A virtual pin cushion is taken from part of a survey that was done in 2003 and happens to be in the vicinity of my project. The stone and eight others like it were found during reconnaisance today. Some are no doubt marks of the city layouts on the block but I have not obtained those layouts yet. Others are marking property corners.
The trouble with most of these marks is they did not fit the calculated positions the 2003 surveyor made and are therefore all wrong. The little adjustments he made relative to their position show on his map. Some are as much as 0.8 feet from their thoretical position. While I'm sure his analysis was thorough, and deciding which two were correct was a chore, I can't agree with this type of work.
I examined each of the stones I found today and none look like they have been disturbed. Since they were set in 1857 it is my opinion they were not set in error. Indeed to call them in error when you are measuring with laser beams is presumptuous.
It is also confusing to see bearings and distances on this map and try to decide if the measurements are to the mark or to a theoretical position. Did he knock on doors in the neighborhood to tell each of the property owners that their marks are wrong?
Finally, it is ironic that one of the marks he used as being good was a steel #5 reinforcing rod presumably because it was newer than the old stones and when I found it today it had been hit and was bent.
Yeah, that's dumb and bad. Normally I might try not to embarrass a PLS but when it comes to paper pin cushions that sentiment goes out the window.
Then there was the case of four of my monuments found consistently about1.5' N, 1,5' NW, 1.5' SW AND 1.5' S of my stated locations. The fellow was breaking in a new field worker,. I suggested he have the mathemagical genius go back out to see where my numbers would put those numbers. Called me back with embarrassment I could detect via the phone lines. My monuments matched up the the center of recently installed corner posts. I did my job for the seller. The buyer went out and pulled and reset everyone just far enough from the PTO-powered post hole digger center to barely clear the new hole.
Use your brains, people.
While in this case I agree with your complaint, I have an argument to kick the hornets nest regarding a Virtual Pincushion that I would love to piggyback onto this. My argument:
1) A virtual pincushion is better than a physical one. It does not make our profession look so obviously foolish.
2) A virtual pincushion is necessary in places where monuments are found and they do not agree with the rights on the ground.
Ex: You have a dedicated road 50' wide and have monuments set by surveyors on either side of the road that you are measuring at 49.5' apart. Multiple other monuments up and down the block confirm the road to be 50' wide. How wide is this road? How do you not create a virtual pincushion?
Ex: You have a non-called-for (and non-record) monument that overlaps a senior property conveyance by 0.5'. Do you set a pincushion corner? Accept a junior, non-called for monument? Pull the monument and set your own? Or create a virtual pincushion?
We as a profession love to look down on the pincushion but at times they are not actually a pincushion and are instead misunderstood situations (I have a property that I surveyed with a 0.2' long segment which I could have monumented but didn't). At other times the virtual pincushion is your only choice if you are unwilling to hold junior, non-called-for, or non-record monuments.
Your first example does not contain enough information. How was the road created? Your segment nat well very 49.5' feet wide. Three rod roads are very common in some places...
Again, not enough information. If the rod was relied on by the owners it may have become the corner. I hear the argument about 'not of record' all the time. We had 100 plus years of no records in much of this state. If there is clear reliance why impose math in the face of probable earned rights?
The examples are provided for discussion, each site is different and there will never be enough details provided. I will just keep adding onto the example to make the virtual pincushion the "best" choice.
How about this one instead: A right-of-way line that is a straight tangent coincident with 100 lot corners. You locate 80 monuments between two originals and they are all understandably a tenth this way or that from the line. Would you redraw the line between the original monuments? Best fit all the monuments? Or create a zig zag from a straight line. The first two choices create virtual pincushions but are more fundamentally sound choices than holding measurements on all of the monuments.
Or we can modify the other examples:
1) The road was dedicated on a plat as 50' wide. Multiple surveyors have found evidence on either side of the road that varies +/-0.5' from 50'. Do you hold the public right of way width (the king gets his due) and create pincushions or do you hold each monument and zig zag that right-of-way?
2) The property corner is found with a very new PLS number on it and there is no record of that monument having been set in a recording state. The senior parcel you are finding the monument overlapping is a National Park. What do you do?
In similar cases I have created virtual pincushions rather than set a physical pincushion. I don't feel I have any other option when these situations crop up because I rarely can call a monument relied upon enough to be of common report, and I am not a lawyer who can argue for adverse possession or prescriptive rights. Don't get me wrong I do not want this to be the case and I am doing far more analysis than just holding the math, I just don't see it as within my power as a PLS to say that junior/senior rights or rights of the public are less important than a non-original monument.
Hopefully the shown measurements are to the stone bound and the .03', .06' with the little arrows are to the virtual pin cushion, of course those notations can be ignored by all.
At least it doesn't say N63d26'06"E, 0.07' to corner,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I've seen those, talk about surveying cringe.
Agreed it is not the best communication of what the surveyor intended and you have reached the conclusion that he is communicating a virtual pin cushion. Another interpretation is that he is only showing the difference between locations described in the legal description and the actual corners. Why do you make the assumption he is calling the found monument to not be the corner? Why not assume he is calling it the corner and is calling the deed description incorrect? Granted he is not clear in what he is trying to say, but why assume the worst?
1) A virtual pincushion is better than a physical one. It does not make our profession look so obviously foolish.
