. At the same time the physical road goes from bearing generally south to bearing in a SE'ly direction. Just an irregular R/W I guess.
4)By controlling your lines, I meant are other monuments, or deeds, or surveys controlling the length and direction of all lines. You said you were going to add "per deed" so that explains it.
Agreed that deed reference should be on the plan.
While I take your point that the client is paying for the product, I think that a plan is a technical document and the client should not expect to understand everything on it without explanation. I don't think the plans need to be dumbed down to meet the client's understanding, but I do think that the plan needs to be explained to the client so that they understand it.
The problem is when someone who understands the document from a technical perspective can't figure out what you are trying to convey.
I lean more to client understanding, sure you can't make all the technical aspects of a survey understood, but your map and information should go as far as possible to do that.
You need to meet survey standards, but I'm not surveying for other surveyors.
Never had a single one write me a check for my surveys.
Always think about how the map can be seen and used by the client, or how easy it is to find and use your monuments by the client, simply stamping info on the cap that makes it clear what it is helps immensely.
Here is an example of one of our survey plats and accompanying descriptions. I did this one in October. This is a pretty good example what our normal boundary survey plats have come to look like in recent years. I thought about posting the ALTA/ACSM I just finished, but it has a lot of details that we wouldn't normally have on a plat, so I didn't think that would be a fair representation.
Dad's been at this since 1983. He did great work from the get go. Compared to others in the area, his plats and descriptions have always been, in my opinion, at the head of the class. But we've come a long way since then. The good thing is that as professionals, we have permission, perhaps even an obligation, to continue to improve our services. A plat from 10 years ago, pulled from our files, would look similar to this one, and would include the same important elements, but I think what we do now is better than what we did then. In 10 more years I hope to be able to say that our product then is better than this one from October.
Rich, by putting your plat up there and asking for comments, you've demonstrated that your pursuit of excellence is greater than your need for self aggrandizement. That's very commendable. You also showed courage which inspired me to put this one out there.
Rich, by putting your plat up there and asking for comments, you've demonstrated that your pursuit of excellence is greater than your need for self aggrandizement. That's very commendable. You also showed courage which inspired me to put this one out there.
I agree with Shawn's sentiments, I hope to see more good plat examples in Beerleg.
Has anyone heard from Paul Plutae? He posted some notables way back when.
Warren Smith, post: 349272, member: 9900 wrote: Wasn't this scenario on the exam you just took and passed? 😀 Welcome to the world of licensure!
yep! but as you know in the real world not everything is as cut and dry as a test question! o.O
Paul D, post: 349234, member: 323 wrote: n/f = now or formerly. I don't work in NY but around here those who need to know what it means, does.
Brave man to post his plan, not sure I would ever put my work up here to be (constructively) torn apart.
The "N/F" is a standard survey notation 'round here as well. I have rarely seen it spelled out "Now or Formerly".
I hate lower case.....never use it myself, but to each his own
Rich., post: 349219, member: 10450 wrote: Same property I was working on last week. Drawing up the plat now.
Attached is said plat and a closeup of the line in question.
I found the three Monuments as called for in deed however can find nothing else along Weaver Street as most of it is just a rough tall ledge outcropping.
Should I show the lines per the found monuments and put the bearing on the small line (55.73') to make the closesure? I chose to do a new bearing rather than hold bearings as the distance is the exact distance called for in deed from angle point to monument found. And note deed bearing as well as I have on plat...
or
Should i just use the lines as per the description and just note the measured distance along the line with said monuments? (the 226.22' line)
Do you have to set the missing corners? Here in NJ it is required.
Note that in the example survey of mine that I linked I legended the abbreviation "DLC", which is ubiquitous around here.
On further review I see that I did not legend "U.S.B.T.", which is an acronym so obscure that people are unsure of just what it actually stands for (General consensus is "United States Bearing Tree" - which makes some sense because they are PLSS corner reference documents). I should have done so.
