So I have to write descriptions for wetlands that are well into the middle of a property for a client who has to submit them to the ACoE. We did not do the boundary survey of the property but we have done all the topographic, as-built, and layout work for the wetlands restoration project. The work is so far from the property lines that is simply does not matter for this project. So my thought here is to set a starting point (capped 36" rebar) and assign a coordinate to it. Then run my descriptions with a few other coordinates in there. I'd be very descriptive about my datum, etc.
It should be noted that I have gotten permission to set only one point in the the field per wetland...it should also be noted that we are describing wetlands that were flagged by someone who was essentially an intern for the client (a non profit group) and that we located them sub foot...
What say you about this?
Tom
The controlling monument, point of beginning or commencing point should be a recoverable and provable place.
When you are ready to certify that your reference is sufficient and the results are repeatable, then and you should be good to go.
I would not show any boundary locations without locating them.
😉
I'd sure like to see a bearing and a distance from a monument in addition to the coordinates.
Would the Washington Monument be OK?
B-)
Loyal
> Would the Washington Monument be OK?
>
> B-)
> Loyal
yes, as long as the plat has a tie from the boundary to the Washington Monument.
we are describing wetlands that were flagged by someone who was essentially an intern for the client
Clients flagging their own wetland! That would go over big at the planning board!
Why not just provide the coordinates of each flag? Anybody can connect the dots later.
If the plat had a Latitude and Longitude on it somewhere, then it WOULD HAVE,
😛
Loyal
> If the plat had a Latitude and Longitude on it somewhere, then it WOULD HAVE,
>
> 😛
>
> Loyal
I'm oldschool. can't convert lat/not to anything useful in the field. Give me a bearing and a distance to pace and I can find those wetland flags.
Would not fly here. We must begin from a Government corner or from a subdivision corner. None of that rinky-dinky magic stuff allowed.
A cool idea
Our state regs say each plat of survey must have a tie to a "point of reference" that is monumented and on record. I wonder.....
> Would not fly here. We must begin from a Government corner or from a subdivision corner. None of that rinky-dinky magic stuff allowed.
This is partially why I think states should look at their minimum standards and seek to modify them. If you establish a starting point with state plane coordinates (or lat/long) and use a reproduceable bearing base, a future surveyor coming behind you can follow your footsteps in the field....especially if you add controlling calls to trees or other features in the field. Will the client allow you to mark any of the bearing trees with a nail and disc? I know you said set one point, but does that mean only one point in the ground?
Never had to write a description for a wetland??? but... why not use an existing property corner as a starting reference point?
I would set the one point well out of the wetland area, make it as permanent as possible, put it somewhere near good physical ties, good reception, and where it has the least chance of being destroyed. Then use that one point as a point of commencement. The idea is to be able to compare future locations to current, and that means there must be a way to determine how close the coordinates are.
Yeah, what Jeremy said....
Yeah thete will be bearings and distances... I just want to start from a coordinate.
They have their own wetland people (this is a large non profit environmental and land trust group). The person is certified with a degree but very fresh to this stuff.
> What say you about this?
I gather that these are local coordinates. Local coordinates and only one monument = no basis of bearings. Unless you took a sunshot, or a bearing to some natural backsight, or something of the sort. Therefore, not locate-able and not a sufficient description.
If you brought GPS to bear you could easily set a second monument off-site, in the nearest public right of way. Then you would have a basis of bearings.
If your one monument was tied to state plane (via OPUS, perhaps) you could claim ties to any number of CORS monuments. Then you might get by.
We did not survey the property lines and it has never been staked. The property is wedged between a state owned river (not monumented) and a railroad (good luck finding a monument there).
Loyal inferred it...a properly established coordinate is just as good as if not better than a physical monument which can easily disappear. However, as with anything else, procedures matter.
I have seen property descriptions in other countries that were all UTM. It was for a very large tract, 1000's of hectares, and as far as I was concerned tied it down quite well.
Basically, you need some good metadata...datum, epoch, CORS used, point accuracy attained. Relative accuracy means nothing in this context. I would rather know that all of the points are ±0.03 m with respect to the datum than that the survey was 1:20,000.
