Working on an existing building and parking lot site. Have done a bunch of surveying services on this.
The site is going to have construction on it, and the adjoining properties (same owner) is going to also. In getting ready for the closing on these two properties we have prepared ALTA's on each site. (I thought we were done, but you know how that goes...)
Since things are going to be different ownerships, we prepared a bunch of easements (20 to be exact). Now I am getting a request (from the lender of course) to show "all proposed easements", since the are going to record at closing. So in regard to proposed easements on ALTA's:
1. Are they required to be shown?
2. Can they be shown?
3. Should they be shown?
I have solved this issue in the past by creating a separate sheet labeled "Exhibit of Proposed Easements". This can also be done to show an overall tract where various tracts are being compiled. Separating what is and what might be is always a good practice.
Have done similar. Any proposed or future items on a separate sheet that does not get certified.
ppm, post: 370938, member: 6808 wrote: Working on an existing building and parking lot site. Have done a bunch of surveying services on this.
The site is going to have construction on it, and the adjoining properties (same owner) is going to also. In getting ready for the closing on these two properties we have prepared ALTA's on each site. (I thought we were done, but you know how that goes...)
Since things are going to be different ownerships, we prepared a bunch of easements (20 to be exact). Now I am getting a request (from the lender of course) to show "all proposed easements", since the are going to record at closing. So in regard to proposed easements on ALTA's:
1. Are they required to be shown?
2. Can they be shown?
3. Should they be shown?
Yes, you charge extra for things not disclosed in the original contract. You should show everything they are willing to pay you to show.
If I'm the one who drafted the proposed easements and I'm intimately involved with the development in general then I'm certainly just as reliable of a source for the proposed information as the controlling jurisdiction is for proposed changes in street right of way lines described in Table A Item 17. As long as the Client is willing to pay for the extra work involved with preparing the proposed info sheet and I do a good enough job describing what it is and what it isn't I don't have a problem including it as part of the survey and stamping it. The ALTA standards are a minimum requirement, not a maximum and heck, Item 21 is open ended anyway...they built in latitude for additional information.
Cameron Watson PLS, post: 370982, member: 11407 wrote: willing to pay for the extra work involved with preparing the proposed info sheet and I do a good enough job describing what it is and what it isn't I don't have a problem including it as part of the survey and stamping it. The ALTA standards are a minimum requirement, not a maximum and heck, Item 21 is open ended anyway...the
You know those projects that you are TOO familiar with... This is one. I agree, I was just always taught that the ALTA was a map of what is here today. Not in the future. I like the separate map or sheet idea, I think it will be approached that way. I remember doing that before, but it was a long time ago. Thank you all.
