The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules for Cadastral Survey 2021 outline the legal and procedural requirements for cadastral surveys in New Zealand. These documents emphasize the importance of maintaining the integrity of the cadastre. A key aspect of this integrity is the correct placement and marking of survey marks, which serve as permanent references for boundary definition. The act stipulates that survey marks must be placed in a manner that ensures their long-term stability and visibility, minimizing the risk of disturbance or removal. When a survey mark is disturbed or removed, it potentially jeopardizes the accuracy and reliability of the cadastral system, leading to boundary disputes and legal challenges. The Surveyor-General’s Rules outline specific procedures for the replacement or reinstatement of survey marks, requiring licensed cadastral surveyors to follow rigorous standards to ensure that the new mark accurately represents the original position. This includes utilizing appropriate survey techniques, documenting the replacement process, and referencing existing survey control. Failing to adhere to these standards can result in non-compliance with the Act and potential disciplinary actions for the surveyor. Furthermore, the rules emphasize the surveyor’s responsibility to notify LINZ of any disturbed or replaced marks, ensuring that the cadastral database is kept up to date.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002, coupled with the Surveyor-General’s Rules, establishes a robust framework for cadastral surveying in New Zealand. A crucial aspect is ensuring the enduring accuracy and integrity of cadastral data, particularly when dealing with historical surveys and their integration into modern Land Information Systems (LIS). When discrepancies arise between historical survey plans and current ground conditions, a Licensed Cadastral Surveyor (LCS) must meticulously investigate the origins of the discrepancy. This involves a detailed analysis of the historical survey records, including field notes, survey marks, and any relevant documentation pertaining to the original survey. The LCS needs to assess the reliability and accuracy of the historical survey methods employed, considering the limitations of the technology and techniques available at the time. Furthermore, the surveyor must evaluate whether any subsequent land use changes, natural events (e.g., erosion, earthquakes), or undocumented alterations have contributed to the observed discrepancy. The Surveyor-General’s Rules provide guidance on how to deal with such discrepancies, emphasizing the need to prioritize the preservation of original monumentation and boundary intent. The LCS must then determine the best course of action to reconcile the historical survey with the current cadastral fabric, ensuring that any adjustments are justified, well-documented, and compliant with the relevant legal and professional standards. This process may involve re-establishing lost or disturbed survey marks, conducting new surveys to verify existing boundaries, and preparing a comprehensive report outlining the findings and the rationale for any adjustments made. The goal is to maintain the integrity of the cadastral system while respecting historical evidence and ensuring that property rights are accurately defined and protected.

To determine the adjusted bearing, we need to account for the convergence. Convergence is the angular difference between true north and grid north. In the South Island of New Zealand, convergence is typically west of grid north, meaning we need to subtract the convergence angle from the grid bearing to obtain the true bearing. Given: Grid bearing from Trig A to Trig B: 175° 30′ 00″ Convergence at Trig A: 0° 05′ 30″ West of Grid North Since the convergence is west of grid north, we subtract it from the grid bearing: True bearing = Grid bearing – Convergence True bearing = 175° 30′ 00″ – 0° 05′ 30″ True bearing = 175° 24′ 30″ Now, to calculate the geodetic distance, we need to use the given ellipsoidal parameters and the geodetic coordinates. However, without the geodetic coordinates of Trig A and Trig B and a method to calculate the geodetic distance on the ellipsoid (such as Vincenty’s formulae), we cannot directly compute the geodetic distance. We can only estimate the change in geodetic distance due to a change in scale factor. Given: Combined scale factor (CSF) used in the original survey: 0.99995 Revised CSF after network adjustment: 1.00002 The change in scale factor is: \[ \Delta CSF = 1.00002 – 0.99995 = 0.00007 \] This represents a relative change. To find the percentage change, we divide the change by the original CSF: \[ \text{Relative change} = \frac{\Delta CSF}{\text{Original CSF}} = \frac{0.00007}{0.99995} \approx 0.0000700035 \] To get the percentage change, multiply by 100: \[ \text{Percentage change} \approx 0.00700035\% \] The original grid distance is 10,000.000 m. The change in distance due to the revised CSF is: \[ \Delta \text{Distance} = \text{Original distance} \times \text{Relative change} \] \[ \Delta \text{Distance} = 10000.000 \times 0.0000700035 \approx 0.700035 \text{ m} \] Therefore, the revised geodetic distance is: \[ \text{Revised distance} = \text{Original distance} + \Delta \text{Distance} \] \[ \text{Revised distance} = 10000.000 + 0.700035 \approx 10000.700 \text{ m} \]

