Mr. Robison brings up an interesting point that isn't often discussed. Perhaps it is taken as a given in many areas - the LINE (emphasis per Mr. Robison) as ran on the ground.
In my area of practice, it is not at all unusual for a new division to be created by setting the two end points of a line and calling it good. Often times, people are only interested in getting the paperwork to the closing attorney and really don't care in the least about the survey marks or exactly where the line runs.
On a small lot division, I would see no problem with setting just the corners as they are often inter-visible.
On a larger tract, it is not likely that you can see front to back.
On a farm, intermediate points would probably just be in the way.
I just finished an 11 acre tract earlier this year. Once the deed has been processed the new line created required that I set a front corner, run back a little over 1000' back to an existing subdivision corner, then with the original boundary to the beginning.
To me, it did not seem appropriate to just mark the ends, so the line in between is flagged and painted.
What is typical in your area of practice? Do you 'run the LINE on the ground'?
I definitely agree that a line "as ran on the ground" can vary greatly from a tangent line between corners. Be careful how a description is written..sometimes the devil is hiding in the details.
A few years ago here in Oklahoma a surveyor was disciplined and fined by the State Board for showing a half-mile of fence on survey that had only been physically located at the corners. Well, fences did what fences do...and there was some litigation and he came up a few grand poorer.
We always locate the fences at frequent enough stations to tell what's happening. We watch for boundary or occupational evidence of acquiescence and show it on the drawing. I do very few surveys anymore that I don't produce a drawing.
Unless you can stand on one corner and see the other, my guys are instructed to put a 'wood line' along the property line as a common courtesy. Yes, we still carry machetes and brush-hooks. It takes very little time and most clients are pleased.
It depends if they want to fence the line, or want the line marked for some other reason.
I'm Just finishing one up that is not run on the ground. It is all fenced and I'm showing where the fence is in relation to the property line, but they don't want to build new fence.
Others have wanted a stake every 300' along line and line of sight, so each job is different.
Well, you bring up an interesting thought. What the meaning of "is" is....no wait that was from something else. What does the "line as run on the ground" mean?
When I first started surveying, the crew chief I worked for would run a property line on the ground by setting on a property corner and turning the appropriate angle from a backsight to go down the bearing of the property line. In the woods we would go as far as we could and hit a tree, and we would offset around that tree and try to get back on line. Or maybe we would turn an angle and figure out the next angle to turn after moving forward to go back toward the back corner. If you retraced my work, would you need to run line in a similar fashion, to run the "line as run on the ground", meaning follow my lines on the ground? Or does it mean the line as it travels on the ground regardless of how it was set (ie, by GPS or a random traverse, then calculated by coordinates, etc.)
> Well, you bring up an interesting thought. What the meaning of "is" is....no wait that was from something else. What does the "line as run on the ground" mean?
>
> When I first started surveying, the crew chief I worked for would run a property line on the ground by setting on a property corner and turning the appropriate angle from a backsight to go down the bearing of the property line. In the woods we would go as far as we could and hit a tree, and we would offset around that tree and try to get back on line. Or maybe we would turn an angle and figure out the next angle to turn after moving forward to go back toward the back corner. If you retraced my work, would you need to run line in a similar fashion, to run the "line as run on the ground", meaning follow my lines on the ground? Or does it mean the line as it travels on the ground regardless of how it was set (ie, by GPS or a random traverse, then calculated by coordinates, etc.)
Mr. Adams,
The meaning of "is" per a previous Arkansas Governor..wait that "is" something else...
>What does the "line as run on the ground" mean?<
I refer back to the notes of the original surveyor. If he was using compass and chain or even transit and tape, I feel he was running along, or with a few offsets, the LINE. If he was using theodolite and EDM, perhaps he was 'traversing' along the line of least resistant from hilltop to hilltop...from 'corner to corner'. If he was using GPS, his line would hop from 'corner' into outer space and back down to the next 'corner'. I feel it is part of the retracement survey to know 'how that old surveyor did it'...otherwise how could I follow the original line?
DDSM:beer
(P.S. I had nothing to do with the Whitewater Subdivision nor did I ever meet that woman...lol)
I used to just pin endpoints but I've realized the client wants to be able to find the line and now I routinely flag the line out -- I avoid blazing and painting, too hard to correct a screwup. Plus it's messy. I once tripped in the woods and the paint can hit a sharp rock and blew up; Back at the office howls of laughter greeted me as I walked in with shirt and face and hair spray-painted orange. Some guys around here just flag out the first 200 feet or so. Others are pretty aggressive with blazing and painting.
> Unless you can stand on one corner and see the other, my guys are instructed to put a 'wood line' along the property line as a common courtesy. Yes, we still carry machetes and brush-hooks. It takes very little time and most clients are pleased.
I'll have to admit, I do not always mark the line as well as it really should be. Something I definitely should work on.
The Land Court has this right, they have required intermediate monuments for years now.
One advantage, Jon,..
to instruct my guys to put in a wood-line is I know they've walked the line. More than once the crew has stumbed across a small shed, boat canopy or even a tidy compost bin that "wa' a wee bit o'er the line".
Insurance for an old gray fart that spends too much time at a desk instead of out in the field where he belongs..:-$
Jon
The latest rewrite of minimum standards in Kentucky considered this issue. There was an attempt to require monumenting lines at no less than 500 feet that finally got pared down to monumenting linear monuments (creeks, ridges, etc) at no less than every 1,000 feet. A straight line can be nearly infinite with no monuments required in between the endpoints.
I like to put something on line but sometimes the owners just don't care. I did a 16 acre farm recently and the owner wanted it well marked. We installed 2' x 5/8" rebar with 3" aluminum caps at least every 100 feet down each line. I really appreciate it when a client is like that.
KY Reference Monuments
Another surveyor and I were discussing this issue a couple of days ago. We have completed a few projects recently that have required reference monuments at 1000' intervals.
I understand the need for monuments set online but I think it is useless to set monuments every 1000' along the top of the bank of the Ohio River or Big Sandy River. If I set a monument where a boundary line intersects the river (at the top of the bank or somewhere near), so that the landowner knows where his boundary is, what is the use of setting ref. monuments along the river?
That owner knows that the river is his boundary. It is a complete waste of time and the owners could care less. Why does the board think it is necessary?
KY Reference Monuments
Apparently there have been many instances of more ambiguous boundaries not being well monumented if at all such as ridgelines. A member of the licensure board can answer your question at the upcoming KAPS conference at the panel discussion on Friday afternoon.
Tom
I remember that being discussed. At one of our chapter meetings, there was some very heated objection to the idea. Several folks suggested that it should be left to the discretion of the surveyor - unfortunately, that can't always be the case.
KY Reference Monuments
David,
I have been trying to prepare a standards discussion. One interesting thing that I noted as I was pouring over the standards with a fine-tooth comb:
2. A physical feature that represents a linear monument shall be monumented or reference monumented at a minimum of every 1,000 feet, and those monuments shall be set in intra-visible pairs not to exceed 1,000 feet in spacing between pairs.
I know many folks run with the 1000 feet and set a iron pin then run another 1000 feet to set another iron pin. I don't think every one has been necessarily paying as much attention to the "intra-visible" portion of the standard.
If (not saying you have not noticed that wording) you had not necessarily caught that, it might be worth keeping in mind.
KY Reference Monuments
I noticed that. I still opine that the board is meddling. It's ridiculous. That should be left to the surveyor and the landowner.