Ask A Surveyor
If you are a landowner seeking advice from surveyors, please post your questions and issues here.... View more
Organizer:
- Organized by
-
Arrow number table on a parcel map
Arrow number table on a parcel map
This question, I assume, is one of the dumber ones, but here goes. On parcel survey maps made in the 1960s and 1980s, they have an arrow-like symbol pointed north (specifying grid north in the more recent versions). The arrow is divided into four boxes, each with a three or four digit number. I notice that this symbol no longer appears in maps made in the 1990s. See the examples below. What did this notation mean?
- 27 Replies
Where are you located? I don’t recall ever seeing such arrows on any survey, ever.
Contra Costa County, California. Zone 0403.
I??d like to see the whole sheet.
I suspect your “dumb” question will stump most of us–I’ve never seen anything like that
It looks like a County GIS index back when GIS’s were on paper.
Parcel numbers of adjoing tracts?
San Luis Obispo County uses an index grid with similar numbers. Ours are truncated NAD27 coords.
I agree that it is likely signifying the adjoining something (map, parcel, index, file # etc) showing the north south east and west adjoiners.
Might be unique to certain cities or counties in California
Attached are two examples of complete parcel maps and the annotated assessor’s parcel map. I still can’t figure out what those arrow-table notations mean.
- It’s the first three or four digits of nad27 grid coordinatesCA 3-0403162,040.528 (m)
531,627.966 (usft)
531,629.029 (ift)461,432.264 (m)
1,513,882.354 (usft)
1,513,885.382 (ift)-01 01 55.830.99993507N/A I feel like I read that further up the thread. ????
@gary_g
OK, Mr. Brilliant Smart Pants. What does the 528 represent?
Ha! You are on the wrong coast, buddy.
Seriously kidding Mr. G.
JA, PLS, SoCal
Thank you very much to you all, and especially Gary. The 528 is the Northing coordinate rounded to a kilo-foot. For small areas, the high and low values are the same when rounded to the kilo-foot.
I love this shit.
OK We have an answer as to what it tells you. My question, as applied in the 1970s and 1980s, is WITWWWOSGAC? That is: WHO IN THE WIDE WIDE WORLD OF SPORTS GIVES A C***?
It’s an indexing system to quickly get you close to the map’s location. It’s helpful in non-PLSS areas.
@holy-cow I’ll give you one answer: If you testify as an expert witness (which I understand LSs do routinely), and given that old maps are often relevant to current work, you might be asked random questions at your deposition, such as what mysterious notations on old maps mean. Your answer to questions about the arrow number table, before this thread, would be some form of “I don’t know.” At trial, a cross-examination question could be, “Mr. Cow, isn’t it true that there were several numbers on this map that you could not explain at your deposition?” Answer: Yes. “And Mr. Cow, you had absolutely no clue. Isn’t that right?” Answer: Yes. His closing argument could include: “You heard this so-called surveyor admit that he couldn’t make heads or tails of several important items on the map. So you should not trust his work.”
In summary, it’s better to know than to not know.
I understand your thinking.
My experience, starting in 1978, in no way tied anything to State Plane numbers. Period. That is, until GPS equipment became available and was used widely. For common boundary survey work, that was not used as part of the information gathered, even though it might have been available to the surveyor. I’m not saying no one used it. I’m saying it was not commonly used by the majority of land surveyors in practice. Thus, answering “I don’t know”, is correct. Given the opportunity, I would have noted to the court that not all symbols and shortened forms of information can be deciphered by all, using the example of FIP, which might be Found Iron Pipe or Found Iron Pin.
@holy-cow My day job is expert witness work, has been for over 30 years. Your testimony is limited to answering questions, just like a percipient witness, so you don’t necessarily have any opportunity to explain why you didn’t know. This is particularly true when you have a less skilled attorney for a client, or they have had their confidence shaken by your not knowing. Your client may think that letting you explain might just be digging the hole deeper.
But really, the reason I’m pushing back is that I really enjoy Gary’s curiosity and skillful detective work, and I cringe when reading a post that belittles it. Learning new information is good, at least if your head is in the right place.
Log in to reply.