For those that don't know I am the Chairman of APLS. As the chairman I have assumed the role as the figure head of this organization. I have been continuously involved with APLS for 28 years. I am writing this as a means of getting the word out about APLS.
APLS was chartered as an organization of surveying professionals who sought to make the profession of Land Surveying better. Having said that I think we can all agree that some in the profession will not always agree with the direction has has been going. First with CEUs and now the revisions to the minimum standards.
I believe it is important for everyone to remember that although we all may not agree on the particular route APLS may take in the betterment of the profession. The end game is to make things better for the practicing surveyor in Arizona. At the moment the surveying profession is beset with several challenges that lie ahead. Recently the SBTR let us know that they intend to refine the definition of surveying in the state. APLS and the SBTR may not agree on all positions; we as APLS has tried to act as a single sounding board for what surveyors would like to see. Again some don't agree with the route APLS is taking but I think the majority agree that the current state of affairs is less than what is desired.
What the practicing surveyor needs to know is that membership is strictly voluntary and as a member you can influence how APLS policy will answer these challenges. It would be nice if all practicing land surveyors joined but that is not reality. So many will strike out on their own and voice opinions to the SBTR. To them I say good luck and God's speed. However it would be nice if we all came together as one voice and spoke from a position of strength to the SBTR. This is where I believe the chapters can make a real difference. If the chapters were to open their meetings up to non-members then the non-member could see we do not act under the cover of darkness but out in the open. Together we can accomplish the goals we all agree on. On the issues we don't agree on we can at least have an educated debate and clarify what issues are important.
Monday, November 4, 2013
Friday, September 27, 2013
What is considered good research?
I have been to countless seminars; classes, and lectures; that all said that the survey starts with research. Going to the Recorders/Clerks office and pulling deeds and surveys. With this in mind; how in the hell did the Assessor's Tax Parcel Identification Number become the replacement. I will stipulate that the assessor's office can be a good place to start research. HOWEVER, the assessor's office is not the only place to do the research.
I have been seeing a trend that where records of survey have been citing the assessors parcel number as the basis of their research. Really? What happens when the number changes? There is no short cut to doing the research. Do it write or don't do it at all.
Viva La SALSA
I have been seeing a trend that where records of survey have been citing the assessors parcel number as the basis of their research. Really? What happens when the number changes? There is no short cut to doing the research. Do it write or don't do it at all.
Viva La SALSA
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
More than Measurers Part 2
Here lately I have had the opportunity to speak with colleagues around the state. There seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding in what the land surveyor is trying to accomplish. I have met people who can measure to the Nth degree of accuracy. Yet, their boundary conclusion is EXACTLY wrong.
How can a profession concentrate so heavily on the science of measurement and neglect the art of understanding evidence. How did arbitrary numbers become more important than evidence of occupation and use? Why do we hide behind measurements and ignore the true facts laying there before us?
As a for instance:
SurvA gets a call to locate the corners of lot 9 Nonya Acres. The subdivision is the SE1/4NW1/4 and the SW1/4NE1/4 and the NW1/4SE1/4 and the NE1/4SW1/4 of Section 10 T1NR1E Yomama PM. The County of Utopia has created a Coordinate data base of all section and 1/4 section monuments (that existed at the time of the survey) for the entire county. SurvA goes the the County's website pulls the subdivision plat and the Coordinates for the Section Corners. Then proceeds calculate his way into lot 9. Having created this mathematically superior sketch; uploads the data to the data collector and hands it off to his technician and says "go forth and do great things"... The PC arrives at the address; turns on the GPS and stakes out the coordinates setting new pins because there wasn't any at the stakeout and drives to the local park to grab some shade and enjoy a cold drink because he doesn't want to get back to office to early.
