Okay, so I said I was back so I'm going to carve out some time at least once a week to post a new blog. So here's what's been happening since 2009:
I sold my business, Beacon Surveying & Engineering, to Stephen J. Christian & Associates here in Indianapolis. We took our entire company with us. Since they didn't have a surveying department previously, we're pretty much doing what we were doing before - just for a new employer. It tends to get me home earlier at night and I don't have to worry about bank statements, invoices, etc. I enjoyed our run with Beacon but this has been a good change for me.
My wife continues to work as a project manager for a publishing company and has been rising through the ranks. We both realize we're very blessed to have had her stay home during the time our kids were young but it certainly took a bite out of her career. Still, neither of us would have traded that time.
I think the last you saw of my oldest son, Kyle, on here was a high school graduation picture. Well...it has been a few years as he will be graduating from Ball State University in May with a degree in Risk Management and Insurance. He's currently interviewing for a full time position after graduation.
My younger son, Brad, is now a freshman at the University of Indianapolis (known by most around here as UIndy). He's just finishing up his first semester in pre-athletic training and is hoping to get into the athletic training program for next semester. The program takes 16 students - they started with around 55 and I believe he said 36 applied for admission. Very proud of how hard he's worked and has taken responsibility of his studies.
And finally, the little princess, Libby. She's a junior in high school and still dancing. She's in her third year on the varsity dance team at the high school. They've been very successful - having won a couple of national championships. Libby was sixth at nationals with her solo last year. We've started doing our college shopping with her. She just took the SAT exam last Saturday and has Bowling Green State University in Ohio at the top of her last currently.
So there you go...two years of updates in about five paragraphs. Until next time...take care!
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Thursday, November 29, 2012
I'm Back (No, really this time!)
My last post noted that I was back to my blog. Yeah, didn't really happen. But today, I was getting ready to delete my bookmark to my friend, Alisa's, blog when I noticed that she had re-started blogging. Got me in the mood to do the same. I'll try to catch you up on what's been going on over the next few posts or so.
To those reading this...thanks for coming back!
Saturday, April 23, 2011
I'm Back!
So I've decided to return to my blog and will attempt to catch up with everything that's happened over the last year and a half. Look for more beginning later this week.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Being Thankful
For the past half-dozen or so years, my family has delivered Thanksgiving meals to those less fortunate through our church. It's a great time for us to spend together and a great teaching moment that we need to be grateful for what we have. However, this year my wife and kids each had another activity that day so I delivered meals by myself.
Normally, we'll deliver a meal and take a couple of minutes to discuss the family and then drift back to whatever we were discussing prior to the delivery. Don't get me wrong - I love spending this time with my family - but this year was a lot different for me.
I arrived at the church about 9:15 a.m. as the leaders of this effort were going to be having a driver's meeting prior to loading vehicles at about 9:30. Since I also know the woman who directs this effort, she greeted me and asked the volunteers at the table to go ahead and give me my maps since we had done this so many times in the past. The lady who was handing out the assignments and maps sheepishly asked if I would be willing to drive to Kokomo to deliver baskets. My first thought, which happened to come flying right out of my mouth was, "No, I can't drive to Kokomo. It's a good hour drive just to get there." She then asked if I would be willing to drive to either Atlanta or Cicero, both of which are about 30 miles from our church. Feeling guilty that I had turned down driving an hour one way to deliver food to someone who probably really needed it, I instantly said yes and asked if I could have six baskets in those areas.
I really didn't think much about delivering the baskets on my way to the first house so I turned on the radio and listened to some music. After my first delivery, I decided to turn off the radio and really think about what I was doing and how I was impacting someone's life by providing a nice Thanksgiving meal that they may not be able to have without my delivery. It didn't take me long to realize that it's actually sad that we only help these people on Thanksgiving. They certainly need our help all year long.
On the way to my last delivery, I was driving down a very nice street with well-kept houses and found myself wondering as I got close to the address why anyone in this area would need a Thanksgiving meal. When I was about a half-block away, I saw amongst these nice houses three small run-down brick buildings each housing two apartments. Upon delivering a meal to one of the apartments I realized that there are people living amongst us everywhere who needed our help from time to time.
I'm already looking forward to delivering Thanksgiving meals next year. I think I'll ask if I can go to Kokomo. In the meantime, I hope to find other opportunities to help others in need. I hope you do, too.
Normally, we'll deliver a meal and take a couple of minutes to discuss the family and then drift back to whatever we were discussing prior to the delivery. Don't get me wrong - I love spending this time with my family - but this year was a lot different for me.
