A step in the right direction

Stacy,

I agree with you 100%.

I would like to see current surveys required for property transactions, say every 5 to 10 years like you said. This would help maintain the property corners that are in place, and help perpetuate them for future generations.

In my neck of the woods, rural West TN, a lot of the deeds are old, and the old fences and monuments are disappearing with time. Even in new subdivisions the monuments are being destroyed by utility construction/repair. Requiring new surveys when refinancing and selling/buying property would help maintain them for the future.

Just my humble opinion.

Jimmy

In Kentucky, we call that the "Surveyors Retirement Act" because if it happened we would have enough work to eventually retire. I think it is a spectacular idea for all of the obvious reasons but probably won't happen here for many decades at least. There is a big push right now to oust one of the major planning commissions in the area. Personal independence and the right to do what one wishes with their property is prevalent at the moment. Being forced to have a survey would be hard for the public to swallow, even with property changing hands. If I had to guess, I'd say 96.2% of all property closings around here do not involve a survey of any kind. They also say that 88.4% of statistics are made up on the spot.

We are losing monuments all the time and I document what I find but another statistic here is that 91.7% of all boundary surveys are never recorded. The pretty and informative plats are filed away in a client's desk drawer never to be seen again. There isn't a way to file a boundary survey in a way that will be easily found for future generations. I'm working on that one.

Interesting timing on your post.

I was at a meeting of the KAPS legislative committee this past weekend. One of the items brought to the table was a proposal to work on a recording requirement.

There seemed to be many in favor, so it might be something that KAPS begins to move forward with working on getting enacted.

I would not be in favor of a law that forced me to resurvey a lot that was surveyed 5 or even 10 years ago.

I have bought (and sold) several lots over the years, most the were subdivided 10-30 years ago. These lots have remained undeveloped with the corner monuments intact. Forcing me to have these lots surveyed does not make sense to me.

The primary objective is to promote stability in land boundaries. The way that is done is to ensure that each landowner knows where their boundary monuments are located. The new landowners need to have their monuments recovered and made known to them. If they know where they're at, they're more likely to rely upon them when they make improvements (after all, that's the only time when they're needed).

A full survey isn't necessary to convey that information to the buyer. It should be a simple corner recovery process as long as the landowner maintains their monuments. If there is a failure to maintain them, then the seller should be saddled with the expense of replacing them.

One of the major hurdles in the idea of requiring surveys for conveyances is that you are raising the closing costs which are highly regulated in an effort to keep them as low as possible. That's why there are $100 home inspections, $50 termite inspections, etc. That's also why a number of jurisdictions were successful in inventing a "mortgage survey" which was designed to perpetuate the boundary monuments without requiring an expensive full survey.

What was the surveying profession's reaction? Total despise of "low-ball" surveys filled with disclaimers and warnings.

Think about it for a moment... Mortgage surveys filled the need for monument recovery and perpetuation of that information to the new buyer. Corner monuments were located by a professional, flagged up, and a quick inspection was provided for a reasonable fee (typically under $150) which maintained the low costs of closing.

Land boundary surveyors provide three roles in society: (1) they set corner monuments which represent boundary locations, (2) they recover corner monuments, and (3) they perpetuate evidence of rehabilitated corner monuments. Plats prepared when a boundary is created are typically made part of the permanent title record, fulfilling role #1. Mortgage surveys are an excellent tool for fulfilling role #2.

Role #3, which is the premise of this thread, requires that a full survey be performed when a monument is replaced or rehabilitated. The only way for that evidence to be perpetuated is for the surveys to be kept in a publicly accessible repository. The only ones who really care about this are surveyors. Landowners won't establish it. Lawmakers won't create it. Surveyors must step up and do it. Why? Because role #3 is our duty.

Who will benefit from such a repository? Surveyors, through more certainty in monument placement and less liability because more stability will be achieved. Landowners, through lower cost surveys needed to replace missing monuments because the surveyors have more evidence to utilize in their decision-making process, and fewer land boundary disputes with their neighbors. Society in general will also benefit from the perpetuation of survey-grade evidence of boundary locations which can be utilized for improving their various mapping systems, including GIS.

If you're living in a region where there is no public repository for your surveys, then your living in a region where the surveying profession has failed to recognize the importance of their third role in society. If you live in a region that does provide such a repository and you're failing to do your part by filing your surveys, then you've personally failed to recognize the importance of your role in society. That's a failure of our own which can't be blamed on any other.

JBS

Now if they would put some sensible time limit on it. I think requiring a survey no more than 5-10 years old would be about right.

As much as I agree, it ain't gonna happen. "Let the buyer beware and exersize their own due dilegence". At least that's the motto of the much stronger and well represented arena of realtors, lenders, and title companies. That is when it comes to typical residential sales transactions.

However, there is a rise in governing bodies requireing a "current" survey for any improvements being done. That is a terrific thing, and does in fact accomplish the end goal - protecting the public (sometimes in spite of themselves, much to their chagrin).

And I believe the days of laypeople writing descriptions for simple divisions, line adjustments, etc which are lacking a survey, are coming to an end. Another good thing.

Mr Stahl, you summed this issue up incredibly. As was your presentation at APLS Conf. Thanks for your time.