Upon returning to the office the technician downloads his Data collector and give the CAD guy his data. CAD guy takes a hour to create a Record of Survey; showing the section corner ties to the lot perimeter. Plots it to mylar and lays it on the RLS's desk. RLS signs it and gives it to the office clerk who takes it to the county for recordation. AHHHH, the field to finish survey. Bodda Bing, its done and billed.
Next morning the phone rings...... Its the client; seems the pins on the east are in his yard and the pins on the west are in his neighbors yard...neighbors are mad and fighting and your client wants an explanation. So the RLS says: "Well the location of the lot is where we staked it. If that isn't where you are occupying contact you title company and have them help you fix it because everyone in that block has the same problem." The client hangs up and is now being threatened with a lawsuit.
Questions to Ponder:
1. Was there any direct supervision of anybody by the RLS?
2. Did the RLS evaluate the evidence of the boundary?
3. Where is Lot 9?
4. Was life better as a party chief or an RLS?
How can a profession concentrate so heavily on the science of measurement and neglect the art of understanding evidence. How did arbitrary numbers become more important than evidence of occupation and use? Why do we hide behind measurements and ignore the true facts laying there before us?
As a for instance:
SurvA gets a call to locate the corners of lot 9 Nonya Acres. The subdivision is the SE1/4NW1/4 and the SW1/4NE1/4 and the NW1/4SE1/4 and the NE1/4SW1/4 of Section 10 T1NR1E Yomama PM. The County of Utopia has created a Coordinate data base of all section and 1/4 section monuments (that existed at the time of the survey) for the entire county. SurvA goes the the County's website pulls the subdivision plat and the Coordinates for the Section Corners. Then proceeds calculate his way into lot 9. Having created this mathematically superior sketch; uploads the data to the data collector and hands it off to his technician and says "go forth and do great things"... The PC arrives at the address; turns on the GPS and stakes out the coordinates setting new pins because there wasn't any at the stakeout and drives to the local park to grab some shade and enjoy a cold drink because he doesn't want to get back to office to early.
Upon returning to the office the technician downloads his Data collector and give the CAD guy his data. CAD guy takes a hour to create a Record of Survey; showing the section corner ties to the lot perimeter. Plots it to mylar and lays it on the RLS's desk. RLS signs it and gives it to the office clerk who takes it to the county for recordation. AHHHH, the field to finish survey. Bodda Bing, its done and billed.
Next morning the phone rings...... Its the client; seems the pins on the east are in his yard and the pins on the west are in his neighbors yard...neighbors are mad and fighting and your client wants an explanation. So the RLS says: "Well the location of the lot is where we staked it. If that isn't where you are occupying contact you title company and have them help you fix it because everyone in that block has the same problem." The client hangs up and is now being threatened with a lawsuit.
Questions to Ponder:
1. Was there any direct supervision of anybody by the RLS?
2. Did the RLS evaluate the evidence of the boundary?
3. Where is Lot 9?
4. Was life better as a party chief or an RLS?
Thursday, August 15, 2013
More than Just Measurers
Every once in a awhile I have a tendency to forget what it is I am supposed to be doing when I survey a piece of property. I tend to fall back on the measurements. Mainly because this is the easiest of the chores that make up this profession. I focus hard on the math of the system and over look obvious signs that I am headed down the wrong road. This became clear to me recently when I was approached by a colleague from the metro-phoenix area whom had taken on a survey in my neck of the woods. Long story short; he found monuments that I had missed. The monuments he found basically shifted the property I had surveyed about 10 feet; it was planar shift so no area was compromised. After looking at the evidence he presented me; it was clear that I had to amend my survey and explain it to my client. I guess at this point I need to explain that my client has been a family friend since I was a toddler. My father had surveyed for them for decades and had passed the torch to me. So my relationship with client wasn't exactly cut and dry. So first I verified what the other surveyor found and corrected my survey. then I took my client to the property and walked the boundary and explained where I had failed. I showed my client where my monuments were and where they were supposed to be. then as they watched I pulled the erroneous monument and placed the correct one. Of course I have to pay for some fence to move (that I gladly offered to pay for) and at first the was shocked. However when I explained that moving a fence was cheaper than a court battle that they would surely lose; they became appreciative of the fact that I had come forward instead of trying to hide it. That struck me as odd. Why would I hide such a thing? I believe my integrity is more valuable than a fence and the although my pride took a well deserved hit. I would rather be a "stand up" guy than a sneak. In a small town like this you cannot gamble with your reputation. Making things "right" is far more precious than the almighty dollar.
