So...I've been working on a re-plat for a client for over a year now. They're not waiting on me, it's just a slow process with the city and other entities. Anyway, just last week, the engineering consultant asked me to "remove" a note from a 2008 recorded plat that our firm did NOT perform.
Note: "All lots in this subdivision are restricted to usage other residential."
My initial thought was nope, not gonna do it. First off, it's not my survey to "edit". Second, it's a recorded plat. Third, the re-plat will be filed and take precedence over the 2008 plat. Fourth, this "note" seems more like a zoning issue, not a survey issue and a restriction listed on the survey which really doesn't hold any water since zoning will determine the restrictions, not the survey. Am I correct?
What are your thoughts on editing a survey done by a different firm? I don't think there's any liability with editing the 2008 plat but I still don't feel comfortable with it.
Also, this has been resolved without any editing but I would like your thoughts.
Liability lurks in every nook and cranny (do we even have these anymore?)
Tell them to contact the jurisdiction that is responsible for these types of restrictions, and ask them to remove the note.
?ÿ
Around here, you would need to record a plat revision to remove such a note...You would also need approval from all affected owners within the plat.
?ÿ
That which was done can be un-done, as along as all relevant circumstances are the same.?ÿ So, if platting and zoning code don't forbid it and all owners signatory to the plat agree, you can definitely "undo" the note with your plat.?ÿ After all, the 2008 plat added a condition that did not exist on previous plats--did they have the right to do that? Yes!
You therefore have the same right:?ÿ You can also add a condition on your plat.?ÿ Your new condition is that it invalidates the 2008 condition.
I'm not a fan of leaving vestigial conditions on plats--now is the perfect time to take care of it.
Your liability will be; when someone within the plat doesn't like you removing the note and sues you.
?ÿ
They can say: I was subject to this note and by God, everyone else will be too! If you are successful in removing the note, they will claim damages. Stating that they was subject to the note for all of those years and demand restitution for all of that suffering.
Yes, everyone who was affected by the original note must be signatory to the plat that removes it.?ÿ If they won't sign, then you're stuck with it.
"What are your thoughts on editing a survey done by a different firm? I don't think there's any liability with editing the 2008 plat but I still don't feel comfortable with it."
Absolutely not.
"Note: "All lots in this subdivision are restricted to usage other residential.""
This "note" makes no sense at all. It is too ambiguous.
?ÿ? ?ÿ
I would not do it. ?ÿSomeone else might, but, I would not.
Yes, everyone who was affected by the original note must be signatory to the plat that removes it.?ÿ If they won't sign, then you're stuck with it.
For my personal knowledge...
The plat with the note is from 2008. Do you have to have all current owners sign, or should every person who owned a property covered by the plat since 2008 need to sign?
?ÿ
Thank you,
Melita
I suppose a previous owner may still have an interest in any diverse reaction to the note; but it's a stretch,...
Yes, everyone who
wasis?ÿaffected by the original note must be signatory to the plat that removes it.?ÿ If they won't sign, then you're stuck with it.For my personal knowledge...
The plat with the note is from 2008. Do you have to have all current owners sign, or should every person who owned a property covered by the plat since 2008 need to sign?
?ÿ
Thank you,
Melita
Right, as you imply, all current owners (in my opinion).
You have to ask yourself why do they want the note removed??ÿ"Note: "All lots in this subdivision are restricted to usage other residential"
To build a resident in a commercial or industrial area.?ÿ What happens if they build a home, well the homeowner's may start to complain about the nose and lights of the business working late or early or on the weekends. The business owners are going to say hey since 2008 this is a non residential area. No homeowners should be living here or the homeowner's are going to say not according to my plat signed by X, and the?ÿengineering consultant probably will not be too much help.?ÿ
Also I am not sure a replat will override the 2008 plat requirements. You are supposed to match building lines, easement lines, and such when doing a replat. I know sometimes Cities overlook or miss this, but the adjoining property owners sure don't. So you need to match the restrictions as well, or get everyone in the Platted Subdivision to sign the new plat.
