PG&e asking to put BOB on plat and description of easement

sako · Post by **sako** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 12:27 pm

I was asked to show street monuments, bearing and distance, ties to the property and the BOB on the plat map for a strip description, then state the BOB in the description.
I think a plat which is not a result of a survey does not need a BOB and showing the monuments. The description is clear, without any ambiguity and has enough information to be retraced. The BOB is indicated by reference to a line in the description. The plat map shows the lot on a recorded Tract map and the location of the easement.

btaylor · Post by **btaylor** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 12:51 pm

sako wrote:I was asked to show street monuments, bearing and distance, ties to the property and the BOB on the plat map for a strip description, then state the BOB in the description.
I think a plat which is not a result of a survey does not need a BOB and showing the monuments. The description is clear, without any ambiguity and has enough information to be retraced. The BOB is indicated by reference to a line in the description. The plat map shows the lot on a recorded Tract map and the location of the easement.

Funny I was just requested also to put a BOB on a simple easement in a lot from a tract map. It could not be more obvious what the BOB is. It's the only thing of record referenced on the map and the legal.

I am beginning to think we need plat and legal checking standards. The redlined comments can be a tad bit subjective and unnecessary.

RAM · Post by **RAM** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 2:14 pm

Does it hurt? If for clarity, why not?

btaylor · Post by **btaylor** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 2:55 pm

It is unnecessary. If you use the logic of "it does not hurt" then you may as well capitulate to everything, right?

bruce hall · Post by **bruce hall** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 4:37 pm

"the does it hurt" idea a bad one. It doesn't hurt so add this, and it doesn't hurt so add that, ad infinitum.

The "for clarity" part I like, although I use the BOB so I can set up on a line and turn an angle, and it sounds like the OP has bearing on his plat and description.

Sako has a point.

One day the "powers that be" will be requiring grid coordinates on the legal descriptions "for clarity".

I guess it is more money in my pocket if I can charge for it.

Jay Wright · Post by **Jay Wright** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 6:38 pm

It "hurts" my client when I have to charge him to redo my description and plat.
OR
It "hurts" me to work for free to comply with BS

Darth Vader · Post by **Darth Vader** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 6:28 am

8730 (c) Any officer or employee of an electric, gas, or telephone corporation, as defined in Sections 218, 222, and 234, respectively, of the Public Utilities Code, with annual revenues of twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) or more, whenever he or she prepares a legal description of an easement for utility distribution lines and service facilities, provided the following conditions are met:
(1) Each description identifies the corporation that prepared the description and states that it was prepared pursuant to this exemption.
(2) Each corporation has in its employ, or on contract, an individual authorized to practice land surveying who shall be responsible for establishing criteria for determining the qualifications of technical specialists preparing those legal descriptions, specifying the format and information to be shown on maps or documents containing those descriptions, and capable of answering questions regarding the preparation of those descriptions.

D Ryan · Post by **D Ryan** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:05 am

PG&E has a standard set of description requirements, which I generally find reasonable. They help retrace the description. I'm not sure I'm following your situation though. You state it wasn't based on a survey. We're left to assume it may be a simple "westerly 10 feet of lot XXX shown on XX map..." or something like that. In that type of case, without an actual survey, a basis of bearings citing particular monuments would in fact be creating fiction.

Dave Ryan,
Humboldt County

pls7809 · Post by **pls7809** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 11:00 am

If you're doing it for PG&E where they are your client, then I don't find those requests unreasonable at all. SCE has similar requirements.

If you're submitting an easement to them for another client and the property wasn't surveyed, then you obviously can't report what you didn't do and those things are likely negotiable through a phone call or two.

Peter Ehlert · Post by **Peter Ehlert** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 12:57 pm

maybe PG&E is saying "we want it surveyed"

PLS7393 · Post by **PLS7393** » Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:42 am

I too have seen some unnecessary comments coming back from map reviewers. Pick your battles and move on, lol.

As for legal descriptions, if a licensed surveyor is not reviewing the doc. I may comment. As Wattles said "Simplicity without ambiguity".

