Kent McMillan, post: 361364, member: 3 wrote: At the face of it, a wooden peg wouldn't seem to be very permanent. Is highly rot-resistant wood normally used and what would an average life span be expected to be?
Originally pegs were made of Totora a native timber which basically does not rot.
These days most are treated pine
My personal oldest find was a peg around 140 years
jim.cox, post: 361263, member: 93 wrote: No - The marker IS the boundary.
Unless it can conclusively be proven to be disturbed.
Our permanent survey marks witness the location - they dont define it
Even Landonline, our government computerised survey system, is vector based and makes very little use of coordinates.
Our land is far too dynamic for coordinates to be much use - they rank very low in the hierarchy of evidence
Perhaps he meant some more permanent local reference point.
When land was initially laid out here in the US, wooden stakes were common, but they burn, rot, fall over, etc, and while they are by law the actual corner, when placed by the original surveyor, they become what we term "obliterated" when they cannot be found in their original undisturbed condition or location. This term means that while it is not visible, the actual location can be determined by close accessories that reference the location at which the wooden stake was set.
We might term a corner that needed to be reestablished from coordinates, or from distant monuments a "lost" corner, depending on the specifics. (This is a fairly generalized explanation.)
Is this same idea at work in NZ?
Surveyors need to keep in mind, that no matter how much we love numbers and all the fun things we can do with them with our computational devices, they don't define squat. They merely provide the road map to the object that IS the monument. Your mileage may vary, but the monument is the monument.
eapls2708, post: 361164, member: 589 wrote: One guy in the area uses some kind of copper sleeve that bonds to the top inch or so of the outside of the pipe.
I wonder how copper water pipe, and fittings for it, compare to rebar diameters. If there is a decent match you might have a relatively cheap source of metal markers that you could stamp along the side. Corrosion could be a problem in some soils with dissimilar metals.
Holy Cow, post: 361389, member: 50 wrote: Surveyors need to keep in mind, that no matter how much we love numbers and all the fun things we can do with them with our computational devices, they don't define squat. They merely provide the road map to the object that IS the monument. Your mileage may vary, but the monument is the monument.
Obviously, the significance of unidentified monuments of imperfect permanence and stability depends upon the circumstances, though. The term "monument" in itself implies something definite, identifiable, stable, and reasonably permanent. Some anonymous object drifting downhill over time in expansive soil wouldn't fit the category, for example.
Morasse caps from Berntsen on 5/8" rebar. Colorfast and durable, never had one critter-chewed like other plastic caps I've seen.
Licensed Land Surveyor
Finger Lakes Region, Upstate New York
Coyotes
Bill68, post: 361144, member: 10680 wrote: We stopped using plastic caps when I started seeing them all chewed up. Lately we've been using aluminum caps from Berntsen. They make a very nice product for less than a few dollars per rod.
Coyotes!
In NY there is no monumentation laws. We don't monument corners when subdividing.
They thought about changing the monumentation law a while back but didn't.
I Def think they should make the law at least that all new subdivisions require each lot be monumented.
JBrinkworth, post: 361140, member: 6179 wrote: RINGGUARD Homepage
I can't say enough about this company! Top shelf customer service and a quality product.
Their MAXX Caps are great too...when a 1-14" cap just won't do 😉
Agree with JBrinkworth. Ringguard are the best cap I've used. The company is out of Sevierville, TN.
dms330, post: 361475, member: 2118 wrote: Morasse caps from Berntsen on 5/8" rebar. Colorfast and durable, never had one critter-chewed like other plastic caps I've seen.
This is what we use - tremendous durability in ALL conditions.
Rich., post: 361516, member: 10450 wrote: In NY there is no monumentation laws. We don't monument corners when subdividing.
They thought about changing the monumentation law a while back but didn't.
I Def think they should make the law at least that all new subdivisions require each lot be monumented.
I can't imagine having a law requiring(or allowing) subdivisions without a requirement for monumentation. That process destroys the whole concept of simultaneous creation of parcels...
My State Board says its okay in spite of the Statute requiring it - and it is creating disasters.