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules for Cadastral Survey 2021 outline the legal framework for cadastral surveys in New Zealand. A key principle is maintaining the integrity of the cadastre, which requires surveyors to act impartially and independently. While collaboration with stakeholders is essential, a surveyor’s primary duty is to the cadastre itself. This means that if a conflict arises between a client’s desired outcome and the legal requirements for cadastral boundary definition, the surveyor must prioritize the legal requirements. Ignoring this duty could lead to inaccurate boundary determinations, compromised property rights, and potential legal challenges. The Act emphasizes the surveyor’s role in upholding the accuracy and reliability of the land title system. The Surveyor-General’s Rules further detail the specific procedures and standards that surveyors must follow to ensure compliance with the legal framework. The Rules also address ethical considerations, emphasizing the surveyor’s responsibility to act with integrity and objectivity. When dealing with a situation where a client’s instructions conflict with legal requirements, a surveyor must clearly explain the legal constraints to the client and adhere to the statutory obligations, potentially requiring them to decline instructions that would compromise the integrity of the cadastre.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules for Cadastral Survey 2021 (and any subsequent amendments) define the legal framework for cadastral surveys in New Zealand. These documents outline the responsibilities of Licensed Cadastral Surveyors (LCS), the standards for survey plans, and the procedures for boundary definition and determination. An LCS must act with due diligence and competence, adhering to the principles of accuracy, integrity, and impartiality. When dealing with conflicting evidence, an LCS must consider all available information, including historical records, physical evidence, and the intentions of the original parties. The hierarchy of evidence, as interpreted through case law and professional practice, typically places original survey marks and occupation as high priority, but the weight given to each piece of evidence depends on the specific circumstances of the case. The LCS must document their reasoning and decisions clearly in the survey report. The LCS is obligated to inform all affected parties of the potential boundary discrepancy and to attempt to reach a resolution. If a resolution cannot be achieved, the LCS may need to advise the parties to seek legal advice or refer the matter to a dispute resolution process. The Surveyor-General retains oversight and has the power to audit and review cadastral surveys. The correct course of action involves carefully weighing the evidence, documenting the process, informing the affected parties, and attempting to resolve the issue in accordance with legal and professional standards.

The problem involves calculating the adjusted coordinates of a boundary peg after a resurvey reveals discrepancies. We need to distribute the error proportionally along the boundary line. 1. **Calculate the total error:** * Error in Northing (\(\Delta N\)): 100.015 m – 100.000 m = 0.015 m * Error in Easting (\(\Delta E\)): 200.025 m – 200.000 m = 0.025 m 2. **Calculate the total length of the boundary line from Peg A to Peg B using the original coordinates:** * Original coordinates of Peg A: (100.000 m, 200.000 m) * Original coordinates of Peg B: (150.000 m, 280.000 m) * Length \(L = \sqrt{(150.000 – 100.000)^2 + (280.000 – 200.000)^2}\) * \(L = \sqrt{(50.000)^2 + (80.000)^2} = \sqrt{2500 + 6400} = \sqrt{8900} \approx 94.340 \ m\) 3. **Calculate the length from Peg A to the subject peg (Peg C) using the original coordinates:** * Original coordinates of Peg A: (100.000 m, 200.000 m) * Original coordinates of Peg C: (125.000 m, 240.000 m) * Length \(l = \sqrt{(125.000 – 100.000)^2 + (240.000 – 200.000)^2}\) * \(l = \sqrt{(25.000)^2 + (40.000)^2} = \sqrt{625 + 1600} = \sqrt{2225} \approx 47.170 \ m\) 4. **Distribute the error proportionally to Peg C:** * Proportion \(p = \frac{l}{L} = \frac{47.170}{94.340} = 0.5\) * Correction in Northing (\(dN\)): \(p \times \Delta N = 0.5 \times 0.015 = 0.0075 \ m\) * Correction in Easting (\(dE\)): \(p \times \Delta E = 0.5 \times 0.025 = 0.0125 \ m\) 5. **Apply the corrections to the resurveyed coordinates of Peg C:** * Resurveyed coordinates of Peg C: (125.005 m, 240.010 m) * Adjusted Northing: 125.005 m + 0.0075 m = 125.0125 m * Adjusted Easting: 240.010 m + 0.0125 m = 240.0225 m 6. **Final Adjusted Coordinates:** (125.0125 m, 240.0225 m) This question tests the candidate’s understanding of error distribution in cadastral surveys, a critical aspect of ensuring accuracy and compliance with LINZ standards. The proportional adjustment method is commonly used to reconcile discrepancies found during resurveys, maintaining the integrity of boundary definitions as per the Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules. Understanding how to correctly apply these adjustments is crucial for a Licensed Cadastral Surveyor.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules for Cadastral Survey 2021 outline the legal and procedural framework for cadastral surveying in New Zealand. A key principle is maintaining the integrity of the cadastre. This integrity relies on surveyors accurately re-establishing existing boundaries and creating new ones that fit seamlessly into the existing framework. When inconsistencies arise, particularly concerning overlapping claims or ambiguities in historical records, the surveyor must apply a hierarchy of evidence. This hierarchy prioritizes natural boundaries (subject to accretion/erosion principles), original survey marks, occupation (when consistent and long-standing), and finally, dimensions on the original survey plan. The Surveyor-General’s Rules further detail how these elements should be weighed. The Act also emphasizes the importance of resolving boundary disputes amicably, if possible, and documenting all decisions and evidence considered in the survey report. The LIS system provides access to survey plans and related information. In cases of significant discrepancy, the surveyor is obligated to notify LINZ and potentially seek a determination from the Māori Land Court or High Court. The surveyor’s role is not simply to measure, but to interpret legal descriptions, reconcile conflicting evidence, and ensure that any new boundaries are legally defensible and maintain the overall integrity of the cadastre.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules for Cadastral Survey 2021 establish the legal framework for cadastral surveys in New Zealand. These documents define the roles and responsibilities of Licensed Cadastral Surveyors (LCS), the standards for survey plans, and the procedures for creating and altering land boundaries. A key principle underpinning these rules is the preservation of existing property rights. When a boundary is uncertain or in dispute, an LCS must follow a rigorous process to determine the correct boundary location, considering all available evidence, including historical records, physical evidence, and the intent of the original survey. The Act emphasizes the importance of maintaining the integrity of the cadastre, which is the official record of land ownership and boundaries. Any alteration to the cadastre must be justified by clear and convincing evidence and must not unjustly deprive any landowner of their rights. The Surveyor-General’s Rules provide detailed guidance on how to resolve boundary discrepancies, including the use of boundary adjustments, easements, and other legal mechanisms. When faced with conflicting evidence, an LCS must exercise professional judgment and apply the principles of boundary law to arrive at a fair and equitable solution that respects the rights of all parties involved. This often involves balancing the need to correct errors with the need to protect existing property interests.

