I think that if any Cali surveyor rejects a monument by whatever amount, for discussion let's use 0.06', then they may be required to file a Record of Survey.
Since you are contesting a previously establish opinion you are also stating that an 'alternate location' does exist.
I think that Sec 8762 (b) (3) applies to this situation:
(3) Evidence that, by reasonable analysis, might result in
materially alternate positions of lines or points, shown on any
subdivision map, official map, or record of survey previously
recorded or filed in the office of the county recorder or the county
surveying department, or any map or survey record maintained by the
Bureau of Land Management of the United States.
I bring this up because of the frantic phone call I got this afternoon from the woman who wants me to check a June 2010 survey that was done. The surveyor rejected a previously set lead and nail that was on a 2 foot offset and shifted the line south into what she perceives as her lot by the grand amount of six hundredths ( 0.06').
The street her lot is located on is 1400 feet long, and her lot is almost exactly mid block. The 2010 surveyor just did a straight proration and ...well, long to short, if he had of accepted that lead/nail then this gal would never have taken pictures, called her lawyer or called me.
All this just got me to thinking about 'alternate positions', hence the post.
It's a half foot in Washington.
RCW 58.09.090
When record of survey not required.
(1) A record of survey is not required of any survey:
(a) When it has been made by a public officer in his or her official capacity and a reproducible copy thereof has been filed with the county engineer of the county in which the land is located. A map so filed shall be indexed and kept available for public inspection. A record of survey shall not be required of a survey made by the United States bureau of land management. A state agency conducting surveys to carry out the program of the agency shall not be required to use a land surveyor as defined by this chapter;
(b) When it is of a preliminary nature;
(c) When a map is in preparation for recording or shall have been recorded in the county under any local subdivision or platting law or ordinance;
(d) When it is a retracement or resurvey of boundaries of platted lots, tracts, or parcels shown on a filed or recorded and surveyed subdivision plat or filed or recorded and surveyed short subdivision plat in which monuments have been set to mark all corners of the block or street centerline intersections, provided that no discrepancy is found as compared to said recorded information or information revealed on other subsequent public survey map records, such as a record of survey or city or county engineer's map. If a discrepancy is found, that discrepancy must be clearly shown on the face of the required new record of survey. For purposes of this exemption, the term discrepancy shall include:
(i) A nonexisting or displaced original or replacement monument from which the parcel is defined and which nonexistence or displacement has not been previously revealed in the public record;
(ii) A departure from proportionate measure solutions which has not been revealed in the public record;
(iii) The presence of any physical evidence of encroachment or overlap by occupation or improvement; or
(iv) Differences in linear and/or angular measurement between all controlling monuments that would indicate differences in spatial relationship between said controlling monuments in excess of 0.50 feet when compared with all locations of public record: That is, if these measurements agree with any previously existing public record plat or map within the stated tolerance, a discrepancy will not be deemed to exist under this subsection.
(2) Surveys exempted by foregoing subsections of this section shall require filing of a record of corner information pursuant to RCW 58.09.040(2).
[2010 c 8 § 18004; 1992 c 106 § 1; 1973 c 50 § 9.]
Calif related : Calling found monuments off -Radar
At least you guys know a value, all we get are undefined words, like 'material'.
Calif related : Calling found monuments off -Radar
PLSS, YUCK! I think most of us around here like our 'best personal opinion'(s) option. And, they can take that BLM manual thingamajig and stick it where the sun don't shine.
DOH! Just kidding! I'm a kidder!...:-)
Take care,
Ed
Calif related : Calling found monuments off -Radar
I much prefer the freedom and responsiblity that comes from the proper exercise of judgement and the expression of a professional opinion that comes along with the duties as a surveyor. "Material" has a legal meaning and I much prefer making the decision based upon the evidence, rather than a formula that was cooked up and that is really antithetical to the real duties of a surveyor.
I have no idea what other surveyors, think their duties are, but they are in fact very specific with respect to RETRACEMENT.
In the Los Feliz area of Los Angeles, there is a block bounded by Finley-Rodney-Franklin-Dracena. This is basically a rectangle,and a completely developed block in a City with plenty of control, not a lot of elevation change and yet there are at least 4 different lead and tags at the mid block split on the south end of the block. Each of these lead and tags are less that .15' from each other. Maybe, someone filed, I do not know......but apparently someone is not clear on the concept.
I have filed a corner record where I showed another surveyor's corner off by a very small amount and it was accepted by the county and no RS was required. I did not set another corner. I found the surveyor's corner when I was going to set mine. The other surveyor had not filed and when I called the surveyor AS A COURTESY TO SAY I AM GOING TO FILE AND SHOW HIS CORNERS.....he was an....well less than professional.
If we pull a number out of the air 0.06' is not material,except for a downtown highrise in Los Angeles. I would be wary of someone complaining about .06'or .34'(lol) and their ambulance chasing attorney.
Calif related : Calling found monuments off - Dane
> If we pull a number out of the air 0.06' is not material,except for a downtown highrise in Los Angeles. I would be wary of someone complaining about .06'or .34'(lol) and their ambulance chasing attorney.
