In Part Table A, Item 17 says:?ÿ
"Proposed changes in street right of way lines, if such information is made available to the surveyor by the controlling jurisdiction..."
The couple ALTA's that I have don in Portland, I have called the local ROW department, and get either no response at all, or the response is you are not asking the correct department. And then they cannot ever tell me the correct department... (If anyone that reads this knows who at the City of Portland (Oregon), would answer this question I would be grateful to know.)
To what length is a surveyor to go in order to seek out this information?
I think you have done more than enough... drop it.
Personally, I don't go fishing for what is just swimming in someones head.
IF you have been told that there is something in the works that does effect your project, that is a different matter. In that case, document your effort and results on the face of your drawings... kinda like you wrote above
The most difficult thing to find is something that never happened.
I don't know the structure of Portland's municipal services but that call goes to Planning & Zoning or Community Development in most of the City's around here.?ÿ?ÿ
Ah yes.?ÿ If the city/county/State agency has made the improvements and your ground survey detects them then it's your duty to research the salient take in the records. Sure, contact the controlling authority for proposed R/W changes but "proposed" is not the same as in the record and if you are stonewalled by the controlling agency deliver/record your survey based on existing conditions with a caveat note.?ÿ?ÿ
One thing I hate about ALTA surveys is they initially?ÿ want you to warranty invisible encroachments, future actions by local jurisdictions, etc.?ÿ Not our job; an ALTA (also ROS surveys) concerns the parcel in its present condition, based on the record and an actual field survey.?ÿ Any verbiage about future or invisible encroachments should be struck from the contract when delivering an ALTA survey.?ÿ I've done dozens of them and they've alway acquiesced, or they found a different surveyor who will sign for future or invisible encroachments.
An obvious R/W take,?ÿ (usually additional lanes and cut curb access restrictions), without proper records at the agency level is not your problem; delineate the encroachment and thet your client and the agency fight over it.?ÿ The government screws up with great regularity; our job is to protect owners from encroachments by both the government and adjacent neighbors.?ÿ
I think the question of proposed changes to street ROW is an important consideration. Many municipalities target widenings long in advance of having the opportunity to take them. Most of the time they use development/redevelopment permit approval as the leverage to get what they need. It would be good to know going into a transaction if this situation will present itself. Granted, in most development deals those conversations are going on several different fronts so a diligent developer should already know the answer to that question.
One place to check would be the Bureau of Development Services website for current Land Use Applications.
The internet is our friend. I found resources for much of Portland at cityofportland.gov
I usually do a reasonable search then cite where I looked and who I called. I have also been known to budget a full day of PM time looking for the correct source. That is on top of value price..
The catch I see here is that a "proposed" change may occur, may not ever occur, may not occur until some wonderful pot of money falls out of the sky.?ÿ If it is not already approved for construction AND funded, it is of no concern to a current transaction.?ÿ We should not be showing "blue sky" on our plats.
Sometimes "proposed" can mean "it's going to happen one way or the other". Check this assessors map for example. Look on the west side of the map south of the Regional Transportation District parcel bisecting the map. There are 5 parcels (7-H, 7-C, 7-G, 7-M & 7-N) that have already been identified as going to need to donate ROW. Bet your bottom dollar any of those go in for a permit, whether it be to redevelop or add a garage, it won't get City staff approval unless the added ROW grant is part of the application.
Taking without compensation should be a Federal crime. That is precisely what letting little dictators steal your rights is all about. One more reason you don't have to worry about me moving into or investing in such areas. Eminent domain out of absolute necessity is much different from this bullying.
PPM,
I have heard of a department called "Long Range Planning". I do not have a contact or number but you might ask Lois Jennings for a number.
She is a planner in the BDS section.
Taking without compensation should be a Federal crime. ...
Uhh.. it's more than that. It's prohibited by the the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be put twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
I think the question of proposed changes to street ROW is an important consideration.?ÿ Many municipalities target widenings long in advance of having the opportunity to take them.?ÿ Most of the time they use development/redevelopment permit approval as the leverage to get what they need.?ÿ It would be good to know going into a transaction if this situation will present itself.?ÿ Granted, in most development deals those conversations are going on several different fronts so a diligent developer should already know the answer to that question.?ÿ?ÿ
Sure, for the developer.
I'd simply let the title company hunt around for this information.?ÿ If they give me something plottable, great, and if not, great.
Thank you for all the suggestions/ responses.?ÿ
A few years ago, Pierce county thought it might be a good idea to make room for a future right-of-Way; just in case they need it...
Right, but you can't be a surveyor for your client and a politician at the same time. Someone wants me to investigate what might happen in the future, I do it, charge for it. Doesn't mean I know what will happen in the future, nor that I approve of any particular government policy. But my investigation has value. I can tell the client what I think might happen. I get paid for a professional opinion, based on my education and experience, applied to my investigation; not for a political opinion.
Exactly the point I was trying to make. I pulled that map through the course of my standard research when putting together a full scope proposal to provide entitlement and construction documents on several of those lots. The Architect had already put together a concept site plan which didn't account for the ROW widening I believe will be required. That makes me think, damn, that's going to be a big deal because the site plan was already tight. Better to bring it up sooner than later.
I'm not going to debate the justness of the action one way or the other but I know what the City's justification will be. If you want to redevelop and increase the density, you need to give us the ROW to get our utilities and services to you. How the compensation is set will be deal specific, maybe there's a credit to their PLD or maybe there's some kind of tax incentive but there is a quid pro quo and eminent domain doesn't usually even come into play. Everyone usually just plays ball.
I can understand why you want to add the "proposed" future to your plat if the area in question is like the one in your attachment. I would have a long chat with my client, but, would never recommend showing anything that is merely proposed. If the client absolutely insists it be shown on the plat, I would have him provide me with a letter to that effect first so as to clear myself from any claim of damages from the seller whose property I am possibly damaging or accentuating by showing what is currently fiction. There may be several other proposals floating around that would affect the utility of the tract from draft zoning changes to potential height restrictions. Again, it is not our job to anticipate every negative thing that MIGHT occur. or every positive thing that might make the tract more valuable We are to show what is real and current.
Sorry, Duane. We are going to have to disagree on this topic. Our license does not extend to "blue sky". We should not cross the line into areas that fall outside of our technical expertise. It is the client's role, not ours, to investigate such things.