Seeking opinion regarding ROS

[E_Page]

If your client's are stating that there is a problem along that line in the form of a house encroaching, and they are also saying that they don't need that line surveyed, you have an incongruity.

Explain to them that you must survey that line as well as the rest of the property because you will need to verify the encroachment and will need to tie into the monuments of that survey anyway in the course of your work.

Only 2 found monuments in the survey, being 50' apart and several lots away seems pretty thin to base a boundary determination on, but you will find out if that's really all the other surveyor had to work with once you get into the field.

[Peter Ehlert]

Concerned Surveyor:
perhaps you should start by contacting the surveyor that prepared that RoS, he is still around...

[bruce hall]

the attached survey, without going in the field?

[Dave Karoly, PLS]

Where is the attachment (the Survey)?

Did it get removed?

[Dave Karoly, PLS]

The County does not approve Record of Survey maps. If they are then they shouldn't be.

The purpose of a Boundary Survey is to find the location of the boundary between two properties. That map does not look like a Boundary Survey to me; a Mathematics Survey maybe, but certainly not a Boundary Survey.

Advise your client that a house, particularly an old house, could be pretty good evidence of an alternate location of the boundary between them and their neighbor.

[bruce hall]

map. Looks like a pretty gutsy move to me, the map and survey that is. Good Luck.

[dmi]

I wonder who the professional is here? I am not going to look at the map because the map does not make any difference in the equation, in terms of the relationship between consultant and client.

I am willing to listen to my client,but I am not sure that I will listen to them tell me how to survey. This seems to me to be entirely within the realm of professional opinion- that is after all what the client is really paying for.

[Ian Wilson]

I am often asked to survey “one line” or not to bother with surveying a particular line because it was already done.

As Dane pointed out, I am the professional performing a professional function that carries significant liability.

As for the first case, I use the analogy that the parcel is like a single piece in a jigsaw puzzle. I need to figure out the out side edges of the puzzle to put all the pieces in place before I can understand the picture. Just as one would be very hard pressed to figure out the entire picture from one piece of a portion of one piece, I would be hard pressed to understand the boundary issues without looking at the larger picture.

As to not bothering to survey a portion because it was already done, not a chance. I may well like the other surveyor and have great respect for him, but I’m going to check the work all the same. Just this Wednesday, I completed a field survey of some 38 acres of land in very rugged terrain, including riparian habitat and a lovely bug-filled swap area. A portion of this land had been surveyed by a local gentleman whose I respect and consider a treat to follow 99.99% of the time. On this particular survey, I found the 0.01% of the time. At a few of the corners, I found 60D spikes instead of the 1” IPs indicated. I also found one monument 5.04’ out of position per mapped location. I also found a monument shown on an earlier map reported as not found on this surveyor’s map – the monument was less than half a foot from the one set on the newer map. Clearly, the field crew was not up to the quality of work normal for the gentleman who signed the “new” map.

As to the RS attached, it does not show any logic that SHOULD have been used to determine the positions for any points set – other than “record”. It does not create any new lines – other than the possible creation of the “deed line” at the middle of Lot 7. It provides no information that might be useable to determine why the survey was performed or how the survey was performed. In short, it really isn’t worth much at all.

If the client wants to limit me as to how and what I do to survey their lands, they aren’t going to be my client. I cannot afford to have my hands tied by someone who does not understand the basic principles of what I do for a living. As one of my mentors use to tell me, this job is too easy to do right, why waste time doing it wrong?

[Gromatici]

That survey is almost good enough for a topo or a tentative map. I like to have 3 points, just to see if there are boundary issues.

Sadly, there are more map submittals like this that you might think. My personal theory is that some surveyors work on the 4" theory. It's the theory that their client won't sue for errors or omissions, as long as it's within 4" of another surveyors work.

For instance, they hire the 4" surveyor for $2000 to do the survey. He finds a couple monuments but the field crew can't find anything else, so he "calls it like he sees it" and throws in the record data is done with it. The neighbor doesn't like the way the crew looks (yes we've had people describe how the surveyor had trashy trucks and one company in town had the police come out because of appearance) and hires a surveyor himself. His surveyor wants $4000 to do the same survey and he does a through job. Closes out block, finds some non-record monuments set by the original surveyor (this is typical in SB) or other record monuments and does some grant boundary method for angle points and some proportioning along straight block lines and files a RS with an amendment to his original contract for an additional $1000.

The difference is about 4". Your client finds out how much his neighbor pays and realizes that he paid 2x the amount for 4". In his mind, that's what he paid for and decides that you aren't getting a penny more. Fortunately your had a 50% retainer, so it's not a total loss.