To determine the adjusted bearing and distance, we first need to calculate the total angular misclosure and distribute it proportionally among the traverse legs. Then, we adjust the bearings and calculate the new coordinates and distances. 1. **Calculate the total angular misclosure:** The sum of interior angles of a five-sided traverse should be \((n-2) \times 180^\circ\), where \(n\) is the number of sides. In this case, \((5-2) \times 180^\circ = 540^\circ\). The measured angles sum to \(105^\circ 15′ 20″ + 110^\circ 45′ 30″ + 95^\circ 30′ 10″ + 120^\circ 20′ 00″ + 108^\circ 09′ 00″ = 539^\circ 59′ 00″\). The angular misclosure is \(540^\circ – 539^\circ 59′ 00″ = 0^\circ 01′ 00″\) or 60 seconds. 2. **Distribute the misclosure proportionally:** The total length of the traverse is \(150 + 200 + 180 + 220 + 170 = 920\) meters. The correction per meter is \(60″ / 920m \approx 0.0652″ / m\). 3. **Calculate bearing corrections for each leg:** The bearing correction for each leg is calculated by multiplying the length of the leg by the correction per meter. However, since the question asks for the adjusted bearing and distance of leg DE only, we will focus on that. The correction needs to be applied cumulatively around the traverse. We need to consider the proportion of the total misclosure that applies to leg DE. As the question asks for the *adjusted* bearing, we apply the correction *before* calculating coordinates. Assuming the misclosure is distributed evenly, each angle gets \(60″/5 = 12″\) correction. The bearing of DE is affected by the corrections applied to angles A, B, C, and D. The initial bearing of DE is 280° 15′ 00″. 4. **Adjust the bearing of leg DE:** The sum of corrections applied to the previous angles is \(4 \times 12″ = 48″\). Since it’s a closed traverse, the correction is subtracted. The adjusted bearing of DE is \(280^\circ 15′ 00″ – 48″ = 280^\circ 14′ 12″\). 5. **Adjust the distance of leg DE:** Since the question mentions angular adjustment and asks for the adjusted bearing *and* distance, it’s implied there’s a linear misclosure as well. However, the linear misclosure is not provided. Without this information, we can’t adjust the distance. Therefore, the distance remains 170m. Therefore, the adjusted bearing of leg DE is \(280^\circ 14′ 12″\) and the adjusted distance is 170m.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules for Cadastral Survey 2021 outline specific requirements for dealing with situations where a boundary is uncertain or disputed. Section 241 of the Property Law Act 2007 provides a mechanism for the court to determine boundaries. The Act emphasizes the importance of accurate and reliable cadastral information for land administration and property rights. Rule 15.1 of the Surveyor-General’s Rules 2021 deals with the treatment of ambiguities and discrepancies and gives the order of preference for evidence. This order is: occupation, natural boundaries, survey marks, measurements. When dealing with historical surveys, particularly those predating modern surveying equipment, discrepancies are common. The Surveyor must consider the best available evidence, including historical records, occupation, and physical features, to determine the most probable original location of the boundary. The process requires a detailed analysis of all available evidence, applying surveying principles and legal precedents to arrive at a reasoned conclusion. This may involve consulting with legal professionals and obtaining court orders to resolve complex boundary disputes. The Surveyor-General’s rules provide guidance on how to deal with such situations, emphasizing the need for clear and transparent documentation of the evidence considered and the rationale for the decisions made.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules outline the legal requirements for cadastral surveys in New Zealand. Rule 28(2) of the Surveyor-General’s Rules specifies the requirements for connecting a new survey to existing survey marks. It mandates that a new survey must be connected to at least three primary survey marks (or two primary and one secondary, under certain conditions) to ensure its integration with the national survey control network. These connections are crucial for maintaining the integrity and accuracy of the cadastral system. The purpose of these connections is to minimise the propagation of errors and ensure that new surveys are spatially consistent with existing cadastral data. Failure to comply with Rule 28(2) can lead to the rejection of the survey plan by LINZ (Land Information New Zealand). The connections must be made with appropriate accuracy and precision, using survey methods and equipment that meet the standards specified in the Rules. The surveyor must also provide evidence of the accuracy of the connections in the survey report. This evidence may include the results of independent checks and adjustments. The connections to survey marks must be clearly shown on the survey plan, including the coordinates and heights of the marks, and the distances and bearings to the new survey. The surveyor must also ensure that the survey marks are properly identified and referenced in the survey report.

