Why bother surveying if you are going to leave nothing but a geometry problem to solve for other surveyors?
Why bother surveying if you are going to leave a mystery for your client as to where the boundary exists?
The example I will give is a subdivision. The client owns Lot 2, and wants to know the west boundary. Specifically the boundary between Lots 1, and their lot.
The subdivision shows one monument, a drill hole, and another "set... held for line. So the surveyor "held" a point they set. How quaint. Why show it being on a line with no distance to its location??ÿ
Summarily, if the client doesn't know where the boundary is, the result is a survey that is incomplete.
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
Excellent questions.?ÿ This would not be acceptable here, for certain.
Excellent questions.?ÿ This would not be acceptable here, for certain.
I wouldn't think it would be acceptable anywhere.
?ÿ
I think you're looking at this all wrong...
Perspective and reality is whatever people believe, not the actual facts.
Looks like a surveyor that found no monuments, held the fences, partitioned out 1.0000 acres perfectly perpendicular from the west fence line and perpendicular to the ROW line (as fixed by the fence corners), and tried to substantiate their work with some sketchy "set monuments" that magically fit the occupation.
Fee ~ $350-$600: 2 hours field time, 1/2 hour cad time, and enough work on the ground on on paper (DD = Deeded Distance?; Nothing measured?) to make you prove your case that this survey is wrong.
This is the perfect "con-job" parcel/lot division. Safe bet all the way to the bank.
Rinse, repeat 2-3 jobs per day, 3-5 days a week; and you have yourself a comfy living.
The responsible "professionals" of our industry are suckers when compared to the unscrupulous folks eating our lunch and getting away with it everyday.
At least that's how it appears to work in the rust belt, and the folks "seal shopping" on surveyorconnect, reddit, etc.
Jeff Lucas wants to include your problems.?ÿ
???
I was working in an area once that the parcel I was working on had all bearing and distances to ??points?. So, I start pulling neighboring deeds and most of them were bearing a distances to ??points?. Ugh ?????ÿ
We prefer to leave out the word "point" unless it has some more words to go with it, such as: to a point on the East Section Line.?ÿ The monument may move a bit over time, but the intention is that the end of a specific boundary call is on that East Section Line.
One, also, needs to remember that when you call to a physical object, you are referencing that entire physical object, not necessarily a minute speck that some semi-trained employee has decided is that minute speck.
Well, don't keep us in suspense - how many "point" monuments did you find and hold? ????ÿ
@rover83 eventually I found a couple deeds that called out a couple monuments and one had a line that ran with the edge of the road ROW. Just worked back from that putting all the puzzle pieces together. I guess to me it??s odd to create a parcel that??s essentially floating out there not really tied to any monument(s) and creates more work for the next guy. Also, if I survey an existing parcel or created a new parcel I might as well set pins for the landowners to see and give reference to a couple adjoining monuments.
We prefer to leave out the word "point" unless it has some more words to go with it, such as: to a point on the East Section Line.?ÿ The monument may move a bit over time, but the intention is that the end of a specific boundary call is on that East Section Line.
One, also, needs to remember that when you call to a physical object, you are referencing that entire physical object, not necessarily a minute speck that some semi-trained employee has decided is that minute speck.
Holy, you're missing the point. All that's necessary is to call out the dimple on the cap. Be sure and describe the dimple, the diameter, the depth of dimple. That way when there are multiple dimples on any cap it's obvious which one is the corner.?ÿ
?ÿ
Precisely where is that imaginary speck on a 150 year-old cottonwood tree?
if I survey an existing parcel or created a new parcel I might as well set pins for the landowners to see and give reference to a couple adjoining monuments.
Depending on state laws,and the type of survey you're required to set missing pins as a matter of the standard of practice too.?ÿ This profession is a unique path, and this website is an awesome resource for learning the way from which meanders along.
thanks for the post!
I agree, it's not ideal, but it looks like the original parcel is bounded by stonewalls.
Because of that, I don't think I'd have any problem reproducing this and setting the corners of Lot 1, if that's what you're being contracted to do.
Assuming that the stonewalls are intact, and look like this, not some random stones here and there
I agree, it's not ideal, but it looks like the original parcel is bounded by stonewalls.
This was my initial take as well...the stone walls are the monuments/bounds, and the drill holes may very well be for computing closure.
It's not a good survey, but it's not exactly leaving the next surveyor holding the bag. Both parcels can be placed on the ground with this document.
Precisely where is that imaginary speck on a 150 year-old cottonwood tree?
Hey!! Stop using logic Holy!!
?ÿ
?ÿ
Imagine a picture of Alfred E. Neuman (Mad Magazine Kid) grinning from ear to ear. ???? ???? ?????ÿ
I can't see the legend but I surmise from the drill holes that there is some type of solid wall around this property. It seems the surveyor is indicating a very extensive monument on three lines of the property and all 4 corners. Something much better than anything he could set himself. So what is the problem with his survey?
to a point on the East Section Line.?ÿ
Excess worthless verbage above. "to a point on the East Section Line" ?????ÿ