Having the respect of a community as local expert is priceless. My father once told me that the goal of every surveyor should be to gain the respect of his family first, peers second, and the community third. Although my pride took a hit; I believe I took at least a step in that direction. My client actually thinks better of the situation now than when they did before. Sometimes you learn more from being wrong than being right and although the ego may get bruised in the process the lesson becomes solidified. At this point, I would rather the people who live in my area; think highly of my work than be concerned about my fees. I am starting to get there and it feels fine. Having a honest reputation, a strong work ethic, a professional attitude, and recognition from the community is the true meaning of success in my book. My mentor drilled that into my head and to some extent some of it took. Or at least that is what i was told by my client. Who gave me hug and bought me lunch. That don't happen everyday; but when it does its nice.
Having the respect of a community as local expert is priceless. My father once told me that the goal of every surveyor should be to gain the respect of his family first, peers second, and the community third. Although my pride took a hit; I believe I took at least a step in that direction. My client actually thinks better of the situation now than when they did before. Sometimes you learn more from being wrong than being right and although the ego may get bruised in the process the lesson becomes solidified. At this point, I would rather the people who live in my area; think highly of my work than be concerned about my fees. I am starting to get there and it feels fine. Having a honest reputation, a strong work ethic, a professional attitude, and recognition from the community is the true meaning of success in my book. My mentor drilled that into my head and to some extent some of it took. Or at least that is what i was told by my client. Who gave me hug and bought me lunch. That don't happen everyday; but when it does its nice.
Monday, June 24, 2013
Has this ever happened to you?
Last week I was working on a parcel in Pinetop. The owner thought there might be a trespass issue and asked me to survey the property. So when I get there I find some really juicy evidence. 1/2" pieces of sucker rod set by William Bartlett RLS #618. The work was really tight so rebuilding the survey was not as difficult as anticipated. I found a copy of Bartlett's plat and he showed a 0.07 acre strip between 2 lots. this was the area of concern for my client. They thought it was theirs. The neighbor on the other side of the strip has a shed and concrete pad for a RV in the strip and they were clearly using it.
As it turns out; and after a lot of digging around we found Bartlett's monuments around the strip. The strip existed and was surveyed in 1961. So instead of my clients defending against adverse posession. There was no issue at all. The neighbor however asked if I could survey his place also and help him find an attorney. He wants the strip he's been using. So I gave him a few numbers and finished his parcel also.
On the way home I began to over think it. Was I crossing an ethical boundary here? As a land surveyor I cannot advocate of any party. Yet when two neighbors are fighting over a strip of property and both of them want you to survey it for them is there a breach of ethics? I believe in full disclosure and let all involved know who had requested the initial survey. I also let my first party client know that the neighbor wanted me to survey his also. Noe seemed to have a problem. But does that mean I don't have a problem?
Is this the perfect position or the worst one? Maybe I am over thinking it again...
As it turns out; and after a lot of digging around we found Bartlett's monuments around the strip. The strip existed and was surveyed in 1961. So instead of my clients defending against adverse posession. There was no issue at all. The neighbor however asked if I could survey his place also and help him find an attorney. He wants the strip he's been using. So I gave him a few numbers and finished his parcel also.