I arrived at the church about 9:15 a.m. as the leaders of this effort were going to be having a driver's meeting prior to loading vehicles at about 9:30. Since I also know the woman who directs this effort, she greeted me and asked the volunteers at the table to go ahead and give me my maps since we had done this so many times in the past. The lady who was handing out the assignments and maps sheepishly asked if I would be willing to drive to Kokomo to deliver baskets. My first thought, which happened to come flying right out of my mouth was, "No, I can't drive to Kokomo. It's a good hour drive just to get there." She then asked if I would be willing to drive to either Atlanta or Cicero, both of which are about 30 miles from our church. Feeling guilty that I had turned down driving an hour one way to deliver food to someone who probably really needed it, I instantly said yes and asked if I could have six baskets in those areas.
I really didn't think much about delivering the baskets on my way to the first house so I turned on the radio and listened to some music. After my first delivery, I decided to turn off the radio and really think about what I was doing and how I was impacting someone's life by providing a nice Thanksgiving meal that they may not be able to have without my delivery. It didn't take me long to realize that it's actually sad that we only help these people on Thanksgiving. They certainly need our help all year long.
On the way to my last delivery, I was driving down a very nice street with well-kept houses and found myself wondering as I got close to the address why anyone in this area would need a Thanksgiving meal. When I was about a half-block away, I saw amongst these nice houses three small run-down brick buildings each housing two apartments. Upon delivering a meal to one of the apartments I realized that there are people living amongst us everywhere who needed our help from time to time.
I'm already looking forward to delivering Thanksgiving meals next year. I think I'll ask if I can go to Kokomo. In the meantime, I hope to find other opportunities to help others in need. I hope you do, too.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Topographic Surveys - Part 1
As mentioned in my last post, there are times when a client needs only topographic and planimetric information. Instances where this may be the case are projects that only require filling of earthwork, construction of a sidewalk or something similar.
Many times we get requests for topographic surveys that show aerial photography and a big, red circle that says "Survey Limits". While this may seem like all the information needed for the surveyor, I think it's only a very small part of the information we need. The first thing I always ask our client is always the same question: "What's the real purpose of this survey?" Certainly, the answer to this question allows me to have a better understanding of what's really important inside the magical red circle. It also allows me to determine the level of accuracy needed to accomplish the task.
Regarding the vertical datum or basis of elevations for the topography, we always need to know who is going to use the survey. For instance, in some cases it may be adequate to assume an elevation of 100.00 at a particular location. However, if we know that it may be near a flood plain or flood fringe, we may need to use National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) 1929 as many of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps are based on this datum. Other times, a particular governmental jurisdiction may have a Geographic Information System (GIS) based on another datum such as the North American Vertical Datum (NAVD) 1988 or even possibly on a long established assumed datum.
Similarly, we need to know what horizontal datum or coordinate system the survey needs to be on. Many times our clients have heard of State Plane Coordinates and instantly reply that they prefer that system. However, you need to be warned that state plane coordinates, universal transverse mercator (UTM) coordinates and many other coordinate systems covering large areas are not a one to one conversion to coordinates that can be established on the ground. I'll get into that more in another post as it needs to be a complete post of its own.
Often we see that our clients want a temporary bench mark set on the construction site. My opinion is that having only one bench mark set on the site is a bad idea. If the elevation shown on the plans is shown in error (let's say its 700.91 but inadvertently shown in the plans as 700.19) it could create some major problems with the intended construction of the project. We have a company policy that we never set less than three bench marks on a site so that we always have one that we assume is good and one to check it with in case one is destroyed prior to construction. For larger areas we normally recommend to our clients that we set one bench mark for every six and a half acres. Why six and a half you ask? The optics on a typical automatic level that mights be used by a contractor has a usable range of about 300 feet (and it's about as good as our eyes are). The area of a circle with a radius of 300 feet is about six and a half acres.
Another piece of information needed by the surveyor is the contour interval to be shown on the drawing. Many times the purpose of the survey leads us to the determination of the contour interval required as the more accuracy required, the smaller the contour interval is normally going to be. There are many times that specifications for surveys indicate that not more than 10% of the elevations cannot exceed an error of more than one-half the contour interval, a specification that has been perpetuated since the National Map Accuracy Standards were first developed in 1941 by several government agencies including the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
In the next post, I'll talk about what other information is needed for topographic surveys after the basis of data is established.
Many times we get requests for topographic surveys that show aerial photography and a big, red circle that says "Survey Limits". While this may seem like all the information needed for the surveyor, I think it's only a very small part of the information we need. The first thing I always ask our client is always the same question: "What's the real purpose of this survey?" Certainly, the answer to this question allows me to have a better understanding of what's really important inside the magical red circle. It also allows me to determine the level of accuracy needed to accomplish the task.