The problem requires us to determine the allowable positional tolerance for a new boundary peg in a rural subdivision, considering both the local accuracy requirements and the overall network accuracy standards mandated by the Surveyor-General’s Rules (SGR) for cadastral surveys in New Zealand. The local accuracy is defined as 20mm + 50ppm, while the network accuracy is 50mm + 50ppm. The distance to the nearest permanent boundary mark is 450 meters. First, calculate the local accuracy tolerance: \[ \text{Local Accuracy} = 0.020 + (50 \times 10^{-6} \times 450) = 0.020 + 0.0225 = 0.0425 \text{ meters} = 42.5 \text{ mm} \] Next, calculate the network accuracy tolerance: \[ \text{Network Accuracy} = 0.050 + (50 \times 10^{-6} \times 450) = 0.050 + 0.0225 = 0.0725 \text{ meters} = 72.5 \text{ mm} \] According to the SGR, the final positional tolerance must satisfy both the local and network accuracy requirements. This means we must choose the smaller of the two calculated tolerances. Therefore, the allowable positional tolerance for the new boundary peg is 42.5 mm. The Surveyor-General’s Rules mandate stringent accuracy standards for cadastral surveys to ensure the integrity of land titles and boundaries. Local accuracy relates to the precision of measurements within a localized area, while network accuracy ensures the overall consistency and reliability of the cadastral network across larger distances. Both must be satisfied. Failing to meet either standard could lead to rejection of the survey plan by LINZ (Land Information New Zealand) and potential legal challenges regarding boundary disputes. Surveyors must meticulously plan their surveys and use appropriate equipment and techniques to achieve these accuracy requirements. The positional tolerance is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the cadastre.

The correct approach involves considering the interplay between the Cadastral Survey Act 2002, the Surveyor-General’s Rules, and the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) regarding esplanade reserves and strips. The key is understanding that while the RMA dictates the *requirement* for esplanade reserves/strips during subdivision near the coast, lakes, and rivers, the Cadastral Survey Act and Surveyor-General’s Rules specify *how* those reserves/strips are defined, surveyed, and depicted on cadastral survey plans. The Surveyor-General’s Rules provide the technical standards for defining the boundaries of these reserves/strips, ensuring they are accurately located and integrated into the cadastral system. Furthermore, the Land Transfer Act 2017 governs the registration of these reserves/strips, providing security of title. While the RMA triggers the need, the Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and Surveyor-General’s Rules provide the mechanism for its implementation within the cadastral system. The Public Works Act 1981 might be relevant if the Crown is acquiring land for a public work, but is not the primary legislation governing the definition and survey of esplanade reserves arising from subdivision. The Local Government Act 2002 deals with local authority powers and functions, but not the specific technical requirements for cadastral surveying.

The scenario presents a complex situation involving a potential encroachment on Māori land due to historical surveying inaccuracies and differing interpretations of boundary descriptions. The key lies in understanding the hierarchy of evidence in boundary determination and the specific legal considerations applicable to Māori land under Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993. While physical occupation holds weight, it’s secondary to original survey marks and intentions. However, in cases involving Māori land, the Act emphasizes the importance of consultation and agreement with the relevant Māori Land Court and affected landowners. Ignoring this consultation could lead to legal challenges and potentially invalidate the survey. The Surveyor-General’s rules emphasize the need for surveyors to act impartially and consider all available evidence, including historical records, survey plans, and oral histories. The presence of an occupation line is a factor, but not the determining one. The best course of action involves thorough investigation, consultation with all stakeholders, and seeking guidance from the Māori Land Court to ensure any proposed boundary adjustment respects both the legal framework and the cultural significance of the land. The Act requires a higher degree of consultation and agreement than standard boundary adjustments on general land.

The problem requires us to calculate the adjusted bearing and distance of a boundary line after discovering a systematic error in the total station’s angle measurements. The error is proportional to the angle measured, and we need to apply corrections to both the bearing and the distance. First, calculate the total angular misclosure in the traverse: \[ \text{Misclosure} = (\text{Measured Sum}) – (\text{Theoretical Sum}) \] The theoretical sum of interior angles for a 4-sided traverse is \( (n-2) \times 180^\circ \), where \( n \) is the number of sides. In this case, \( n = 4 \), so the theoretical sum is \( (4-2) \times 180^\circ = 360^\circ \). The measured sum is given as \( 360^\circ 00′ 20” \). \[ \text{Misclosure} = 360^\circ 00′ 20” – 360^\circ 00′ 00” = 20” \] The proportional correction per angle is: \[ \text{Correction per angle} = -\frac{\text{Misclosure}}{4} = -\frac{20”}{4} = -5” \] The measured bearing of line AB is \( 85^\circ 15′ 30” \). The corrected bearing is: \[ \text{Corrected Bearing} = 85^\circ 15′ 30” – 5” = 85^\circ 15′ 25” \] Now, we address the distance correction. The total station has a systematic error of 1 part in 5000. This means for every 5000 meters measured, there is a 1-meter error. The measured distance of line AB is 250.00 meters. The distance correction is: \[ \text{Distance Correction} = \frac{250.00}{5000} = 0.05 \text{ meters} \] Since the error is systematic and adds to the measurement, we subtract the correction to get the true distance: \[ \text{Corrected Distance} = 250.00 – 0.05 = 249.95 \text{ meters} \] Therefore, the adjusted bearing of line AB is \( 85^\circ 15′ 25” \) and the adjusted distance is 249.95 meters. This question tests the understanding of angular misclosure adjustment and systematic error correction in distance measurements, crucial concepts in cadastral surveying. It requires applying both angular and distance corrections, reflecting real-world surveying scenarios.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules for Cadastral Survey 2021 outline the requirements for dealing with non-compliant boundaries. When a boundary is found to be non-compliant, a surveyor must first attempt to reinstate the boundary to its original position, consulting historical records and evidence. If reinstatement is not feasible, an agreement between the affected landowners is sought to fix the boundary. This agreement must be documented and meet specific requirements outlined in the Act and Rules. If an agreement cannot be reached, the surveyor must proceed under section 239 of the Property Law Act 2007 or apply to the District Court for a determination. The key principle is to balance the legal requirements with the practical realities of the land and the interests of the landowners, adhering to the standards of accuracy and integrity expected of a Licensed Cadastral Surveyor. All steps taken and the rationale behind them must be clearly documented in the survey report and dataset submitted to LINZ. This ensures transparency and accountability in the cadastral process.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules mandate specific procedures for dealing with discrepancies found during a cadastral survey. When a surveyor identifies a discrepancy that potentially affects property boundaries, several steps are crucial. Firstly, the surveyor has a responsibility to thoroughly investigate the discrepancy. This involves reviewing historical survey data, title documents, and any other relevant information to understand the origin and nature of the issue. Secondly, the surveyor must assess the impact of the discrepancy on the surrounding land parcels and property rights. This assessment should consider the magnitude of the discrepancy and its potential consequences for landowners. Thirdly, transparent communication with affected landowners is paramount. The surveyor must clearly explain the discrepancy, its potential impact, and the proposed resolution. Landowners should be given the opportunity to provide input and raise any concerns. Fourthly, the surveyor needs to determine the best course of action to resolve the discrepancy. This may involve re-establishing boundaries based on the best available evidence, negotiating boundary adjustments with landowners, or seeking a determination from Land Information New Zealand (LINZ). Finally, all actions taken and decisions made must be meticulously documented in the survey report and cadastral survey dataset (CSD). This documentation should include a detailed explanation of the discrepancy, the investigation process, the communication with landowners, and the rationale for the chosen resolution. The Surveyor-General’s Rules provide specific guidance on the content and format of the survey report and CSD in such cases. Failing to follow these procedures can lead to legal challenges, delays in plan approval, and potential disciplinary action against the surveyor.

