11. Location of utilities existing on or serving the surveyed property as determined by:
- observed evidence collected pursuant to Section 5.E.iv.
- evidence from plans requested by the surveyor and obtained from utility companies, or provided by client (with reference as to the sources of information), and
- markings requested by the surveyor pursuant to an 811 utility locate or similar request
That second bullet point has me concerned. Just how much effort is the surveyor obliged to expend chasing after as-built records, GIS, etc, etc.??
Mark Mayer, post: 354658, member: 424 wrote: Just how much effort is the surveyor obliged to expend chasing after as-built records, etc, etc.??
As much effort as he agreed to expend. Since all Table A items are optional, it's up to the surveyor to define the scope of work that he's prepared to complete.
I avoid volunteering to provide utility research, since it's never a slam dunk. If the client insists, I start by offering what I believe I can provide with a reasonable effort. If they want more, then we start talking about the challenges of identifying the utility owners and obtaining usable records from them within an acceptable time frame, and the soaring costs of accomplishing same.
I have found 811 will not field mark a site unless you will be digging or excavating soon. But instead I usually explain we are making the plans to be used for construction and they will notify all the utility companies who will then send/email all their records of utilities in the specified area. For free.
And we too usually avoid at all costs getting the utilities marked. We tell the person ordering to get them marked and we will go once that is complete.
Jim Frame, post: 354661, member: 10 wrote: As much effort as he agreed to expend. Since all Table A items are optional, it's up to the surveyor to define the scope of work that he's prepared to complete.
I avoid volunteering to provide utility research, since it's never a slam dunk. If the client insists, I start by offering what I believe I can provide with a reasonable effort. If they want more, then we start talking about the challenges of identifying the utility owners and obtaining usable records from them within an acceptable time frame, and the soaring costs of accomplishing same.
Respectfully, I do not think you can certify to Item 11 with out doing that extensive research.
Right above Item 1 it says "If checked, the following optional items are to be included in the ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey, except as otherwise qualified (see note above):"
And item 11 does not say "evidence from plans IF requested by the surveyor..".
I think this new item 11, is going to be very costly, and therefor be something that clients are priced out of doing. Kind of like 11(b) was, but maybe even more now.
The 811 bullet isn't a big deal to me. You call, they respond or they don't. But the bullet regarding obtaining plans will be a problem. Too subjective. Also it doesn't appear that these bullet points can be separated. Looks like a bad deal.
Gary Kent produced a video explaining the thinking behind these items. Unfortunately I cannot find the link.
They won't do the 811 mark out for us here. If you are not the contractor that is actually about to dig then they don't mark it out.
I agree about going over it with the client and making sure they know what utilities you will be able to show, to what level of detail, and what it's going to be based on.
Dan Patterson, post: 354726, member: 1179 wrote: They won't do the 811 mark out for us here. If you are not the contractor that is actually about to dig then they don't mark it out.
I agree about going over it with the client and making sure they know what utilities you will be able to show, to what level of detail, and what it's going to be based on.
And yet some how I'm sure that if you planted an iron rod through a fiber optic cable they'd be looking at you to cover the repair bill.
Gary Kent video
[MEDIA=youtube]DsI8fKk7Tuo[/MEDIA]
I suppose as long as the particulars of item 11 are left negotiable then the subjective nature isn't too perilous. I would be very careful in proposal outlining scope of services to make sure it was clear what I would do.
ppm, post: 354668, member: 6808 wrote: Respectfully, I do not think you can certify to Item 11 with out doing that extensive research.
Again, Table A items are optional and negotiable. Don't like the wording of Item 11? Reword it to your liking and put that wording in your contact and on the face of the survey.
What scares me is the recycling of surveys where a surveyor will negotiate a specific set of items under Table A, then the survey is used for something it was never intended for.
Joe the Surveyor, post: 354733, member: 118 wrote: What scares me is the recycling of surveys
That's a problem that has always existed and isn't attributable to any iteration of the specifications.
In North Carolina it was legislated two years ago that 811 must be notified when performing a survey of any kind even a little lot survey. This placed the burden of calling in all surveys on the surveyor but the markers don't hold up their end. The utilities almost never get marked. I put the ticket numbers in a note on my plats and state what got marked and what didn't.
Somebody is paying the locator. Can the surveyor hire the locator service?
Bill93, post: 354739, member: 87 wrote: Somebody is paying the locator. Can the surveyor hire the locator service?
The way I understand it is the locate companies are paid by the utility owners. There is no cost to the surveyor other than time. I guess you could hire a private locator.
Adam, post: 354735, member: 8900 wrote: In North Carolina it was legislated two years ago that 811 must be notified when performing a survey of any kind even a little lot survey. This placed the burden of calling in all surveys on the surveyor but the markers don't hold up their end. The utilities almost never get marked. I put the ticket numbers in a note on my plats and state what got marked and what didn't.
We've had horrible response from NC 811 when we've use it. There are times where I know for a fact there are underground utilities on site which have were not marked, but the best I can do is note the 811 ticket # on the survey. We far prefer to use a private utility location service whom we've worked with for years. We offer his services as an add alternate in most of our fee proposals, and most of the time the client will opt for the private location, even at an added expense.
hgman, post: 354743, member: 8980 wrote: We've had horrible response from NC 811 when we've use it. There are times where I know for a fact there are underground utilities on site which have were not marked, but the best I can do is note the 811 ticket # on the survey. We far prefer to use a private utility location service whom we've worked with for years. We offer his services as an add alternate in most of our fee proposals, and most of the time the client will opt for the private location, even at an added expense.
Wow. That seems like an excellent approach. Does the private locator have access to utility plans, or does he just flag what is visibly evident on site (like locating a telephone cable if he sees a pedestal to locate from)?
In my area - Northern California - the one-call service doesn't provide design locates. And their fines for false excavation locate requests are quite high.
What's really bad is I had a site with a gas substation on the property. The sent the locate reply email and said no utilities in project area. I called the owner of the gas utility and they said "it's up to them to mark it and it was not their concern"
what the heck?
Jim Frame, post: 354745, member: 10 wrote: In my area - Northern California - the one-call service doesn't provide design locates. And their fines for false excavation locate requests are quite high.
It's hard to call in a fake excavation ticket when surveying is in the company name.