During your design process is it absolutely necessary to place Drainage or Sanitary Manholes precisely at the intersections of all streets within a subdivision, or any other road for that matter?
Those that do, apparently no nothing about surveying, and have probably never actually visited a jobsite under construction. 😉
I don't know about your particular situation but generally they (we) try to access as much of the property with as little pipe (and manholes) as possible. With manholes in the center of an intersection you can extend pipe upstream in all directions without having to cross curb lines (a definite no-no in a lot of places). I've been on both sides of this argument, how DO I set a monument in the center of the intersection if there is a manhole cover there? This is one of those situations where there may never be a "good" answer.
Andy
Since I work in two states PA and NJ that seldom put map control points in intersection boxes it is less of a problem. I did some work in Newark, NJ from intersection control and that was less than pleasant. Most boxes had their covers missing and you had to remove hypodermic syringes and other vile detritus to expose the control point. Traffic control was not a problem since we had an armed off duty police officer escorting us for other reasons. The commercial property owner insisted on the armed guard and paid for it.
As an engineer there are reasons for wanting the manholes on the centerline. First a manhole on the center line is easier to construct since the lid ring can be set level. A manhole off the center line has to account for both road grade and pavement crown. it is rather unpleasant and unsafe to have a manhole within the traffic lane. Putting it in the parking area presents a problem when access is required. Considering that in urban areas you will find, sanitary, storm, telephone, electric and even steam manholes, plus waterlines and gas lines and their related valve boxes, all within the curb to curb line the surveyor is out of luck to have his job made easier. I find it much safer to access and occupy monuments at right of way PCs and PTs than any within the street. Centerline access for sewer cleaning can generally be done while allowing traffic flow in both directions.
I also take it you do not understand that surveyors have the highest per capita death rate among all construction occupations due to vehicles. Why do you want to be in traffic, especially considering the expense to provide state mandated signage and/or flagmen?
Paul in PA, PE, PLS
Keeping manhole lids outside of the wheel track is an important design consideration, and the centerline/centerline intersection is the No. 1 best place for that. Witness the buildup of gravel in what I call "the diamond of safety" at the CL/CL intersection of any busy street, especially in the winter.
"how DO I set a monument in the center of the intersection if there is a manhole cover there?"
Straddlers, although a royal PITA is the quickest that I have found.
ÛÏAs an engineer there are reasons for wanting the manholes on the centerline. First a manhole on the center line is easier to construct since the lid ring can be set level. A manhole off the center line has to account for both road grade and pavement crown.Û
IÛªm not questioning center-line installation I am questioning INTERSECTION placement.
As far as this is concerned:
ÛÏI also take it you do not understand that surveyors have the highest per capita death rate among all construction occupations due to vehicles. Why do you want to be in traffic, especially considering the expense to provide state mandated signage and/or flagmen?Û
Sorry I wonÛªt waste WendellÛªs digital storage on a response.
No utility line should run on true R-o-W center. Saving a few feet of pipe while guaranteeing maximum destruction during install and repair is flawed logic. All you do is make certain maintenance will be as disruptive as possible.
Our community is one of many where the fabric of Title is tied to the PLSS. We are finally holding those who design improvements that destroy monuments accountable. If you choose to destroy our infrastructure to install yours, there better be a diligent search and replace for monuments.
The PLSS is for a rural environment. Once you need to install sanitary sewer you are in an urban environment and the PLSS should be replaced by a metes and bounds system.
The PLSS was designed to easily disperse public lands. Once those lands are in private hands there is no legal requirement to maintain the PLSS. It is however handy for rural areas, but the land will still exist without it.
As far as I see a manhole is a sufficiently accurate monument for the PLSS and is very unlikely to move.
BTW, You asked for an engineer's opinion.
Paul in PA, PE, PLS
ÛÏThe PLSS is for a rural environment. Once you need to install sanitary sewer you are in an urban environment and the PLSS should be replaced by a metes and bounds system.Û
No thank you, there is way too much ambiguity, not to mention liability, associated with misinterpretations by Surveyors associated performing those surveys.
PLSS surveys are much more straightforward with respect to controlling boundaryÛªs.
As far as the Manhole question aboveÛ?.
In Florida, all platted subdivisions are required to have PCPÛªs, (permanent control points) set at ALL CENTERLINE roadway intersection points; pc, pt, pi, prc, etc. There is absolutely no reason for a manhole to be located at these points. To me itÛªs a perfect example of Engineers who know nothing about Surveying.;-)
ÛÏBTW, You asked for an engineer's opinion.Û And I got it! Thanks Paul ! 🙂
Clearly, then, the problem is with the dictate that surveyors are to set PCP's where they are the most likely to be destroyed. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Every time some resurfacing needs done, for example, the latest PCP may disappear or at least get moved a few shiny coordinates to the left/right/down.
ÛÏClearly, then, the problem is with the dictate that surveyors are to set PCP's where they are the most likely to be destroyed. Stupid, stupid, stupid.Û
I agree ALL C/L points will be destroyed during resurfacing and control will have to be perpetrated from existing corners. But we still have to abide by current standards in place.
FL/GS PLS, I do not understand your statement about ambiguity in a filed map metes and bounds subdivision. I believe only a gross error could introduce any ambiguity.
As far as centerline intersection points and PCs and PTs they are at most reference points to an actual occupied lot. Yes, one can prove that upon abandonment the underlying fee for a street returns to individual lot owners, but that prospect is so remote it is not dealt with on a day to day surveying basis. Title is regularly passed by referring to the exterior of the occupied useable lot.
So you have a legal requirement that does not make sense and blame the engineers who attempt to do things sensibly?
Paul in PA, PE, PLS
Around here, we try to keep new sewer lines out of the paved areas to save in granular backfill costs and to make for better future accessibility for maintennance and repairs.
ÛÏFL/GS PLS, I do not understand your statement about ambiguity in a filed map metes and bounds subdivision.Û
I do not understand your statement above, or this one below. Neither are relevant to the question.
ÛÏAs far as centerline intersection points and PCs and PTs they are at most reference points to an actual occupied lot. Yes, one can prove that upon abandonment the underlying fee for a street returns to individual lot owners, but that prospect is so remote it is not dealt with on a day to day surveying basis. Title is regularly passed by referring to the exterior of the occupied useable lot.Û
As Meat Loaf said, ÛÏlet me sleep on it and IÛªll give you an answer in the morningÛ !
Paul in PA, post: 344406, member: 236 wrote: The PLSS is for a rural environment. Once you need to install sanitary sewer you are in an urban environment and the PLSS should be replaced by a metes and bounds system.
The PLSS was designed to easily disperse public lands. Once those lands are in private hands there is no legal requirement to maintain the PLSS. It is however handy for rural areas, but the land will still exist without it.
As far as I see a manhole is a sufficiently accurate monument for the PLSS and is very unlikely to move.
BTW, You asked for an engineer's opinion.
Paul in PA, PE, PLS
In the PLSS States i work in it is a legal requirement to tie all surveys and subdivisions to PLSS corners. We maintain title under the system it was created in.
Paul in PA, post: 344378, member: 236 wrote: I find it much safer to access and occupy monuments at right of way PCs and PTs than any within the street. Centerline access for sewer cleaning can generally be done while allowing traffic flow in both directions.
I also take it you do not understand that surveyors have the highest per capita death rate among all construction occupations due to vehicles. Why do you want to be in traffic, especially considering the expense to provide state mandated signage and/or flagmen?
Paul in PA, PE, PLS
I wish that some location other than the center-line was used for monuments. It is dangerous. But there is no other way used, around here (Pacific Northwest).
Your lucky to have unpaved areas. I understand there are places in this country, where the only unpaved areas are small grassy lawns where random people let their dog doo their thing... 😉