The problem involves calculating the adjusted coordinates of a boundary corner after a traverse adjustment using the Bowditch method. The Bowditch method distributes the total error in latitude and departure proportionally to the length of each traverse leg. 1. **Calculate the total traverse length:** \(L_{total} = 150.00 + 200.00 + 250.00 + 300.00 = 900.00 \text{ m}\) 2. **Calculate the error in latitude (\(\Delta Lat\)):** \(\Delta Lat = \sum (\text{Latitude}) = 149.95 + (-199.90) + (-249.95) + 299.90 = -0.006 \text{ m}\) 3. **Calculate the error in departure (\(\Delta Dep\)):** \(\Delta Dep = \sum (\text{Departure}) = 0.05 + 0.10 + (-0.15) + (-0.004) = 0.004 \text{ m}\) 4. **Calculate the correction for latitude for leg AB:** \(C_{Lat,AB} = -\frac{L_{AB}}{L_{total}} \times \Delta Lat = -\frac{150.00}{900.00} \times (-0.006) = 0.001 \text{ m}\) 5. **Calculate the correction for departure for leg AB:** \(C_{Dep,AB} = -\frac{L_{AB}}{L_{total}} \times \Delta Dep = -\frac{150.00}{900.00} \times (0.004) = -0.00066667 \text{ m} \approx -0.0007 \text{ m}\) 6. **Calculate the adjusted latitude of point B:** \(Lat_{B} = Lat_{A} + \text{Latitude}_{AB} + C_{Lat,AB}\) \(Lat_{B} = 1000.00 + 149.95 + 0.001 = 1149.951 \text{ m}\) 7. **Calculate the adjusted departure of point B:** \(Dep_{B} = Dep_{A} + \text{Departure}_{AB} + C_{Dep,AB}\) \(Dep_{B} = 2000.00 + 0.05 + (-0.0007) = 2000.0493 \text{ m} \approx 2000.049 \text{ m}\) Therefore, the adjusted coordinates of point B are (1149.951 m, 2000.049 m). The Bowditch method, also known as the compass rule, assumes that errors are randomly distributed and are proportional to the length of the survey lines. This method is commonly used in cadastral surveys for adjusting traverses where angular measurements are considered to be of equal precision. The corrections are applied to both latitudes and departures to ensure that the adjusted traverse closes mathematically, which is essential for accurate boundary determination and land administration.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules mandate rigorous standards for survey accuracy and data integrity. A key aspect of this is the management of systematic errors, particularly those arising from instrument calibration and environmental factors. These errors, if unaddressed, can propagate through a survey, leading to significant discrepancies in boundary locations and area calculations, which can have severe legal and financial ramifications. In the scenario presented, the surveyor’s failure to properly account for temperature-induced chain elongation and collimation errors in the total station introduces systematic errors. These errors are not random and will consistently bias measurements in a particular direction. The magnitude of the error depends on the magnitude of temperature variations and collimation error. The effect of systematic errors on a large subdivision is cumulative, leading to significant discrepancies between the planned and actual dimensions. It is crucial to apply corrections for systematic errors during data processing. This involves applying temperature corrections to chain measurements and adjusting total station readings for collimation errors. These corrections are typically based on calibration certificates and environmental monitoring data. Furthermore, the surveyor should have performed redundant measurements and least squares adjustments to detect and minimize the impact of systematic errors. The Surveyor-General’s Rules specify accuracy standards for cadastral surveys, and the surveyor must ensure that these standards are met, even after applying corrections. Failure to do so can result in the rejection of the survey plan by LINZ and potential disciplinary action. The surveyor must have a robust quality assurance system in place to identify and mitigate systematic errors.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules mandate specific procedures for dealing with boundary discrepancies. When a surveyor encounters a discrepancy that exceeds allowable tolerances during a redefinition survey, they cannot simply choose the solution that best suits the client’s immediate interests. The surveyor has a professional and legal obligation to thoroughly investigate the origin of the discrepancy, considering historical records, survey plans, physical evidence, and adjoiner consultation. The primary goal is to re-establish the original boundary location as accurately as possible, adhering to the principles of *ad medium filum aquae* (where applicable), *occupation*, and *best evidence*. The surveyor must document the discrepancy and the steps taken to resolve it in a comprehensive report, potentially including a Diagram of Survey showing the discrepancy. If the discrepancy cannot be resolved through investigation and agreement, the surveyor must advise the client to seek legal advice or mediation. The Land Transfer Act 2017 also plays a role, particularly concerning indefeasibility of title, but it doesn’t override the surveyor’s duty to accurately re-establish the original boundary. Surveyor-General’s Rules 2021 also requires a report to LINZ if the surveyor cannot resolve the discrepancy. Ignoring a discrepancy or choosing a solution solely based on client preference would be a breach of professional ethics and potentially a violation of the Cadastral Survey Act 2002.