As Jay said, it hurts with unnecessary time being spent on unnecessary issues.

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Mon Apr 20, 2015 11:08 am

I have been seeing some real bad legal desc requirements by unlicensed govt personnel. My biggest issue is turning a lot and block or N 50ft of the W 300ft into a metes and bounds. These reviewers have no boundary experience and are just following what some higher up, many times a lawyer, wants. They don't understand Lot 5 of Tract XX they think all descriptions need to be B & D.

We are reverting back to the days where scribes were paid by the word and a 2 paragraph legal is 2 pages.
KISS Keep It Simple Stupid.

In school they have you become wordy, but in the real world time is money and the shorter the report or legal the more people will read the whole thing instead of skimming it.

Bottom line, we need some way of controlling our legals when submitted to govt or quazi govt agencies. Our stamp is on the final doc not theirs and govt is never held liable.

bryanmundia · Post by **bryanmundia** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 6:33 am

land butcher wrote:In school they have you become wordy, but in the real world time is money and the shorter the report or legal the more people will read the whole thing instead of skimming it..

In school they actually teach you to use the Flesch-Kincaid Readability Tests when writing papers, documents, etc.

You can read more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flesch%E2% ... lity_tests

These tests can also be set up in Microsoft Word so when you do a spell check (which hopefully everyone does before they submit a legal description) it will actually show you the statistics you would need to determine the level of schooling someone would need to read your document. Under the "Proofing" tab in your options just check the box that states "Show Readability Statistics"

As for making it short and sweet and to the point I am all for that however, I feel that if the main focus is short that many times things that are important are then omitted or not as clear and concise as they should be. I would say to focus more on what and who you are writing the description for and not so much on how short you can make the document.

Besides, when you are sitting on the stand testifying, is the statement "I didn't read the whole document because it was too long" something that you feel comfortable saying? I know I wouldn't!

By the way, this post has a Flesch Reading Ease Index of 50.8 and a Grade Level of 14.5

bryanmundia · Post by **bryanmundia** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 7:21 am

sako wrote:I was asked to show street monuments, bearing and distance, ties to the property and the BOB on the plat map for a strip description, then state the BOB in the description.
I think a plat which is not a result of a survey does not need a BOB and showing the monuments. The description is clear, without any ambiguity and has enough information to be retraced. The BOB is indicated by reference to a line in the description. The plat map shows the lot on a recorded Tract map and the location of the easement.

Since no one else has asked so far I will. Does your strip description have controlling calls which could be used as a Basis of Bearings? Do your bearings not match that of the underlying map you are utilizing for your strip description? I think instead of focusing on the fact that they asked you to provide this information you should focus on the fact of why. Maybe adding some information about your description could shed some light and give us an opportunity to provide you with constructive and positive feedback.

David Kendall · Post by **David Kendall** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:24 am

If someone from PG&E ever suggests that I put the readability index in a legal description I will drive directly over to their office and punch him in the nose.

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Wed Apr 22, 2015 11:20 am

David Kendall wrote:If someone from PG&E ever suggests that I put the readability index in a legal description I will drive directly over to their office and punch him in the nose.

Me too.

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Wed Apr 22, 2015 11:26 am

A strip desc can take a number of forms:

The west 5ft of lot 7.

The east 5ft of A st between the centerlines 1st and 2nd streets.

A strip of land 5ft in width its west line lying parallel to and 10ft east of the centerline of A street between the centerlines of 1st and 2nd streets.

none of those need bearings or mons.

dedkad · Post by **dedkad** » Wed Apr 22, 2015 11:54 am

bryanmundia wrote:Since no one else has asked so far I will. Does your strip description have controlling calls which could be used as a Basis of Bearings? Do your bearings not match that of the underlying map you are utilizing for your strip description? I think instead of focusing on the fact that they asked you to provide this information you should focus on the fact of why. Maybe adding some information about your description could shed some light and give us an opportunity to provide you with constructive and positive feedback.

