.violations first spotted using the town’s GIS mapping

Seems reasonalbe to me. If the county/city has a fairly accurate parcel layer, and digital ortho photos, GIS would be a good tool for spotting *possible* encroachments. Then, of course, that would need to be field verified. It sounds like the town does intend to do a field verification. I say good for the town for putting their GIS to good use.

Yay!! More eye in the sky authoritarianism!

Rick

Sorry Squinty

Adverse possession punishes those who are not good stewards of their own land. While one cannot possess against the sovereign the sovereign is reponsible to be a good steward also. Since the town is looking at the town's property there can be no expectation of privacy by others.

Paul in PA

Yea, I pretty much support everything I read.

One point though, I thought the part about getting the encroachments field verified sounded a little like overkill, and really is just a waste of tax payer money. I mean as long as they're clearly showing as encroachments on the cadastral layer, that should be good enough. That's what I use in my boundary determinations, I imagine it should be good enough for them, too. These GIS contraptions cost millions of dollars. MILLIONS! And they are compiled by some of the brightest minds this fair land has to offer. Sounds to me like a recipe for some really accurate cadastral info. And when you pair that with some hi-rez satellite photos, hey, you almost CAN'T go wrong. Why can't we all just accept that GIS stands for "Damn-Fine Surveying"? All these malcontents and doubting Thomases just irritate me with their non-stop whining and nay-saying. GIS is your friend!!! Don't you get it?!?!?!

Stephen

😉

Stephen

I'm not sure, but....

something's bothering me.

"For its part, the Conservation Commission has bought small boundary markers to place around the borders of conservation land."

I hope they're gonna use a professional land surveyor to place those boundary markers, although it doesn't say so.

I'm not sure, but....

> something's bothering me.
> I hope they're gonna use a professional land surveyor to place those boundary markers, although it doesn't say so.

There in lies the problems associated with these types of issues. The likelyhood of that city having a staff PLS is remote, so then who exactly is making these determinations and monumenting them. And the minute they leave the right of way and enter private property and establish that land owners lines, a whole can of conflict of interest issues surface.

Citing somebody for not having a permit for a shed or driveway, is a lot different that establishing their property lines. Ask any private sector surveyor.

I'm not sure, but....

"The town engineer will visit each site to confirm the violations"

Well, that should do it. At least they aren't relying on just the GIS to figure it out.

Kind of funny when the the commission chairman says; "I suspect that people just don't know or lose track of where their property line is".

He should be talking about the town and not the private citizens. It appears that they are the ones who lost track. Hopefully they will take the time and do it correctly before they start fining people.

Stephen, I actually saw a copy of an ALTA survey where it appears the "boundary" was set using the GIS aerial. On the ALTA, no real boundary monuments were tied in, although they all exist on the actual boundary and the subdivision boundary. The location of the "boundary" matches that shown on the GIS aerial, and is shifted about 7 feet from the actual boundary.

I kid you not.

I had a realtor call me and ask if I could do a survey from an photo that he had. I emailed back with the basic state requirements for that kind of legal, later he got back with me and told me he was just trying to explain to the client why he couldn't just draw up a legal on paper only.

Then a week later after I got the job the realtor called back to say that he loaded up the county GIS and saw that the fence lines were "off" the sectional lines. About 100-300', so he was glad I was doing the survey to "straighten up" the fences back to where they belong.

I didn't even get into it with him. He'll see where it all ends up later this week. It looks like the fences are pretty good after all. So many people look at GIS lines and think-well they must be right.

Where is your sarcasm font/symbol?:-P

glad to hear you personally moved each fence to match those record lines

do you move stone walls too?

It was hard, all the fence posts were frozen in the ground, and the wire was all rusty, but I got it all moved for the whole 80Ac tract. Now it will fit the GIS, which of course, is what's important.

No rock walls here.

Mea culpa...

I should have read the link...my bad. I made an assumption the town was looking for zoning violations.

Rick

I'm not sure, but....

Jack,

If I read the article correctly, the conservation people are marking wetlands, something that is outside the purview of the majority of surveyors.

SJ