Maine is the only state I’m aware of that has true Land Surveyor / Client privilege. A client has the ability to hire a PLS and contractually oblige him to refrain from discussing any or all aspects of their boundary survey with abutters or anyone else. Knowledge is a valuable commodity (just ask Google). No one should be required to give information away for free whether it is to the state or their neighbor.
Sometimes a client needs time to figure out how to deal with a serious boundary problem, such as an encroachment. Tough luck if you live in a recording state. I’ve worked in one recording state and certainly appreciated the increased number of plats. I didn’t, however, like the periphery details that seemed to creep into the requirements for recording. For example, Conway, NH required that all structures on abutting lands be located if within 100’ of the subject boundary. NH, a recording state, created a system where municipalities could extort PLSs for data that they in turn use to assess the value of lands not owned by the client. A slippery slope…
I’d be interested to see the recording fees in non-recording states versus recording states. NC only requires subdivision plats to be recorded ($25). Maine varies per registry but it costs about the same as NC. I suspect that recording states require more periphery details as a condition of plat approval and have much higher recording fees. Not only do municipalities in recording states use survey clients to provide them with free data, they likely charge them more to do it.
With all that said, there may be some utility in having recording states in the PLSS if the conditions of plat approval are kept to a minimum. A good system is designed to isolate the inevitable errors encountered within, thus preventing them from causing harm throughout. In practice, the PLSS often does the opposite. Since an erroneous survey has the potential to harm noncontiguous parcels, it may be a bit more sensible to require recording in the PLSS.
What if a law said, in essence, it doesn't have to be recorded, but if it isn't, it can't be used. Suppose the law stated that if a survey is not recorded within 90 days of the date on the face of the survey, it may not be introduced in court, may not be mentioned in a deed, may not be used to obtain a zoning or building permit, and all professionals licensed by the state must, before examining any plat, check the date and that the plat has been recorded; if it hasn't, they can't look at it.
Naturally the law would only apply to plats prepared after the law goes into effect.
and all professionals licensed by the state must, before examining any plat, check the date and that the plat has been recorded; if it hasn't, they can't look at it.
That part sounds especially counterproductive.
Recording laws in Oregon apply to cases where property monuments are set. Any such monument is going to be the monument of at least one other property, in most cases not the clients.
If I don't set such monuments, I'm not obliged to share the results of the survey with anybody. I am obliged to do the survey in a manner that "protects the rights of the public". But if you have the impression that anybody can demand to see the results of such a survey you are mistaken. It is quite common to postpone, or dispense with, pinning property corners for just this reason. There are lots of things I do that the public has no right to see.?ÿ ?ÿ?ÿ
... NC only requires subdivision plats to be recorded ($25).
From my home county (Washington County, Oregon) and typical of the local area.
Subdivision filing fee
$2200?ÿ Deposit base fee
$?ÿ ?ÿ50?ÿ Deposit per lot and tract
$ 435?ÿ Plus survey filing fee
So the fee is going to be $3000 for even a small effort. And this is just for the plat. The improvements must be completed, loads of fees go along with that.?ÿ?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
What specifically do you mean by "plats"??ÿ Are you referring to maps that subdivide land??ÿ Or are you referring to a retracement survey of boundary lines from a deed or previously recorded map (or plat)??ÿ Or both?
"Plat" is the typical term used for a recorded map in N.C. The $25 fee stated by Murph is incorrect.
The statewide mandated fee for recording a map at any County Register of Deeds is $21 per sheet.?ÿ
There are basically three classes of recorded maps.
1) Boundary survey that requires no certification other than the surveyor $21
2) Exempt or exception map (anything other than a subdivision by definition or a boundary). Subject to a County or City review fee ranging from free to $200+/-,
?ÿ ?ÿ depending on the location.
3) Subdivision plat. Subject to a County or City review fee ranging from a nominal amount to thousands of dollars depending on location and number of lots.
?ÿ
I would believe that any client has the right to request that their survey remain private information
Apart from state mandated recording, I would not welcome the lawsuit they would file against me or any other surveyor.
@norman-oklahoma- exactly right
You only have to record when you do something the effects people besides your client, like set a monument. Boundary information that is only known by one side is not very valuable. Recording states have a more stable candastre, and saves landowners money. Less need for courts and multiple surveys.?ÿ
Alaska, a recording state, charges $20 for the first sheet, and $5 for additional sheets. All plats (and deeds) are available online for free.?ÿ
In New Mexico, another recording state the fees vary by county, but $20-$25 dollars is common.
?ÿThe PLSS, it isn't any more susceptible to bad locations being perpetuated to distant locations than metes and bounds descriptions. Maybe it seems like that because parcels tend to be bigger in PLSS states? I guess fence line surveying is more common in Colonial states, so relative locations don't really matter.?ÿ?ÿ
In Colorado, county surveyors keep boundary surveys indexed by section, township and range, so we know who and how monuments were set.
In my own experience, I've had very bad luck working for the very few landowners who insisted on "secrecy" of boundaries. I have all to learn about Maine!
Since I live in an area that has a history of unrecorded surveys I have no use for the practice as a rule. I sorta feel like the secrecy idea you describe is a foolish idea and serves no practical or useful purpose as it applies to our "profession".?ÿ
However, I do understand that sometimes it is necessary and have done it on several occasions.?ÿ
In Colorado, county surveyors keep boundary surveys indexed by section, township and range, so we know who and how monuments were set.
In my own experience, I've had very bad luck working for the very few landowners who insisted on "secrecy" of boundaries. I have all to learn about Maine!
