Let's imagine an ALTA shows 2 " IP's set at the corners. The map is accepted and the deal closes.
A few years later a new deal opens up and another surveyor comes along and does his ALTA thing, but he is missing every tiny nail/tag in the 2" pipes by a few hundredths here and there. This minor difference in measuring causes the maximum allowable Relative Positional Precision of the original ALTA to be out and the second surveyor reports this on his ALTA..
So the question is this, what holds..the 2" Pipe or the pin point position on the nail that holds the identifying tag?
Look guys..I am not trying to start a war or stir a pot, but these types of things really should be considered by each and every one of us.
ALTA Question
-
BoundaryMan
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:44 pm
Nothing.LS 4722 wrote:Let's imagine an ALTA shows 2 " IP's set at the corners. The map is accepted and the deal closes.
So the question is this, what holds..the 2" Pipe or the pin point position on the nail that holds the identifying tag?
IMO, The ALTA Survey Map and the subsiquent RS Map filed do not impart constructive notice; it’s just an opinion of said surveyor who surveyed & prepared it.
-
LS 4722
- Posts: 479
- Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 8:42 am
BoundaryMan
OK, but what is your answer to the post question?BoundaryMan wrote:Nothing.
IMO, The ALTA Survey Map and the subsiquent RS Map filed do not impart constructive notice; it’s just an opinion of said surveyor who surveyed & prepared it.
So the question is this, what holds..the 2" Pipe or the pin point position on the nail that holds the identifying tag?
-
land butcher
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 7:26 pm
- Location: calif
-
Gromatici
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:06 am
- Location: Santa Barbara, CA
- Contact:
boundary
The answer is in how the deed is written and not a statement about the positional accuracy on a map. If the deed calls out a pipe then it could be out a lot more and be the legal corner regardless of exceeding the allowable positional tolerances. It could be thatched have been disturbed or the retracing surveyors rods are not plumb.
Eric J Ackerman, PLS, RPLS, CFedS
Licenses: CA. AZ, ID, NV, CO,UT
Gromatici Land Surveying, Inc.
http://www.gromatici.com
proposals@gromatici.com
Licenses: CA. AZ, ID, NV, CO,UT
Gromatici Land Surveying, Inc.
http://www.gromatici.com
proposals@gromatici.com
-
E_Page
- Posts: 2144
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:49 am
- Location: El Dorado County
The key is to look at the methodology of the previous survey. Did the surveyor use correct methodology: the correct monuments to control of the placement of those he set, proper apportionment of excess or deficiency, proper afforded weight to pertinent evidence, and did his measurements reasonably comport with the standards in place at the time the survey was made?
If that all shakes out good, hold the older pipes.
A surveyor who is now performing ALTAs and using the 0.07'+/-50ppm as the standard by which he either accepts or rejects existing monumentation does not understand the certification he's signing or the standards behind them.
That relative positional tolerance pertains only to the measurements he has made and is using in his survey. They do not pertain to surveys made previously by others with respect to the measurements and calculations of the current survey. How can you hold a past surveyor accountable (with regard to his monuments) to standards not yet in place to comport with measurements and calculations of a survey not yet performed, and possibly performed with technology not yet invented capable of precision not yet attainable?
Doesn't make much sense when you apply a little intelligence to it.
And staying along the lines of not making much sense once reasonable thought is applied, let's look at BoundaryMan's comment:
"Nothing.
IMO, The ALTA Survey Map and the subsiquent RS Map filed do not impart constructive notice; it’s just an opinion of said surveyor who surveyed & prepared it."
I know where this logic comes from. A lot of surveyors use it to justify not fully evaluating the monuments that may already be in place. If they represent "just an opinion", then theirs is no better than yours and your free to have a different one. A RS, although public record, does not constitute constructive notice as does a subdivision map. That's not just your opinion, it's the current state of the law in CA (Stearns v. Title Insurance & Trust Co. 18 Cal.App.3d 162).
Yep. OK. That works in conversation, professional discussion, in debate, and in most areas in how we live our lives. Go ahead, have an opinion, have two or more. Opinions are like elbows, everyone's got a couple. Your opinions can even be different than mine. In most areas of life or even in professional practice, that's OK and even healthy to society and to a profession.
