Monuments in CO- How to deal with From True Corner

In Colorado, what is the standard of practice:

Our standard of practice is phrased a bit differently.?ÿ The statutes state that we can be disciplined for failing to do things, so under Section 12-120-306. Disciplinary actions - grounds for discipline, subsection (1)(b) states:

Failing to meet the generally accepted standards of the practice of land surveying through act or omission

Option "A" is not allowed.?ÿ In short "paper pincushions" are forbidden.?ÿ The surveyor must set their own monument at the corner.

Option "B" is forbidden.?ÿ There is no Vice Grips provision included in the Colorado Revised Statutes that would permit a PLS to pull the pin of another.?ÿ That doesn't mean it doesn't happen....SIGH!?ÿ Instead, we are required to include narratives of all conflicting evidence on our plat.

Option "C" is permitted.?ÿ However, the PLS must include a statement on their plat fully describing the reasoning used to reject the existing monument and set a new monument at the professed true corner position.

Rather than duplicating the analysis for why Option "A" is not allowed and the conditions that must be adhered to when a Colorado PLS selects Option "C" here is an article in the May 2016 issue of the PLSC's professional journal, Side Shots.?ÿ A past member of the Board, Earl Henderson, PLS has authored several articles under the general title of "Rule of the Month".?ÿ The May 2016 article (page 8) is entitled, Rule of the Month: Pincushions, Binaries, New Board Rule 6.5.4.1 and C.R.S. 38-51-104

As to your question of what to do in Colorado, I'll add Option "D" Accept the damned thing and move on!

We have a "blunder rule" in Colorado.?ÿ One of the more recent court cases is Morales v. CAMB.?ÿ If the monument doesn't quite fit the record dimensions, but it is determined by the PLS to be in the position established by the original surveyor, it shall be held!

ETA:?ÿ Link to Morales v. CAMB

@gene-kooper

Thank you Gene. That is very helpful!  D is certainly an option.  I would say that if I'm looking for a PLS monument, or a large ranch that would be appropriate. It's not uncommon for original monument to be several feet off.  I failed to give scale to my illustration.  Or maybe if the deed call "to a pipe" would certainly allow for accepting it, even on a small scale. 

However, for a small 75' x50' lot, where the other pipes fit within hundredths, and there is this one monument not fitting well, a surveyor could argue that it's out of position due to it being disturbed at some point.  In my illustration, I failed to explain that I was talking about a relatively large error in a monuments position, not called for, on a small lot.  Although minor errors should really be ignored, if there is something significant, let's say 1.5' in a small lot, I don't think accepting it is the best solution.  Here is CA, I have run into situations where everything on a 1 acre lot fits great except for 1 pipe, that was 1.8' from true corner. It was likely disturbed during the construction of a concrete wall, and the contractor simply put it back where his mistakenly thought it went.  That is all conjecture.  Per our State LAW, and Standards of Practice, I could not accept it.  A "paper pincushion" is considered the norm, or what we consider even better is to document the position of the pipe, removed it, and set a pipe at the true corner, as my opinion has it.  In practice that is rarely done, and the former is the norm. 

Obviously, I will want to do what is the norm, within the State, and not another State.  I agree:  If you have a simultaneous conveyance, and there are points set in error, they still hold.  

So for Colorado:  Let's say you're doing a lot survey, in a subdivision, and you find all three corners fitting well, within a tenth or two.  The lot is 75' x 100'.Then when you get to one corner, it's off by 2 feet.  It's tagged, and is of the same character.  It happens to be a front corner, on a right-of-way, and it's also short of the right-f-way, after you tie out the other folks corners to the right and left of your corner.  it also doesn't appear to fit well angularly; meaning that it's not simply "short" of the terminus of the line, but also "off-line" based upon where it should be.  You happened to have been the surveyor who also surveyed several other lots in the same subdivision, retracing the same surveyor (who passed away a few years ago), and he is known for setting his monuments all within a tenth.  For me, I would not accept this pipe.  The land owner himself takes out his rag tape, and confirms that the pipe doesn't fit well. Another surveyor is out there at the same time and confirms the same result you have, within 0.04'.  This isn't a case of "my measurements vs. measurements of bygone eras".  There is a brand new fence built within a few inches of the pipe.  All the other pipes were buried by 6" of dirt (encased in concrete), but this one is up 4" and when you shot it, the pipe was wiggling, like it had just been moved. It still has the concrete casing around it, but is now 2" above the ground, with remnants of dirt and grass embedded in the concrete.  It's a pretty obvious that the pipe has been "disturbed" or moved. 

