The Chapter describes the requirements of a survey and those of a record of survey. They are in separate sub chapters and not related by any language that eliminates responsibility. You have to obey both. The requirement to monument 'sufficient corners' is there even if the map is not being filed. While I agree the Statute gives some latitude it clearly does not allow simply not setting any corners. If the Washington Board allows that interpretation I would suggest the State Society get busy changing things.
If I ran into an ALTA where no Corners were set I would approach the Surveyor. If they did not make it right we would be seeing the Board.
thebionicman said: "The missing ingredient in most cases is a dedicated Professional willing to follow the process."
That statement covers about 99% of the surveyor vs. surveyor issues discussed on this board.
> It depends on the law in your State. Most of the Northwest any boundary survey will require all corners be found or set.
In WA, that statement is contrary to many, if not most, surveyor's interpretation of the law. I am not the attorney general, nor an attorney at all, so I will decline making an authoritative statement.
It would be interesting for the BOR to make a statement.
RCW 58.09 "Purpose"
(Bold is by me.)
The term "whenever" clearly defines this chapter as pertaining to surveys that require recording, and the work and maps associated with such.
Again, I am no lawyer, but I know that many surveyors produce all sorts of exhibits and maps and whatever that never get recorded, follow only the standards defined by the client (and professional resposibility), and are perfectly legal.
> I believe one of the primary misunderstandings in these cases is that some land surveyors believe there is a difference between performing a boundary survey and performing an ACSMALTA survey. There is no such thing as an ACSMALTA survey.
>
> When requested, you are performing a boundary survey and reporting it in accordance with ACSMALTA survey standards. And that is in addition to any state mandated reporting requirements that may exist for boundary surveys.
That is my understanding as well.
> A 'legitimate survey where no corners are set' is not possible in many jurisdictions. I wouldn't work in one where it is...
In WA, it is certainly possible...RCW 58.09 has a whole subheading defining that specific circumstance. It is called "58.09.090 When record of survey not required."
Washington doesn't require all. The language is somewhat subjective but is clearly linked to substantial preservation of boundaries. If I were presented with an ALTA with no monuments as the thread suggests we would have an answer from the Board. If they allow the practice I'll become familiar with the Washington Legislative process.
It is our obligation as Professionals to protect the public. Governing ourselves and influencing policy decisions is part of that.
My .02, Tom
What does "all corners" mean
> It depends on the law in your State. Most of the Northwest any boundary survey will require all corners be found or set.
A little interesting discussion on this comes up from time to time, and here is an example plat: Redmond Ridge Master Plat
Look at Page 12. You will note that the boundaries have limited monumentation. At first this seems outrageous...but I assure you that having been intimately involved in the build-out of this plat, it worked very well for many reasons.
> Washington doesn't require all. The language is somewhat subjective but is clearly linked to substantial preservation of boundaries. If I were presented with an ALTA with no monuments as the thread suggests we would have an answer from the Board. If they allow the practice I'll become familiar with the Washington Legislative process.
> It is our obligation as Professionals to protect the public. Governing ourselves and influencing policy decisions is part of that.
> My .02, Tom
I would not disagree, but in a competitive environment, setting corners can be a significant increase in cost. It also triggers an almost automatic necessity of recording the survey. This is additional cost as well, since the drafting requirements mean that it is essentially a standalone drafting effort. Also, for whatever reason, some clients do not want these recorded.
A change in the law would not make me sad, I prefer a higher standard, especially for ALTA's.
>...If I were presented with an ALTA with no monuments as the thread suggests we would have an answer from the Board....
I think that this is the key part. The OP makes it sound like there is no way to apply [what I assume is a mathematically defined] boundary on paper to the ground, since no physical monuments are called out on the ALTA with ties to boundary.
This is substandard in any jurisdiction, I would presume. Hopefully, it was only an oversight by the surveyor.
