Ridiculous Plat Decisions

I see a few other shorties there too. What the heck. I mean, who does that kind of stuff?

Stupid people!

Have you put together a search party to find line C41???

Would that be considered a pin cushion?

Zoidberg, post: 325563, member: 8841 wrote: Have you put together a search party to find line C41???

C41 was probably 0.01'. Everyone has to have a line they won't cross!

A perfect example of “CADD” idiots, and some Surveyors too.
We are currently working in multiple subdivision projects with 0.10 curve lengths, and just plain stupid geometry. It’s a real PITA to set iron rods with caps a tenth apart.

Oh well the earth still spins. 🙂

Have a great Independence Day!

A similar pet peeve of mine are plats for original tracts that were supposed to be something like 200 feet by 300 feet and rectangular showing something like:

Thence north 89 degrees 59 minutes 58 seconds east, 199.99 feet;
thence north 00 degrees 00 minutes 01 seconds east, 300.01 feet;
thence north 89 degrees 59 minutes 59 seconds west, 200.01 feet;
thence..................................

Idiots ! The world is full of them !

FL/GA PLS., post: 325566, member: 379 wrote: A perfect example of “CADD” idiots, and some Surveyors too.
We are currently working in multiple subdivision projects with 0.10 curve lengths, and just plain stupid geometry. It’s a real PITA to set iron rods with caps a tenth apart.

Oh well the earth still spins. 🙂

Have a great Independence Day!

Its a good thing you dont use 1 inch iron pipes.

Designers and engineers who refuse to let the surveyor "clean" up the line work before making a commitment to planners. Also, making lots knats rear tight to bare minimum SF so there is no room, not even a 0.10 to move a line.

What do you do?

As much as I love some of the automation tools available in software like Carlson today, you still need someone with half a brain to review to make sure it all makes sense.

Stephen Ward, post: 325555, member: 1206 wrote: All too often I find subdivision plats with ridiculously short line and curve segments along the roads where the side lines intersect the R.O.W. Often it appears that no one bothered to see if the lot lines could be tweaked to eliminate the short segments while still maintaining minimum lots area, width, etc. This one goes on my wall of shame as an example of what not to do:

Read it and weep. Yes, Ladies and Gents, that is a genuine curve segment with a length of 0.11'. :pinch:

You can punch the same cap in two places! How long will that last before the next idiot puts their punch marks on there or sets another maker because one (or both) missed the cap. Of course if the cap gets rotated a bit the games over.

YEAH, that's pretty LAME!!

Where is the "thumbs down" button?

:bad: Right there.

:love::bad:

I'm sure they staked all of those, too!

C Billingsley, post: 325658, member: 1965 wrote: I'm sure they staked all of those, too!

I'll report back after I do my fieldwork....I'll be shocked if I find two pins 0.11' apart. When I have a situation where I have an unavoidable short section I monument the main corner and show the break point as a non-monumented corner. Not the ideal solution, but it avoids setting two monuments in such close proximity that homeowners and fence builders can be lead astray.

You might find 4 pins 0.11' apart.

Yes it's cadd monkeys using automated software and incompetent surveyors stamping with no review.

I had one a few years ago where the rear lines of a s/d of some the lots were 365.43' on a curve. The tangent of the curve was 365.38'. The s/d was a bust so the engineer/developer who had some local stroke sold off part of the s/d to the school board for a new middle school. I got the boundary and design survey for the project and had to deal with staking the lots that were never staked.
The developer walked away with tax payer money to bail his failed development and cut his losses too.

Stephen Ward, post: 325661, member: 1206 wrote: can be lead astray.

Dang English language and its homophones.....what I meant to type was "can be led astray."

"homophones"?"

I believe that is now a politically incorrect word.

Paul in PA