To determine the adjusted bearing and distance, we first need to understand the effect of local attraction on the observed bearings. The difference between the forward and back bearings at Station A is \(181^\circ 30′ – 1^\circ 30′ = 180^\circ\), indicating that Station A is free from local attraction. However, at Station B, the difference is \(183^\circ 00′ – 3^\circ 00′ = 180^\circ\), indicating that Station B is also free from local attraction. Since both stations are free from local attraction, the observed bearings can be directly used to calculate the adjusted bearing. The adjusted bearing from A to B is the same as the observed bearing, which is \(1^\circ 30’\). Now, we need to correct the distance for slope. The slope distance is 250.00 meters, and the vertical angle is \(2^\circ 30’\). The horizontal distance (adjusted distance) can be calculated using the formula: \[ \text{Horizontal Distance} = \text{Slope Distance} \times \cos(\text{Vertical Angle}) \] \[ \text{Horizontal Distance} = 250.00 \times \cos(2^\circ 30′) \] \[ \text{Horizontal Distance} = 250.00 \times 0.99904822 \] \[ \text{Horizontal Distance} = 249.762055 \text{ meters} \] Rounding to two decimal places, the adjusted horizontal distance is 249.76 meters. Therefore, the adjusted bearing from A to B is \(1^\circ 30’\), and the adjusted distance is 249.76 meters. This calculation considers both the local attraction (which is absent in this case) and the slope correction to provide accurate cadastral survey data. The horizontal distance is crucial for accurate area calculations and boundary determinations, aligning with the requirements of the Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and Surveyor-General’s rules.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules mandate specific procedures for dealing with situations where a boundary definition relies on an existing survey mark that has been disturbed or lost. Section 22(1)(c) of the Act requires that a surveyor must re-establish the position of the mark in accordance with the Surveyor-General’s Rules. Rule 15.1 states that the re-establishment should be based on the best available evidence, which may include original survey data, historical records, and physical evidence. If these sources conflict, the surveyor must apply professional judgment to determine the most probable original location. The surveyor must document the process and reasoning behind the re-establishment in the survey report. If the re-establishment deviates significantly from the original position, the surveyor must notify LINZ and potentially affected landowners, providing them with the opportunity to raise objections. If objections cannot be resolved through negotiation, the matter may need to be referred to the Land Valuation Tribunal or the District Court for a final determination. The key principle is to maintain the integrity of the cadastre while ensuring fairness to all parties involved. The process involves a hierarchy of evidence, with original survey data being the most reliable, followed by historical records and physical evidence. The surveyor’s role is to act as an impartial expert, using their skills and knowledge to determine the most accurate re-establishment of the boundary.

The scenario describes a situation involving a potential breach of ethical conduct and professional standards for a Licensed Cadastral Surveyor (LCS) in New Zealand. Under the Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules, an LCS has a duty to act impartially and with integrity. This includes disclosing any potential conflicts of interest. The LCS’s prior involvement in a subdivision for a relative presents a conflict of interest when they are later engaged to survey a neighboring property where a boundary dispute arises with that same subdivision. The key principle is that the LCS’s judgment and impartiality might be compromised due to the pre-existing relationship and prior work. The Surveyor-General’s Rules emphasize transparency and the avoidance of situations where a surveyor’s objectivity could be questioned. Failure to disclose this conflict and proceeding with the survey without informing all parties involved would violate these ethical and professional obligations. This could result in disciplinary actions, including potential suspension or revocation of their license. The correct course of action is to disclose the conflict of interest to all parties involved (both property owners) and allow them to decide whether they are comfortable with the LCS continuing with the survey.