Dane..the womans issue is not about an amount (0.06') it is her concern that a second monument was installed that disagrees with what is already there.
Late yesterday we went to the area and walked the entire block looking for tags. Aside from the 3 monuments within 50 feet, the 2 new ones and the older one 0.06' north, we only found one other tag that was 700 feet north, LS 1768. The reason that only one other remained in this block, which is 1600 feet long, not 1400 feet like I originally posted from a guess, is that the City of Glendale did some improvements on that block and the surrounding ones and this one tag did not land where a drive approach would come in. It was an odd end of block lot that had the approach from another street.
They redid the drive approaches for each lot and in doing so destroyed every single monument that existed near the approaches.
Typical PL to Approach Layout
I know that is all off subject but I just thought I would throw it in since there is a big debate in CLSA about this monument destruction cities do and not preserving the existing monument positions so they can be re-installed after the improvements are finished, as I have been told.
Back to the subject...
Accepting monuments or rejecting them is at the discretion of the surveyor. This is a good example that a decision to reject a monument could very well backfire.
I have been retained to do a survey to answer the question that the woman has and probably also the neighbor has. There are two monuments for my property line, which one is correct, or I should say, in my opinion, which one would I accept.
I'll do the survey with what I have to work with. I will be unbiased in my decisions and file my opinion. This at least provides me with an opportunity to get some more monuments on record before they get destroyed. I will be doing an RS. The retracement appears to be one of proration only.
PS Dane... In my opinion, the key words of 8762 (b) (3) are 'alternate positions of lines or points' and not 'material'...that's my take
What Did I Miss?
Paul, last I read, you were in Texas......what happened? Did you move back?
What Did I Miss?
Cowboy hat was 4 sizes too big for him and the boots gave him blisters.
🙂
What Did I Miss? - Angelo
> Cowboy hat was 4 sizes too big for him and the boots gave him blisters.
> 🙂
Hahahah Robert... and the humidity made me shrink 😛
Angelo..I am 62, and after thinking it all over I decided just to finish my years in a place that I know and have a following..
Texas is beautiful The people are just fantastic. I am glad I took the 'vacation' it helped get things into a better perspective.
What Did I Miss? - Angelo
Just to add to the lightness of this all.
I have always wondered if you are ever tempted to ask a client or neighbor in the field for "Just the facts, Ma'am"
I know that I couldn't resist if I was surveying in L.A.
🙂
What Did I Miss? - Robert
> Just to add to the lightness of this all.
> I have always wondered if you are ever tempted to ask a client or neighbor in the field for "Just the facts, Ma'am"
> I know that I couldn't resist if I was surveying in L.A.
>
> 🙂
I never said that, but yesterday I had to tell my client that I did not want to see any more pictures or hear anymore stories about what she thinks took place .. you know how excited clients can get..
She and her husband understood completely. I want to remain unbiased and without outside influence, just in case someone later on down the line asks.
I guess that is close to "Just the facts, Ma'am"
Paul - Speaking of CLSA threads and calling found monuments off, have you seen the CLSA thread I started called "map v. monument"? So far it's got 4,706 views and 198 replies and still no consensus on whether a monument that's set by a 7.5-foot blunder on a 2.3-acre parcel should be held or not.
okay Paul
We all know that magnitude is not a reason to call a point off. The question is does the point represent the intentions of the parties. If you are retracing, then did you get the point close to the line it is supposed to on? So I do not think attempting to get a point on a certain and missing is something that constitues an alternate position. What constitutes an alternate position, is a true disagreement about the evidence that controls the location of the line. The classic example is where one surveyor misses and original monument that is found by a latter survey.
So even if the situation arises that there maybe alternate positions are the differences in the position MATERIAL. So, strictly speaking you are correct and this is something that I will keep in mind. Your kind of reasoning is something that would encourage surveyors to accept found monuments more readily since if the board agreed with you then you would be on the hook for a record of survey. I would urge to to send a letter to the board and get their opinion on this.
Danish
> ... are the differences in the position MATERIAL.
To me and you and most of the guys, 0.06' is not material. To this woman, it is material. I have yet to read in the act that the word 'material' or 'alternate positions' have been solely reserved for interpetations by land surveyors only.
Ok..lets suppose we have a lot to survey. You come in record, plug in a point. Next day, another guy prorates, misses you by a tenth, plugs in another point. Is your point in an 'alternate position'? Would it become 'material' to a guy wanting to build a wall with one edge just 1/4" clear of line? Material can be many things, not just an amount of measurement.
> So far it's got 4,706 views and 198 replies and still no consensus on whether a monument that's set by a 7.5-foot blunder on a 2.3-acre parcel should be held or not.
Don't hold your breath waiting for consensus, Steve -- it ain't gonna happen!
Calif related : Calling found monuments off - Steven
I havent seen the post yet..maybe tomorrow I'll check it out. Did you provide pictures/maps??
Danish
I AM NOT REALLY TALKING ABOUT MEASUREMENT EITHER. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT "MATERIAL" IS A LEGAL CONCEPT. AS YOU HAVE DESCRIBED CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE A SMALL DIFFERENT IN DISTANCE IS MATERIAL, AND THAT IS FINE.