It does to anyone who looks a the plat until the end of time.
2) A virtual pincushion is necessary in places where monuments are found and they do not agree with the rights on the ground.
Surveyors are not authorized to pull monuments. By the same token they are not authorized to set new ones in the field or virtually where existing monuments are being used as boundaries, right or wrong. When we can get this concept through our thick skulls we can be more useful to the public. Where there is conflict there needs to be resolution, not another real or virtual location. I admit it takes more time and effort.
I wonder why surveyors think the position described in the description is not the existing monument? The answer my friend is blowin in the wind.
1) A virtual pincushion is better than a physical one. It does not make our profession look so obviously foolish.
Maybe it looks slightly less bad to the public, but that's probably because they don't understand what they're looking at.
2) A virtual pincushion is necessary in places where monuments are found and they do not agree with the rights on the ground.
Ex: You have a dedicated road 50′ wide and have monuments set by surveyors on either side of the road that you are measuring at 49.5′ apart. Multiple other monuments up and down the block confirm the road to be 50′ wide. How wide is this road? How do you not create a virtual pincushion?
This doesn't seem that complicated. If you have found monuments that support the record and apparently there is no other evidence to consider then why agonize over this? Reject the monuments, set your own if the situation calls for it, and explain your reasoning. These paper pin cushions seem to be the call-sign of a surveyor unwilling to make a decision when ironically that's exactly what people are hiring us to do.
Ex: You have a non-called-for (and non-record) monument that overlaps a senior property conveyance by 0.5′. Do you set a pincushion corner? Accept a junior, non-called for monument? Pull the monument and set your own? Or create a virtual pincushion?
The first and last solutions wouldn't even be an option for me.
What I hope to discuss is when this practice is practical and the right answer. If I have a subdivision with original monuments at the block corners, and private surveyor monuments scattered between, record or no record those monuments are not perfect, and I have yet to see a survey text tell me to hold them as original if the original monuments are still in place. Maybe this is a de minimis situation but every monument has error, but surveyors are arguing that we hold every single monument between the two originals? So the block should zig zag and not be a standard width? What if you only have no original monument and 10 others that are all +/- 0.1' referencing the line between the now obliterated originals? I would think a best-fit line between all 10 would be the best way to hold all of the monuments equally and re-establish the original line... but that creates a lot of virtual pin cushions that are small, but still there. Take that same 0.1' and call it 1.0'... what then?
Out here in CA when you pull monuments people get very upset. The second choice is my preference too (and I think a solution to many pincushions)... but I have had a very obviously moved monument (5+ feet off of a line between two monuments at the edge of a road that was widened) that I removed and reset and the county surveyor suggested leaving it and setting my own to make the old corner a witness corner.
Just today I was in the field and a line that was supposed to have 4 monuments on it (per recorded map) had 2 that fit and 2 that were 1' off... what do I do?
I ask not to be argumentative but because these questions have plagued me for years and there is no clear answer that I have found in any texts except maybe The Pincushion Effect which isn't an industry standard. All I want to do is the best job I can, but every time I run into a funky situation (every day) no one is willing to give an answer. All of this is to say I appreciate responses to this and hope it doesn't come off too contentious.
So the block should zig zag and not be a standard width?
Is the intent for the block to have a zig zag line? Probably not. Do you think the public will be harmed by a series of pins that miss the line between the block corners by 0.05'? How about 0.10'? If not then maybe you simply show the line passing through those monument symbols on your map and let everyone assume they're perfectly on line. The value of maintaining harmony in the neighborhood seems like a thing that doesn't get talked about much, unfortunately.
Take that same 0.1′ and call it 1.0’… what then?
Well, obviously at some point a discrepancy becomes too big to ignore. This is where you continue to use your experience and professional judgement to determine if the monument has been disturbed, or a blunder occurred when setting it, or if you're missing a record which explains the difference, etc.
...but I have had a very obviously moved monument (5+ feet off of a line
between two monuments at the edge of a road that was widened) that I
removed and reset and the county surveyor suggested leaving it and
setting my own to make the old corner a witness corner.
A monument got moved over 5 feet and somehow remained on the boundary where it could function as a witness corner? That seems a little hard to believe unless another surveyor was involved, but if it's truly on line and far enough away to not cause pincushion problems then I don't think it would hurt to reference it.
Just today I was in the field and a line that was supposed to have 4
monuments on it (per recorded map) had 2 that fit and 2 that were 1′
off… what do I do?
More experience and professional judgement. 😎
If I have a subdivision with original monuments at the block corners,
and private surveyor monuments scattered between, record or no record
those monuments are not perfect, and I have yet to see a survey text
tell me to hold them as original if the original monuments are still in
place
Just because the block corner original monuments are still in place does not make the private surveyor monuments scattered in between unoriginal monuments. Those private surveyor monuments can be original monuments for the lots of the block they are set for.
Straight lines only exist in theory and are between 2 monuments. When you have intervening monuments they will always put an angle point in the line. The monuments get honored, not the line. The block is straight on paper but it zig zags between every individual lot corner that is monumented. If the monument has never been relied on, putting it where it should be may be the judicious thing to do. After it has been relied on, it is the corner online or not. Professional judgement is used to determine how much zig zag is appropriate. There does not exist an objective evaluation of the monument's position relative to record position.
