paden cash, post: 400715, member: 20 wrote: Interesting thoughts Andy. I haven't thought things through near enough, for sure. But in my mind a platted area (with all the easements created simultaneously) probably really wouldn't gain much by having easements monumented within the lot boundaries. The easements are a dependent feature of the lot. And in saying that I also have to say there are surely cases in unplatted areas where the same could be shown. Something to think about for sure.
When I went through the surveying and mapping program at TJC, one of the first field trips was to a subdivision where the easements were monumented. It was riduculous and I'm sure the instructor took great joy in watching us try to figure out which monuments were for the boundary and which belonged to the easement. As I recall, there were some monuments just a foot or two apart.
paden cash, post: 400718, member: 20 wrote: It's a specialty niche I guess, but definitely growing. I kind of backed into it by helping out on highway project like I described above. What also helped out was the experience I already had with the Land Services Department of the larger statewide electric provider.
A lot of smaller co-ops have been thrust into the 21st. century by technology and it's opening their eyes. Two of my co-op clients actually have an attorney on staff and the others do not. One has a small town"good ol' boy" lawyer retained just in case. Attorneys in the utility business are actually a catalyst for surveying work. Like I said, power providers pay bigass insurance premiums and liability is a big issue. All of them understand there is a 'higher reality' as to whether they are operating within public R/W and dedicated easements. And keeping electrical facilities within prescribed criteria is also a public safety issue.
And it helps that they are considered non-profit organizations (as opposed to quasi-public utilities with stock-holders). They have the revenues and as long as expenses can be justified toward providing service to a subscriber, they are all for it.
Our major power providers have their own survey staff, but the others don't seem to think there is any issue (one of the others is in 14 states).
Bill93, post: 400705, member: 87 wrote: You need a different type of cap or tag for easement monuments to reduce confusion (at least the fonfusion for those thorough enough to read stamping or look at a plat).
I don't know how common it is, but I've seen plats with yellow caps for boundary monuments and pink caps for reference and other points.
I've also seen this used in very limited circumstances, and it works great until porcupines and raccoons chew the caps off.
I think it would be a very confusing world if every easement had to be monumented. There are a few times when it would be beneficial but for the most part, I doubt it would help anyone. That is why we are licensed, so we can make that decision from an unbiased, professional perspective. Sadly, the reason we have all the rules and regs is because somewhere, somebody took advantage of the lack of a particular rule or the vague wording in a rule. For many years we never had a rule or reg that said a surveyor had to set the boundary corners. We always thought it was a given, kind of the idea that the corners were a major part of the survey. Common sense, right? Ha! We started noticing that we were headed to a time where setting the monuments would be the exception. So, our Plat Act and Technical Standards were rewritten to include setting monuments (boundary, not easement corners). My point is that some day, professionals will be experts at following rules blindly and will be unable to make a decision based on the public good.