> If I ran into an ALTA where no Corners were set I would approach the Surveyor. If they did not make it right we would be seeing the Board.
I can assure you that it is very common practice in the Portland area to perform ALTA surveys without monumenting the corners. Doing so triggers map recording which will easily add a couple grand to the cost and a month to the timeline for County Surveyor review.
Few ALTAs, if any, are done to resolve boundary disputes. A great many ALTAs are done prepatory to construction which would promptly blow out said corners. One understands the reluctance of clients to pay that freight. Still others are done merely for financing purposes with no physical changes to the site contemplated. Let sleeping dogs lie. Clients should be able to choose whether they want to share the knowledge of where the property lines are.
There are a lot of development projects where the boundary is determined, and many maps issued, years before the site is staked. And some of those projects wither on the vine and never get staked. That is perfectly legal under Oregon law, and at least tolerated on Washington.
> So tell me -
>
> If there is a survey on record and a new surveyor is retained to provide an ALTA Survey, without Item 1 and he does not set monuments, what would prevent him from simply copying the information from the recorded survey and enter it into cad and produce the ALTA?
>
> If he doesn't set corners; How you you even know he visited the property?
>
> - We call those Drive-Bys or Windshield Surveys around here
Well, the PLS signs it...if they are willing to lie on the survey, I suppose copying the existing survey and setting no corners is the smallest amount of damage they could do.
If he doesn't set corners, why do you care if he visited the property? That is kind of the jist of this whole discussion. It is just a piece of paper without physical monuments of some sort. Many surveyors (and understandably so, in some cases) find this to be substandard work.
But if you question the honesty of the surveyor, perhaps no monuments to perpetuate the fraud is best...
I find it odd that up against eastern Oregon the opposite policy is followed. I find it disturbing that you are correct that no clear Statutory requirement exists there. We have a lot of Oregon licensees here and they think it does.
I do not agree with leaving the option of not setting Corners on the table. It defeats the concept of a recording state. Others that do require monuments have exceptions to deal with the cases you describe. As for the owners rights, his information potentially impacts Title held by others. It's the old 'my right is limited by the impact it has on others' thing...
My .02, Tom
Texas Rule on Monumentation of Surveys
> You can absolutely do a survey w/o setting a monument, just because you don't pound a bar in the ground don't mean you didn't survey the property, especially an alta/acsm, you still hafta tie tons of stuff, you'll still visit every corner, but you ain't gotta pound a rod.
Maybe I misunderstand your post, but how do you reconcile that view with TBPLS Rule §663.17 on monumentation?
The rule:
(a) All monuments set by registered professional land surveyors shall be set at sufficient depth to retain a stable and distinctive location and be of sufficient size to withstand the deteriorating forces of nature and shall be of such material that in the land surveyor's judgment will best achieve this goal.
(b) When delineating a property or boundary line as an integral portion of a survey (survey being defined in the Act, §1071.002(6) or (8)), the land surveyor shall set, or leave as found, an adequate quantity of monuments of a stable and reasonably permanent nature to represent or reference the property or boundary corners. All survey markers shall be shown and described with sufficient evidence of the location of such markers on the land surveyors' drawing, written description or report.
(c) All metes and bounds descriptions prepared as an exhibit to be used in easements shall be tied to corners of record related to the boundary of the affected tract in accordance with subsection (b) of this section.
(d) Where practical, all monuments set by a Professional Land Surveyor to delineate or witness a boundary corner shall be marked in a way that is traceable to the responsible registrant or associated employer.
