couple of follow up points:
as per andy's comments- there are "sufficient" ties to outer boundary points there, but not as many as i would normally show.?ÿ and it was a conscious decision based in context and for the sake of clarity. that easement was one of probably a couple dozen done on that tract.?ÿ i was the survey project manager for that development (of which that particular tract is but a tiny piece and also which will MAYBE see the final phases of single family residential construction completed by the end of 2018- yes, it's still going.?ÿ took the dogs for our morning jog through the framing crews in section 37B or whatever just a few hours ago.) and wrote more easements for it over 8 years time than i have for all other jobs i've ever done, combined.?ÿ except one.?ÿ which was neck and neck with that one for possibly the most restricted real estate in north america.?ÿ in texas, at least.?ÿ i spent years scratching my head at how many hairs were split on a daily basis over the course of my time running those two developments, and argued countless times for dialing back the scope (and associated costs) for such heavy handedness with the encumbrances. (i would estimate i was paid a couple hundred thousand dollars in salary over a decade strictly for writing easements over two specific sites.?ÿ the platting, that's a whole different rube goldberg-esqe story.)
point being- i took the tack that while i'd normally make more reference ties to boundary corners, that the sheer preponderance of documents referencing the same handful of well-monumented corners at the same approximate time would, in and of itself, serve as monumentation, as opposed to adding another couple of pages of reference ties to an already 24-page easement document.?ÿ (and yes- there was an attached line/curve table sheet- 3, in fact. and 18 pages of metes and bounds)
this may have been the exact site/easement that convinced me to move off the gross area/save and except the donut holes easement description practice.?ÿ if you look at it, there are six different islands that would have had to been s&e'd out of that description.?ÿ i remember spending the better part of a day just trying to decide the most efficient way to slice and dice that thing up to write a continuous outer boundary description.?ÿ i don't know how many pages (or words) were saved by doing so, but i'd bet a fair amount.
as to r.j.'s point- relative to the explanation of context above, i was the survey project manager at the civil firm who was the lead consultant on the development.?ÿ so we hung the stars and the moon out there, and you can probably well imagine how the platting, design, and site plan process went over several years' time when all revisions and amendments are factored in.?ÿ iirc, the crew shot the conduit in place in the trenches that were dug from finished grade.?ÿ i honestly don't remember if slabs were in place by then or not, but i do know that the buildings weren't, and i wouldn't have trusted the slab locations for squat (note the terms "revision" and "amendment" above...).?ÿ otherwise i agree, and would otherwise be willing to do just what you suggest.
but back to the original point:?ÿ i can see the value in monumenting, say, a straight-line (or, i should probably just say "simple") access easement over farmer jones' servient estate when farmer jones and the dominant successors and assigns might be wanting for a little congeniality or what have you.?ÿ but in the context of what is becoming an increasingly over-engineered urban environment (latest numbers put something like 85% of texans live in urban environments), easements like the one i posted are more and more prevalent.?ÿ hell, i can't walk from my house to the UT campus (about a mile and a half) without counting hundreds (maybe thousands, if i really started looking) of PKs, spindles, 80d nails, etc. that could just as well delineate an easement, but i'd bet with about 99% certainty are either somebody's traverse point or else an offset for a utility staking.?ÿ we really want to go doubling/tripling that number?
@peter ehlert
I never finished listening to the podcast, but the comments I heard from the board members is to not require monumenting all easements. Common sense seemed to be winning out. They had one complaint that was tabled pending discussion of the requirements for monumenting an easement. At some point, I'll finish the meeting and find out what happened to the disciplinary case.
Don't have download speed to watch Board meeting and could not find the download button that I had been using and watch.
?ÿ
I suppose I didn't think that through. You're not going to have a building without the utilities laid, you can't install utilities without an easement ..
That building complex looks like it would make a good memorial or reference though.
