Comments for Absolute Geomatics, Inc. http://www.absgeo.com Professional Land Surveying, Mapping and Consulting - Welcome to the Evolution! Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:10:06 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on Impracticable vs Impractical, a discussion of the proposed TBPLS monumentation rule by WPB http://www.absgeo.com/blog/2009/09/impracticable-versus-impractical-a-discussion-of-the-proposed-changes-to-the-tbpls-monumentation-rule/comment-page-1#comment-13 WPB Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:10:06 +0000 http://www.absgeo.com/?p=25#comment-13 Would it ease your concern any if I had the cap stamped "witness mark", or "reference mark"? Would it ease your concern any if I had the cap stamped “witness mark”, or “reference mark”?

]]> Comment on Impracticable vs Impractical, a discussion of the proposed TBPLS monumentation rule by WPB http://www.absgeo.com/blog/2009/09/impracticable-versus-impractical-a-discussion-of-the-proposed-changes-to-the-tbpls-monumentation-rule/comment-page-1#comment-12 WPB Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:04:24 +0000 http://www.absgeo.com/?p=25#comment-12 That's a very good point. I can't argue with it. Of course, they could have called me for a new copy of the plat. I could have emailed it to them (actually, there should have already been a copy of it in their email archives). In reality, that is probably too much to expect them to do. I don't totally disagree with what you are saying, but I still think the rule is too strict as written. I believe we should still have the option available to us, but that we should be very careful in our decisions. Thanks for your comments HAK. That’s a very good point. I can’t argue with it. Of course, they could have called me for a new copy of the plat. I could have emailed it to them (actually, there should have already been a copy of it in their email archives). In reality, that is probably too much to expect them to do. I don’t totally disagree with what you are saying, but I still think the rule is too strict as written. I believe we should still have the option available to us, but that we should be very careful in our decisions. Thanks for your comments HAK.

]]> Comment on Impracticable vs Impractical, a discussion of the proposed TBPLS monumentation rule by hak http://www.absgeo.com/blog/2009/09/impracticable-versus-impractical-a-discussion-of-the-proposed-changes-to-the-tbpls-monumentation-rule/comment-page-1#comment-11 hak Fri, 11 Sep 2009 18:46:30 +0000 http://www.absgeo.com/?p=25#comment-11 From the public point of view: It’s been two years since that surveyor was here. This weekend seems to be a good time to re-set that corner post (soft ground). I remember seeing some points by the old post but where did I put that survey plat? Look, here is a marker 2’ from the old post that the surveyor set. Must be the corner, in fact I remember him setting this point. Let’s dig!! From the public point of view: It’s been two years since that surveyor was here. This weekend seems to be a good time to re-set that corner post (soft ground). I remember seeing some points by the old post but where did I put that survey plat? Look, here is a marker 2’ from the old post that the surveyor set. Must be the corner, in fact I remember him setting this point. Let’s dig!!

]]> Comment on Impracticable vs Impractical, a discussion of the proposed TBPLS monumentation rule by WPB http://www.absgeo.com/blog/2009/09/impracticable-versus-impractical-a-discussion-of-the-proposed-changes-to-the-tbpls-monumentation-rule/comment-page-1#comment-10 WPB Thu, 10 Sep 2009 22:04:42 +0000 http://www.absgeo.com/?p=25#comment-10 That's funny, I thought you were going to say it was common to set offsets. ;-) That’s funny, I thought you were going to say it was common to set offsets. ;-)

]]> Comment on Impracticable vs Impractical, a discussion of the proposed TBPLS monumentation rule by Gary Jeffress http://www.absgeo.com/blog/2009/09/impracticable-versus-impractical-a-discussion-of-the-proposed-changes-to-the-tbpls-monumentation-rule/comment-page-1#comment-9 Gary Jeffress Thu, 10 Sep 2009 22:00:02 +0000 http://www.absgeo.com/?p=25#comment-9 My stab at the answers: Question 1: What is difference (if any) between a reference monument and witness monument? I believe there is no difference and that these terms are interchangeable. Question 2: What does “If more than one reference is set, each monument shall be uniquely identified” mean? That each monument shall have a different cap? A separate bearing and distance to each monument describes a different location and hence makes each monument uniquely identified. Of course each monument should be described as "5/8 IR" or "two foot dia. live oak", etc. as well. Question 3: What is the purpose of the rule? To force less-than-prudent surveyors to actually set their corners My guess is the rule is meant to clarify the correct way to monument an inaccessible corner and allow the surveyor to make a professional call as to whether or not the corner is accessible. By-the-way, where I come from most land owners like to place their corner fence posts on the corner so no adjoining owner receives a benefit of an offset corner post. In this situation it is not uncommon for the corner to be described as "GIN Top Post" meaning "Galvanized Iron Nail in Top of Post". My stab at the answers:

Question 1: What is difference (if any) between a reference monument and witness monument?

I believe there is no difference and that these terms are interchangeable.

Question 2: What does “If more than one reference is set, each monument shall be uniquely identified” mean? That each monument shall have a different cap?

