I have Jeff Lucas's book and I read it, but it is very much another text book and I did not get much new info out of it.
In my part of Upstate New York the record dimensions rule, so we show the monuments refenced to the record.
You're going to tell me more about this, because it sounds like the survey would have a call to a point, and then cute little language like "North 0.53', East 0.87' from a found steel rod".
I am violently opposed to doing that, and in fact, if I voiced my full opinion in this forum, I'd get a lifetime ban.
Something like that, but it is usually parallel and perpendicular ties from the lines at the corner.
Sort of like showing ties to a fence post or some other object near a corner or along a line.The ties hardly ever get called out in the description, the monument just gets omitted.
I'm sure you would not like the way we do it, but I also know that the attorneys that order most of the property transfer surveys locally would quickly find a different surveyor if every survey showed different bearings and distances than the deed description.
It sounds like the surveyors in the area have allowed attorneys to practice surveying. We have all encountered attorneys like this, but most of us (I hope) see this as an opportunity to educate the attorney and don't let a unlicensed person yell us how to do our job.
My surveys substantially follow the NYSAPLS Code of Practice which is mostly about mapping standards. The monument section is very limited.
3.M - MONUMENTS
1. Monument and witness marks should be noted and referenced.
Even the section about monuments in the NYSAPLS proposed “Minimum Technical Standards for Practicing Land Surveying in the State of New York” is a little open ended.
“When a map is to be provided as part of the survey, all found monumentation and boundary markers used and relevant to the boundary determination shall be shown upon the map with ties to the determined lines and/or corners. Generally, surveyors should not set multiple corner monuments or practice “pin cushioning” as this only adds confusion to interpretations and future boundary determinations.”
I do not have a compilation of NY case law, but what I have seen is split 50/50 between monuments and intent, where called for monuments hold unless the intent can be proven otherwise. I find monuments, but most of them are not called for. They are in the vicinity of the corner based on the record description.
Our Code of Practice requires record lines to be shown.
"3.J" RECORD LINES 1.
When the parcel surveyed is laid out on a filed map the survey map should reference: the title of the map, the map number, lot numbers, and block numbers of the premises, as required. Other filed maps or maps locatable from the record title may be indicated or superimposed on the boundary survey map. When street and lot lines are identical with another map, a notation to that affect should be made.
I’m going to ask a question and then put another log on the fire and refill my coffee cup.
In a survey recording state, is a recorded retracement survey measurement a record distance or a measured distance? Our law requires us to note the record distance and measured distance when they are different. There could sometimes be an original measurement as shown in the deed or the original survey followed by 2 or three retracement measured as distances of the same line, all recorded. I consider the original distance record and not any subsequent recorded survey measurements, but I’ve been wrong before. If I am wrong, I would have to recite every previous “record” distance as recorded as i.e 100.00(Bk A, pg x), 100.04(Bk B, Pg y), 99.96 (Bk C, pg z) etc. etc., measured as 100. 02. Point is, are we getting confused about what changing the record means to a title person as opposed to a surveyor?
I consider retracement survey measurements to be record measurements. They are all measuring the same line so barring some sort of blunder I think it would be ridiculous not to.
Immediate prev deed. Or current deed.
Nate
