I wouldn't say
Never use the term approximate corner. But it would be very rare. I have seen them on a wetlands walk where the commission members need to see the 'general location' of a boundary as it relates to the wetlands. But its rare indeed to use that term.
I wouldn't say
Approximate corner is like being a little bit pregnant, either it is or it isn't!
If it's a temporary mark for clearing/construction I like to use the phrase "temp. prop corner" that way it's clear that there is no monument or that it's not permanent in nature. I can't think of a good reason why anyone should be marking "approx. prop corners". What happens if the surveyor gets fired from the job or never comes back and the property owners start to rely on that stake?
If that's the case then the stake should say "TEMP PROP COR" rather than approximate.
> If it's a temporary mark for clearing/construction I like to use the phrase "temp. prop corner" that way it's clear that there is no monument or that it's not permanent in nature. I can't think of a good reason why anyone should be marking "approx. prop corners". What happens if the surveyor gets fired from the job or never comes back and the property owners start to rely on that
There's a rebar with a cap, and that's the guard stake. The stake isn't the exact property corner, the rebar is, so it just says 'approx" on the stake.
Or,
what about the guys that say that a surveyor can't determine the property corner? Only the owner or the courts can decide that. Maybe you need to mark it "my opinion of the property corner".
Okay joking around.
I can see having the approximate location shown with a temporary stake. The stake could get moved, the stake may be leaning even though they drove the tip in about right. What's the contractor going to do if he can't have the corners staked for clearing or landscaping limits? Who is better to have stake the limits than a professional land surveyor? (Approximate, temporary, whatever you want to call it).
"Temporary" property corner? Seriously?
> in what context are these corners being placed?
It's a dodge around Oregon's recording statute. If you set a monument for a property corner you are supposed to file a Record of Survey Map with the County Surveyor. And the type of monument is proscribed by statute as well (5/8" x 30" rod and cap meets spec). The County Surveyor filing fees alone- in the Portland Metro area at least - are more than the entire amount that surveyors are getting for lot jobs in Oklahoma. It takes at least a full office day to prepare the simplest Record of Survey, adding significant cost to a lot staking job. Then the CS will redline your submission and edits are required. Back and forth, sometimes more than once. It is almost impossible to imagine a lot staking in the Portland area for under $3k, the mapping and recording being about 2/3 of the total.
Some guys figure that if you set a (substandard) hub instead and call it "approximate" you can dispense with the Record of Survey. This is an obvious dodge and the board, together with those Surveyors who don't like to conduct "dodgy" business, doesn't like it. But they haven't managed to successfully discipline anybody for doing it, specifically. They have caught a few for setting these things more approximately than their clients could tolerate.
Sometimes in the course of a development project there is a legitimate reason to set approximate corners for viewing before you set the permanent corners. Such as staking a proposed line adjustment or property division. So I've done that. I don't do this sort of lot job work much anymore, but if I did I think I would label the lath "Proposed Fence Corner".
I can see the reasons someone might want this, and I have been asked, but I've always refused. The problem is that no one will read the "approximate" - they just won't. It will become "the" corner set by the land surveyor." Just like the ballpark price they promised not to hold you to, or the plainly marked "preliminary draft" they promised not to submit. I wouldn't be surprised to return to the approximate corner, and find a hundred feet of fence installed right to it, or even a new house at the minimum offset. Never underestimate how badly the public will misunderstand this!
I recently encountered a situation where a surveyor discovered two years after the fact that unbeknownst to him, his "Preliminary" ALTA Survey map was recorded by a County Recorder in spite of the fact that it was not sealed nor drawn on Mylar, both State statutory requirements for recordation. He may now be held responsible for not monumenting corners in spite of the fact that he never completed the project. NOTHING is Preliminary, approximate or temporary!
Every document we produce bears a seal. It is either signed or stamped preliminary through the seal. Another habit is including the date in the Preliminary stamp. If it slips by the recorder we may be embarrassed, but we won't be disciplined...
> "Temporary" property corner? Seriously?
We occasionally do this in plats where they need lot lines for some reason, but the final locations are still in flux. "Temp" corners are very common around here. But, that is in new construction where there are literally no lot lines truly in existence since no plat has yet to be filed.
Yeah, I'm starting to think that I should never again issue a preliminary plan. I think I'll finalize and stamp them, and if the clients wants changes, just issue a revision.
I make it a habit to check through the recorded plans on the Registry of Deeds website for the towns I work in, just to see what others have been up to. A few years ago, I ran across a recorded septic system plan. It was mine! I had prepared an as-built plan for a site that had wetlands nearby (all properly permitted). A local Natural Resources employee decided they needed some sort of conservation restriction on the property, and the best way to document this was to hand draw it on the as-built septic system plan I had submitted to the Health Department. It was on paper (not Mylar), had my PE stamp (not PLS), and did not have the square the Registry reserves for it's stamp or the required certification that it met "the rules & regulations of Registry of Deeds". Yet it was recorded as Plan ### of 20##. I've seen sketches, etc. recorded as an attachment to a deed, easement or other document, but never as a full blown plan. I bet I have the only recorded septic system in Middlesex county.
Speaking of septic system plans, I once showed up to as-built a large system on a multi-million dollar property, and found that the installer only had my preliminary plan, the the approved issued final plan. It had "PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION" in 1 inch letters top & bottom, along with an orange note explaining its preliminary draft nature. That didn't stop the installer - he looked at me like I had 3 heads when I told him. Fortunately, there had been no changes on that project. The preliminary plan had been given to him by...wait for it... the ARCHITECT, who you would think would know better (well, you might think that, but not me anymore...).
With septics, I issue a preliminary for the client to review, but also to prove to the client that the plan is complete so they can pay me before I issue the final plan. I do this because most of them are for people selling, who will gladly sell, move away and never pay you. So now I make the preliminary septics unbuildable by leaving off the benchmarks and proposed elevations; this seems to work - there haven't been any more incidents since.
> "Temporary" property corner? Seriously?
A wood hub set in Arizona will probably still be sound in 50 years. A (fir) wood hub set in Washington or Oregon will be sound for about a year, maybe 2.
Kind of reminds me when an engineer told me to do approximate boundaries on a site plan I was preparing for him. 1 acre lot with new construction. Just his way of trying to get a lighter bill. He got the full survey at the full price from me anyways.
:good: :good: :good:
