Sorry about the late reply...
Oregon does require subdivision and partition plat monuments to measure within a tenth (or 1/10,000). See ORS 92.050(2), https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/92.050 or ORS 92.060(4), https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/92.060. My question is measure within a tenth of what?
My understanding is that field conditions have to match within a tenth of the measurements reported on the submitted subdivision or partition plat document. In other words, the field measurements and submitted paperwork need to be consistent.
I've never understood this requirement to apply to record information. I have seen some variation on interpreting this requirement. Some people do interpret it as applying to record information and match their work to record within a tenth.
What do you (or others, especially Oregon Surveyors) think?
If there is a 100' x 500' tract of land, it is up to the surveyor to determine where that exists on the ground. If there are existing monuments from when the tract was created, it is unlikely to exist as 100' x 500'. Let's say that the surveyor determines the tract to exist as 100.3' x 499.8'. It seems that ORS 92 would require that the monuments as they exist in the field (100.3' and 499.8') be reported on the submitted subdivision or partition plat within a tenth. In other words, the submitted subdivision or partition plat must list values in the range 100.2-100.4' x 499.7-499.9' to comply with the ORS 92 requirement. I don't see that the record of 100' x 500' has any relevancy to reporting the measurements and the requirements of ORS 92.
Virtual pin cushions and monumented pincushions seem to be the same thing to me, neither one is accepting the existing monument. Both are creating a new position for the corner. The only difference between real and virtual pincushions are that one monuments the new position on the ground and the other indicates that new position on the paper using the existing monument as a reference. I don't think that ORS 92 requires surveyors to match record information within a tenth and create real or virtual pincushions. It seems if the surveyor determines that the property boundary is to accept the existing found 5/8" rod with plastic cap xxxx flush per survey xxxx n28e 0.18' from computed position they are free to do so. It seems that ORS 92 would require that they then report that accepted position within a tenth. ORS 92 would prevent accepting the found monument and reporting record and measured as the same.
Unless you are the original surveyor acting on behalf of a landowner making a new parcel, all you can do is render an opinion.?ÿ You can't monument the corner as that was supposed to have been done by the original surveyor.?ÿ What if there was no original monument set (maybe government rules require a marker to be set).?ÿ All you can do is render an opinion.?ÿ Opinions vary.
You're sort of in?ÿ a tough spot.?ÿ No original corner or call and a client that expects the corner to be set.?ÿ So you render an opinion.?ÿ If there is a disagreement then the owners can work it out or litigate.?ÿ Many landowners just accept the surveyors work.?ÿ After 20 years (in my state) the corner is established, not by the surveyor but by the landowners and the law.
Measurements are way down the list on what establishes the location of a boundary, yet they get the most attention.?ÿ Sometimes I wonder if a lot of folks even know that measurements are not the most import aspect of boundaries.?ÿ Maybe the measurements are mentioned in the deed and most of the other stuff is not.?ÿ Most of the old deeds I deal with in rural Utah are void of any mention of monuments.?ÿ Just a bearing and a distance.?ÿ The most common bearings are north, south, east and west.?ÿ None of it is very accurate.
Pincushion all you want.?ÿ You are not solving any ones boundary problem.?ÿ Welcome to your opinion, and mark it on the ground.?ÿ Don't expect much respect from landowners.?ÿ They just think we are a bunch of nuts.?ÿ Most only hire us because some government application, permit, etc. requires it.
I don't think most of the public understands that our services are the rendering of an opinion.?ÿ They think you are to mark the boundaries in fact.?ÿ Surveyors have never been given that authority, would be unconstitutional.?ÿ Not how our system was set up.