Jim in AZ, post: 361564, member: 249 wrote: I can't imagine having a law requiring(or allowing) subdivisions without a requirement for monumentation. That process destroys the whole concept of simultaneous creation of parcels...
My State Board says its okay in spite of the Statute requiring it - and it is creating disasters.
Yes this is why while surveying here 98% of corners are not monumented. And ones that are had been done recently by a retracing surveyor.
Why bother surveying if there's no monuments?
Rich., post: 361516, member: 10450 wrote: In NY there is no monumentation laws. We don't monument corners when subdividing.
They thought about changing the monumentation law a while back but didn't.
I Def think they should make the law at least that all new subdivisions require each lot be monumented.
I've heard of such madness and never expected it to actually be true.
A piece of paper saying so does not satisfy my clients. They would never pay without there being physical proof of monuments and boundaries.
Texas has ritual ceremony logged into the State's records to celebrate and to stake claim and recognize the identifying monuments and boundaries that go back to day one of their creation.
:gammon:
It must have to do with the political climate of their state.
Nobody knows anything for sure, and they want their land boundaries, to be like their politics! Ha. Kardashian surveying!
In NJ we have to set corners when doing a subdivision. If the map is a major subdivision (3 lots or greater or creating a new public road) we are required to set permanent concrete monuments at least 30" in length containing ferrous material and a mark clearly identifying the surveyor or firm responsible for setting the monuments.
In the course of preparing a boundary survey we are also required to set the corners, but there is a waiver and direction not to set corners that can be signed by the "ultimate user" of the property. This is a very specific document that must be taken directly out of the rules and regulations and there is also a notation that must go on the map. Unfortunately, it seems fairly common that people don't set the corners without bothering to get the waiver.
I always set them. I've taken the position that I don't believe in the corner waiver. I think sometimes the consumer gets duped into thinking they're saving a buck on the corners and then they have no idea where their property really ends. If you are not physically marking the corners, then what's the point of a boundary survey? Not setting the corners on a subdivision where new lines are being created just seems totally insane to me.....
Dan Patterson, post: 361767, member: 1179 wrote: In NJ we have to set corners when doing a subdivision. If the map is a major subdivision (3 lots or greater or creating a new public road) we are required to set permanent concrete monuments at least 30" in length containing ferrous material and a mark clearly identifying the surveyor or firm responsible for setting the monuments.
In the course of preparing a boundary survey we are also required to set the corners, but there is a waiver and direction not to set corners that can be signed by the "ultimate user" of the property. This is a very specific document that must be taken directly out of the rules and regulations and there is also a notation that must go on the map. Unfortunately, it seems fairly common that people don't set the corners without bothering to get the waiver.
I always set them. I've taken the position that I don't believe in the corner waiver. I think sometimes the consumer gets duped into thinking they're saving a buck on the corners and then they have no idea where their property really ends. If you are not physically marking the corners, then what's the point of a boundary survey? Not setting the corners on a subdivision where new lines are being created just seems totally insane to me.....
I agree.
When a new subdivision, you set monumentation at each lot corner? Or just concrete/stone monuments at roadway PCs etc? They do that here but not each lot corner. It's a rule they should make though. At least for now at the local level each municipality should require it until NY does.
Up here in northern NY we set monuments at all unmarked corners on just about every survey we do.
I guess I can understand not setting them if nobody else in the area does but I'm glad I don't work in an area like that.
Gregg
Rich., post: 361770, member: 10450 wrote: I agree.
When a new subdivision, you set monumentation at each lot corner? Or just concrete/stone monuments at roadway PCs etc? They do that here but not each lot corner. It's a rule they should make though. At least for now at the local level each municipality should require it until NY does.
It depends on the situation......if it's a new road, the PCs and PTs get mons and so do R/W intersections (usually 2 per intersection). The outbound get's the conc. mons. The interior lot corners usually just get a rebar and cap.
I hate that no one sets corners anymore. It makes it such a pain in the a$$ all the time. Seems like half the time I go out there's little to no control.