But here's the main problem with that line of thinking: Property boundary monuments are set first and foremost for the landowners to rely on, and only as a secondary consideration for subsequent surveyors to measure from and to.
Landowners have a right to believe that they can rely on monuments set by a licensed surveyor, that the survey was performed correctly and that the corners will not move (earthquakes & landslides notwithstanding). Surveyors who reject existing monumentation for relatively minor differences in measurement do those landowners a great diservice. From the landowners perspective, which is grounded (pun intended) in reality far more than that of many surveyors, if you set a new monument a short distance from the one they knew to mark their corner prior to your arrival, you have just moved their corner.
With that in mind, a surveyor's boundary opinion is not "just an opinion". Nobody is going to pay much mind to most of your opinions, so they won't be affected by them in any way. But as a surveyor offering a boundary opinion, somebody, perhaps several somebodies for many years to come will rely on that opinion of yours as the true and correct location of what for many is the financially biggest and emotionally one of the most important investments they will ever make - their home.
To you, it may be "just an opinion" of some lines representing some measurements you made around some forgettable piece of dirt somewhere within driving distance of your office. For the homeowner who is your client, it is the limits of their private domain; their territory; their castle; their home. It is a place they go to get away from the workday world, a place of rest and refuge. It is a place thay can pretty much do as they please and do with as they please. Most want neither to encroach upon others nor to be encroached upon. Once the limits of their territory are morked, they expect stability. They don't even contemplate that those lines and corners are going to move. The line is here! The corner is here! My surveyor said so and set this iron stake to mark it. That thing ain't goin' nowhere!
But then another surveyor comes along some years later and says "Your corner isn't there, it's here where I set a new monument." To you, it's no big deal because it's "just an opinion", and you probably run across that situation several times a month, showing your slightly different opinion by setting monuments near existing ones at various properties.
But to the landowner, particularly in a residential situation, you've just put his world off balance. Now that you've moved the property line, that fence that he was so careful to build right on or just inside the line is on his neighbors property. Is he going to have to move his mailbox a foot closer to his driveway? If my fence is over the line on this side, is the edge of my other neighbor's patio now on my property? will he be able to steal my land by that thing... what's it called... squatter's rights or something?
In your non-chalant, matter of fact way, you've just destabilized that which the landowner saw as fixed, through a load of uncertainty into his life that leaves him wondering how to fix it, and how much will it cost. But you think nothing of it yourself, move on to the next job, and probably complain about the fee you were forced to come down to for this one because of the local low-ballers - completely unaware of the havoc you've caused by staking what is "just you opinion."
When dealing with a commercial client, the emotional aspect probably won't be there for them, although it very well may be for adjoining landowners affected by your "just an opinion". But the perspective is still similar in that you have moved the corners. That may create various financial and possibly legal liabilities for them, depending upon the magnitude of the moves and depending upon the nature of improvements which may have been along the "old lines".
Further, although you are ostensibly holding the opinion that your opinion is just as good as the previous surveyors, if you don't also acknowledge that by setting new monuments in the vicinity of the old ones, you are fooling no one except possibly yourself. When you set new monuments, you are expressly telling everyone who views the mons or the map that you believe the previous surveyor to have been wrong and that you are right. there simply is no other sensible reason to set new monuments at the corners in different locations.
You want to claim that by setting new monuments that you are simply marking an alternate opinion and not stating the other surveyor is wronng or rejecting his monuments. You might argue that the true corner can never be marked with absolute accuracy and that each of the monuments in the vicinity simply represent the best estimates of the corner's true location given the methods and equipment... blah... blah... blah.
If that's what you would argue, your living in a mathmagical fantasy land and have lost connection with the purpose of your profession. If you survey property boundaries, you are a LAND surveyor, providing service to those who possess and use the land. You are not a geomatician monitoring the movement of a glacier face, a geodesist traking and modeling the movements of the continental plates, or performing QA/QC measurements for high rise construction.
The statistical reasoning of why a true corner cannot be ever truly located will be completely lost on most clients and landowners and will sound like so much gobbledeguk that all boils down to you don't know what your doing so your trying to baffle them with BS. And they will be right.