So according to that article you sent me, a corner needs to be set, or you can accept that pipe.  Do you have to set a corner?    Sounds like you do.  So I would have to provide a "Land Survey Plat" to be "Deposited" that shows my survey.  Shows the "disturbed" pipe, and the replacement pipe I set, with my hypothetic LS###? 

I am not personally the type of surveyor to call pipes off by 0.005'- yes I've seen that!  I'm also not inclined to survey a deed, and if my measurement are off by 0.1' to not accept them either.  The size of the lot, and the date of the survey compared with the deed also come into play, as far as CA goes.  ID has a whole process to go through when you don't want to accept another surveyors monument.  I want to learn how it's done in CO, and make sure I understand it.  I've been surveying for almost 30 years, and I know for a fact that people move monuments, either maliciously, or by accident and I would like to know how you folks handle it in CO. 

Thank for you help! 

@gromatici

Being licensed and practicing in Idaho, and after reading both the article & case referenced by Gene, here's what I'd suggest:

1)?ÿ Be dang sure you have solid and legitimate reasons to reject an existing monument.?ÿ Measurements alone are not solid evidence - monuments nearly always control over bearing and distance.?ÿ All the relevant evidence has to be gathered and properly evaluated in light of controlling property boundary law principles (see Genes cited case and the cited cases within for a start).

2)?ÿ Involve the landowners in the process.?ÿ After all, it is their corner and property lines - not yours.?ÿ Do not proceed to step 3 without completing 1 & 2.

3)?ÿ If you do decide the existing monument is not at the property corner, and the affected landowners agree with your professional opinion, monument the corner, and document, document, document.

?ÿ

?ÿ

If a monument is disturbed it becomes meaningless, except it's good to find it so you know it won't be recovered later. You can usually tell that it's been disturbed. At that point it needs to be rehabilitated. Replace the disturbed monument with yours and note it on your plat.?ÿ

?ÿ

Posted by: @gromatici

You survey a parcel, which has a deed and find that one of the monuments is out of position by 0.4'.?ÿ The other fit within hundreths.?ÿ

I hope you have also checked to the adjoiners' monuments to also see how the questionable one fits with them and not just gone around one lot.

A surveyor's measurement is evidence where the corner is, just like a fence corner or whatever else that constitutes evidence.?ÿ A surveyor's monument controls over measurement alone because monuments have a physical presence, measurements are theoretical.?ÿ Monuments hold.?ÿ I've accepted monuments a foot and half off on residential lots because they agreed with occupation.?ÿ That is where the original surveyor set the corner in spite of the technical error, unless I have other evidence contradicting the location.

Too many guys in this profession know what they are doing but they don't understand what they are supposed to do.?ÿ On a resurvey you locate where the corner is, not where it should be.

The term "from true corner" is a misinterpretation of an undefined concept, and some apply this phrase to direct the reader to a position calculated, but meaning nothing.

In CAMB v Morales, the co court of appeals ruled that in a subdivision which bears the original surveyors certification that he set his monuments, then those monuments found and identified are the property corners, even if two monuments out of 10 lots for a 100 foot line are out of position by 13 feet, and both lots are vacant and all the math works, an obvious isolated field blunder.

In another case which is not reported because it was not appealed, my survey and one monument was the subject of three lawsuits. The jury found and the court ruled that my monument as set constituted the property corner despite two other surveyors coming later one pincushions out by 0.3 feet and another pincushions out by 0.7 feet labeled true corners but meaning nothing.?ÿ

I have a letter from the state board stating that a monument set in good faith absent of fraud constitutes the only property corner.?ÿ

Sifting through all our statutes, it is technically illegal to pincushions the exterior of a subdivision.

