California Surveyors Forums

We did an ALTA Surveys and a lady from title company was reviewing said map. The blue borders were established by deed calls and said property was never surveyed nor monumented.

Said lady from title company called and requested measured & record distances on the blue borders.
She also said over her 30 years experience, one cannot exclude all items in Table-A for ALTA Surveys.

Is she practicing land surveying by reviewing ALTA Survey Map without supervision from a LS?

No.

Who do you think the Land Title Survey is for?

Is she not allowed to review it, ask questions and understand what you're giving her as your work product?

She has to use your work product to create hers, and the liability she will face when relying on your work product.

She may be a bit mistaken in her opinions of what should be shown on your work product, but that is a separate, contractual conversation.

She went into the details of the bearings & distances. Deed calls for blue borders being in part: "to the True Point of Beginning; thence BD 532.25'; thence BD 533.50'; thence BD 324.55'; thence BD 435.23' to the TPOB."

We can only state Blue Borders with BD on ALTA Map. There are no such thing as measured & record distances in this case on blue borders.

I understand the risk the title company involved to insured ALTA Title policy; but IMO she's just lack of basic surveying knowledge to review said map.

As a member of the Corresponding Committee charged with writing the Standards, I am unfamiliar with the requirement for a "Blue Border". Is this reminiscent of the blue border we used to put around the exterior boundary of Parcel Maps that we now refer to as the "distinctive border"?

Your title person is probably referring to Standard 6 B iii, "All distances and directions identified in the record description of the surveyed property (and in the new description, if one was prepared). Where a measured or calculated dimension differs from the record by an amount deemed significant by the surveyor, such dimension shall be shown in addition to, and differentiated from, the corresponding record dimension."

If the only dimensions shown on your map are the record dimensions from the deed, a statement static this would go a long way to dispelling the confusion.

time that I prepared a ALTA survey map without surveying the property. I guess it can be done?

Ian Wilson wrote:She has to use your work product to create hers,....

Title companies write exceptions to the policy based on the survey..

...and the liability she will face when relying on your work product.

She's an employee. She does not have any liability to worry about. You may have missed the fine print Ian, but each policy issued has the statement...'anything that a correct survey will show' or some wording similar to that.

How many would trust an insurance company run by attorneys? Well, that's all a title company is.

BoundaryMan wrote:....Said lady from title company called and requested measured & record distances on the blue borders.?

That's standard, but it seems like overkill. Since you are signing the survey and your measured is what counts, not the record values, adding record dimensions to the survey is just cluttering it up.

She also said over her 30 years experience, one cannot exclude all items in Table-A for ALTA Surveys.

She is correct on that. Items 2, 3, 4 , 8 and 11(a) comes to mind. These items I always include. Item 6 is ridiculous to even have in the 2011 standards. Zoning classification is obtained through the governing agency, not the insurer.

Is she practicing land surveying by reviewing ALTA Survey Map without supervision from a LS?

All she is doing is reviewing a document to see if it meets the standards.

Boundaryman are you working for CDS/First America?

BoundaryMan wrote:... The blue borders were established by deed calls and said property was never surveyed nor monumented.?

I am a bit confused here.

Are you saying that there was never a previous survey that monumented the deed?

OR

Are you saying that you did an ALTA without ever going out and retracing the deed?

And what are "Blue Borders"?

Originally Posted by LS 4722
Are you saying that there was never a previous survey that monumented the deed?

Never a previous survey that monumented the deed.
We were at the field retracing the deed lines. Of course to measure possible encroachment.

Distinctive Borders.

Blue borders is an old term that has been replaced with the term "distintive border", just like Ian stated in his post number 4.

When tract maps and parcel maps were drawn by hand using ink on linen, the draftsman would take the linen, turn it over, take an electric eraser and erase the shiny stuff(starch? or whatever it was) off of the back of the linen on the exterior lines of the subdivision.

The draftsman would then take some blue ink and draw-on the back of the sheet- a wide blue line on the "outside" of the exterior subdivisions lines. This blue line was usually wider(thicker) than all other lines on the map. This "blue border" would make it obvious to the reader of the map what land was being subdivided.

bruce hall wrote:Blue borders is an old term that has been replaced with the term "distintive border", just like Ian stated in his post number 4.

When tract maps and parcel maps were drawn by hand using ink on linen, the draftsman would take the linen, turn it over, take an electric eraser and erase the shiny stuff(starch? or whatever it was) off of the back of the linen on the exterior lines of the subdivision.

The draftsman would then take some blue ink and draw-on the back of the sheet- a wide blue line on the "outside" of the exterior subdivisions lines. This blue line was usually wider(thicker) than all other lines on the map. This "blue border" would make it obvious to the reader of the map what land was being subdivided.

Some areas, like Santa Barbara county, would not accept a blue border. You have to see the maps to believe the mess they required.

bruce hall wrote:Blue borders is an old term that has been replaced with the term "distintive border", just like Ian stated in his post number 4.