The problem involves calculating the adjusted bearing and distance of a boundary line after a local magnetic disturbance has been detected. To solve this, we first need to determine the local attraction at both ends of the line. This is done by comparing the observed bearings (forward and back bearings) with what they *should* be if there were no local attraction (i.e., differing by exactly 180°). At Station A, the observed forward bearing to B is 75°15’00”, and the observed back bearing from B to A is 254°45’00”. The difference between the back bearing and the forward bearing should be 180° if there’s no local attraction. In this case, 254°45’00” – 75°15’00” = 179°30’00”. This indicates a local attraction at Station A of 30’00” (180° – 179°30’00”), affecting the bearing *towards* A. Therefore, we need to add this correction to the forward bearing from A to B. At Station B, the observed forward bearing from B to A is 254°45’00”, and the observed back bearing from A to B is 75°15’00”. The difference is again 179°30’00”, indicating the same 30’00” local attraction but affecting the bearing *towards* B. Therefore, we need to subtract this correction from the back bearing from B to A. The corrected bearing from A to B is 75°15’00” + 30’00” = 75°45’00”. Next, we need to adjust the distance. The question states that the slope distance is 150.000m and the slope angle is 2°30’00”. To find the horizontal distance, we use the formula: Horizontal Distance = Slope Distance * cos(Slope Angle). Horizontal Distance = 150.000 * cos(2°30’00”) = 150.000 * 0.99904822 = 149.857 m. Therefore, the adjusted bearing and horizontal distance of line AB are 75°45’00” and 149.857m, respectively.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules are central to cadastral surveying in New Zealand. When a surveyor encounters conflicting evidence, such as discrepancies between old survey plans, occupation on the ground, and title boundaries, they must prioritize evidence based on legal precedence and the specific circumstances of the case. The hierarchy typically places original monumentation (if undisturbed) at the highest level of importance, followed by reliable occupation that aligns with historical boundaries and then documentation like old survey plans and title records. However, the Surveyor-General’s Rules emphasize the importance of a comprehensive investigation and the need to reconcile the conflicting evidence as much as possible. Section 22 of the Cadastral Survey Act 2002 gives the surveyor the power to determine boundaries, but this determination must be defensible and based on sound surveying principles and legal precedent. The surveyor is obligated to act impartially and consider all available evidence. In cases of significant conflict that cannot be resolved through surveying methods, the surveyor should advise the client to seek legal counsel or mediation to avoid future boundary disputes. The surveyor’s role is to provide an objective assessment of the boundary location based on the available evidence and relevant legislation.

The correct approach involves understanding the Surveyor-General’s rules regarding the placement of new boundaries in relation to existing features and potential ambiguities. Rule 8.1 states that a new boundary should be placed in a manner that avoids creating ambiguities with existing boundaries and respects the integrity of the existing cadastral fabric. In this scenario, placing the new boundary directly adjacent to the existing high-pressure gas pipeline creates a potential ambiguity regarding maintenance access and future upgrades. While easements can address this, the Surveyor-General prefers to minimize potential conflicts at the boundary definition stage itself. Creating a buffer zone, even a small one, ensures that the pipeline owner has clear and unencumbered access for maintenance and potential future upgrades, and reduces the likelihood of disputes arising from the boundary’s proximity to the pipeline. Therefore, the optimal solution is to create a buffer zone, even a minimal one, between the new boundary and the pipeline. This demonstrates adherence to the principles of minimizing ambiguity and respecting existing infrastructure. Simply obtaining an easement, while necessary, doesn’t fully address the initial ambiguity created by the boundary’s placement. Ignoring the pipeline’s presence or relying solely on future agreements is not in accordance with best practices for cadastral surveying in New Zealand.

The problem requires us to determine the adjusted coordinates of a boundary peg after a resurvey reveals a systematic error in the original survey. This involves understanding how to apply a scale factor and a rotation to correct the coordinates. First, we calculate the scale factor \( s \) based on the difference in the measured length of the line AB between the original survey and the resurvey: \[ s = \frac{\text{Resurveyed Length}}{\text{Original Length}} = \frac{100.05}{100.00} = 1.0005 \] Next, we calculate the rotation angle \( \theta \) in radians. The difference in bearing is given as 0°01’30”. Converting this to radians: \[ \theta = (0 + \frac{1}{60} + \frac{30}{3600}) \times \frac{\pi}{180} = 0.000436332 \text{ radians} \] Now, we apply the scale factor and rotation to the original coordinates of Peg C (100.000, 100.000). The transformation equations are: \[ X’ = s \times (X \times \cos(\theta) – Y \times \sin(\theta)) \] \[ Y’ = s \times (X \times \sin(\theta) + Y \times \cos(\theta)) \] Where \( X = 100.000 \) and \( Y = 100.000 \). \[ X’ = 1.0005 \times (100.000 \times \cos(0.000436332) – 100.000 \times \sin(0.000436332)) \] \[ Y’ = 1.0005 \times (100.000 \times \sin(0.000436332) + 100.000 \times \cos(0.000436332)) \] Since \( \theta \) is small, we can approximate \( \cos(\theta) \approx 1 \) and \( \sin(\theta) \approx \theta \). \[ X’ = 1.0005 \times (100.000 \times 1 – 100.000 \times 0.000436332) = 1.0005 \times (100 – 0.0436332) = 1.0005 \times 99.9563668 = 99.9563668 \times 1.0005 = 99.9563668 + 0.0499781834 = 100.0063449834 \approx 100.006 \] \[ Y’ = 1.0005 \times (100.000 \times 0.000436332 + 100.000 \times 1) = 1.0005 \times (0.0436332 + 100) = 1.0005 \times 100.0436332 = 100.0436332 + 0.0500218166 = 100.0936550166 \approx 100.094 \] Therefore, the adjusted coordinates of Peg C are approximately (100.006, 100.094). This process ensures that the resurveyed data is accurately integrated into the existing cadastral framework, maintaining the integrity of property boundaries and land records. The principles of coordinate transformation, scale correction, and angular adjustment are fundamental in cadastral surveying to address discrepancies arising from measurement errors or changes in geodetic datums.

The scenario describes a complex situation involving overlapping interests in land, requiring a Licensed Cadastral Surveyor to navigate multiple legal frameworks and prioritize competing claims. The key is understanding how the Cadastral Survey Act 2002 interacts with other legislation like the Resource Management Act 1991 and principles of Māori land law. The correct approach involves first determining the legally established boundaries of the existing Record of Title. This provides the baseline for assessing the impact of the proposed subdivision and the easement. The Surveyor-General’s Rules for Cadastral Survey 2021 provides guidance on boundary definition, including the hierarchy of evidence. This hierarchy generally prioritizes natural boundaries, followed by survey marks, then documentary evidence. Given the potential for ambiguity in the historical survey data and the presence of physical features, the surveyor must carefully weigh the evidence. Next, the surveyor must consider the implications of the proposed easement. The easement must be accurately surveyed and its location clearly defined on the new survey plan. The Resource Management Act 1991 comes into play because the subdivision requires resource consent, and the easement may be a condition of that consent. Finally, the surveyor must address the potential impact on Māori land. If the proposed subdivision or easement affects Māori land, the surveyor must comply with the Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993, which requires consultation with the relevant Māori landowners and the Māori Land Court. The surveyor’s ethical obligations also require them to act fairly and impartially, considering the interests of all parties involved. The order of priority, therefore, is establishing the existing boundaries, addressing the easement requirements, and then considering the Māori land implications.

The Cadastral Survey Act 2002 and the Surveyor-General’s Rules mandate specific procedures for dealing with situations where a boundary is found to be incorrectly located, impacting adjoining properties. A critical aspect involves determining whether the error constitutes a “material boundary error” as defined within the Act. This assessment is crucial because it triggers specific notification and rectification requirements. The Act emphasizes the importance of maintaining the integrity of the cadastre and protecting the rights of affected landowners. Section 24(1) of the Cadastral Survey Act 2002 requires a licensed cadastral surveyor who discovers a material boundary error to notify the Surveyor-General and all affected landowners. The surveyor must then follow the procedures outlined in the Surveyor-General’s Rules for rectifying the error, which may involve preparing a new survey plan and obtaining consent from the affected landowners. The key consideration is the impact of the error on property rights and the overall integrity of the cadastre. The surveyor’s professional judgment is paramount in determining the materiality of the error and the appropriate course of action.

The problem requires us to understand the principles of traverse adjustment and error propagation in cadastral surveying, specifically in the context of the Cadastral Survey Rules 2021. The angular misclosure is distributed proportionally to the angles. The corrections are then applied to calculate the adjusted bearings. The coordinates are calculated using adjusted bearings and distances. The linear misclosure is calculated and then distributed proportionally to the traverse leg lengths to derive the adjusted coordinates. The calculation involves several steps: 1. **Angular Misclosure and Adjustment:** * Calculate the total of the measured internal angles: 92°35’15” + 85°12’45” + 98°47’30” + 83°24’30” = 360°00’00”. * Theoretical sum of internal angles for a quadrilateral = (n-2) * 180° = (4-2) * 180° = 360°. * Angular misclosure = Measured sum – Theoretical sum = 360°00’00” – 360°00’00” = 0″. This is ideal, so no angular adjustment is needed. 2. **Bearing Calculation and Adjustment:** * Bearing AB is given as 50°00’00”. * Calculate Bearing BC: Bearing AB + 180° – Angle B = 50°00’00” + 180° – 85°12’45” = 144°47’15”. * Calculate Bearing CD: Bearing BC + 180° – Angle C = 144°47’15” + 180° – 98°47’30” = 226°00’15”. * Calculate Bearing DA: Bearing CD + 180° – Angle D = 226°00’15” + 180° – 83°24’30” = 322°35’45”. * Calculate Bearing DA back to A: Bearing DA – 180° + Angle A = 322°35’45” – 180° + 92°35’15” = 235°11’00”. This is incorrect and requires adjustment. * Bearing DA should be 50°00’00” + 180° = 230°00’00”. * Bearing adjustment: 235°11’00” – 230°00’00” = 5°11’00”. 3. **Coordinate Calculation:** * Calculate the unadjusted coordinates of each point using given distances and bearings. * ΔE\_AB = 100 * sin(50°00’00”) = 76.604 * ΔN\_AB = 100 * cos(50°00’00”) = 64.279 * E\_B = 1000 + 76.604 = 1076.604 * N\_B = 1000 + 64.279 = 1064.279 * ΔE\_BC = 120 * sin(144°47’15”) = 69.553 * ΔN\_BC = 120 * cos(144°47’15”) = -97.568 * E\_C = 1076.604 + 69.553 = 1146.157 * N\_C = 1064.279 – 97.568 = 966.711 * ΔE\_CD = 150 * sin(226°00’15”) = -107.976 * ΔN\_CD = 150 * cos(226°00’15”) = -104.142 * E\_D = 1146.157 – 107.976 = 1038.181 * N\_D = 966.711 – 104.142 = 862.569 * ΔE\_DA = 110 * sin(322°35’45”) = -67.604 * ΔN\_DA = 110 * cos(322°35’45”) = 87.431 * E\_A’ = 1038.181 – 67.604 = 970.577 * N\_A’ = 862.569 + 87.431 = 950.000 4. **Linear Misclosure and Adjustment:** * Error in Easting = 1000 – 970.577 = 29.423 * Error in Northing = 1000 – 950.000 = 50.000 * Total traverse length = 100 + 120 + 150 + 110 = 480 * Correction for Easting at B = -(29.423 * 100) / 480 = -6.130 * Correction for Northing at B = -(50.000 * 100) / 480 = -10.417 * Adjusted Easting of B = 1076.604 – 6.130 = 1070.474 * Adjusted Northing of B = 1064.279 – 10.417 = 1053.862 Therefore, the adjusted Easting and Northing coordinates of point B are 1070.474 and 1053.862 respectively.