What should a survey map show ?

goodgps · Post by **goodgps** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:46 pm

We are surveying a piece of property.
Now this propery has been surveyed more than a Brittany Spears tabloid photo.

Piece of cake right ?

My crew goes out and finds old overhead powerlines, paved roadways, old encroaching fencelines, all kinds of appurtenances and encroachments.

The adjacent parcel maps do not list a document number on obvious access easements. They show and label the easement but no record, except for their map itself.

No document for the overhead power lines, some maps don't even show the power lines. Adjacent subdivisions recognize access to "our" parcel over their parcel, yet don't define it ??

Most conditions I get, require "all easements be shown on the map"
We are required to create and record a document for pertenant features on the subject land (such as canals, powerlines etc)

AM I just being "jerked" by that condition, or is there really a requirement. or obligation to show obvious uses or easements (even if implied) on a map ?
I'm talkin about parcel maps and Subdivisions as well as a record of survey.

"Good"

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:48 am

On an RS, I show anything that may have an effect on the boundary, I don't necessarily track down every possible easement that may be appurtenent to or encumbering upon the land.

I do suggest at the outset that the client supply me with a recent PTR, but don't require it. If they supply one, I show the easements listed in the exceptions. If they don't supply a PTR, again, if an easement is going to affect the boundary (the stated purpose of the survey), I show it.

Subdivisions are different. You are creating parcel lines, so any easement that affects the property may have an effect upon the appropriate placement of new interior lines.

If your client is requiring easements, if you've agreed to it ahead of time, show it on the RS. If the local agency is requiring it, but those easements do not affect the boundary, I'm not sure what authority they have to require it. They do have the authority to require it on subdivisions (incl. PMs).

Ian Wilson · Post by **Ian Wilson** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 10:03 am

<quote>Piece of cake right ? </quote>

Oh, Good! Those are the WORST kinds of jobs! If anyone says â€œpiece of cakeâ€ about a project, DOUBLE THE FEE!

<quote>My crew goes out and finds old overhead powerlines, paved roadways, old encroaching fencelines, all kinds of appurtenances and encroachments. </quote>

Be very careful of tossing around the word â€œencroachmentâ€. Without a heck of a lot of research that may include conversations with the original builders of the particular item, you have no idea if it really is encroaching.

Fences are particularly bad for this. The fence may well be built on one side of the property line for a reason and by agreement between the owners. It may have been put there by the original builder and simply restored or replaced over the decades. It is NOT encroaching and making that claim could create a big problem.

<quote>The adjacent parcel maps do not list a document number on obvious access easements. They show and label the easement but no record, except for their map itself. </quote>

Yup. I must admit that Iâ€™m running into this a bit more up in the northern reaches of the state.

<quote>Most conditions I get, require "all easements be shown on the map"
We are required to create and record a document for pertenant features on the subject land (such as canals, powerlines etc) </quote>

Oh boy! The â€œâ€¦all easementsâ€¦â€ clause is the killer. You can never be sure that youâ€™ve got all the easements, whether theyâ€™re recorded or not. The only absolute I follow is to always reject that â€œâ€¦show all easementsâ€¦â€ phrase.

I want it changed to â€œâ€¦the easements as shown in the preliminary title report and Schedule â€œBâ€ documents provided byâ€¦â€

<quote>AM I just being "jerked" by that condition, or is there really a requirement. or obligation to show obvious uses or easements (even if implied) on a map ?
I'm talking about parcel maps and Subdivisions as well as a record of survey. </quote>

Yep, you are being jerkedâ€¦a bit.

The local jurisdictions can require that you show the easements as disclosed byâ€¦ or some other such, but they canâ€™t require that you show â€œâ€¦all easementsâ€¦â€. That wouldnâ€™t stand up to a light breeze.

As far as the RS, itâ€™s a map showing your opinion. While the County Surveyor may ask you to show something else, they cannot make it a condition of accepting the map. They can place a comment on the map stating that you refused to do something, but you have the right to place a rebuttal statement on the map, too.

<Man, I wish we could get the VBL codes turned on so that we could actually quote text and use bold, italic and underline to help â€œpleaâ€ our case.>

dmi · Post by **dmi** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 8:39 am

What is in your contract? What services are defined as being part of the scope of the agreement? What did you contract to do?