The vast majority of deed descriptions were not written with the degree of precision and accuracy many surveyors ascribe to them. Most were written based upon information or measurements far less precise than what we can easily measure at the touch of a buttonn now. An aliquot description is based on the original GLO surveys. It's not uncommon to find by modern measurement that the GLO surveyors were off by several feet per half mile; sometimes off by several dozen feet. And yet many modern surveyors will find a 40 or 50 year old pipe, and even though they can identify its origin and that the surveyor who set it followed proper methods, still reject the pipe because it falls a couple feet (or sometimes a couiple inches) from where they calculate that aliquot corner to be according to their recent GPS measurements.
This may come as a shock, but if the same GLO surveyors who surveyed the township had also set that aliquot division corner, you'd more than likely find it to be several feet from where your mathmagical point would be based on measurements from just the section corners and exterior 1/4s.
The landowners know, just as the courts know that there can only be one set of corners marking a line. If one set is right, all others must, by definition, be wrong. Landowners do not yet have the ability to build effective fences that float around just above the ground, honing in on that ever elusive "true" corner.
[Damn. Too long again....]
If that all shakes out good, hold the older pipes.
A surveyor who is now performing ALTAs and using the 0.07'+/-50ppm as the standard by which he either accepts or rejects existing monumentation does not understand the certification he's signing or the standards behind them.
That relative positional tolerance pertains only to the measurements he has made and is using in his survey. They do not pertain to surveys made previously by others with respect to the measurements and calculations of the current survey. How can you hold a past surveyor accountable (with regard to his monuments) to standards not yet in place to comport with measurements and calculations of a survey not yet performed, and possibly performed with technology not yet invented capable of precision not yet attainable?
Doesn't make much sense when you apply a little intelligence to it.
And staying along the lines of not making much sense once reasonable thought is applied, let's look at BoundaryMan's comment:
"Nothing.
IMO, The ALTA Survey Map and the subsiquent RS Map filed do not impart constructive notice; it’s just an opinion of said surveyor who surveyed & prepared it."
I know where this logic comes from. A lot of surveyors use it to justify not fully evaluating the monuments that may already be in place. If they represent "just an opinion", then theirs is no better than yours and your free to have a different one. A RS, although public record, does not constitute constructive notice as does a subdivision map. That's not just your opinion, it's the current state of the law in CA (Stearns v. Title Insurance & Trust Co. 18 Cal.App.3d 162).
Yep. OK. That works in conversation, professional discussion, in debate, and in most areas in how we live our lives. Go ahead, have an opinion, have two or more. Opinions are like elbows, everyone's got a couple. Your opinions can even be different than mine. In most areas of life or even in professional practice, that's OK and even healthy to society and to a profession.
But here's the main problem with that line of thinking: Property boundary monuments are set first and foremost for the landowners to rely on, and only as a secondary consideration for subsequent surveyors to measure from and to.
Landowners have a right to believe that they can rely on monuments set by a licensed surveyor, that the survey was performed correctly and that the corners will not move (earthquakes & landslides notwithstanding). Surveyors who reject existing monumentation for relatively minor differences in measurement do those landowners a great diservice. From the landowners perspective, which is grounded (pun intended) in reality far more than that of many surveyors, if you set a new monument a short distance from the one they knew to mark their corner prior to your arrival, you have just moved their corner.
With that in mind, a surveyor's boundary opinion is not "just an opinion". Nobody is going to pay much mind to most of your opinions, so they won't be affected by them in any way. But as a surveyor offering a boundary opinion, somebody, perhaps several somebodies for many years to come will rely on that opinion of yours as the true and correct location of what for many is the financially biggest and emotionally one of the most important investments they will ever make - their home.
To you, it may be "just an opinion" of some lines representing some measurements you made around some forgettable piece of dirt somewhere within driving distance of your office. For the homeowner who is your client, it is the limits of their private domain; their territory; their castle; their home. It is a place they go to get away from the workday world, a place of rest and refuge. It is a place thay can pretty much do as they please and do with as they please. Most want neither to encroach upon others nor to be encroached upon. Once the limits of their territory are morked, they expect stability. They don't even contemplate that those lines and corners are going to move. The line is here! The corner is here! My surveyor said so and set this iron stake to mark it. That thing ain't goin' nowhere!