What was the outcome?
NO, not my survey, not my mess.
They can do all the copy magic and remove whatever they want on their own.
New surveyor, new survey, new certificate.
Outcome:
The re-plat took the 2008 plat which was one single lot and pushed a street through the single lot making a small lot to the north and a larger lot to the south. Then the southern lot was divided into 3 smaller lots, all south of the new street. The engineering consultants asked for the note to be removed so they can design apartments/hotels and other residential dwellings as well as commercial. In their minds, the "note" was stating that residential was not an option based on the 2008 survey.
Our re-plat has no such note and since 2008 the area has been rezoned to include commercial and residential so it's really a moot point.
Personally I am NOT comfortable with editing someone else's survey whether it be notes or some other entity. You want me to "edit" it, fine.... we'll do our own survey and go through the processes required to file. Thank you all for your input.
WTH??ÿ How do you remove a note on a?ÿrecorded subdivision plat??ÿ?ÿ Oh, yea, you said engineer consultant.............?ÿ I'd tell the EC, as soon as he shows me the statutes that allow me to do such an idiotic thing..............
?ÿ
The only ways to do this?ÿare a re-plat or amended plat (basically the same thing), which must be signed by all current interested parties.?ÿ?ÿ
Some basic issues aren't clear to me, having not researched such law.
Does zoning trump notes on a plat if they are not compatible? Or does the more restrictive of either apply?
What if a note reflects zoning at the time it was filed but zoning changes to be more or less restrictive?
Owners don't get to sign off on zoning changes, do they? Their input is probably limited to speaking at a public hearing and then being ignored by the powers that be.
In Washington State, your state may vary...
Does zoning trump notes on a plat if they are not compatible?
No, the note on the plat governs (unless it restricts due to race, religion; generally anything that shows prejudice)
Or does the more restrictive of either apply?
No, you can't change the note except with an amended plat. The type of restriction doesn't matter (unless it shows prejudice)
What if a note reflects zoning at the time it was filed but zoning changes to be more or less restrictive?
I did a survey for a pot farm and the current zoning was light industrial. There was a note on the plat that said no commercial or industrial use. We had to file an amended plat.
Owners don't get to sign off on zoning changes, do they?
you are correct, at least around here, anyway. If enough voices show it, it might make a difference, but not likely. Have you ever been to a hearing for a new landfill site? 99.9% of the time it's going to go in anyway...
I am assuming that the note is or is similar to a protective covenant. In Ga., my past experience has been that the local municipality enforces only the zoning regulations and not protective covenants. Covenants may be enforced by by civil action by stake holders subjected to the restrictions?ÿ ?ÿSome states require that these types of covenants expire after a set period of time. ?ÿSo, this action could be subject to the State, municipality, and/or adjoining owners within the subdivision. I would not remove the note unless directed in writing by an attorney or provided some type of indemnification. ?ÿEngineers, attorneys and Clients will allow surveyors to take as much liability as we will accept.
so what's the problem??ÿ i'm assuming this is in COA.?ÿ if so, you already know it's gonna get reviewed 8 ways to sunday, and if somebody has an issue with it, you'll find out.?ÿ not that things don't slip through the cracks here and there, but if there's one good thing about the overwhelming quantity of hoops one must jump through to get a plat approved around here, it's that you're almost guaranteed your document will be free of errors (save the whole boundary determination thing) by the time it gets recorded.
i've put all kinds of stupid, pointless, non-survey related notes and info on plats at the behest of various parties.?ÿ (heritage trees and benchmarks immediately come to mind as regular requirements that have no place on a plat.) because let's be honest- plats (at least around here) any more are only PARTLY about the survey. as long as my survey is good and the info pertaining to that is good, i could hardly care less whatever else is on there.?ÿ like you said- it's not survey-related.?ÿ i'd love to see the case where a surveyor loses a lawsuit over some stupid note about hydrangeas or off-site parking.
