In 2005 I surveyed a vacant commercial site in Tucson for my favorite client. For the coordinate base I called a found iron rebar near the Southwest corner of the site 200.00 North and 500.00 East. I used my Leica GPS system for the survey work with local initialization near the middle of the site, and from that I derived a bearing for the quarter section line. The procedures I used were standard for Tucson and local sites. As the various parcels were developed I subsequently monumented the boundaries, filed record of surveys, and wrote legal descriptions for the sites and for utility easements, all still on the same coordinate system.
In 2011 I surveyed a larger vacant commercial site across the street (northward), maintaining the coordinate system from the first site. Different client, but exceptionally nice. A large parcel within that site was subsequently sold, and as usual I monumented the boundary, filed a record of survey, and the national engineers for the developer had me write legal descriptions for the many easements, all still on the same coordinate system. The only thing unusual was all of the easements were complex and convoluted, exceptionally so. I had to use a colored point map to keep it all straight.
In 2019 the same national engineers asked me to provide them with state plane coordinates (SPC) for the parcel because they prefer working in SPC. I told them switching coordinate systems mid-stream was a bad idea, and the governmental entity reviewing the plans could be very difficult. I was quite clear on that. They insisted on SPC for the boundary over my objections, which I documented and preserved.
Year 2020. Governmental entity is not happy all of the complex easements are on one system and all of the plans are on another system. They don??t match. Well no, of course they don??t. Neither is wrong, but they certainly don??t match. And we haven??t even gotten to the staking crews yet.
Inventing a time machine, going back in time and starting in SPC would be simpler...
"What could possibly go wrong?"
There is ever only ONE correct answer to that question...
"Everything, anything and all at the worst possible time."
?ÿ
The Hitchhickers Guide To The Galaxy introduces the concept of the "Someone Else's Problem Field" - which has proven very handy in times like these
?ÿ
Unless those sparks are hot enough to melt the hose AND the tanks are turned on, not much will go wrong. The hoses would not melt through or burn from those sparks during one grinding operation. There is no way the tanks will overheat.?ÿ
If it burns through a pressured acetylene hose (maybe 5 psi), you could have a sizable flame.?ÿ If the oxygen hose burns through first, the sparks will get hotter and could set some nearby combustible aflame.
I'm sure you will bring order (eventually) to the madness Bruce.?ÿ The fix is easy, just costly at this point.
Working for "National Engineers" who were requiring SPC's is where I learned to try as hard as possible to never provide such info. After months of discussion they admitted that they had "never" known what they were doing and had "never" performed a job properly. Over 15 years of work in all 50 states and several territories and countries!
The age old SPC conundrum, if the job is done in SPC it doesn't fit distances, nor record "true north" bearings. If you do it to fit distances and more or less "true north" bearings, computer jockeys can't handle it.
Why they can't? Beats me but sometimes it's easier to take the path of less resistance.?ÿ
I've been patting myself on the back after a meeting with an engineering group and their GIS department. For that project I did everything on SPC, although explaining why my acreages don't match theirs has been an ongoing struggle, over and over again. Cause you know they have to submit "correct" acreages.?ÿ
I don't have a good answer for you except they should use your original coordinate system, every computer program I know would handle it fine with metadata.?ÿ
The age old SPC conundrum...
Three words - "low distortion projection".?ÿ
If you really want to blow their minds, tell them they better hurry and get all this done because the government is changing the coordinates again in 2022!
Is it so unusual to have a series of easement documents on different bases of bearings? Certainly it is much better to have consistency, but I think this can be worked through.
Long term answer is Low Distortion Projections. Best of both worlds - near enough to ground to ignore scaling if it is convenient to do so, while being tied to NSRS and enabling use of grid system.
In 2005 i can understand your logic but in today's world it's almost harder not to tie your data to state plane.?ÿ The downstream and upstream efficiencies are immeasurable