But then another surveyor comes along some years later and says "Your corner isn't there, it's here where I set a new monument." To you, it's no big deal because it's "just an opinion", and you probably run across that situation several times a month, showing your slightly different opinion by setting monuments near existing ones at various properties.
But to the landowner, particularly in a residential situation, you've just put his world off balance. Now that you've moved the property line, that fence that he was so careful to build right on or just inside the line is on his neighbors property. Is he going to have to move his mailbox a foot closer to his driveway? If my fence is over the line on this side, is the edge of my other neighbor's patio now on my property? will he be able to steal my land by that thing... what's it called... squatter's rights or something?
In your non-chalant, matter of fact way, you've just destabilized that which the landowner saw as fixed, through a load of uncertainty into his life that leaves him wondering how to fix it, and how much will it cost. But you think nothing of it yourself, move on to the next job, and probably complain about the fee you were forced to come down to for this one because of the local low-ballers - completely unaware of the havoc you've caused by staking what is "just you opinion."
When dealing with a commercial client, the emotional aspect probably won't be there for them, although it very well may be for adjoining landowners affected by your "just an opinion". But the perspective is still similar in that you have moved the corners. That may create various financial and possibly legal liabilities for them, depending upon the magnitude of the moves and depending upon the nature of improvements which may have been along the "old lines".
Further, although you are ostensibly holding the opinion that your opinion is just as good as the previous surveyors, if you don't also acknowledge that by setting new monuments in the vicinity of the old ones, you are fooling no one except possibly yourself. When you set new monuments, you are expressly telling everyone who views the mons or the map that you believe the previous surveyor to have been wrong and that you are right. there simply is no other sensible reason to set new monuments at the corners in different locations.
You want to claim that by setting new monuments that you are simply marking an alternate opinion and not stating the other surveyor is wronng or rejecting his monuments. You might argue that the true corner can never be marked with absolute accuracy and that each of the monuments in the vicinity simply represent the best estimates of the corner's true location given the methods and equipment... blah... blah... blah.
If that's what you would argue, your living in a mathmagical fantasy land and have lost connection with the purpose of your profession. If you survey property boundaries, you are a LAND surveyor, providing service to those who possess and use the land. You are not a geomatician monitoring the movement of a glacier face, a geodesist traking and modeling the movements of the continental plates, or performing QA/QC measurements for high rise construction.
The statistical reasoning of why a true corner cannot be ever truly located will be completely lost on most clients and landowners and will sound like so much gobbledeguk that all boils down to you don't know what your doing so your trying to baffle them with BS. And they will be right.
The vast majority of deed descriptions were not written with the degree of precision and accuracy many surveyors ascribe to them. Most were written based upon information or measurements far less precise than what we can easily measure at the touch of a buttonn now. An aliquot description is based on the original GLO surveys. It's not uncommon to find by modern measurement that the GLO surveyors were off by several feet per half mile; sometimes off by several dozen feet. And yet many modern surveyors will find a 40 or 50 year old pipe, and even though they can identify its origin and that the surveyor who set it followed proper methods, still reject the pipe because it falls a couple feet (or sometimes a couiple inches) from where they calculate that aliquot corner to be according to their recent GPS measurements.
This may come as a shock, but if the same GLO surveyors who surveyed the township had also set that aliquot division corner, you'd more than likely find it to be several feet from where your mathmagical point would be based on measurements from just the section corners and exterior 1/4s.
The landowners know, just as the courts know that there can only be one set of corners marking a line. If one set is right, all others must, by definition, be wrong. Landowners do not yet have the ability to build effective fences that float around just above the ground, honing in on that ever elusive "true" corner.
[Damn. Too long again....]
Evan Page, PLS
A Visiting Forum Essayist
A Visiting Forum Essayist
-
E_Page
- Posts: 2144
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:49 am
- Location: El Dorado County
[... so here's the rest.]
