ekparian wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 10:51 am
…
An engineering firm surveyed the property next door and created a tract map around 2010 and they set the property corners.
Low and behold I found 2 sets of corners (those from the 1950's and those from 2010's) about 8 feet apart along the common property line.
The engineering firm essentially created a gap, not overlap so the tract lot owner was not trying to claim my clients land but was shorted in thier land. Obviously the original corners hold.
File a complaint with BPELSG, today.
ekparian wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 10:51 am
His firm was a big firm which was bought out by a bigger firm. They both are/were firms who have an engineering staff, surveyor staff, project managers, planners, hr department etc. Both firms are/were union. He went to work for that bigger firm as a project manager. He said he would look into it and I haven't heard anything further.
Big firm = 25+ surveying people – 2X the issues if the surveyors are warehoused within an engineering company.
I cannot imagine any boundary survey that
requires a big firm. For example, I am in a small firm and we have no less than 160 pages of records of survey currently being reviewed by the county. Over the last twenty years, we have filed more than 300 records of survey. I believe this is more than the five largest firms and the five County Surveyors in my area…combined.
Most big firms have one crew, maybe a backup crew, that does their boundary work. Arguably, for the reasons outlined above, big firms are ill suited to provide boundary surveys for large difficult projects. The process described above, search calcs, repeated phone calls, elaborate directions sounds excruciating. I have worked in that environment, brutal from a professional standpoint. In fact, many of the problem boundaries I encounter are surveyed by big firms. Why? Most big firms, many small engineering firms too, do not have land surveyor owners/principles that can make the call to do it right/complete when there is no budget. We have a resume with some really cool boundary surveys, but many of them would have resulted in my being fired in a big firm. Boundary surveying is no way to make a living.
Big companies are business models first, service providers second and land surveyors – as purists – somewhere further down the line. The business model is programmed for a 3.0 multiplier, 85% utilization rate and 20% profit margin. The PLS is held to the model, any deviation and someone might lose their job. Quality boundaries and budgets are oftentimes incompatible. Awesome boundary or making a budget? Budget usually wins. If you are new to a big firm and doubt what I am saying, throw 10 hours on your next timesheet to Admin/OH and see if you do not get called on the carpet. What will the surveyor do when two more monuments are needed and there is no money left? Searched, found nothing is a fallback position.
ekparian wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 10:51 am
Both firms are/were union.
Combining several posts above, when the union describes their own people as being softheaded, coupled with a real and fair description of working with their folks on the daily, is anyone really surprised by the end results? The union folks are trained, almost to exclusivity, for construction staking. Taking them at their written word, boundary work is a square peg, round hole, bloody forehead, rinse and repeat.
Boundary surveying is its own animal. Good surveyors can make bad mistakes. The further the land surveyor gets away from the field process the odds are increased a mistake will happen - it was not intended to be this way. There is no "field" or "office" surveyor. It is licensed land surveyor with preferences towards the field and/or office. Looking ahead, there is LSIT, PLS and the unemployed folks that know how to set up an instrument.
I have had my share of close calls – several factors are in play that separate success from failure. The biggest source of failure is usually in survey research. The second biggest source of failure is a failure to recognize and collect evidence and third, donk measurements/procedures. At some point after the research, the budget concerns exacerbate number two and three and the road to negligence becomes well travelled.
DWoolley