A separate bearing and distance to each monument describes a different location and hence makes each monument uniquely identified. Of course each monument should be described as “5/8 IR” or “two foot dia. live oak”, etc. as well.

Question 3: What is the purpose of the rule? To force less-than-prudent surveyors to actually set their corners

My guess is the rule is meant to clarify the correct way to monument an inaccessible corner and allow the surveyor to make a professional call as to whether or not the corner is accessible.

By-the-way, where I come from most land owners like to place their corner fence posts on the corner so no adjoining owner receives a benefit of an offset corner post. In this situation it is not uncommon for the corner to be described as “GIN Top Post” meaning “Galvanized Iron Nail in Top of Post”.

]]> Comment on Impracticable vs Impractical, a discussion of the proposed TBPLS monumentation rule by WPB http://www.absgeo.com/blog/2009/09/impracticable-versus-impractical-a-discussion-of-the-proposed-changes-to-the-tbpls-monumentation-rule/comment-page-1#comment-8 WPB Thu, 10 Sep 2009 19:54:34 +0000 http://www.absgeo.com/?p=25#comment-8 First of all, let me thank you for your comments. I really appreciate your participation in this discussion. Please let me clarify. I usually set my monuments at the actual location of the corner. Sometimes, I set witnesses, but I am not randomly setting them here and there just to avoid having to come back. I am not saying that witnesses are appropriate in all situations, or that I set witnesses in all situations. Obviously, you have described a few situations where setting witnesses is probably inappropriate. I’m sure there are plenty more where those came from, in the same sense that I could come up with several more examples of situations where I believe a witness would be more appropriate. What ever the case, I don’t believe you can say, with absolute certainty, that witnesses are inappropriate in all situations. We are certainly viewing this issue from different perspectives. How about this scenario…I approach a 3-way fence corner looking for a monument that I know from my current survey should be nearby. I dig several inches deep, all around the fence post, and then search with a locator for several feet in every direction from the fence post, and find no iron rods. Hoping not to have to return to this corner, I set a nearby witness, maybe two feet in each direction from the corner, in a convenient location that is more likely to survive when the new land owner rebuilds this section of fence. After performing my calculations, I determine the location of that corner to be approximately 0.8 feet from the fence post, on the back side of the fence. My survey would show a calculated point in line with the fence, 0.8 feet from the fence corner, and would show a bearing and distance to both the fence post and the witness from the corner, and maybe even perpendicular distances from the witness to each property line. I know without a doubt, that I have already searched the location of the calculated point for a monument, and found none. Which of the following is more practical: 1) Setting the witness, showing its relationship to the corner in detail on the survey, or 2) Setting a monument 0.8 feet from the fence corner, knowing that your client will most likely disturb that monument when he pulls up that fence post, sets a new one, in concrete, on top of, or right next to, the iron rod set at the corner? Can you say, without a doubt, that either one is more practical than the other? If my calculated point should fall outside of my search radius, you can bet that I’ll be back out there looking for that corner. I regularly make extra trips to the field to search again for monuments that may have been missed on the first visit. Is a corner witnessed (whether the witness is placed on a line or not) by a monument one foot, or even three feet away not considered “marked”? Changing the word impracticable to impractical may or may not resolve this issue. It does introduce judgment back into the equation, but I believe it would still limit our judgment as to when it is appropriate, or practical, to use witness monuments. The point is, there are circumstances where, in my opinion, it is just as practical, if not more so, to set a witness rather than monument the actual corner. And who is to be the judge of that? I say, the surveyor setting the corner. I have learned that there are very few, if any, absolutes in surveying. This proposed rule, however, is absolute and unyielding. There is no room for judgment, period. That, to me, takes just a little bit of “professional” out of being a professional land surveyor. I can’t help but think that there must be another way to resolve the issue at hand without eliminating the practice of prudently setting witnesses all together. First of all, let me thank you for your comments. I really appreciate your participation in this discussion.

Please let me clarify. I usually set my monuments at the actual location of the corner. Sometimes, I set witnesses, but I am not randomly setting them here and there just to avoid having to come back. I am not saying that witnesses are appropriate in all situations, or that I set witnesses in all situations. Obviously, you have described a few situations where setting witnesses is probably inappropriate. I’m sure there are plenty more where those came from, in the same sense that I could come up with several more examples of situations where I believe a witness would be more appropriate. What ever the case, I don’t believe you can say, with absolute certainty, that witnesses are inappropriate in all situations. We are certainly viewing this issue from different perspectives.