"So what, you want me to be judge and jury and decide unwritten rigths in the field?!"
Don't be a knucklehead! Of course not. But an existing monument in a position differing from your calculated position by an amount indicative of the expected positional errors between your respective surveys does not represent an unwritten transfer if you accept that monument. As a matter of fact, if that monument was set according to proper methods and with reasonable care (as considered according to the time and conditions when the monument was set), then the corners and lines were marked. If they were relied on or otherwise accepted, then they were most likely then established on the ground as would be recognized in court (if it ever had to go there), and you are now moving those lines and corners to new locations at which they never previously existed except in a theoretical fantasy land. They had already existed for real on the ground.
Why do you think monuments are at the top of the evidence list for boundaries?
"It's not for me to decide which opinion is right. That's for a judge or a jury."
What a lame excuse for not fully doing your job. Why are you licensed, simply to identify potential problems or to investigate their nature and causes so that you can provide solutions? I don't know about you, but I don't know any surveyors who have a judge on their crew to make the tough decisions for them when a conflict is found. Being a professional is supposed to mean that you are qualified to analyze the difficult situations and provide answers, or at least useful guidance. I also don't think many landowners budget an extra $50K to $300K when they call for a survey just in case the surveyor finds that things don't fit together perfectly.
What good is a doctor who after charging you for an office visit, bloodwork, xrays, and an EKG, simply informs you "you have nausea and an earache" and sends you on your way. "Wow, I didn't realize I had an earache until he told. That Doc's brilliant!".... Not likely. A competent doc is going to look for the reasons causing the symptoms to see if it's cancer, that pepperoni and onion pizza with a side of hot wings you had the day before, or something between.
Would you expect the doc to not ask pertinent questions? What if you had spells of dizziness but forgot to say? Wouldn't you think that important for the doc to consider? If so, would you expect him to ask?
Why do we insist on recognition as professionals, but seek to abrogate our role to investigate and analyze such things as "why is this monument at my calculated corner location?" So many of us hold up the banner of "professional", yet when the existence of tough questions of "where is the boundary" come up, are quick to send the questioner off to a real professional who probably doesn't know the first thing about boundaries.
Surveyors testify in court as expert witnesses. the purpose of an expert witness is to help the court understand the meaning and significance of technical matters. The evaluation of evidence is the primary technical matter of a boundary survey. If you can't or unwilling to locate the boundary by the same rules that a court must follow to determine it, what good are you? what good are to a court if you've nothing to add? If you're an expert, the judge has to make the decision, but your job is to help him understand the significance of the evidence you've found. If you don't do that per application of law, you've done it wrong and potentially mislead the judge as to the significance of evidence.
If you are unwilling to analyze the evidence, what good are you to the landowner. Once you set your corners, especially if you give this cockamamy "just an opinion" nonsense, is the landowner supposed to have any confidence in your survey. "He wouldn't say that he staked the true corners. They're different than the old corners. He didn't seem to sure of himself even if he was a little arrogant. I don't know if he marked my property lines or not."
In setting new corners without fully analyzing what's there, you diminish the profession and the public's confidence in it, you disrespect the surveyors who've come before. But most importantly, you disrespect the land and the landowners by not bearing in mind the importance of what you are doing for them. It is far more than "just an opinion" you are providing.
"So what, you want me to be judge and jury and decide unwritten rigths in the field?!"
Don't be a knucklehead! Of course not. But an existing monument in a position differing from your calculated position by an amount indicative of the expected positional errors between your respective surveys does not represent an unwritten transfer if you accept that monument. As a matter of fact, if that monument was set according to proper methods and with reasonable care (as considered according to the time and conditions when the monument was set), then the corners and lines were marked. If they were relied on or otherwise accepted, then they were most likely then established on the ground as would be recognized in court (if it ever had to go there), and you are now moving those lines and corners to new locations at which they never previously existed except in a theoretical fantasy land. They had already existed for real on the ground.
Why do you think monuments are at the top of the evidence list for boundaries?
"It's not for me to decide which opinion is right. That's for a judge or a jury."