Regarding the vertical datum or basis of elevations for the topography, we always need to know who is going to use the survey. For instance, in some cases it may be adequate to assume an elevation of 100.00 at a particular location. However, if we know that it may be near a flood plain or flood fringe, we may need to use National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) 1929 as many of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps are based on this datum. Other times, a particular governmental jurisdiction may have a Geographic Information System (GIS) based on another datum such as the North American Vertical Datum (NAVD) 1988 or even possibly on a long established assumed datum.
Similarly, we need to know what horizontal datum or coordinate system the survey needs to be on. Many times our clients have heard of State Plane Coordinates and instantly reply that they prefer that system. However, you need to be warned that state plane coordinates, universal transverse mercator (UTM) coordinates and many other coordinate systems covering large areas are not a one to one conversion to coordinates that can be established on the ground. I'll get into that more in another post as it needs to be a complete post of its own.
Often we see that our clients want a temporary bench mark set on the construction site. My opinion is that having only one bench mark set on the site is a bad idea. If the elevation shown on the plans is shown in error (let's say its 700.91 but inadvertently shown in the plans as 700.19) it could create some major problems with the intended construction of the project. We have a company policy that we never set less than three bench marks on a site so that we always have one that we assume is good and one to check it with in case one is destroyed prior to construction. For larger areas we normally recommend to our clients that we set one bench mark for every six and a half acres. Why six and a half you ask? The optics on a typical automatic level that mights be used by a contractor has a usable range of about 300 feet (and it's about as good as our eyes are). The area of a circle with a radius of 300 feet is about six and a half acres.
Another piece of information needed by the surveyor is the contour interval to be shown on the drawing. Many times the purpose of the survey leads us to the determination of the contour interval required as the more accuracy required, the smaller the contour interval is normally going to be. There are many times that specifications for surveys indicate that not more than 10% of the elevations cannot exceed an error of more than one-half the contour interval, a specification that has been perpetuated since the National Map Accuracy Standards were first developed in 1941 by several government agencies including the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
In the next post, I'll talk about what other information is needed for topographic surveys after the basis of data is established.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
What type of survey do I need?
I seem to get questions all the time about what type of survey an engineer or architect should specify to get what their client will really need. While there are many different items that can be included in each type of survey, I'm only going to touch on three and try to give a basic description of each starting with the easiest (and probably the least expensive) and progressing to the most complex.
The most basic survey would include topographic and planimetric information only. Topographic information is elevations of features while planimetric information would be any visible items within the survey limits needed. With this type of work, the surveyor does not conduct any research to determine the location of any corners or lines of deeds or easements. Therefore, if the design consultant is not concerned about the location of property lines or easements, this may be the one you need.
The next highest level of survey would be a retracement survey. The minimum requirements for a retracement survey are defined in Title 865 of the Indiana Administrative Code found at http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/title865.html. In short, the Indiana Administrative Code defines how research, field work and publication of the survey are to be conducted. Easement or setback lines associated with the recording of a previous plat are shown; however, any other easements, setback lines or zoning restrictions are only shown when they are provided by the client. This type of survey is normally specified if an improvement is contingent on the property line or an easement line. It may also be needed if there is transfer of realy property without a title insurance requirement.
The final type of survey is an ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey. The minimum requirements for an ALTA survey are defined by the current 2005 standards found at http://www.alta.org/industry/ALTA2005_Standards.pdf. The ALTA survey is normally specified by either a title company or a lender for the project due to the need for title insurance. With this type of survey, the deed, adjoiners' deeds and easements affecting the property being surveyed are provided by the title insurance company and shown on the survey by the surveyor.
A client can specify that they'd like to see topographic and planimetric information in addition to either a retracement or an ALTA survey. However, there can be no "mix and match" between retracement and ALTA surveys - they're mutually exclusive animals.
In the next few weeks, I'll be talking about these different types of surveys in depth so that they are more easily understood by our clients. Please feel free to ask any questions by leaving a comment and I'll try to cover them in upcoming posts.
The most basic survey would include topographic and planimetric information only. Topographic information is elevations of features while planimetric information would be any visible items within the survey limits needed. With this type of work, the surveyor does not conduct any research to determine the location of any corners or lines of deeds or easements. Therefore, if the design consultant is not concerned about the location of property lines or easements, this may be the one you need.
