Would the marking of the ground at the corners of a building envelope within a conservation easement be considered the practice of land surveying? Especially if the building envelope along one line is common to a property boundary?
The building envelopes in the Conservation Easement Deed are defined by coordinates to the nearest foot.
The more I look into this project I'm involved in, the more I see a GIS person has defined the limits of the conservation easement, provided legal descriptions, some M&B, some by aliquot parts, some by coordinates in the recorded deed as well as maps as attachements to the deed.
Why does the Nature Conservancy allow this to happen? Is it in their best interests somehow that I'm not seeing aside from the expense of a real survey?
SD
The Conservation Easements I Have Seen Require Setbacks
Typically 20' to the building line, since you cannot build to a line without some disturbance outside the building.
Possibly the wrong word terminology has been used.
Paul in PA
The Conservation Easements I Have Seen Require Setbacks
There is a setback within the building envelope but the envelope is common to a property line and it has been marked on the ground by a GIS person (unlicensed surveyor) with a hand held data collector.
> Would the marking of the ground at the corners of a building envelope within a conservation easement be considered the practice of land surveying? Especially if the building envelope along one line is common to a property boundary?
>
> The building envelopes in the Conservation Easement Deed are defined by coordinates to the nearest foot.
>
> The more I look into this project I'm involved in, the more I see a GIS person has defined the limits of the conservation easement, provided legal descriptions, some M&B, some by aliquot parts, some by coordinates in the recorded deed as well as maps as attachements to the deed.
>
> Why does the Nature Conservancy allow this to happen? Is it in their best interests somehow that I'm not seeing aside from the expense of a real survey?
>
> SD
In Ohio both offering to contract for construction layout and preparation of descriptions have been defined as within the scope of professional practice.
>SUMMARY It is the Board’s opinion that the offer to provide construction staking services to the public (by an unlicensed individual and/or unlicensed firm) would constitute the illegal practice of surveying and is not permissible under Ohio Revised Code Chapter 4733. (Full opinion)
>SUMMARY Based on Ohio Revised Code Chapter 4733, it is the Board’s opinion that only a registered professional surveyor can correctly determine if the description for a parcel of land accurately descripted that parcel of land, its location on the earth's surface, and its relationship to adjoining lands. Accordingly, the preparation of a metes and bounds legal description is clearly the practice of surveying. (Full Opinion)
I would refer the situation to your licensing board and request an opinion. Be sure to supply specifics as well as describing any problems created by the actions.
yes in NC, this is surveying
The way I see it, if you have to know where the property line is in order to correctly place the marks, it is surveying. If the person is working on their own property it might be different. If they are making the determination for someone else, it's pretty questionable.
> Would the marking of the ground at the corners of a building envelope within a conservation easement be considered the practice of land surveying? Especially if the building envelope along one line is common to a property boundary?
>
Absolutely.
> The building envelopes in the Conservation Easement Deed are defined by coordinates to the nearest foot.
>
This would depend on who and how the coords were determined, and there intended and possible future uses.
> The more I look into this project I'm involved in, the more I see a GIS person has defined the limits of the conservation easement, provided legal descriptions, some M&B, some by aliquot parts, some by coordinates in the recorded deed as well as maps as attachements to the deed.
>
IMHO, at least some of this would be considered surveying. This is the big danger of GIS and related databases and coordinate generating applications, a complete mis-use of what they were intended for.
> Why does the Nature Conservancy allow this to happen? Is it in their best interests somehow that I'm not seeing aside from the expense of a real survey?
>
Why do some people try to cut as many corners as possible??? $$$$ and absence of knowledge and professional guidance.
:good:
