With the economy improving (at least in the areas I work in), I am getting more and more requests that sound like people are doing design work off of an ALTA Survey. Either one my company did, or one someone else did. Typically this comment comes from an architect or conceptual planner.
As most surveyors know an ALTA Survey has to do with title, not design. Anyone have a note that they would mind sharing, so I can come up with my own, that states something to the affect of "Do not use this ALTA Survey for Design".
If contours are required on Table A, that basically implies design will be done. Not an issue for me- if that item is checked you can bet I'm getting paid as though it's a design survey.
Besides- I can't think of anyone around here that designs anything off a PDF or hard copy of a survey. Handing over CAD files is an entirely different issue.
Why wouldn't you use an ALTA plan for design? Especially if the option to acquire elevations is checked? Once the plan is in the clients hands you have to be prepared for whatever use they may have. I mean, you have located the improvements accurately, so why not?
Dtp
Everyone I've ever done that required vertical relief was use for design.
ppm, post: 384043, member: 6808 wrote: As most surveyors know an ALTA Survey has to do with title, not design
You could look at it from 180 degrees as well...you can't design without know what encumbers the property and usually without obtaining funding upfront (which requires an ALTA survey).
In the market where I work, an ALTA survey, with topography and designated utilities, is the standard design base
foggyidea, post: 384047, member: 155 wrote: Why wouldn't you use an ALTA plan for design? Especially if the option to acquire elevations is checked? Once the plan is in the clients hands you have to be prepared for whatever use they may have. I mean, you have located the improvements accurately, so why not?
Dtp
Because ALTA's don't normally include invert elevations of storm drain and sewer structures, or vertical info on curbs across the street, or street elevations several hundred feet past the property... all critical design items.
This is a topic that has worried be to some extent for years. The spatial relations we depict should not be questioned, but, the level of precision on certain items may not be adequate for final design. For example, if we are provided information that says a certain buried line runs from here, to there, to over by that other place, that is what we show on our drawing. The fact that such a line exists is important. Knowing absolutely, exactly where it runs throughout its entire course may be critical in the final design of things. Normally, that could involve exposing the line rather than merely providing what we normally provide. I can see some designer locate something like a parking lot light pole based on the semi-crude information provided by the standard ALTA. Then when they begin to dig the hole for the base to be poured all Heck breaks loose. It must be that *%*@%$#^ surveyor's fault.
One person's concept of precision is not necessarily the same as another person's view. Especially once the doodoo has hit the propulsion device.
An ALTA is not the basis for design. The Purpose of the ALTA, states nothing about it. It is a financial / insurance tool. If a client wants to add that to it as item 21 I suppose they can, but Item 5 doesn't even make a statement that, if it is checked the ALTA Survey is for design purposes. Item 5 does not change the purpose of the Survey.
I mention this for reasons like Holy Cow and Jim in AZ mention. The items on the ALTA meet the precision requirements for an ALTA, but there are times that they do not meet precision requirements for architectural or civil design.
Thats true and most of the time I am doing a topo for the engineer before It ever gets to the need an ALTA stage. I try to head this off upfront but It happened to me a couple weeks ago. I was asked to do a boundary, then asked to make it an ALTA and then back to your basic boundary.
Well of course it might not show EVERY LITTLE THING that a pre-design topo might show, but it better be good enough to use to start scaling buildings, parking and such. Maybe more information will be necessary but a hard copy blueprint better be accurate and to scale! And it so, then why couldn't it be used for whatever purpose the client needs? This is kind of like the warnings that come on merchandise "Not to Be Used for any other purpose than it's intended use".
Do you think that by placing that note that you are somehow reducing your liability? You're dreaming then.
How about subdivision plans creating new lots and property lines? Can they be used to scale and place a house? Why not? The plan is intended to create the lot, NOT TO BE USED for design? Yeah, I doubt it.
foggyidea, post: 384074, member: 155 wrote: Well of course it might not show EVERY LITTLE THING that a pre-design topo might show, but it better be good enough to use to start scaling buildings, parking and such. Maybe more information will be necessary but a hard copy blueprint better be accurate and to scale! And it so, then why couldn't it be used for whatever purpose the client needs? This is kind of like the warnings that come on merchandise "Not to Be Used for any other purpose than it's intended use".
