Are you required to record a plat of a retracement survey even if you don't reset any corners?
In Washington, no:
[?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ ]
(iv) Differences in linear and/or angular measurement between all controlling monuments that would indicate differences in spatial relationship between said controlling monuments in excess of 0.50 feet when compared with all locations of public record: That is, if these measurements agree with any previously existing public record plat or map within the stated tolerance, a discrepancy will not be deemed to exist under this subsection.[?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ ]
It seems to me 0.50' is arbitrary and denys the surveyor's purview to determine what is or is not a material discrepancy when conducting a survey.?ÿ 0.50' on a 2,000 acre ranch parcel may not be material, but 0.49' on an urban ?¬ acre lot is certainly cause for alarm and should trigger an ROS.
I was licensed for 36 years in Washington State and the coddling attitude of the State Licensing Board was a source of irritation for 15 years, endless irrational arbitrary "requirements" supposedly to protect the public.?ÿ For career advancement reasons I moved and was licensed in a different (also recording) State where the State Board was less authoritarian and felt more comfortable conducting my profession as I saw fit, not guided by unreasonable State "punch lists."
It seems to me 0.50' is arbitrary
Any threshold is arbitrary, but it would make a lot more sense to set some limit like 0.5 or 0.25 +500 ppm that allows for a difference between urban and rural.
Quantity standards applied to quality issues will always fail to some degree. A relative position tolerance with an absolute floor usually functions best in practice. I do not advocate for separating rural and urban. Doing crap work based on our perception of current value is still crap work. It's not that hard to do it right.
Quantity standards applied to quality issues will always fail to some degree. A relative position tolerance with an absolute floor usually functions best in practice. I do not advocate for separating rural and urban. Doing crap work based on our perception of current value is still crap work. It's not that hard to do it right.
This is the attitude that I disagree with.?ÿ You are undoubtedly a great surveyor, but your instinct is not to find out what the client actually needs but rather to force them to accept what you feel they should have.?ÿ It??s the one size fits all mentality that bothers me.?ÿ A rural lot does not need to be surveyed to the same accuracy as a lot in Manhattan (my guess is that you could do it more efficiently and precisely than most).?ÿ Since you brought up accuracy, I would rather see stricter requirements regarding the robustness of the monuments we set than increased precision.
Now that most states require a four year degree, documented apprenticeships, and nearly sixteen hours of testing prior to becoming a PLS, why should there be procedural requirements that cannot be negotiated??ÿ Why is Maine the only state where a PLS can use his professional judgment to create a contract tailored to the unique needs of his client?
If it cost more to do a job right you would have a point. When it comes to boundaries you have two situations. Either I'm recovering a boundary or establishing one. If I am recovering it my duty is to the public. It is beyond my authority to do crap work wherein property is reassigned. If I am establishing it should be to a high enough quality that owners a d following surveyors aren't keft wondering what I was trying to do.
Back in the day of chaining and manual theadolites it did cost more to measure well. These days it almost takes more effort to screw it up. I am well in tune with the desires and needs of clients. They aren't always the same thing. The mark of a professional is steering them to what they need and prodiving it. I've done very well in that regard and expect to continue for a bit longer.
a boundary survey may be an opinion today but after 60 years of good faith reliance it's nice to know there was a survey. Sure if left up to people today they will often choose to save a few nickels but it is best to require adequate recorded documentation. It's just one of the obligations that should come with land ownership since we as a society ordain the concept of land titles and our courts have to sort out the messes paid for by future people who did not cause the issue in the first place.
Not in Idaho. Item 1, Table A is not optional here. If any triggers for an ROS exist you file. You don't have to record the ALTA (a d I wouldn't), but the ROS is still required.
You are missing the point, the judgement doesn't achieve anything if your neighbor doesn't know.?ÿ
The fact that a land survey is not legally binding is exactly why letting your neighbor know is crucial. If it was legally binding then to bad for your neighbor if he didn't know about it before he built his addition, but since it is not legally binding,?ÿ it's to bad for you that your neighbor built an addition based on his own survey that you didn't know about, and the judge sides with his surveyor in court because there was no acquiescence to your survey because your neighbor didn't know about it.?ÿ
It does sound arbitrary. In Alaska the "material discrepancy" standard is left up to professional judgment. There are endless arguments, and wildly differing opinions on what a material discrepancy is. I am not sure which way is better, but 0.5' sounds ridiculously low for most areas. It is actually lower than the reported precision of most original surveys in the west (1 link). Very few rural property owners care about 0.5'.
@murphy the rural worthless land attitude has created a ton of future work for surveyors by previous surveyors. When something valuable is discovered like oil, then those boundaries get a lot of money thrown at them! Been there. Timber is another example, been to court on that one because of crummy cheap surveys done 50+ years prior, like a staff compass and 1320' to lay out a 40 ac parcel instead of a proper survey. Bad surveying always come back to bite a generation or two down the road regardless of how rural it was at time of survey.
SHG
Spot on. My family bought 18 acres for 400/acre in 68. Sold the last of it in 92 or so for 90k plus per acre. It would have been worth more if the SURVEYOR hadn't monumented the 'worthless' access 0.8' too narrow.