Route Surveying, Canals Predate Railroads
> Does Texas have any Corner Record filing/recording requirements?
They are all now described in the Real Property Records in various deeds of record, complete with accurate positions in the Texas Coordinate System of 1983. It isn't a challenge to find them any more.
Route Surveying, Canals Predate Railroads
Does everybody (surveyors) do that? Is it required?
Route Surveying, Canals Predate Railroads
> Does everybody (surveyors) do that? Is it required?
Our Minimum Technical Standards provide that a surveyor needs to describe and give connections to the controlling monuments that were used in determining a boundary. What that means is that if a surveyor uses, say, two survey corners three miles apart to determine a line from which a tract boundary is located, then the surveyor should give the connections to those corners.
It is not uncommon for surveyors to give the positions of various corners expressed in the Texas Coordinate System of 1983, but it is somewhat rare to see the practice I prefer to follow of giving ALL the coordinates of ALL the monuments described. Typically, a few coordinates will be spotted around a description with the idea that anyone who wants the rest will have to calculate them using the boundary survey data. I'm not a fan of that particularly since it just makes unnecessary work.
I have used that method on crane rails in the past. Window the drawing and write it out to a block, then bring it back in exaggerating the the x scale (or y scale depending on orientation) by a factor of 12 x the the drawing scale. For a 1"= 30' the exaggeration would be 360. Bring the two sides of the building together so that both crane rails will fit on the same page. Makes it much easier to see the problems.
James
Route Surveying, Canals Predate Railroads
> I'm not a fan of that particularly since it just makes unnecessary work.
Not a fan? Kent, you're almost a 'groupie' for unnecessary work.
Stephen
Route Surveying, Canals Predate Railroads
> > I'm not a fan of that particularly since it just makes unnecessary work.
>
> Not a fan? Kent, you're almost a 'groupie' for unnecessary work.
Well, it's clear that the difference between our practices is that you don't understand the necessity of actually making a full investigation into and report upon the facts of a boundary survey. There is no way to give a reliable opinion without an appropriate investigation. "The dog ate my research" just isn't a very good answer when problems arise.
In modern practice in Texas there's really not much of an excuse for not reporting the NAD83 positions of boundary markers found and placed. "We weren't paid to do that" just is lame on most projects. The main reason why more Texas surveyors don't provide all the monuments is that the convention of reciting the point i.d. nos. in metes and bounds descriptions and annotating them on maps isn't widely followed. Simply adding the point i.d. nos. makes a drastic improvement in quality of descriptions and positions of monuments possible.
> I have used that method on crane rails in the past. Window the drawing and write it out to a block, then bring it back in exaggerating the the x scale (or y scale depending on orientation) by a factor of 12 x the the drawing scale. For a 1"= 30' the exaggeration would be 360. Bring the two sides of the building together so that both crane rails will fit on the same page. Makes it much easier to see the problems.
Yes, the human eye is very good at detecting patterns when alignment information is presented that way.
Route Surveying, Canals Predate Railroads
> Well, it's clear that the difference between our practices is that you don't understand the necessity of actually making a full investigation into and report upon the facts of a boundary survey. There is no way to give a reliable opinion without an appropriate investigation.
I dispute these statements in their entirety based on the knowledge that what you mean by full and appropriate investigation is to research every parcel line back to its creation. I have stated my reasons.
Stephen
Route Surveying, Canals Predate Railroads
> I dispute these statements in their entirety based on the knowledge that what you mean by full and appropriate investigation is to research every parcel line back to its creation. I have stated my reasons.
Yes, those reasons amounted to either (a) fences or (b) one might find a problem that a casual inspection of the property doesn't turn up.
Route Surveying, Canals Predate Railroads
>
> Yes, those reasons amounted to either (a) fences or (b) one might find a problem that a casual inspection of the property doesn't turn up.
No.
Stephen
Very interesting. I have not seen that. It's not appropriate for the work I usually do, but sometime I will use that technique.
Thank you Kent