The answer to this thread is that MOST co surveyors in retracements consider found monuments to be the desired property corner unless a legitimate legal reason warrants a multiple monument which is explained on the plat. That is the standard of practice. A minority of surveyors, albeit shockingly frequent, do the exact opposite and report to the public some fictional distance to a theoretical position they call the true corner as if such information means anything to the landowner.

OK so in a slightly different scenario: what if youƒ??re surveying ?ÿlots and their centerline control that youƒ??ve tied into. Then you find front lot corners but theyƒ??ve either been set at a one or 2 foot offset on the property line but not at the terminus of the lot line. ?ÿor theyƒ??re at some random number like 0.86ƒ?? or 1.15 feet from the intersection of the Lot corner with the right of way.

?ÿ

In some jurisdictions the streets, by statute, are giving their full width and so Surveyorƒ??s in some jurisdictions would say that that a monument is on the lot line and is used to project to the true corner being the intersection of the lot line with the right of way. Now I know some of you have talked about how there isnƒ??t true corners that monuments hold so: is Colorado a state where you hold the monuments and that defines the right of way regardless of the centerline control?

?ÿ

Would you simply state on your map that youƒ??re excepting the monument as being on the lot line but itƒ??s literally not at the true corner? Would you then have to set a monument at the true corner?

This is an a hypothetical question: Iƒ??ve run into this dozens and dozens and dozens of times over the past 30 years of serving so itƒ??s a very valid question. I know exactly how I would handle it in the jurisdictions I have surveyed in because itƒ??s what everyone does but that doesnƒ??t mean thatƒ??s how itƒ??s handled in Colorado.

?ÿThis is an a hypothetical question: Iƒ??ve run into this dozens and dozens and dozens of times over the past 30 years of surveying so itƒ??s a very valid question. I know exactly how I would handle it in the jurisdictions Iƒ??ve surveyed in because itƒ??s what everyone does....,but that doesnƒ??t mean thatƒ??s how itƒ??s handled in Colorado.?ÿ

So the two big questions are: one does Colorado want the roads to be the with as shown on the subdivision map?

2. can you set a monument at the intersection of the lot line and right away if you find another monument letƒ??s say 8/10 away on the property line? Is that monument that you found 8/10 away from the intersection at the real intersection of the right away or is it simply off-line and thus from true corner?

Third question is: is there a way to contact the board about these questions because I think I need some clarification on this.

?ÿ

?ÿ

?ÿ

?ÿ

?ÿ

@gromatici

"In some jurisdictions the streets, by statute, are giving their full width and so Surveyor’s in some jurisdictions would say that that a monument is on the lot line and is used to project to the true corner being the intersection of the lot line with the right of way. Now I know some of you have talked about how there isn’t true corners that monuments hold so: is Colorado a state where you hold the monuments and that defines the right of way regardless of the centerline control?"

I have not seen a street width established by statute in my 40 years of surveying in California.  Are you telling me subdivision lot corners can be staked and the lots developed including right of way walls, houses at setbacks, etc... and subsequently after the paving, utilities, lots developed, etc.. are in place and the crew comes in completes the final street monuments that don't match the property corners, you are required to ignore the property monuments years later?  I can't grasp how that is equitable.

@la-stevens

It is not equitable, and as far as I know there is no U.S. with statutes like this. There are statutes/regulations or case law requiring full width when monuments are lost or never set, but regardless of how many people on here insist that the concept of original monuments holding doesn't apply to ROWs they have never been able to provide any evidence for this beyond, "I was always tought", or, "the guy at DOT told me so". 

Posted by: @gromatici

OK so in a slightly different scenario: what if youƒ??re surveying ?ÿlots and their centerline control that youƒ??ve tied into. Then you find front lot corners but theyƒ??ve either been set at a one or 2 foot offset on the property line but not at the terminus of the lot line. ?ÿor theyƒ??re at some random number like 0.86ƒ?? or 1.15 feet from the intersection of the Lot corner with the right of way.

?ÿ

In some jurisdictions the streets, by statute, are giving their full width and so Surveyorƒ??s in some jurisdictions would say that that a monument is on the lot line and is used to project to the true corner being the intersection of the lot line with the right of way. Now I know some of you have talked about how there isnƒ??t true corners that monuments hold so: is Colorado a state where you hold the monuments and that defines the right of way regardless of the centerline control?