How about this scenario…I approach a 3-way fence corner looking for a monument that I know from my current survey should be nearby. I dig several inches deep, all around the fence post, and then search with a locator for several feet in every direction from the fence post, and find no iron rods. Hoping not to have to return to this corner, I set a nearby witness, maybe two feet in each direction from the corner, in a convenient location that is more likely to survive when the new land owner rebuilds this section of fence. After performing my calculations, I determine the location of that corner to be approximately 0.8 feet from the fence post, on the back side of the fence. My survey would show a calculated point in line with the fence, 0.8 feet from the fence corner, and would show a bearing and distance to both the fence post and the witness from the corner, and maybe even perpendicular distances from the witness to each property line. I know without a doubt, that I have already searched the location of the calculated point for a monument, and found none. Which of the following is more practical: 1) Setting the witness, showing its relationship to the corner in detail on the survey, or 2) Setting a monument 0.8 feet from the fence corner, knowing that your client will most likely disturb that monument when he pulls up that fence post, sets a new one, in concrete, on top of, or right next to, the iron rod set at the corner? Can you say, without a doubt, that either one is more practical than the other? If my calculated point should fall outside of my search radius, you can bet that I’ll be back out there looking for that corner. I regularly make extra trips to the field to search again for monuments that may have been missed on the first visit.

Is a corner witnessed (whether the witness is placed on a line or not) by a monument one foot, or even three feet away not considered “marked”?

Changing the word impracticable to impractical may or may not resolve this issue. It does introduce judgment back into the equation, but I believe it would still limit our judgment as to when it is appropriate, or practical, to use witness monuments.

The point is, there are circumstances where, in my opinion, it is just as practical, if not more so, to set a witness rather than monument the actual corner. And who is to be the judge of that? I say, the surveyor setting the corner. I have learned that there are very few, if any, absolutes in surveying. This proposed rule, however, is absolute and unyielding. There is no room for judgment, period. That, to me, takes just a little bit of “professional” out of being a professional land surveyor. I can’t help but think that there must be another way to resolve the issue at hand without eliminating the practice of prudently setting witnesses all together.

]]> Comment on Impracticable vs Impractical, a discussion of the proposed TBPLS monumentation rule by hak http://www.absgeo.com/blog/2009/09/impracticable-versus-impractical-a-discussion-of-the-proposed-changes-to-the-tbpls-monumentation-rule/comment-page-1#comment-7 hak Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:00:13 +0000 http://www.absgeo.com/?p=25#comment-7 One problem with writing a Rule is that it has to be interpreted and understood equally by all and has to be enforceable. It seemed very simple to me during my years working under several Registered Public Surveyors that our duty was to find monuments called for and to mark on the ground all missing or new corners. The language that says “all corners, angle points, PC’s and PT’s are marked on the ground”, or a variation thereof, may appear in more written recorded documents than the Pledge of Allegiance. A return trip to the field should not be an excuse to not set a corner of a survey. Unless you visit the actual spot that corner falls at on the ground, are you sure your survey is complete? What if that corner falls over a fence you may have missed an angle in? What if when you went to set that missing corner you were thinking about not returning to the field to set, you find a marked corner that fits to the deed call? Was your survey finished? It seems to me that the simple rule, “mark your corners, each corner”, is good practice. If we don't go to the field to mark our corners, why should we go to the field to find them? One problem with writing a Rule is that it has to be interpreted and understood equally by all and has to be enforceable.
It seemed very simple to me during my years working under several Registered Public Surveyors that our duty was to find monuments called for and to mark on the ground all missing or new corners. The language that says “all corners, angle points, PC’s and PT’s are marked on the ground”, or a variation thereof, may appear in more written recorded documents than the Pledge of Allegiance.
A return trip to the field should not be an excuse to not set a corner of a survey. Unless you visit the actual spot that corner falls at on the ground, are you sure your survey is complete? What if that corner falls over a fence you may have missed an angle in? What if when you went to set that missing corner you were thinking about not returning to the field to set, you find a marked corner that fits to the deed call? Was your survey finished?
It seems to me that the simple rule, “mark your corners, each corner”, is good practice. If we don’t go to the field to mark our corners, why should we go to the field to find them?

]]> Comment on Impracticable vs Impractical, a discussion of the proposed TBPLS monumentation rule by WPB http://www.absgeo.com/blog/2009/09/impracticable-versus-impractical-a-discussion-of-the-proposed-changes-to-the-tbpls-monumentation-rule/comment-page-1#comment-6 WPB Wed, 09 Sep 2009 23:19:10 +0000 http://www.absgeo.com/?p=25#comment-6 A very good point was brought to my attention a while ago regarding the monumentation of creeks and rivers. A creek or a river is considered to be the monument, so there would be no reason to set artificial monuments. I managed to miss that fundamental, so I thought I would point it out. A very good point was brought to my attention a while ago regarding the monumentation of creeks and rivers. A creek or a river is considered to be the monument, so there would be no reason to set artificial monuments. I managed to miss that fundamental, so I thought I would point it out.

]]> Comment on Impracticable vs Impractical, a discussion of the proposed TBPLS monumentation rule by Nedra Foster http://www.absgeo.com/blog/2009/09/impracticable-versus-impractical-a-discussion-of-the-proposed-changes-to-the-tbpls-monumentation-rule/comment-page-1#comment-4 Nedra Foster Wed, 09 Sep 2009 15:02:12 +0000 http://www.absgeo.com/?p=25#comment-4 I think you make excellent points. In order for the TBPLS to consider your remarks, they need to be submitted to TBPLS. I hope you will do so. I think you make excellent points. In order for the TBPLS to consider your remarks, they need to be submitted to TBPLS. I hope you will do so.

]]>