Do you include marking property lines as part of a survey?

We do whatever the clients wants, or needs done.
Stake with inter-visible stakes, corners only, topo and boundary with out setting anything...Depends on the client

One thing I learned from Larry Phipps was to give clients options to choose form, therefore our proposals generally offer:

1) Staking Fee
2) Certified Plot plan fee
3)Set Pins or Concrete Bounds

I don't understand the question. How is it "extra" to charge for a service provided to a client?

If you mean do I give a price that the client does not know what it includes, and then itemize charges for everything, the answer is no.

I assume you are wanting to argue that we should sell a "survey" and that it should contain a standard list of services. That we should not be free to contract with the client for what they want or need. That seems a bit out of character for you.

N/A

Typical job site

Yes, as we do boundary drawings as Plans of Survey requiring monumentation.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_910525_e.htm

But "Sketches", prepared for various reasons, are just that, that do not require monumentation.

Cheers,

Derek

Let me rephrase the question...

WHen you survey a large parcel, say 50-100 acres; what percentage of time do you mark the lines?

I would say for us, it's over 90%.

Duane

No, I am arguing that:

In my area we almost always mark the property lines when performing a survey on a larger parcel. And I would say we ALWAYS mark the lines on newly created parcels.

If you usually do NOT mark the lines, then I can understand why the additional reproducible bearing base is so important. When lines are properly marked, the the line is evident on the ground and (in general) the evidence trumps any bearing.

> Since I'm still in the arguing mood, here's something that probably also varies over the country (and world).
>
> Do you include marking property lines as part of a survey?
>
> or do you charge extra for it?
>
> (Now I'm not talking about 1 acre lots where you can see pit to pin, I'm talking about larger parcels. )

Generally, around my area of practice (New River Valley of Virginia), marking the lines are NOT included in the beginning estimate (by any company). I also make them aware of that fact. If they would like the lines marked in a particular section or area or for a specific reason, I usually ask them and try to accommodate that request.

In WV, where I went to school, most rural/mountain surveys were done for timbering/clearing and the cost of marking lines is typically included in the the estimate or cost agreement.

It's just a region by region, area by area thing. Definitely no clear cut answer.

Carl

Duane

:good:

Yes, on less than 50% of my surveys.

My fee is more when marking boundaries because it takes more time and labor.

This is timber country and boundaries are often located today and gone tomorrow. We set tpost that are more findable after timber crews have finished their harvest.

Seller wants minimum survey that would include monuments, locations or no survey at all if bank and title company will use the last one.

Buyer wants to know where everything is, monuments, boundary, and their setback distances and utility locations.

It is all chosen by price. After a week or few years, that all changes. They then want everything by need and feel that cutting brush should cost minimum wage instead of surveyor's fees.

Boundary marking gets less and less every year.

0.02

Let me rephrase the question...

It's significantly more labor intensive to mark property lines West of the Cascades. We always mark them for logging projects (of course) and for most large acre projects but we leave it up to the Client and their budget.

Duane

> If you usually do NOT mark the lines, then I can understand why the additional reproducible bearing base is so important. When lines are properly marked, the the line is evident on the ground and (in general) the evidence trumps any bearing.

Well, unless those line monuments you've set along where you suppose the boundaries to be are called for in a conveyance of record, they would not be anything other than some surveyor's idea of where the boundary MIGHT be, hardly conclusive evidence. The boundary will, of course continue to be where it is described in the conveyance.

So, if you want to fix a boundary in the position of intervisible markers that are not of record, the adjoining landowners would need to execute an agreement to that effect. Otherwise, the line stakes are only correct if they're correct.

Kent

> > >
> Well, unless those line monuments you've set along where you suppose the boundaries to be are called for in a conveyance of record, they would not be anything other than some surveyor's idea of where the boundary MIGHT be, hardly conclusive evidence. The boundary will, of course continue to be where it is described in the conveyance.
>
> So, if you want to fix a boundary in the position of intervisible markers that are not of record, the adjoining landowners would need to execute an agreement to that effect. Otherwise, the line stakes are only correct if they're correct.

Yes Kent, Not sure how they mark lines in Texas but Line stakes or Line Blazes are placed on the line (and not with a compass). They would generally have a higher probability of being correct than an easily transposed number on a plan derived from a single sun shot or coordinate pair.

Not sure why you would want to keep the location of the property line a secret from the landowner but... What good is a survey if the landowners don't know where the line is? Do you make the landowner hire you each time he wants to cut a tree or construct a road?

Personally, I'd rather see a parcel with a blaze line all the way around it and no corner monumentation than four corner pins and no evidence along the property lines. Hundreds of blazed trees are hard to move whereas a pin can easily be moved or removed. And if you run plenty of barbed wire along the line, the loggers will usually leave the tree (or at least a high stump)

> > Definitely no clear cut answer.
>
> Carl

Yes, clear-cuts can be a problem. Good pun even if it wasn't intentional.;-)

> > > Definitely no clear cut answer.
> >
> > Carl
>
> Yes, clear-cuts can be a problem. Good pun even if it wasn't intentional.;-)

har. har.

🙂

Kent

> > If you usually do NOT mark the lines, then I can understand why the additional reproducible bearing base is so important. When lines are properly marked, the the line is evident on the ground and (in general) the evidence trumps any bearing.
>
> Well, unless those line monuments you've set along where you suppose the boundaries to be are called for in a conveyance of record, they would not be anything other than some surveyor's idea of where the boundary MIGHT be, hardly conclusive evidence. The boundary will, of course continue to be where it is described in the conveyance.
>
> So, if you want to fix a boundary in the position of intervisible markers that are not of record, the adjoining landowners would need to execute an agreement to that effect. Otherwise, the line stakes are only correct if they're correct.

True... and those line marks would hold no more importance than the corner monuments...

"they would not be anything other than some surveyor's idea of where the boundary MIGHT be"

Kent

> Not sure why you would want to keep the location of the property line a secret from the landowner but... What good is a survey if the landowners don't know where the line is?

Well, I'm all in favor of marking boundaries in a way that landowners can keep track of. The purpose of the original survey is to define the boundaries of a tract in such a way that they can be identified or re-established at any time into the foreseeable future. If a landowner wants to expend the large sums that placing intervisible monuments at intervals along his boundaries costs, I'm certainly willing to do it. Generally, when the line monuments are of record, they merely inflate resurvey costs if the basic tract is well defined and accutely surveyed.

For example, just this weekend I was out finishing up setting line stakes along about 1.5 miles of boundary of a tract that I surveyed last year. I rough staked the lines for clearing that was done with a Hydro-Ax and once the lines were open enough for the fence contractor's work, I set rebar at approximately 500 ft. intervals along the lines that are defined as a matter of law by the monuments at the endpoints called for in the deed. The Hydro-Ax clearing cost the landowners about $12,000.

So, now there are rebars to use to align the mile and half of wire fence, and the boundaries are as described in the conveyance last year. Seems pretty simple to me.

[sarcasm]All you need to mark boundaries is flo glo paint on a stick and you are ready to roll.[/sarcasm]

I've been following the series of articles written by Larry P.

It would be a good read for anyone looking to offer surveying services to clients and showing them the value of the different services we offer.