The reality is that the end result could have been a couple of feet. But many of these surveyors have never been sued, and probably "get it close enough". Many take pride in being “Ninjaâ€￾ like in speed. That great for construction and topographic mapping, but there is a different mentality for boundary surveying.

For me, I want it to be within an error ellipse of a couple of hundredths or the proverbial 0.04' because of measuring differences and not my methods or lack of gathering evidence.

[goodgps]

Ian,
It is okay to survey "one line" it is permissible within the LS act.

I won't do it either, though. I agree. ! How the heck do you get ONE line without surveying at least some of the others. And why wouldnt "they" be shown on the survey too ? were they "bad lines". . .not to be shown ?

Sorry, We are land surveyors ladies and genlemen (gentlefolk)
We are a small group of proud professionals.

Now, this map looks like a highschool drafting lesson, not a professional survey map. (hope i didnt step on toes)

there is no significant control shown. Am I just being picky ?

I reviewed this map with my staff. My newest drafter said "gee boss, if we drew a map like this, you'd go ballistic" he's right.

If a client "just wants something" Give them a fair price to do the correct thing and if they question "why are you there"?, just respond, that its part of the job, no extra cost.

And if they are growing POT over there, ignore it. . . .really, its not your concern.

"good" for nuthin ?

[Lee Hixson]

This map looks suspiciously like ones that I've run across in Alameda County. For some reason this County has more than it's share of slack surveyors.

Wherever it's from, the "LS" should be reviewed by The Board.

As for surveying just one line, if my client insisted upon it, fine, I would agree to it. But, unbeknown to him/her, my price and my approach to the job would be identical to a full survey.

[goodgps]

fortunately in the central valley counties, there are vigilanties who keep their eyse on other peoples surveys.
I got chewed on for continuing to use "base" in the mount diablo base and meridian. They say it's simply mount diablo meridian.

I also do the same pricing technique . . . Full survey price .

Good job

[btaylor]

Man that is one of those maps...Unfortunately I see this type here in San Mateo County more often that I want. When you see this, it is helpful in the sense that you probably do not want to survey that area. It can only get you in trouble to use it for anything other than a way to get within 1-2 feet of other older monuments - if there are any.

I would guess that there are no original monuments out there and you will find the same 2-3 surveyors in that area and nothing will hold of record, other than this one in relation to the two monuments 50 feet apart.

I do not enjoy working those areas because you cannot do any amount of diligent work since the stuff like this that has happened over the last 10-30 years will make you have to spin some sort of record map/virtual pin cushion extravaganza out there. San Mateo County guys know this area as "Emerald Hills".

[E_Page]

No previous surveyor's work can or should keep you from being diligent.

When I see these surveys that don't tell me much on their face, it doesn't scare me. I just know up front that I'll probably have to put in a little extra effort to find good monumentation or to sort out the mess left by less diligent surveyors.

[LA Stevens]

This survey shows next to nothing as far as evidence to derive a boundary.

If a surveyor has evidence to derive a boundary, he better show all of it. I've heard of judges becoming very upset, from someone suppressing evidence.

In the county I survey in, a great amount of unrecorded records exist. If you are willing to pay the surveyor who controls the records to do the research, you have the opportunity to discover where the original monuments were discovered and the supporting evidence to replace them. In addition to any other monuments placed and what they relied on to place them. A good many cases exist where the monument set was a witness monument and not the corner, but other surveyors used the WP as the corner. Becomes very messy. Let alone 98% of the descriptions never called for any monuments, although they were set prior to the deed.

I work in a great county with many great surveyors where we talk about problems. I strongly recommend everyone to become involved in being an active member at the chapter level where they work. I could not be a competent surveyor, without having access to the unrecorded documents in this county or the knowledge I have gained from old time surveyors as well as present day.

[goodgps]

Concerned,

Thanks.

I wouldnt rely on this survey too much. Unfortunately the clients/ owners are very sincere when they say their line has already been surveyed. Afterall they paid for a survey and recieved one, from a professional surveyor.

If you buy into this idea, that the pipes/positions are correct at face value, then you share in the hot potato pie. If you ignore the survey, then your price reflects your soon to be good work. so you may not get the job (unless you already have the job)

Like the folks have said. . . its best to acknowledge the map as paper but know that you will have to prove your own survey.

Common folks don't know the difference between a good survey and a bad one. Like it's been stated before, clients don't read "Brown" "Wattles" or anything.
We don't read a surgery manual before going to the doctor ??

Each and every Landsurveyor must understand that real property is a serious issue. It is a basic principle of our country. We DONT survey land just to make a quick buck. Our contracts for a property survey are often times a losing crap-shoot but yet we tredge on.

The honest slope is steep enough. . . .stay off the other slope, its very slippery.
Best wishes

"good"


Remember. . . there are "men" in compliment, but there "aint" in complaint.