On the way home I began to over think it. Was I crossing an ethical boundary here? As a land surveyor I cannot advocate of any party. Yet when two neighbors are fighting over a strip of property and both of them want you to survey it for them is there a breach of ethics? I believe in full disclosure and let all involved know who had requested the initial survey. I also let my first party client know that the neighbor wanted me to survey his also. Noe seemed to have a problem. But does that mean I don't have a problem?
Is this the perfect position or the worst one? Maybe I am over thinking it again...
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Catching up
May flew by. I haven't been that busy in May since 5 years ago. You might have noticed I haven't been posting anything. When you work alone and spend long days all week; the weekend is all about my girls. Enough said.
Yesterday I made the trip to Phoenix to attend a special meeting of the BTR. The meeting only had 2 agenda items Saying good bye to Ronald Dalrymple and Continuing Education. A BTR member revealed the results of the survey that the BTR had on line about CEU's. Statistically is was dead even as far as surveyors were concerned. Unitl you removed the dual registrant Engineers. Then the true RLS's by majority were in favor of a CEU program. After much (and the majority) of testimony was taken from the gallery, the BTR discussion commenced. The BTR discussed the issue and the point was raised that the number of enforcement cases showed an issue; the profession was surveyed and supported CEU's; and APLS was requesting a CEU program. During that discussion the Land Surveyor member of the BTR made the motion "for the board to take no action toward a CEU program". With a quick second and a roll call vote the motion passed. AT THIS TIME THERE WILL BE NO CEU PROGRAM.
Those on the BTR that supported APLS in this please continue to do so. Those among us who quietly supported us please continue to do so. This is by no means over. I don't know what the politics are behind this vote and the way it happened. It stinks of an inside job but I will never be able to prove it. So in my humble opinion I will simply say this: The surveying community in the state of Arizona has once again been shown that we are not allowed to take control of our own destiny. Our fate, our regulations, our practice, is defined and administered by bureaucrats and other professionals who know nothing of what we do and its impact on the state.
I can only offer this hope for our future. I will hope and pray that when and if one of these gentleman who participated in the "No" vote yesterday; someday in the future call on a surveyor to survey their house or property. If that survey is to have any sort of problem that gets really ugly. I hope they think back to the vote they cast and ask if a CEU program was worth it or not. Because they have done that for every land owner in the state that has a baseless boundary issue because of a lack of education and no mandate to aquire it.
Yesterday I made the trip to Phoenix to attend a special meeting of the BTR. The meeting only had 2 agenda items Saying good bye to Ronald Dalrymple and Continuing Education. A BTR member revealed the results of the survey that the BTR had on line about CEU's. Statistically is was dead even as far as surveyors were concerned. Unitl you removed the dual registrant Engineers. Then the true RLS's by majority were in favor of a CEU program. After much (and the majority) of testimony was taken from the gallery, the BTR discussion commenced. The BTR discussed the issue and the point was raised that the number of enforcement cases showed an issue; the profession was surveyed and supported CEU's; and APLS was requesting a CEU program. During that discussion the Land Surveyor member of the BTR made the motion "for the board to take no action toward a CEU program". With a quick second and a roll call vote the motion passed. AT THIS TIME THERE WILL BE NO CEU PROGRAM.
Those on the BTR that supported APLS in this please continue to do so. Those among us who quietly supported us please continue to do so. This is by no means over. I don't know what the politics are behind this vote and the way it happened. It stinks of an inside job but I will never be able to prove it. So in my humble opinion I will simply say this: The surveying community in the state of Arizona has once again been shown that we are not allowed to take control of our own destiny. Our fate, our regulations, our practice, is defined and administered by bureaucrats and other professionals who know nothing of what we do and its impact on the state.