It may be the case the items you are mention are truly outside the scope of the agreement and you can go back to the client with different options about how to handle these issues.

I think you know what goes on a survey map. You ought to put that on the map AT NO EXTRA CHARGE, if that is what is in your contract or if your client has the expectation of getting that type of data on the survey map.

You know who is responsible for not bidding the job correctly to begin with is don't you?

Do the right thing it will feel better in the loinger run.....

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:43 am

Dane - "Conditions" implies this is coming from the reviewing agency, not the client.

dmi · Post by **dmi** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:04 am

OKay Evan,
Who is responsible for knowing what a local agency will require as part of a submittal package?

RAM · Post by **RAM** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:07 am

If you acting as agent for the client, you are. Must know all local and state laws, regs. etc.

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:39 am

Just stating that you were appoaching it as a contract issue rather than a conditions issue.

Of course the surveyor is responsible for knowing what must be included in a submittal package, but that wasn't the question. The question was what conditions may be imposed. I adressed that in an earlier post.

dmi · Post by **dmi** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:11 am

Evan,

I put the question simply. I know the answer to the questions. these are important basic questions that the professional surveyor knows or will find out before they send the contract out the door. Let's not go off half cocked here.

Surveyor826 · Post by **Surveyor826** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:13 pm

SMA 66436 requires that all parties having a "record title interest" sign the map, but allows you to omit the signatures of easement holders if "their names and the nature of their respective interests are stated on the map."
That's why its called the "Signature Omission Note" on Tracts/P.M.s
While it does not require you delineate the easement on the face of the map, you'd be foolish not to, and the local agency would require it be delineated, but not necessarily annotated.
Public utilities require additional coordination, beyond the scope of this reply.

The undocumented easements certainly should be investigated and resolved prior to the map preparation.
The Utility should have information on their easement rights, contact them and ask.

You should be working off of a title report, so get them to work on it, likely they just missed it, or the easement has already been quit claimed and the utility lines not yet removed.

As far as the offsite access, they may not delineate the access on the adjoining plat but it is again likely that there is a document or agreement on file that spells out how access is to be gained to your property.

These are probably title issues that need to be resolved, so enlist their assistance. They insured it at some point, and should be happy to avoid current issues with it.

So basically, you have a lot of research and coordination to do.
Cheers!

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:53 pm

Half cocked? There was nothing about contract issues or the client demanding this info. It was put in the context of conditions for "parcel maps and Subdivisions as well as a record of survey".

In your response, you approached the issue as if Good was in a dispute with a client about showing easements.

Whose going off half cocked? I'm locked 'n loaded and my safety is on. With your 1st response though, you seemed to be firing at shadows in the bushes.

Half cocked indeed!

;-)

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:37 pm

2009 CLSA Conference

Room 100

Debate between Dane Ince and Evan Page

Should be fun to attend.

RAM · Post by **RAM** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:27 pm

Only if Ric brings his pictures from your ski trip

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:31 pm

RAM,

Their not pretty!

dmi · Post by **dmi** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:05 pm

What should a survey map show ?
What should a survey map show ?
What should a survey map show ?
What should a survey map show ?

I still maintain a survey map ought to show what was stated in the contract that the mapping product would show and if the contract is for a parcel map, final map, or record of survey, then the form and content are subject input from the local agency.

Probably a good idea to keep the powder dry, never can tell when you might need it...

Humbly submitted by your Certified Federal Consultant ...

Ian Wilson · Post by **Ian Wilson** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 4:32 am

I have to side with Dane on this one.

The contract is there for a purpose and it's not just to comply with the PLS Act. It's there to spell out what you will and what you will not do.

I don't mean that I puit in my contracts the fact that I will draft a north arrow and such.

Remember the Table A items from an ALTA? They are designed to contractually agree to what will be shown and what will not.

Same deal.

RAM · Post by **RAM** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:45 am

Ian, trouble sleeping? In my world 4:30am does NOT Exist.

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:04 am

I bet it would if you were getting up to go fishing.