What a lame excuse for not fully doing your job. Why are you licensed, simply to identify potential problems or to investigate their nature and causes so that you can provide solutions? I don't know about you, but I don't know any surveyors who have a judge on their crew to make the tough decisions for them when a conflict is found. Being a professional is supposed to mean that you are qualified to analyze the difficult situations and provide answers, or at least useful guidance. I also don't think many landowners budget an extra $50K to $300K when they call for a survey just in case the surveyor finds that things don't fit together perfectly.
What good is a doctor who after charging you for an office visit, bloodwork, xrays, and an EKG, simply informs you "you have nausea and an earache" and sends you on your way. "Wow, I didn't realize I had an earache until he told. That Doc's brilliant!".... Not likely. A competent doc is going to look for the reasons causing the symptoms to see if it's cancer, that pepperoni and onion pizza with a side of hot wings you had the day before, or something between.
Would you expect the doc to not ask pertinent questions? What if you had spells of dizziness but forgot to say? Wouldn't you think that important for the doc to consider? If so, would you expect him to ask?
Why do we insist on recognition as professionals, but seek to abrogate our role to investigate and analyze such things as "why is this monument at my calculated corner location?" So many of us hold up the banner of "professional", yet when the existence of tough questions of "where is the boundary" come up, are quick to send the questioner off to a real professional who probably doesn't know the first thing about boundaries.
Surveyors testify in court as expert witnesses. the purpose of an expert witness is to help the court understand the meaning and significance of technical matters. The evaluation of evidence is the primary technical matter of a boundary survey. If you can't or unwilling to locate the boundary by the same rules that a court must follow to determine it, what good are you? what good are to a court if you've nothing to add? If you're an expert, the judge has to make the decision, but your job is to help him understand the significance of the evidence you've found. If you don't do that per application of law, you've done it wrong and potentially mislead the judge as to the significance of evidence.
If you are unwilling to analyze the evidence, what good are you to the landowner. Once you set your corners, especially if you give this cockamamy "just an opinion" nonsense, is the landowner supposed to have any confidence in your survey. "He wouldn't say that he staked the true corners. They're different than the old corners. He didn't seem to sure of himself even if he was a little arrogant. I don't know if he marked my property lines or not."
In setting new corners without fully analyzing what's there, you diminish the profession and the public's confidence in it, you disrespect the surveyors who've come before. But most importantly, you disrespect the land and the landowners by not bearing in mind the importance of what you are doing for them. It is far more than "just an opinion" you are providing.
Evan Page, PLS
A Visiting Forum Essayist
A Visiting Forum Essayist
-
BoundaryMan
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:44 pm
Opinion
Mr. Page,
Thank you for posting.
We have to look at this as “two-way streetâ€. One cannot be biased. Human being make mistake. I wish there is one size fits all in surveying.
The prior surveyor may have set a pipe 0.5 foot off then he intended as “cornerâ€. Thanks goodness his monument was tagged and can easily be contacted. This happened twice in the past months when we retraced survey in our area. I contacted prior surveyor (my standard practice) and he agreed to our call for his error. He made correction from there.
What are the consequences if we just accepted said monument? (Or if that was a subdivision monument where the sub-divider subdivided more that what he owned?)
A found monument, whether record or non-record monument, needs to be carefully evaluated! Contact surveyor who set it if necessary. That’s why we have 8772.
Thank you for posting.
We have to look at this as “two-way streetâ€. One cannot be biased. Human being make mistake. I wish there is one size fits all in surveying.
The prior surveyor may have set a pipe 0.5 foot off then he intended as “cornerâ€. Thanks goodness his monument was tagged and can easily be contacted. This happened twice in the past months when we retraced survey in our area. I contacted prior surveyor (my standard practice) and he agreed to our call for his error. He made correction from there.
What are the consequences if we just accepted said monument? (Or if that was a subdivision monument where the sub-divider subdivided more that what he owned?)
A found monument, whether record or non-record monument, needs to be carefully evaluated! Contact surveyor who set it if necessary. That’s why we have 8772.