The next highest level of survey would be a retracement survey. The minimum requirements for a retracement survey are defined in Title 865 of the Indiana Administrative Code found at http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/title865.html. In short, the Indiana Administrative Code defines how research, field work and publication of the survey are to be conducted. Easement or setback lines associated with the recording of a previous plat are shown; however, any other easements, setback lines or zoning restrictions are only shown when they are provided by the client. This type of survey is normally specified if an improvement is contingent on the property line or an easement line. It may also be needed if there is transfer of realy property without a title insurance requirement.
The final type of survey is an ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey. The minimum requirements for an ALTA survey are defined by the current 2005 standards found at http://www.alta.org/industry/ALTA2005_Standards.pdf. The ALTA survey is normally specified by either a title company or a lender for the project due to the need for title insurance. With this type of survey, the deed, adjoiners' deeds and easements affecting the property being surveyed are provided by the title insurance company and shown on the survey by the surveyor.
A client can specify that they'd like to see topographic and planimetric information in addition to either a retracement or an ALTA survey. However, there can be no "mix and match" between retracement and ALTA surveys - they're mutually exclusive animals.
In the next few weeks, I'll be talking about these different types of surveys in depth so that they are more easily understood by our clients. Please feel free to ask any questions by leaving a comment and I'll try to cover them in upcoming posts.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Signed off by who?
We're working on a survey in a particular county in Indiana that was part of a lawsuit basically involving a five-foot strip of property that was sold twice. The original surveyor did the job correctly but somebody created a property description that caused the overlap with a parcel previously sold by the same owner. I talked to the original surveyor (the only one who has worked on this project) and he said that the description was not prepared by him. Now.....in Indiana, the only two professions that can legally prepare property descriptions are professional land surveyors and lawyers. I could go on for an extended period of time about lawyers and their distinct misunderstanding of survey law but I'll save that for another post sometime. Obviously, some lawyer thought he could write a description and ended up causing a lawsuit.
What we had prepared (and spelled out in our scope of work) was a boundary survey of the five-foot strip in accordance with the state minimum standards and the creation of a description for the same. Since it did not create a new tax parcel and the previous surveys had shown the boundaries correctly, according to Indiana standards, the survey was not required to be recorded. However, one of the attorneys involved in the lawsuit decided that our survey needed to be recorded. Having worked in this county before, I tried to talk him out of recording this survey and stated that it did not need to be according to the Indiana Administrative Code. However, the recordation of this survey was apparently part of the lawsuit so it needed to be done.
Normally when we record surveys, I put my professional land surveyor's stamp on the drawing, sign it, take it to the recorder's office where they stamp it with the recording information and we're done. However, I had been warned that this particular county had some "different" ideas about what was required to record a survey so I called a local surveyor to ask him what verbage needed to go on our plat of survey to get this thing through.
I wasn't ready for what he sent me. The survey has to be certified by the surveyor (makes sense to me), by the owner (okay, I can live with this one), by the auditor (I guess since they're the one assessing taxes I can somewhat understand this one but there's no real exchange of property created by the survey), the mayor (which I don't understand at all as he probably has no idea what he's signing), the clerk-treasurer (who probably is more clueless than the mayor) and the plan commission (huh? we're not platting a new subdivision, asking for a variance or rezoning - just trying to record a stinking survey!).
This has to be the most ridiculous example of waaaaaaaaaaay too many layers of government being involved in such a simple process.
Rant over.
What we had prepared (and spelled out in our scope of work) was a boundary survey of the five-foot strip in accordance with the state minimum standards and the creation of a description for the same. Since it did not create a new tax parcel and the previous surveys had shown the boundaries correctly, according to Indiana standards, the survey was not required to be recorded. However, one of the attorneys involved in the lawsuit decided that our survey needed to be recorded. Having worked in this county before, I tried to talk him out of recording this survey and stated that it did not need to be according to the Indiana Administrative Code. However, the recordation of this survey was apparently part of the lawsuit so it needed to be done.
Normally when we record surveys, I put my professional land surveyor's stamp on the drawing, sign it, take it to the recorder's office where they stamp it with the recording information and we're done. However, I had been warned that this particular county had some "different" ideas about what was required to record a survey so I called a local surveyor to ask him what verbage needed to go on our plat of survey to get this thing through.
I wasn't ready for what he sent me. The survey has to be certified by the surveyor (makes sense to me), by the owner (okay, I can live with this one), by the auditor (I guess since they're the one assessing taxes I can somewhat understand this one but there's no real exchange of property created by the survey), the mayor (which I don't understand at all as he probably has no idea what he's signing), the clerk-treasurer (who probably is more clueless than the mayor) and the plan commission (huh? we're not platting a new subdivision, asking for a variance or rezoning - just trying to record a stinking survey!).
This has to be the most ridiculous example of waaaaaaaaaaay too many layers of government being involved in such a simple process.
Rant over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)