tomchurch, post: 393191, member: 10174 wrote: I can't read all of this thread right now but I feel like we're going down a road I've seen before. Some states require monumentation, many do not. Where I am in NY (just north of NYC) we are lucky to find any calls in deeds. Subdivision stakes are set after approval of the plat in most cases. 90% of our work is re-tracing parcels that have existed for 100-200 years. The idea of finding an "original" monument is a bit of a joke. Especially considering that many subdivisons were done in the early 1700's and that many surveyors did not set anything (even to this day). Many subdivisions prior to the 60's were deeded not mapped. It's not required to set corners in NY and I would suspect that the vast majority of surveys do not include setting corners.
A map may call for a 50' ROW and for all the lots to be 100' wide. No calls in deeds or on any maps (more often the case than not in my area). Say I find a pipe at one end of the block and a rebar on the other end that work well between each other mathematically. I then find 4 rebar along the ROW. Three of them are generally along that straight line and once is 0.4' off (either in or out from the ROW). I'm not going to change the ROW because of one rebar that I have no idea who set, when it was set, if it was disturbed, etc. A statute or platted right of way does not change based on a rebar I know nothing about. Say 3 of the rebar fell reasonably close to the 100' lot corners and the 4th was 0.3' off making one lot 99.70 and the other 100.30. I'm not going to change the dimensions of a platted, deeded, lot based on a rebar that I know nothing about when I have other things that fit the mathematics (also evidence) better. I can't tell you how many times I've watched landscapers rip out a corner then re-set it after mowing, or how many homeowners have come out and said "yeah I put that rebar there".
I don't have a problem calling out a tie between an uncalled piece of evidence and a computed corner when necessary...the key thing to remember here is that our determination is supposed to be a preponderance of all the avaliable evidence.
I hear you. I'm in lower Westchester County. Mamaroneck to be exact. Same situation.
Rich., post: 393246, member: 10450 wrote: I hear you. I'm in lower Westchester County. Mamaroneck to be exact. Same situation.
I'm in Beacon (Southern Dutchess) but spent a bunch of years working for Sells (now WSP) in Westchester. The lack of monumentation in Westchester County (even up north) is crazy. It's not that much better up here but there has been less disturbance so things stick around longer. We do a lot of municipal work on Mamaroneck and Irvington.
I'm familiar with WSP. If you've worked in Mamaroneck I'm sure you may have seen my name, Spinelli. We have everything in Mamaroneck so if you are working on something and need something please do not hesitate
tomchurch, post: 393298, member: 10174 wrote: I'm in Beacon (Southern Dutchess) but spent a bunch of years working for Sells (now WSP) in Westchester. The lack of monumentation in Westchester County (even up north) is crazy. It's not that much better up here but there has been less disturbance so things stick around longer. We do a lot of municipal work on Mamaroneck and Irvington.
I'm familiar with WSP. If you've worked in Mamaroneck I'm sure you may have seen my name, Spinelli. We have everything in Mamaroneck so if you are working on something and need something please do not hesitate
JPH, post: 392911, member: 6636 wrote: I just thought of a situation where I've created a virtual pin-cushion. (maybe a similar one was mentioned above - not sure).
Street line was established by layout and found monuments, which nailed it down pretty conclusively. One found lot corner was about 0.3' short of the the street line, and the other about 0.5'.
I didn't set additional monuments here - not going to physically pin-cushion, don't see the need. And I wasn't going to lift anyone else's monuments so I could set my own. So, my drawing has a couple virtual pin-cushions, and I don't see anything wrong with it, but maybe some of you, (Tommy), probably do.
But it also makes me wonder at what point, I would set a new monument. 10' from the corner, sure. 5', yes. 1', 0.8', probably, I don't know.
I have done that before myself. There is a difference in having a monument as an online witness to an unmarked point in the right-of-way, and the nonsense that has been discussed in this thread.
linebender, post: 393176, member: 449 wrote: I don't feel pressure to give or take. A surveyor is not authorized to give and take. Retracement is determining where the boundary exists without giving or taking.
Maybe it's a matter of semantics, but, like it or not, every time we either accept or reject an uncalled for monument we are the judge and jury and are either "giving" or "taking" property, so to speak, by comparison to the deed. That is, until we upset things, folks go to court, and an actual judge makes the call.
Hollandbriscoe, post: 393243, member: 9155 wrote: One thing i am seeing in this discussion is a lot of people are concerned with making the client happy. On a boundary survey it is not my job to make the client happy it is my job to tell them the truth. If i am surveying a lot that is supposed to be 50' wide and i find pins that are 49.9' apart I am going to hold them unless there is clear evidence that they are disturbed.