I was thinking the same thing, but since OP said that the lot was shown on a tract map, I assumed that the strip was entirely within a single lot and there were no calls along any adjoiners that might be part of a different tract map with a different BOB.

sako · Post by **sako** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:44 pm

I wrote a strip description, they requested a metes and bounds, I told them a strip description has less ambiguity and is easy to retrace. Then I was asked to add BOB in description and show the monuments, their character and ties to the property on the plat map. The developer didn't want any more delay on the project, so I complied. Now I have another project, the 8' PG&E easement runs through 6 lots. I prepared strip description for all 6 lots and want to wait and see what the comments will be.

sako · Post by **sako** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:49 pm

Just to clarify, the first project was also a strip between 2 lots. The TM has been recorded and I used the same bearings showing on TM.
I believe in writing a description the BOB is determined by describing the first line, plus as Land butcher mentioned a strip description doesn't need to have a BOB.

bryanmundia · Post by **bryanmundia** » Fri May 08, 2015 5:33 am

sako wrote:
> Just to clarify, the first project was also a strip between 2 lots. The TM
> has been recorded and I used the same bearings showing on TM.
> I believe in writing a description the BOB is determined by describing the
> first line, plus as Land butcher mentioned a strip description doesn't need
> to have a BOB.

It might not have a BOB but it needs at least 1 controlling call to a line. That controlling line then becomes your basis of bearings. Basic rule in my opinion, if you show bearings and distances, then write a note in your plat/document/etc. as to where those bearings and distances came from.

Where is the harm in that?

sako · Post by **sako** » Fri May 08, 2015 12:03 pm

PG&E wants me to change the description from a Strip to Mets-Bounds, then change the plat map, show all those B&D, ties to monument line and do this for 6 lots in a Tract map that recently has been recorded. All of these are UNNECESSARY in my opinion.
The harm is that I have do spend time redoing these plats and descriptions without getting paid for.

D Ryan · Post by **D Ryan** » Fri May 08, 2015 12:26 pm

That just seems baffling. Is this coming from their Land Dept. from someone who knows what a legal description is? I'm asking that in all seriousness. I can't imagine the people in our local Land Dept. asking for such a thing. In fact I've just recently provided strip descriptions that they are just fine with. It's a very clean, elegant, completely retraceable format. Are you sure your description doesn't contain something weird you're not sharing with us?

Dave Ryan,
Humboldt County

bryanmundia · Post by **bryanmundia** » Fri May 08, 2015 12:48 pm

sako wrote:
> PG&E wants me to change the description from a Strip to Mets-Bounds,
> then change the plat map, show all those B&D, ties to monument line and
> do this for 6 lots in a Tract map that recently has been recorded. All of
> these are UNNECESSARY in my opinion.
> The harm is that I have do spend time redoing these plats and descriptions
> without getting paid for.

I agree that what they are asking for is unnecessary for sure based on what you have described. What would happen if you just said "No"? If you simply state that based upon the scope of work and nature of the easement, it is in your professional opinion that a metes and bounds description is not necessary and that it would actually cause potential land title conflicts for PG&E in the future.

sako · Post by **sako** » Fri May 08, 2015 1:09 pm

D Ryan wrote:
> That just seems baffling. Is this coming from their Land Dept. from someone
> who knows what a legal description is? I'm asking that in all seriousness.
> I can't imagine the people in our local Land Dept. asking for such a thing.
> In fact I've just recently provided strip descriptions that they are just
> fine with. It's a very clean, elegant, completely retraceable format. Are
> you sure your description doesn't contain something weird you're not
> sharing with us?
>
> Dave Ryan,
> Humboldt County
Dave,
I tried to attach a copy of the description and plat, but it says: "Sorry, the board attachment quota has been reached."
Whatever that means.

California Surveyors Forums

PG&e asking to put BOB on plat and description of easement

PG&e asking to put BOB on plat and description of easement

I agree that

As to see the criteria for preparing legal descriptions

Re:

Re: PG&e asking to put BOB on plat and description of easement

Re: PG&e asking to put BOB on plat and description of easement

Re: PG&e asking to put BOB on plat and description of easement

Re: PG&e asking to put BOB on plat and description of easement