-
land butcher
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 7:26 pm
- Location: calif
Exactly. For years pubic and private surveyors were using a ref mon for a section corner, one surveyor just wasn't happy with what he saw did a lot of research and finally took his son and went out on his own and found the corner mon. Just because someone else held the mon doesn't always make it right.. YOU HAVE TO FULLY EVALUATE the monuments that you find. You have to learn everything you can about it:
Another surveyor I know found a prop corner off exactly 1ft. He checked it out from every direction he could and determined it was a blunder and put the pipe in the correct location. Ethical, no but saved someone egg on their face and him filing a RS etc. I don't know the location and the LS is deceased so that's that.
Another surveyor's brother bought a new home and before the fences went up moved the back prop cor pipes to give himself a bigger yard. The back lines were as straight as the streets and the fence guys just built the fence where it should be. LOL
Then there was the equestrian homes with ownership to the CL of the streets and CL of the horse trails, but they put the back mons on the edge of the trail for safety. The fence guys came in, found the pipes, took them out drilled the hole set the post poured the concrete and stuck the pipes in the concrete.
Life is fun.
-
Dave Karoly, PLS
- Posts: 670
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 6:26 pm
- Location: Sacramento
-
Dave Karoly, PLS
- Posts: 670
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 6:26 pm
- Location: Sacramento
We have it pretty good.
Taking a walk in a roughly 40s or 50s neighborhood outside the Hospital in Alexandria, Virginia (Mom is recovering from hip replacement which is going very well). I think I spotted a property corner; a 3/8" steel pin painted gray, no tag. Sticking up about 3 tenths at the base of one of those concrete block (no mortar) landscape retaining walls. I didn't see anything else. I'm pretty sure East Coast States don't have centerline control, they don't believe in it.
Taking a walk in a roughly 40s or 50s neighborhood outside the Hospital in Alexandria, Virginia (Mom is recovering from hip replacement which is going very well). I think I spotted a property corner; a 3/8" steel pin painted gray, no tag. Sticking up about 3 tenths at the base of one of those concrete block (no mortar) landscape retaining walls. I didn't see anything else. I'm pretty sure East Coast States don't have centerline control, they don't believe in it.
"Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines." -General "Buck" Turgidson
-
Keithwill
- Posts: 197
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:24 pm
- Location: Portland, OR
"The landowners know, just as the courts know that there can only be one set of corners marking a line. If one set is right, all others must, by definition, be wrong. Landowners do not yet have the ability to build effective fences that float around just above the ground, honing in on that ever elusive "true" corner."
love it........
love it........
-
Keithwill
- Posts: 197
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:24 pm
- Location: Portland, OR
-
Dave Karoly, PLS
- Posts: 670
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 6:26 pm
- Location: Sacramento
Keith
Yes, I agree that is good (Evan's comment you put in big bold letters).
It's funny too, in light of Evan's Judge comment, because a couple of weeks ago my subordinate employee was reading passages from a certain Alabama Attorney's book and I commented, "Now that you mention it, I haven't seen any Judges out here doing boundary surveys or Attorneys in their wingtip shoes for that matter."
It's funny too, in light of Evan's Judge comment, because a couple of weeks ago my subordinate employee was reading passages from a certain Alabama Attorney's book and I commented, "Now that you mention it, I haven't seen any Judges out here doing boundary surveys or Attorneys in their wingtip shoes for that matter."
"Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines." -General "Buck" Turgidson
-
Dave Karoly, PLS
- Posts: 670
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 6:26 pm
- Location: Sacramento
Dave-that is good news. Let me see what I can do. -DaveDWoolley wrote:Mr. Karoly:
Speaking of certain Alabama land surveyor and attorney…the Orange County Chapter of CLSA, continuing as a practice based chapter, has calendared Mr. Lucas to speak on September 21st for a full day seminar.
Mr. Lucas has not conducted a seminar in California and we’re excited to have him out.
The seminar is a good deal, you get his book (an $80 value) and an all day seminar for $150.00.
Preregistration is encouraged to insure we have enough books the day of the seminar. Yesterday alone I received confirmation 14 registrations.
I have attached a flyer. Hope to see you there.
Best,
DWoolley
"Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines." -General "Buck" Turgidson
-
Dave Karoly, PLS
- Posts: 670
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 6:26 pm
- Location: Sacramento