I can only offer this hope for our future. I will hope and pray that when and if one of these gentleman who participated in the "No" vote yesterday; someday in the future call on a surveyor to survey their house or property. If that survey is to have any sort of problem that gets really ugly. I hope they think back to the vote they cast and ask if a CEU program was worth it or not. Because they have done that for every land owner in the state that has a baseless boundary issue because of a lack of education and no mandate to aquire it.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Minimum Control
I am seeing a disturbing trend in Arizona Boundary Surveying practice. I see more and more on plats the tendency for the registrant to calculate and monument a boundary and only show tries to street center line monuments and/or section corners. Whatever happened to the principal of "Minimum Control"?
I brought up to believe that a boundary survey started on the subject property and worked its way out until sufficient control was recovered to re-establish the subject boundary. However, on plats I have seen recently, there is a trend that starts at the section and works its way in. WHY? unless you are the first to subdivide the section you don't need to do this (unless there is a very good reason). By acting in this manner you are re-inventing the wheel. It may satisfy the urge to play with the math but on the ground it doesn't prove anything. I believe that a mathematical conclusion does not overturn a monument in the field that has been relied upon and is substantiated by proper pedigree. Moreover, I am seeing plats that set all of the lot corners in a subdivision with no ties to the adjoining lots or block corners. No ties to boundary evidence like fences or occupation. just mathematical sketches that are baseless and cannot be defended or re-traced. I understand the reluctance to use a fence line to reconstruct a boundary. In the hinterlands fences can be scary. However in a subdivision fences between neighbors should be a good indicator of where the lot is or at least where the owners thought it was. Either way, the mathematical expertise of the surveyor is not the determining factor.
Land Surveyors are to quick to rely on math and ignore the obvious. We are supposed re-establish boundaries not prove our mathematical abilities. My father once told me that COGO and AutoCad will destroy land surveying. Well I don't think technological advances have killed it. But they damn sure dumbed it down. I have been a HUGE fan of recordation. However it is days like today that make me think I may be wrong. Some of the surveys I am seeing should have NEVER been recorded and the fact they exist in the record only clouds the record information for the adjoiners.
Getting a license to practice does not prove you are ready to practice. The license only proves you scored better than 70% on a test. I am leaving for the field to try to retrace one of these 1:100000000000000000 closure sketches that is now at home in the courthouse. We shall see what transpires. However I am predicting a bad day for surveying and an excellent day in the Hinterlands.
I brought up to believe that a boundary survey started on the subject property and worked its way out until sufficient control was recovered to re-establish the subject boundary. However, on plats I have seen recently, there is a trend that starts at the section and works its way in. WHY? unless you are the first to subdivide the section you don't need to do this (unless there is a very good reason). By acting in this manner you are re-inventing the wheel. It may satisfy the urge to play with the math but on the ground it doesn't prove anything. I believe that a mathematical conclusion does not overturn a monument in the field that has been relied upon and is substantiated by proper pedigree. Moreover, I am seeing plats that set all of the lot corners in a subdivision with no ties to the adjoining lots or block corners. No ties to boundary evidence like fences or occupation. just mathematical sketches that are baseless and cannot be defended or re-traced. I understand the reluctance to use a fence line to reconstruct a boundary. In the hinterlands fences can be scary. However in a subdivision fences between neighbors should be a good indicator of where the lot is or at least where the owners thought it was. Either way, the mathematical expertise of the surveyor is not the determining factor.
Land Surveyors are to quick to rely on math and ignore the obvious. We are supposed re-establish boundaries not prove our mathematical abilities. My father once told me that COGO and AutoCad will destroy land surveying. Well I don't think technological advances have killed it. But they damn sure dumbed it down. I have been a HUGE fan of recordation. However it is days like today that make me think I may be wrong. Some of the surveys I am seeing should have NEVER been recorded and the fact they exist in the record only clouds the record information for the adjoiners.
Getting a license to practice does not prove you are ready to practice. The license only proves you scored better than 70% on a test. I am leaving for the field to try to retrace one of these 1:100000000000000000 closure sketches that is now at home in the courthouse. We shall see what transpires. However I am predicting a bad day for surveying and an excellent day in the Hinterlands.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)