In my area, there is a practice where local Surveyors do replat surveys by plat, where no actual survey is performed. The local counties require a survey signed by a licensed surveyor to consolidate lots. These lots are usually existing lots that alone do not meet the current minimum lot size required for development. Some of these lots have original monuments and some do not. I refuse to do this type of survey because I believe it to be misleading. I have had clients who have purchased one of these consolidations and asked to have corners recovered. Imagine there surprise when they are quoted the price of a full survey, yet claiming that they already have a survey. The surveyors certification states "this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and is based soley on record information contained on" record plat. I am just wondering if others do this type of survey.
I do some replats and I've worked behind other surveyors replats and I've not heard of anyone doing that. I'm in Texas though. Is that acceptable to your state board?
Sent from my XT1031 using Tapatalk
What you have described isn't even a survey and would definitely not fly around these parts. We do replats but they are basically just plats of existing lots reconfigured in a different manner and they are full blown surveys.
Here in California one use for this type of map is called a certificate of compliance. The Cities and counties ask for this to make sure its understood that the old small lots from 1920 are not buildable. Its typically asked for as part of a building permit
Did the surveyors producing these cosolidation plats do the original subdivision plats. If so and it were recent it's one thing even then you should check if the corners are still in if not then you probably couldn't call it a plat of survey. The only other thing I could see is if it's some sort of goofy quit claim or rezone exhibit.
The County to the north of ours does "paper only" short plats along these lines. However, it must state on the face of the plat, which is usually only 8-1/2" x 11" and included with the short plat paperwork, that "This is a paper Plat only, no survey was made". Many times the perimeter isn't surveyed because their code stated the parent parcel needs to be surveyed but the gray area in the code allows the 1870+/- GLO survey to be the "parent parcel survey". While I don't like them, I can point out to the potential client that no survey was ever made and it states it on the plat information which is included with the title insurance so will require a full survey. Caveat Emptor.
That's quite common here.
If there's no money for a real survey, property is subdivided "partitioned" so the heirs can separate their property taxes. Often a court orders the survey.
Property is paper surveyed using record surveys of the adjoiners property.
Paper surveys are used for takings for highway construction on the biggest Federal Highway Administration projects. There are no highway layouts.
I consider this to be fraud, but there is nothing to be done.
There was a period here in MA when it was very popular because it afforded certain protection from zoning and board of health changes. We could file an Approval Not Required plan, obtain planning board endorsement and, BANG, 3 years protection from BOH changes. Many single subdivision lots were platted (prepared from a previous subdivision plan) were submitted and endorsed without a current survey.
The Board of Registration steeped in with a memo that ended that practice. Thank god!
Around here what you describe is done but typically only for combining existing platted lots within a subdivision. I did one of my own propery combining 2 adjoining lots to eliminate the common lot line that otherwise would have cleaved a shop I was building in two. It wasn't required for a permit but made the bank much more comfortable refinancing having all improvements on a single parcel. I have seen some real nightmares result from paper plat subdivision of lots where new owners had no corners to go by (outside of their imagination) and subdivider insisted they'd had it surveyed despite the bold note on the plat 'No field survey was performed'. They have their place, but to create new boundaries they definitely should be avoided IMHO. I'm not going to put my stamp on something that is likely to cause me grief down the road.
TickMagnet, post: 409734, member: 4378 wrote: Here in California one use for this type of map is called a certificate of compliance. The Cities and counties ask for this to make sure its understood that the old small lots from 1920 are not buildable. Its typically asked for as part of a building permit
I'm not entirely sure you have this right, you may be thinking of a Lot Merger, a Certificate of Compliance is a document requested of the local jurisdiction to validate the legal status of a parcel of land, in short a document validating marketable title. It would not be uncommon to obtain a Lot Merger that is perfected VIA COC.
If all that is happening is a lot line going away why is that a problem ? The ones I have seen do not call themselves a survey anywhere on that plat and usually even state that no survey was performed. There is no reason we can't provide platting or mapping services without doing a survey.
In this county, we have what's called an "Instrument of Subdivision". Basically a paper exercise that allows one to subdivide a lot off of a bigger lot as long as its over 250' wide and over 2.5 acres. Can also be used for consolidation as long as it is improving the current situation. Up until a few years ago ANYONE could draw one up and submit it and it would be approved and registered as a legal document. You can only imagine the problems it creates for local surveyors you have to deal with a plan drawn up and measured by Joe Q. Public..a nightmare. Crappy distances and no monumentation.
It was setup for farmers or the like to be able to cut off a house lot for their family member, or things along that line, without needing to hire a surveyor. A few years ago they changed it a bit so that now it needs to be signed by a surveyor with his seal on it.
We do them quite often but to survey standards. Although we do not show the bearings on them (usually) and distances are rounded to nearest meter. We have to inform the client about them as they are cheaper to do. Most smart clients will opt for the full survey as that results in a better plan and survey markers placed at the corners
foggyidea, post: 409749, member: 155 wrote: There was a period here in MA ...
The Board of Registration steeped in with a memo that ended that practice. Thank god!
Foggy, do you have a copy of the memo or a link? I'd like to take a look and it wasn't redily available on the board website.
Thanks.
Tiglinda, post: 410000, member: 1834 wrote: Foggy, do you have a copy of the memo or a link? I'd like to take a look and it wasn't redily available on the board website.
Thanks.
I don't have a copy, darn it, and it's no longer at the Boards site. It was an advisory ruling that basically stated that recorded plans must be the result of a recent field survey.
Thanks for looking. I was assuming is said you needed a recent field survey. I'll keep trying to find one. There could be one floating around the office.
I have never heard of such a thing here in New York State
Licensed Land Surveyor
Finger Lakes Region, Upstate New York
If this practice continues the Clerk and Recorders Office will to be full of unstaked recorded plats. We as Surveyors are entrusted with preserving boundaries. I don't think this practice follows that philosophy. That is one of the reasons that I refuse to do a paper survey not to mention that I don't want my name associated with what I believe to be a substandard product.
That happens frequently here. But the title on the plat must say it is a compiled plat from record information and no field survey was done.