?ÿ

Would you simply state on your map that youƒ??re excepting the monument as being on the lot line but itƒ??s literally not at the true corner? Would you then have to set a monument at the true corner?

This is an a hypothetical question: Iƒ??ve run into this dozens and dozens and dozens of times over the past 30 years of serving so itƒ??s a very valid question. I know exactly how I would handle it in the jurisdictions I have surveyed in because itƒ??s what everyone does but that doesnƒ??t mean thatƒ??s how itƒ??s handled in Colorado.

?ÿThis is an a hypothetical question: Iƒ??ve run into this dozens and dozens and dozens of times over the past 30 years of surveying so itƒ??s a very valid question. I know exactly how I would handle it in the jurisdictions Iƒ??ve surveyed in because itƒ??s what everyone does....,but that doesnƒ??t mean thatƒ??s how itƒ??s handled in Colorado.?ÿ

So the two big questions are: one does Colorado want the roads to be the with as shown on the subdivision map?

2. can you set a monument at the intersection of the lot line and right away if you find another monument letƒ??s say 8/10 away on the property line? Is that monument that you found 8/10 away from the intersection at the real intersection of the right away or is it simply off-line and thus from true corner?

Third question is: is there a way to contact the board about these questions because I think I need some clarification on this.

?ÿ

?ÿ

?ÿ

?ÿ

?ÿ

What jurisdictions and what statutes require holding the width when original monuments disagree?

If the monuments in your hypothetical were set by the original subdivider and intended to be the lot corner, they are the lot corner.?ÿ Just because many surveyors do something doesn't make it the right thing to do. It just means that the chance of running into trouble because of it is lower.

Posted by: @brian-allen

@gromatici

Being licensed and practicing in Idaho, and after reading both the article & case referenced by Gene, here's what I'd suggest:

1)?ÿ Be dang sure you have solid and legitimate reasons to reject an existing monument.?ÿ Measurements alone are not solid evidence - monuments nearly always control over bearing and distance.?ÿ All the relevant evidence has to be gathered and properly evaluated in light of controlling property boundary law principles (see Genes cited case and the cited cases within for a start).

2)?ÿ Involve the landowners in the process.?ÿ After all, it is their corner and property lines - not yours.?ÿ Do not proceed to step 3 without completing 1 & 2.

3)?ÿ If you do decide the existing monument is not at the property corner, and the affected landowners agree with your professional opinion, monument the corner, and document, document, document.

If you go to a doctor for a check-up and he tells you you're fat, does he run that by you first to make sure you're OK with it?

Posted by: @warrenward

The term "from true corner" is a misinterpretation of an undefined concept, and some apply this phrase to direct the reader to a position calculated, but meaning nothing.

In CAMB v Morales, the co court of appeals ruled that in a subdivision which bears the original surveyors certification that he set his monuments, then those monuments found and identified are the property corners, even if two monuments out of 10 lots for a 100 foot line are out of position by 13 feet, and both lots are vacant and all the math works, an obvious isolated field blunder.

In another case which is not reported because it was not appealed, my survey and one monument was the subject of three lawsuits. The jury found and the court ruled that my monument as set constituted the property corner despite two other surveyors coming later one pincushions out by 0.3 feet and another pincushions out by 0.7 feet labeled true corners but meaning nothing.?ÿ

I have a letter from the state board stating that a monument set in good faith absent of fraud constitutes the only property corner.?ÿ

Sifting through all our statutes, it is technically illegal to pincushions the exterior of a subdivision.

The answer to this thread is that MOST co surveyors in retracements consider found monuments to be the desired property corner unless a legitimate legal reason warrants a multiple monument which is explained on the plat. That is the standard of practice. A minority of surveyors, albeit shockingly frequent, do the exact opposite and report to the public some fictional distance to a theoretical position they call the true corner as if such information means anything to the landowner.

How can the math work if it was a blunder?

Posted by: @bstrand

If you go to a doctor for a check-up and he tells you you're fat, does he run that by you first to make sure you're OK with it?

Not relevant - that doesn't involve the rights of multiple parties.