When tract maps and parcel maps were drawn by hand using ink on linen, the draftsman would take the linen, turn it over, take an electric eraser and erase the shiny stuff(starch? or whatever it was) off of the back of the linen on the exterior lines of the subdivision.

The draftsman would then take some blue ink and draw-on the back of the sheet- a wide blue line on the "outside" of the exterior subdivisions lines. This blue line was usually wider(thicker) than all other lines on the map. This "blue border" would make it obvious to the reader of the map what land was being subdivided.

The very 1st time I was told to blue border a tract map, I flipped the map over, used the elec eraser and proceeded to do the best I could.. I was so proud of that blue border, until my boss and excellent mentor came in and took a look and laughed.. I had used blue pencil instead of ink :P

Bruce..the blue line was always inside the boundary lines, not outside of them..unless I mis interpreted what you said.

FYI to others: The main reason the inked blue border was done away with is because in many instances the blue ink would obscure dimensioning on the map making it unreadable. The width of the blue line was +/- 1/4 inch

BoundaryMan wrote:Never a previous survey that monumented the deed..

Did you look for them...using a shovel?

We were at the field retracing the deed lines. Of course to measure possible encroachment.

Well...since you will be filing an RS along with that ALTA, you should have just monumented the deed.

"Bruce..the blue line was always inside the boundary lines, not outside of them.."

I remember putting the blue border on the outside of the line since the the land beign subdivided was "within the blue border". The monuments(the open or solid circles) at the corners of the land being subdivided would then be inside the blue line. Most of this work was for land in Orange County, can't remember if any of this mapping was in Riverside or San diego counties.

It's been a really long time since I did that, probably 30 years. And I remember the width of the blue border being about 1/16" wide, maybe a tad wider/thicker. I was wider or about the same thickness as a #4 Rapidograph pen.

"Memories, faded and jaded with time......"

LS 4722 wrote:Did you look for them...using a shovel?

Well...since you will be filing an RS along with that ALTA, you should have just monumented the deed.

Yeap, got my brand new hound dog...fence ignoring technology...

The RS is in the making. I don't think we are required to monument the deed. Extra trip, more costs.

dmi wrote:Boundaryman are you working for CDS/First America?

First American Title? No.

bruce hall wrote:"Bruce..the blue line was always inside the boundary lines, not outside of them.."

I remember putting the blue border on the outside of the line since the the land beign subdivided was "within the blue border". The monuments(the open or solid circles) at the corners of the land being subdivided would then be inside the blue line. Most of this work was for land in Orange County, can't remember if any of this mapping was in Riverside or San diego counties.

It's been a really long time since I did that, probably 30 years. And I remember the width of the blue border being about 1/16" wide, maybe a tad wider/thicker. I was wider or about the same thickness as a #4 Rapidograph pen.

"Memories, faded and jaded with time......"

Los Angeles County requires filled circles around the "Blue Borders" now.

I make the ALTA/ACSM plats in color - with a bold blue boundary line around the subject parcel, and easements shown in red. Color plats are easier to interpret for non-surveyors.

I don't think the Title company person is practicing land surveying by reviewing the plat. We can't expect non-surveyors to correctly understand everything on a survey procedure when it is presented like a typical Record of Survey.

Why not show both the bearings and distances per the deed and also what you measured or otherwise determined? Making the plat understandable to the appropriate audience is important. In the case of an ALTA/ACSM survey, we have the freedom to use color, photos, or other ways to communicate the information contained on the plat.

There is no requirement to select any of the table A items. A conversation with client should clear up this misconception.

Paul Goebel wrote:....There is no requirement to select any of the table A items. ....

Anytime you show a valve, man hole, storm drain mh, catch basin etc you are fulfilling item 11(a) of the Table A options.. The same thing for item 8..pools, signs..etc..So the lady was correct who said you cannot leave every option out of Table A.

I am assuming that both of those items are included in your surveys without negotiating an extra fee for doing so.

You are correct though..none of the Table A items has to be addressed, but that's definately something that would cause a problem if one were to not show those items.

LS 4722 wrote:Anytime you show a valve, man hole, storm drain mh, catch basin etc you are fulfilling item 11(a) of the Table A options.

Not if you miss manhole, if it is underneath something or within a walled courtyard...
I interpret 11(a) as being you found EVERYTHING that could be found by surface evidence, meaning more liability.

Surveyors are rightly proud of their work, but these jobs are about shifting liability wherever possible to us. When something goes wrong, property owners sue everyone. An ALTA survey shifts the blame from the prior owner (not disclosing something) and the title insurance company (survey exemption, they missed the easement) and others to the survey professional who signed the map.

Thank goodness, at least in Calif. we have statutory protection defining "certify" to mean "my opinion is", otherwise we'd have been eaten alive years ago.