All of this today and I can't take any more. Maybe I'll move to Jerusalem. I liked it there.
Commercial site, platted lots so simultaneous creation of the lot lines. They want me to certify there are no gaps or gores between the lot lines. (Dumb, but okay I'll do it). There is an adjoining Lot 4 which I have shown and some of the improvements. They want me to remove all reference to Lot 4 and the improvements (NO). There is a sign for this site in the street. They want me to erase the sign from the drawing (NO). It goes on but that is enough venting for now.
Bruce in Tucson
?ÿ
?ÿ
Keep venting, it is good to get it all out. Reduces stress.
People love to push.?ÿ We must push back, with authority.
I was recently asked to create a drawing that did not show any improvements beyond the boundaries of the lot I was surveying.
There was a common driveway and the neighbor was refusing to sign a common driveway agreement.....
I did so and got paid, end of story
Try explaining to a bunch of telecom ?ÿexecs who think a projection is something you watch old movies on that they aren't qualified to certify their mapping meets any official standards of accuracy after they've been faking it for forty years because they didn't want to pay to have anything professionally surveyed and mapped and further, I'm not their friendly local silver bullet dealer. All with a smile of course!
When clients (or their counsel) attempt to sway me to "edit" a survey I usually give them one chance.?ÿ I explain that everything on the survey is there for a reason and as the professional I retain all the rights to its content.?ÿ If they continue to push I usually get really common with them and tell them to take their pick: like it and lump it or stuff it up their butt and get another surveyor.?ÿ
You'd be surprised how short the conversations are after that...
Hey Bruce - good to see you're still posting here. Haven't seen you on here for a while.
Seems fishy to me that someone would want something removed from the survey anyway.?ÿ What are they trying to hide?
That's the strange part - i can't figure out their real reason. They say it is because they want to make it clear the adjoiner is not part of this survey - but I would think my "Lot 4 (not a part of this survey)" accomplishes that. It has in numerous previous surveys.
Different site, different client: Large movie theater with a huge asphalt parking lot, all paved and striped as you would expect, and of course in the middle of the Tucson area desert. They have asked me to include Item #18 (delineation of wetlands). I'm betting that is a paralegal going down a checklist.
Remember that Bruce does nothing but ALTAs. So this is an ALTA we are talking about. ALTAs require you to show improvements within 5' of both sides of the line. And everything in the adjacent street.
I was doing a Texas VLB survey inside an HOA subdivision and showed everything just beyond the adjacent lot's building offset as I would have on any boundary survey.
Both of his neighbors' houses were across the setback lines without HOA approval and there was a large amount of landscaping of rock walls and garden beds in place along the boundaries because there was an 80+ft drop in elevation from the road to the lake along the 350ft boundaries.
On one side there was a shared asphalt driveway that both landowners had paid for equally with a handshake agreement and the Title Company was claiming that the VLB asked for an agreement between landowners before they would agree to complete the loan and allow the property to close.
The neighbor would not sign anything and 2months in with my client at risk of losing his downpayment on his next residence ask me to just show what was on his lot.
The VLB and Title Company had a copy of my previous surveys showing everything, the one where my client placed a 1ft wide white stripe on his side of the property line, the one with that white painted portion excavated and filled with crushed rock and a flagstone set every 20ft to spread rainfall and the one where he had added lights atop the flagstone.
The Title Company was the stumper as they claimed their underwriter would not issue a policy. Truth was that the neighbor was a friend of the family and they were playing politics on my client's dime and trying to ruin him financially by losing him his down payment on his new home and an attempt to lose the sale of his $300k lakehouse.
By delivering a drawing that ended at the property lines was not actually anything except another drawing so the Title Company would feel they had won as the VLB and everyone else involved had a copy of the 1st drawing that showed everything along with every other version.
I have made it a long term policy to be directly in contact with the VLB and any other lender involved in my boundary surveys and deliver an original set of property descriptions and drawings directly to them because of the personal and political ploys of local Realtors, Attorneys and Title Company.
Now we have 3 competing Title Companies in the county, a whole slew of new Attorneys in practice that took over retiring firms and this sketchy Title Company is losing their grip on things.
Sometimes the surveyor must write a letter to someone's BOR that has nothing to do with surveying. I've contacted theirs, the TDI and Underwriters, when her mother in law was in charge and was attempting to declare how I survey or else she would not accept any of my surveys again and I won't hesitate to write another one about her.
0.02
If it's permeable asphalt it's doing much of what a wetland does. Wonder if it's protected from paving over with impermeable? Declare it all a wetland 😎
If you were closer I'd offer to bring my John Deere tractor over and erase that sign for you.
I just had a paralegal in Washington, DC tell me that my ALTA was unacceptable because I didn't show dimensions from ALL improvements on the (heavily developed apartment complex) site to ALL of the property lines, as required by the Minimum Standards. After 5-6 go-rounds with her I had to speak with her supervisor's supervisor before I found someone with a functioning brain... Retirement is looking better every day!!
I just had a paralegal in Washington, DC tell me that my ALTA was unacceptable because I didn't show dimensions from ALL improvements on the (heavily developed apartment complex) site to ALL of the property lines, as required by the Minimum Standards.
Oddly enough, I once had a paralegal in Phoenix tell me that my ALTA in Washington DC was wrong because I labeled Connecticut Avenue?ÿ as "130' Wide - Nominal" rather than "130' Right-of Way".?ÿ Had to get to a grown up to explain that Congress bought the original land for the federal city and then sold off blocks as-surveyed.?ÿ The streets (within the ?ÿL'Enfant Plan) are the variable width remainder parcels owned in fee simple by the feds with jurisdiction for improvements maintenance transferred to the city.?ÿ?ÿ