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:29 pm

So, Certified Consultant (Dane), Ian, and/or others who agree with their statements, if you are performing a boundary for an RS, do you 1) always show all easements of record and any evidence of other easements not of record?, 2) if not, how do you respond to a local agency map reviewer insisting that you do show them, and 3) if such easements are not expressly stated in your Scope of Work, and you do not do this per your understanding of the proper standard content of an RS, how does not including them on an RS become a contractual failure on the part of the LS?

As far as subdivisions go, the local agency may (and most do) require that easements of record be shown. The question in the opening post was whether or not that is a reasonable condition (implying requirement of local agency). Sure, as a secondary issue TO THIS QUESTION, there is a contractual component. Contracting to prepare a PM for the purposes of filing with the County implies that you will comply with the Conditions of Approval.

But the opening question, as I read it (4 or 5 times now to see if I missed something) was not posed in the context of a disagreement with a client as to required content (which would have made the contractual component the primary issue), but a disagreement with a local agency over conditions.

So please explain, in small and easy to understand words so that I can catch it all, how it is that you see the contractual component as the primary (or only?) issue.

Peter Ehlert · Post by **Peter Ehlert** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 2:03 pm

1) no
2) not needed nor required
3) not requested so not required

now just calm down and take a nap :=}

dmi · Post by **dmi** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 2:39 pm

Evan are we in disagreement here?
My first response was just to the question in the title of the post. You correctly responded that I had missed the larger picture of the question being asked in more specific detail in the body of the post. I added a caveat to encompass the shortcoming of my first response.

I am not really interested in engaging in a debate over hypothetical minutiae designed by you to prove that I am wrong.

In answer to you question IN GENERAL TERMS..... it depends, but where the local agency requires data on my map, that I had not included or was not contemplated in the language of the client/ consultant agreement, I usually comply with their wishes.... WHY? Because the goal of the agreement for the client is to wind up with parcel map, final map, or record of survey.

Where a local agency is not involved, this is another matter. My experience is that the client usually has a specifc need in mind when they request a survey. We usually discuss what they need and the survey reflects that need.

There may be times ,when as a professional ,I become aware of facts that the client ought to know about and that data gets included in the survey above and beyond what was stated in the contract, to do otherwise would be malpractice. I won't invent a hypothetical scenario for this as I am certain you can think of plenty of real world situations where what I have said is true.

There are exceptions for everything. This fact does not mean that we ought to reject a simple answer to a simple question, just because every fact set is not contemplated by the initial question or the answer.

If this is still problematic, I'd be happy to sit down over a cherry phosphate and hash this out.

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 4:56 pm

Dane,

I think we are in agreement on the substance of the answers (see my 1st post - if you, as the surveyor agreed to do something, do it - same as you said). But we seem to disagree on what the focus (as opposed to the minutae).

I made no assertion that you were wrong (I agree with what you answered), only that you went off on the track that this was strictly a contract related question (which I maintain the contract concerns are only secondary nature to this question), on the presumption that the person asking was somehow not wanting to fulfill contractual obligations, while accusing me of going off half cocked for pointing out that he was speaking of "conditions" (clients don't set conditions on the approval in the review of maps) and not of client demands.

The only reason I posed hypotheticals was to find a way to get you to address the same question or explain to me why my take on the question was errant. Sorry if you felt there was no right answer. Nothing was designed to prove you wrong.

I'm not sure what a cherry phosphate is. It sounds like flavored laundry detergent. But if it's edible or drinkable, I'm up for it.

For those of you getting "Good" entertainment from the banter, please send $1 each to Dane and I. For those of you sitting close enough to have tossed in cheer or jeers (Ric, Peter), please send $10 each.

Peter Ehlert · Post by **Peter Ehlert** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 5:33 pm

put it on my account dude

dmi · Post by **dmi** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 5:38 pm

Evan,
I never said your take was errant. We are talking at cross purposes here. I have explained what portion of the post my response was directed toward.
You can have the last word as long as it includes the word OKAY.

Gary O · Post by **Gary O** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:35 am

A record of survey should have as much information on it as is required to accomplish the task at hand. A survey could be 20 pages with a bizillion easements, or a survey could be a single corner, not monumented.

When will tickets for the Page/Wilson fight be available?

California Surveyors Forums