|
|
Post by Brent George on Nov 24, 2016 19:00:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian Gillespie on Nov 24, 2016 19:51:24 GMT
Don't we effectively have a coordinated cadastre - Polar Coordinates. Less emphasis seems to be placed on old boundary marks now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brent George on Nov 27, 2016 20:19:31 GMT
Don't we effectively have a coordinated cadastre - Polar Coordinates. Less emphasis seems to be placed on old boundary marks now. Sadly you are generally correct on both counts Ian, although it only needs a "not-so-wee" earthquake to put the benefits of a coordinated cadastre in NZ into perspective.
Our local hindsight here is that the old boundary mark - as originally placed - (ie: in terms of the hierarchy of evidence) is an invaluable piece of evidence in boundary determination.
I reflect on a university resourced pilot exercise - endorsed by LINZ - completed in the Brighton area of Christchurch circa 2008/9. This simplistically surveyed by GNSS, multiple survey standards; witness marks and boundary marks were they were readily available, and compared the coordinates to a LandonLine adjusted network. The conclusions drawn were interesting, and (if I recall correctly) supported the hypothesis that a coordinated cadastre is achievable.
...and then came the Canterbury and later Christchurch earthquakes which literally changed the landscape - especially so in the Brighton (eastern Chch) location.
A cadastre without the "old boundary marks" still representing the legal boundaries after such events would be a dangerous space to be in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pat Sole on Nov 28, 2016 0:15:35 GMT
Well said Brent. I also recall not so very long ago (2009?) where the Surveyor General promulgated a set of draft rules where there was no compulsion for boundary marking. It is fortunate that these did not prevail, particularly in light of the new Canterbury Property Boundaries and Related Matters Act 2016 which continues to place high reliance on original boundary marks (also as a result of the SG promulgating a coordinated cadastre for Chch) and long-established good survey practice. It is all too easy with the data and calculation tools available today, to loose sight of the fact that the cadastre is a field entity and the office data is only part of the picture.
|
|