Do you think that by placing that note that you are somehow reducing your liability? You're dreaming then.
How about subdivision plans creating new lots and property lines? Can they be used to scale and place a house? Why not? The plan is intended to create the lot, NOT TO BE USED for design? Yeah, I doubt it.
With PDF files now it is to easy to get dimensions to the 10th of a foot (maybe even better). PDF programs have settings like OSNAPs in CAD. If you put a utility line on an ALTA, and it is where it was painted (which in these parts +- 2' is the utility locators tolerance), someone dimensions it off a PDF of an ALTA, or even worse a CAD file, and that gets hit. I just want there to be something on the map so there is a warning. Not a matter of reducing liability, just something that says "HEY YOU, THIS IS NOT TO BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE THAN WHAT IS CLEARLY STATED AS THE PURPOSE IN NUMBER 1, OF THE MINIMUM DETAIL REQUIREMENTS".
I said nothing of subdivisions.
I agree with most everything said. I prefer to educate my clients as to what product they expect before I spend any of their money. Typically an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey would cover only the property described by title and perhaps five feet beyond. Generally if one stops there your map wouldn't be considered design worthy. Design surveys are usually driven by the reviewing agency, terrain and value of the real estate. The City of Seattle for instance wants spot elevations every 25' at the gutter line and top of curb and panel corners for 50 feet beyond the boundary of the project and utility inverts at connecting structures for pipes that traverse the project limits. Not to mention being tied into their horizontal and vertical control irrespective of the deed calls. If you happen to have a curb ramp in your picture be prepared to have a detail of it with more elevations than you can imagine. None of this is standard issue for the ALTA/NSPS map; I usually end up providing three distinct maps that include a record of survey.
James Fleming, post: 384054, member: 136 wrote: In the market where I work, an ALTA survey, with topography and designated utilities, is the standard design base
I've had architects call me asking for an ALTA Survey, which I've understood is to be used as a design base. I've sometimes managed to convince them that they really need a topographic map which can be upgraded to an ALTA at a future time.
flyin solo, post: 384045, member: 8089 wrote: I can't think of anyone around here that designs anything off a PDF or hard copy of a survey
Unfortunately around here this seems to be a new trend. Even from 35 year old surveys.
Client education is very important, Sadly, too many times were are speaking with someone about four levels below "the ones who know everything".
I had a significant ALTA years ago that expected all buried lines to be shown. Not just service lines that might normally be marked courtesy of ONE CALL but lines running between buildings. The problem was that they had no employees who actually knew where the lines ran. They definitely weren't going to pay to expose every line. So, we finally worked out something that kept them sort of happy and me sort of happy, but definitely not what they asked for coming out of the chute.
ppm, post: 384069, member: 6808 wrote: The items on the ALTA meet the precision requirements for an ALTA, but there are times that they do not meet precision requirements for architectural or civil design.
[SARCASM]Just tell that to the judge and you should be fine..,[/SARCASM]
We do lots of site plans, seldom do ALTA's, the site plans are for design, the ALTA's don't have enough information for my engineering clients to use for design.
Two similar products, but they are different.
RADAR, post: 384099, member: 413 wrote: [SARCASM]Just tell that to the judge and you should be fine..,[/SARCASM]
Pretty easy "Your Honor, here is the Purpose of and ALTA Survey per the published standards. My map certifies that it is done to those standards"
i should say that working "inside" a civil company, it's rare that we do an ALTA for a site that either 1. won't have significant design coming or 2. is the result of completed design out of this office.
basically, i treat every ALTA as if it's a design and vice versa- locates, inverts, yadda yadda. makes billing, planning, procedure consistent and, therefore, a bunch less to worry about.
A completed Table A should be included in the contract for all ALTA Surveys. This covers utilities, contour intervals and other important site detail. This is a valuable tool for communicating with the Client. Many Clients think of an ALTA as an upgraded survey instead of an instrument for obtaining title insurance.