?ÿThe PLSS, it isn't any more susceptible to bad locations being perpetuated to distant locations than metes and bounds descriptions. Maybe it seems like that because parcels tend to be bigger in PLSS states? I guess fence line surveying is more common in Colonial states, so relative locations don't really matter.?ÿ?ÿ
I don't know that the PLSS is more susceptible to bad locations, but from my experience working in both M&B and PLSS states, it certainly seems more susceptible to poor procedures, most critically aliquot part breakdowns in rural areas. If the crew doesn't go the distance to recover that original monument (or remaining accessories), if the surveyor is not diligent in their research and misses crucial information, if the surveyor for some reason does not hold a monument that he/she should have, then a simple breakdown can cause parcel lines to fall far away from occupation and/or the proper breakdown solution.
M&B surveyors can certainly screw things up badly, but in my experience it is more difficult to unravel the domino effect of a bad full section breakdown than it is to recover and sort out the significance of monuments on a couple of equivalently-sized parcels in M&B-land. Of course, that could be because I started surveying in a M&B state and so I am more comfortable with that.
?ÿ
All land survey systems can benefit from a recording system. A public pedigree of monuments and other conditions lends stability to boundaries. It prevents the 'secret' surveyor from aiding unscrupulous landowners in the theft of property rightly owned by others. It prohibits the 'survey dynasties' who hold fellow professionals and the public hostage by keeping records private.
The charge of all surveyors is to protect the public. We don't need to apologize for making money, but we shouldn't be allowed to do so by fomenting discord and hiding evidence to aid in theft.
In Idaho, stopping work to attempt resolving a problem is not only possible it is often a legal requirement. You can't use that as an excuse to produce a private map and avoid recording altogether.
Recording is not the end all, but I'll never survey in s non-recording State again.
I'm not sure that it is fenceline surveying if you mean that Colonial Surveyors don't gather enough evidence before holding a fence. It does seem like Colonial Surveyors may be more of the mindset of Justice Cooley concerning evidence of acquiescence.
When I first began using my stamp it was a relief to come across riparian boundaries. They were fluid (no pun intended) and didn't require any type of geometrical balancing. The more I survey the more I appreciate laws that reinforce a perception of all boundaries as dynamic.
That fellow from Singapore, who created a firestorm of posts, hammered home the fact that even if you use the best measurement techniques with the best equipment and ignore physical monuments in the pursuit of geometrical purity, boundaries will still move around. Better to accept them as constantly subject to some shifting than to imagine there's a fixed solution.
I think poor procedures vary more by state than by PLSS vs. Colonial States. Metes and Bounds descriptions with distant POB's are just as susceptible to large scale screw ups as the PLSS.?ÿ
By far the biggest source of screw ups that I have seen by modern surveyors is caused by secrete surveys. How can you expect to be able to analyze the decisions of those who came before without access to their surveys??ÿ Of course your neighbor's survey won't agree with yours, if your surveyor didn't even know about your neighbor's.?ÿ
I think its pretty telling that most of the complaints about recording requirements, aside from complaints about ridiculously high recording fees,?ÿ come from surveyors in non recording states.?ÿ
Not letting all who are concerned have access to a survey is like getting a court judgement against your neighbor, but not telling him.?ÿ?ÿ
In recording States an ALTA survey is a viable alternative to a boundary ROS if the client wants the survey to be private.?ÿ There's some caveats in that if new monuments are set in substantially the same location (obliterated) a corner record must be filed, and if monument(s) are set which contradict the record (lost) an ROS must be filed.
I've never had a private property owner request an ALTA because they're gawdawful expensive; it's always a commercial entity with millions on the line, i.e. banks, corporations, who want no surprises.?ÿ Usually if it's a savvy player they'll trigger an ROS ($$$) if any boundary problems are revealed to get the boundary into the record if litigation comes up concerning encroachments, etc., which is quite expensive.
Personally I have no problem even in non-recording States if an LS does a boundary survey & finds most monuments in repose, flags up the lines for fencing, grading, etc., consults with the client concerning encroachments, and records nothing.?ÿ That's a private survey and is inexpensive.?ÿ But, and this is a big but, if the LS sets new monuments they must go into the record or it gets confusing.
OTOH, I've bought 3 private properties over the years, all without benefit of a survey (other States).?ÿ You bet I walked the lines and survelled the situation but found not a single monument, found 60 year old fences and all neighbors were respecting our common boundaries.?ÿ Is the *real* boundary determined by a formal survey which finds long obliterated monuments and/or upsets lines based on some distant record monument calculations really going to change occupation and ignore the fences so theoretically I lose 1.5' on the West line of my one acre parcel worth the aggravation??ÿ Me, I don't care, and my neighbor doesn't either.
Most small private property transfers, especially in lotted subdivisions are slam dunks and hiring an LS is a waste of money.
We had a fellow with no license who was doing surveys on the cheap for people in his hometown.?ÿ Eventually he got his mammary in a wringer and quit doing them.?ÿ I had heard of this but went quite awhile before stumbling on to one of his jewels.?ÿ A lady a couple of doors down from where I was working asked what we were doing.?ÿ Once she knew, she asked if her survey pins might help out.?ÿ She had no plat, of course, but she knew almost to the inch where they were because she had watched as he had set the bars.?ÿ She mentioned how happy she had been with his survey because everything came out right where it needed to be.?ÿ By working from record surveys we found plenty of evidence to do our job plus discover how far off his work had been for her.?ÿ He gave her exactly what she wanted alright, just in the wrong place, by quite a bit.
Eventually stumbled onto quite a few of his jobs with more or less the same results.?ÿ Perfect dimensions between bars and at right angles but not in agreement with work by licensed surveyors.