As contemplated by the above rule, "survey" refers to this definition in the licensing act
(6) "Professional surveying" means the practice of land, boundary, or property surveying or other similar professional practices. The term includes:
(A) performing any service or work the adequate performance of which involves applying special knowledge of the principles of geodesy, mathematics, related applied and physical sciences, and relevant laws to the measurement or location of sites, points, lines, angles, elevations, natural features, and existing man-made works in the air, on the earth's surface, within underground workings, and on the beds of bodies of water to determine areas and volumes for:
(i) locating real property boundaries;
(ii) platting and laying out land and subdivisions of land; or
(iii) preparing and perpetuating maps, record plats, field note records, easements, and real property descriptions that represent those surveys; and
(B) consulting, investigating, evaluating, analyzing, planning, providing an expert surveying opinion or testimony, acquiring survey data, preparing technical reports, and mapping to the extent those acts are performed in connection with acts described by this subdivision.
Mississippi has the cheesiest standards since the 2011 changes. Many prior requirements were dropped, but the main emphasis is on "protecting the public".
The ALTA specs clearly state that State Regs are to be followed if they are more strict than the ALTA Regs.
Given all of that, even the Mississippi rules (we are a non-recording state) leave the surveyor no option when it comes to corner monumentation:
"All monuments, natural and artificial (man-made), found or set shall be shown and described on the survey plat. The monuments shall be noted as found or set. All monuments set shall be ferrous metal, or contain ferrous metal, not less than 1/2 inch in diameter, and not less than eighteen inches in length. All corners shall be monumented, either by a found monument clearly described on the survey plat, or by a monument set as described above, except however, a corner which falls in a creek, stream or ditch, in a gravel or asphalt road or upon solid rock, concrete or other like materials shall be marked in a permanent manner and clearly identified on the plat or witnessed by Witness Corners. Witness Corners shall be set whenever a corner monument cannot be set or is likely to be disturbed. Such witness corners shall be set as close as practical to the true corner and shall meet the same physical standards that would be required for the true corner were it set. If only one (1) witness corner is set, it must be set on the actual boundary line or prolongation thereof. Otherwise, at least two (2) witness corners shall be set and so noted on the plat of the survey. Courses that intersect a creek, stream, ditch or the center of a public road that is to be used as a boundary of the parcel being surveyed, should have witness corners set on the line intersecting same, and be clearly shown on the plat. Concrete right-of-way markers may be acceptable as monuments on all roadways, streets, and utility rights-of-way, and may be placed only at points where right-of-way width or direction change."
I don't have to show a legend, or a ton of other standard drafting practices, but I sure better mark that corner just so, no matter what any silly check list says. PLUS I must find and/or reset the commencing point mentioned in the current legal description. (You'd be surprised just how many of these things are located under large buildings, etc. and have been for years!)
Texas Rule on Monumentation of Surveys
I am curious whether "reference" to property corners could mean any physical monuments, as long as there is a mathematic tie to the corner, or if it means the actual corner is set, or a direct offset is set to each corner?
It seems like the later. How does Texas see it?
Texas Rule on Monumentation of Surveys
> I am curious whether "reference" to property corners could mean any physical monuments, as long as there is a mathematic tie to the corner, or if it means the actual corner is set, or a direct offset is set to each corner?
>
> It seems like the later. How does Texas see it?
The Texas rule is silent on that point, but given that the purpose of monuments is to directly show where boundary corners are and where boundary lines run, it pretty much follows that a scheme of "referencing" boundary corners that requires another survey to determine where the corners are defeats the whole purpose.
In my opinion, the rule should be interpreted to mean that
1) if a corner can be marked, it should be marked, and
2) if a corner cannot be marked, then either
a) witness monuments should be placed on the lines leading to the corner or
b) reference monuments should be placed near enough to the corner that the corner can be located with certainty with minimal effort.
:good:
Texas Rule on Monumentation of Surveys
The jist of my reply was YES a survey CAN be performed w/o setting corners, I wasn't reading the rules or implying anything, I was being extremely literal about CAN.
That being said, I had a ruling by the board once, that NO we didn't have to set all the corners on an ALTA/ACSM survey for a wind farm on 80 sections, ±120 owners, each section/landowner was a separate alta, but the wind farm was one, we didn't have to set all of the interior corners, we just outlined the wind farm.