Maybe I missed something, it is a long thread, but I haven't seen any of that here.
There is making the client happy, and there is making the adjoiners happy. And they are equally important.
From experience I can tell you that when the survey is totally correct sometimes none of the land owners are happy.
Getting the survey correct is what makes you happy.
😀
Improvements aside, if your client gets record dimensions and all of the neighbors get record dimensions, how can they be unhappy? They are getting exactly what their deed describes.
I have one of those bastid sitcheations today. Pretty, orange, 5" x 5" by 20" high concrete markers set by DOT by not where they are supposed to be. So, who's the client going to believe? Me or those big pretty markers set by the OFFICIALS?
Holy Cow, post: 393456, member: 50 wrote: I have one of those bastid sitcheations today. Pretty, orange, 5" x 5" by 20" high concrete markers set by DOT by not where they are supposed to be. So, who's the client going to believe? Me or those big pretty markers set by the OFFICIALS?
I sure hope you moved the concrete markers to where they matched the record. Otherwise, apparently you would be giving and taking land unfairly.
As we all know, the record dimensions are what control the location of boundaries, especially in road rights of way.
Yes, that was sarcasm.
Takes a bit more than a little tap with a hammer to move them babies to the right spot. Especially when they were set erratically. Say 20 feet from where they were supposed to be set, along the ROW not perpendicular to it.
Most were set by the construction contractors during final seeding and clean up. I'm certain they were all triple shot and verified by licensed land surveyors as they were set.
Yes, that was sarcasm.
roger_LS, post: 393435, member: 11550 wrote: Improvements aside, if your client gets record dimensions and all of the neighbors get record dimensions, how can they be unhappy? They are getting exactly what their deed describes.
I've never seen a situation where everyone gets exactly the record dimensions that their deed calls to, but if you do get that situation I would suspect that they would be happy (unless one of those record dimensions changes what they have always used, and causes an improvement to encroach and causes disharmony between the neighbors.)
Brian Allen, post: 393458, member: 1333 wrote: I sure hope you moved the concrete markers to where they matched the record. Otherwise, apparently you would be giving and taking land unfairly.
As we all know, the record dimensions are what control the location of boundaries, especially in road rights of way.Yes, that was sarcasm.
Yes, all you need is two points for a survey. One for position and the second for rotation. Lay record in there and let the chips fall where they may!
If surveying in NYS do not hold DOT ROW monuments. Up until recently they were not set by Surveyors and can be many feet off (hey look there's a rock here, lets set it over there). Station/offset from Survey control holds over the monument. I believe it was a longstanding union dispute about surveyors setting the monuments...in some cases it is still an issue and we just certify what the construction guys set. I think the laborers union claimed that it was their job to set them and the operating engineers (which covers surveyors) let them have it. The union does not really view surveyors as professionals but more as a trade. These days DOT requires a surveyor to either set them or certify that they were set properly.
"do not hold DOT ROW monuments".
I've heard this myth passed along in many states by surveyors. Problem is surveyors don't get to decide. The parties who entered into the agreement do. The agreement is witnessed by monuments and what has transpired since the monuments were set, not a map or station/offsets or a new survey. If the two parties have honored the agreement by "holding" the ROW monument why would it be any different than two private land owners doing the same? I bought into this myth myself for a long time but I've found nothing backed by law to validate it. I'm not buying that you can only hold a ROW monument that was set or certified by a land surveyor. That doesn't line up with case studies I have read. I believe the DOT's that believe they can claim the offset have been given bad advise. Of course they can claim whatever they want if no one will make the correct argument for holding monuments that have been accepted for years as the ROW. How crazy is it to set a prominent mark with a sign labeled ROW next to it and then claim it is meaningless? That always bothered me even when I believed the myth.
It is taught by the highway lawyers in NYS, in continuing education classes, and upheld and advised by NYS DOT regional surveyors. The monuments were not set or certified by a surveyor and are set after the mapping, taking, agreement, and payment for the property. They are set at the end of construction.
NYS considers what is shown on a taking map to be the absolute taking because they cannot take more than they paid for and because the map is the basis of the agreement.
It is taught by the highway lawyers in NYS, in continuing education classes, and upheld and advised by NYS DOT regional surveyors. The monuments were often not set or certified by a surveyor and are set after the mapping, taking, agreement, and payment for the property. They are set at the end of construction. If I remember correctly NYS considers what is shown on a taking map to be the absolute taking because they cannot take more than they paid for and the map is the basis of the agreement. If a monument is held and the area of taking gets bigger, the State would be liable to compensate the adjoing owner for the difference.
Monuments can and are often held if they are the best evidence we have. But even they can be off 5-10+ feet within themselves.
