Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Holtie22

  1. Maybe, but might it also be possible that the city has a utility easement and that the property is casamig's? Many scenarios are possible. A Bundle of Rights
  2. After looking at the database link provided by ArtMan, I think the gent from the city may have been right - it could have been an old lamp post base re-purposed as a benchmark in 1978. The description says it is 9.7 feet East of the West line of Leclaire, and 10.4' (not 210.4') North of the South line of Patterson, which is exactly where the coordinates place it in Google Earth. This means that the sidewalks are within the right-of-way limits of the streets, and that rather than being at the intersection of the street lines, it is symmetrically placed inside those lines - right where you might expect to find a street lamp. Is that a conduit (gas or electric) leading into the squared off portion of the concrete? Of course, this interpretation would also mean that the lawn is within the highway right-of-way and not necessarily yours at all!
  3. I would check with the local surveyors who were using the mark. I have seen a concrete-filled clay tile with an iron rod in the center used as a boundary marker in my town, although it dated to the 1930's. Given the location at what appears to be the intersection of the right-of-way lines of the two streets, an original purpose as a cadastral marker seems more likely than a benchmark, even if was used as such at a later date.
  4. If she's in NYC, then this one is not too far away!
  5. Try this:Benchmark Viewer You have to select the state (Calfornia), then navigate to the area of interest.
  6. Why don't you just ask the surveyor to do the conversion for you? Then you know it will be right.
  7. Thanks for posting this article, wister6813. I have sent the link to the trigonometry teachers at our local high school, where I just spent two days demonstrating how to measure heights with surveying instruments and trig.
  8. From the description, it seems that this Azimuth Mark for Hild 2 was originally located about 2 miles away from the station, about .5 mile north of the county line, and .2 mile north of Blowing Rocks. This would put it around N26 58.630, W080 04.930. It was reported destroyed back in 1964. The area around Hild 2, meanwhile, looks pretty pricey - probably nor a good place to go benchmark hunting, even though there is a good chance the station is still there.
  9. Do you have coords for where you found it? You could try this site: Benchmark Viewer
  10. Actually, the Washington Monument is a poor example since it is not an intersection station, as Dave Doyle can testify!
  11. I think Bill93 gave a pretty comprehensive answer, especially given the fact that it hardly matters anymore. No-one doing work that requires centimeter accuracy is going to be using an intersection station. What you have to realize is that even the fact that it is listed in the National Spatial Reference System has no bearing on the owner's (of an intersection station structure) decisions of how they might conduct a renovation/restoration of their structure. With a few rare exceptions (the Washington Monument is one), the Federal Government has no legal interest in what goes on when these stations are modified, rebuilt, or destroyed. So the owner is free to do as they wish, most likely in ignorance of the geodetic significance of their structure. In the case of Wagner's Main Hall, I doubt that anyone will be doing the measurements necessary to assure that the cupola occupies its original position.
  12. PLS 31976 is Mark X. Plog, Land Surveyor. PLS 38964 is Thomas N. Woldendorp, LS. Geodatum, Inc. is now known as MXP Consulting, Inc. The marker you found is in all likelihood cadastral, ie. related to property lines.
  13. Mike's app is called Bench Map - works great!
  14. I don't think I would take the distances to the North and South marks too literally. I believe that when they were set, the marks would have been intervisible, so the North mark was probably close to the top of the hill near where Camden Drive makes a corner. The South mark is described as being on the side of the hill, so it was probably somewhere between Loudon Heights Circle and the coords provided by 68-eldo. Given the amount of development in these two locations, the likelihood that the marks still exist could be pretty slim. But, if you're going to look, follow John's suggestion and try to keep the Longitude reading on your GPS as close to the center mark's Longitude as possible. Good Luck!
  15. I wonder if the markers you found were associated with This effort?
  16. You're right that all of the finds on GC to date are actually of the Reference Mark. If it was properly installed, the arrow should point to the main station, 33.31 feet away. Boy, does this description have problems! The station is described as being 3 feet west of the rail fence, 3 feet north of the rail fence, and 3 feet east of the rail fence - all at once! Even taking magnetic declination into account, the box score azimuth does not agree with the bearing to the reference mark given in the description. Hopefully you can find this mark, (somewhat below ground level), and provide a better description for future searchers. Good Luck!
  17. I noticed that also. If you zoom in real close in hybrid mode, you will see that the Adjusted mark stays in the same place, but the Scaled marks move every time you click. Could have been done on purpose to show the unreliability of the scaled coords.
  18. I added a sketch that should clarify some of the confusion: It appears to me that PIDs DG2613 & DG0472 are the same point. The first was for the original tri-station, while the second was for the vertical control established on the same point. The DG2613 coords for this station should be accurate.
  19. This mark, of a similar style, was set in 1903.
  20. Give the expert sleuths here on the Benchmarking Forum something to work with. Hopefully a very clear photo which shows the setting agency, designation and year set (or written info of same). A HH2 Lat/Long in the NGS format of DDDMMSS.s. A description of the setting location - roads, railroads, bridges, culverts and other nearby features. Chances are that it is a mark that does not have a PID in the NGS Data Sheets, but someone may be able to dig a description out of another source. Read the pinned subjects at the top of this page. kayakbird I am guessing that it is this one. Even though Groundspeak operates both the Geocaching and Waymarking sites, only finds on those benchmarks included in their out-of-date database are listed on your profile page. Why? Who knows!
  21. frex3wv: I believe (mainly because of the large amount of hand lettering), that you are looking at a provisional edition of the topo. In which case, the X-marks, unless labeled BM, indicate spot elevations. Not sure of the significance of the AT vs T. TopoMapSymbols I added a link to a PDF explaining USGS Map Symbols.
  22. No doubt that's what happened, however, as long as the underground mark still exists undisturbed, the station is NOT destroyed.
  23. This does seem to be an interesting situation. To help illustrate, I have overlaid an image from ScaredyCat's benchmark viewer with information from the box score for WYE-Reset (AC0533). You can actually see the marks for WYE-A and RM-3 in the photo. (You can also see them, along with their witness posts, on Google street view.)According to the datasheet description, WYE-Reset is recessed below ground level. WYE-A should not have been listed as destroyed, since its datasheet describes the existence of an underground mark. The change in date, from 1934 to 1954 in the GC photos remains a mystery! After re-examining the photos of WYE-A, I believe they are the same disk. The difference in lighting is making the 3 look like a 5. Mystery solved?
  • Create New...