From the NYSDOT ROW Manual:
[INDENT]The limits of a highway ROW, which the State has previously acquired by filing acquisition maps,
could be determined by one or more of the following techniques, depending on the evidence
available. In the order of their importance, the techniques are described below:
1) The original baseline is used to describe previous acquisitions and represents the highest
order of accuracy in reestablishing the limits of the acquisitions. Every attempt must be made to
find and locate these original baseline points. If the actual points cannot be found, but the ties
still exist, every effort will be made to locate the ties and reestablish the baseline points from
the ties.
2) Permanent survey markers (PSM) set within the project area are second in
order of importance of evidence to be used for locating the ROW=s original baseline. The PSM=s can be used to recreate the original baseline by transforming the original baseline coordinates or
as-built stations and offsets into the current project coordinates and thus create the existing ROW
limits. The PSM=s have to be field verified to determine their reliability prior to holding them
for control.
3) ROW monuments located in the field are the third most important type of evidence. The distance and direction between field monuments shall be compared to the theoretical inverses computed using information provided by the acquisition maps to determine reliability of the field locations. The best fits would be held for small contiguous areas of acquisition. Clusters of ROW acquisitions separated by areas with no acquisitions or by intersecting roadways may be analyzed on separate ROW coordinate bases. It is not an acceptable NYSDOT practice to attempt to conduct a survey which relies on force fitting the entire project length into a ROW based on a single set of monuments. In some cases the existing centerline or physical structures such as, building corners, bridges or walls can be held to coincide with ROW monuments to substantiate the appropriate hold points.
4) The final, and least recommended, technique to reestablish ROW is to lay the original ROW maps over the project-based map taken from the field and determine the hold points for the best fit. A photogrammetry map, verified in the field, may also be used. These hold points may include the existing centerline, buildings, stone walls or similar fixed features on the map.
After the baseline is re-established using any of the four techniques described above, the ROW
limits must be computed from the stations and offsets shown on the acquisition maps. The surveyor should be aware that highway boundary prescriptive rights may extend beyond the ROW due to public use or maintenance responsibility extending beyond the ROW. Furthermore, the surveyor must keep in mind that the level of precision by which baselines, PSMs, and ROW monuments were set years ago has been exceeded by that which can be attained today with new technology. Sections of older control may only be reliable over limited lengths. Therefore, surveyors should try to reestablish control over reasonable distances and adjust for errors attributable to improved equipment at intersecting highways. This will help ensure that the boundaries of parcels acquired for ROW are not misrepresented as a result of applying new technology.[/INDENT]
linebender, post: 393684, member: 449 wrote: "do not hold DOT ROW monuments".
I've heard this myth passed along in many states by surveyors. Problem is surveyors don't get to decide. The parties who entered into the agreement do. The agreement is witnessed by monuments and what has transpired since the monuments were set, not a map or station/offsets or a new survey. If the two parties have honored the agreement by "holding" the ROW monument why would it be any different than two private land owners doing the same? I bought into this myth myself for a long time but I've found nothing backed by law to validate it. I'm not buying that you can only hold a ROW monument that was set or certified by a land surveyor. That doesn't line up with case studies I have read. I believe the DOT's that believe they can claim the offset have been given bad advise. Of course they can claim whatever they want if no one will make the correct argument for holding monuments that have been accepted for years as the ROW. How crazy is it to set a prominent mark with a sign labeled ROW next to it and then claim it is meaningless? That always bothered me even when I believed the myth.
I'm with you on this. (of course there are exceptions to every "rule". But, more often than not, the monument is the best available evidence even where that old centerline was staked. (I've never seen monuments 10' off of even themselves, but I'm sure it's happened, and I will defer to NYS's common practice in that state; but a land surveyor who is retracing the right-of-way might come up with his own opinion....If he accepts it, then why/how can the DOT come in and say s/he is wrong; especially when they set it, built fences to it, and maintained to it? It makes no sense to me either)
DOT markers here of the variety I described above are the absolute last thing to use. Bridges, box culverts and similar structures will come much closer to matching record locations. Many are many feet from where they were intended to be set. Why? Good question.
Maybe 20 years ago I received a call from a fellow who had one in the middle of what he considered to be his front yard. Apparently, he felt his property would look better if he mowed all the right-of-way grass clear up to the edge of the asphalt. What he wanted me to do was locate the marker precisely, then dig a hole a couple of feet deep, then reset it such that about the top one inch or so protruded above the level of the soil. Then he could mow directly over it, but it would still be there. I suggested he have a serious chat with the DOT about doing that. Never heard from him again. Whew!!!! I didn't want any part of that deal.