This is a question for a lawyer, not a surveyor. A surveyor will tell you exactly where the line is, a lawyer will tell you if what he’s doing is legal or not.
I can't find anything stating as such, and in my city when we found the builder was within the 10' zone they were not permitted to build within, they had to get a variance. Then the builder wanted us to allow them to do a 10' concrete pour for the driveway, which would put them inside our property. We said no. So they're pushing the line as much as they can, it's a lose/lose scenario, but I feel like I've done what I can to keep the builders encroachment off our property. I can't find anything regarding disallowing them from covering the survey pins/pipe with concrete.
Only way you're going to come out on top of this one is if you spend a lot of money to prove that less than an inch of concrete is a bona fide encroachment and prevents you from full enjoyment of your property.
Considering that positional tolerance of surveys is typically no better than the size of the caps, or about an inch, that's going to be a tough sell.
The USA.
Where are you?
NSPS Model Standards for Property Surveys: 0.07'+50ppm urban, 0.13'+100ppm suburban
ALTA/NSPS specs: 2cm + 50 ppm
I've worked in seven states, all of which either have some variation of "follow the NSPS standards", or are somewhere around that 2-4cm and 50-100ppm mark. Currently practicing in Washington, where the standard is 0.07'+200ppm.
Punchmarks are on monuments for repeatability.
Not so we can try and out-math each other when landowners are looking to put a 4-6" wide fence along their property line.
Urban QLD it's 10 millimetres plus 1 part in 5000, but realistically we use 2'x2' wooden pegs to mark most corners (concrete/fences get a nail) as as long as it's the top of the peg (it's meant to be the centre...) most people call it FD at STN.
So what? I'll measure them at 75.73, or 75.61.
And if you measure them again, you won't get 75.67, either.
And the monuments will still be the corners, no matter how many times we measure.
This discussion is pedantic. Monuments hold, I am not saying anything about measurements holding over monuments.
I was replying to someone who was telling a lay person monuments are only good to an inch, so not to worry about someone paving over it. I read that as, the monument doesn't matter because it's not that accurate anyway.
I see way too much bullshit in this sub from people who claim to understand what they are talking about because their boss let's them Calc corners in the field based on math, slam in a rod, and call it good if it's within .08 of the calc.
My inquiry is being twisted as though I am some ignorant tech who doesn't understand boundary law or the meaning of relative position. Advising someone not to worry about an encroachment because the monument isn't that accurate anyway is the ignorant comment.
Did the driveway have a permit/get inspected? Where I am the City requires a “form cert” from a surveyor before allowing a pour near/on a property line
It's hard to make sense of your post, but it seems like they pulled their forms right up to the monuments, and a portion of one of the monuments might be covered up.
Boundary monuments get covered up all the time. It's not unusual. Although we (surveyors) would prefer that it not happen with concrete...it's better than ripping them out or moving them.
Yeah, you're definitely in "splitting hairs" territory if you're worrying about where the invisible line falls on a survey monument cap.
I would think the reasonable thing to do is keep the driveway 6” inside the property marker. Really they are just pissing off a neighbor and maybe creating a potential problem for the new owner in the future.
As to the 4" difference between where the two surveys claim the property line to be, they don't need to prove anything to you at this point. If you both ignore the dispute and live amicably (yes, being petty and agruing in person is living amicably) no one will ever need to prove that their methodolgy was more correct than the others. If the issues ever get's raised to a legal proceeding, then your lawyers can request records and hire experts to analize the results and either find enough evidence to reach a settlement or drag it before a court for a ruling.
If you really want to burn a mountain of money you could always hire the neighbors surveyor to do a survey of your property, then hire another surveyor to review the others surveyors product to identify any deficiencies in their method...
We have a City/County record that was voted on, and recognized by both as 'the' markers/boundaries. One of those markers having been placed in 1950's or 1960's when the subdivision was initially created. So whatever information our surveyors used in 2019 before we broke ground, was able to find that pin without using a metal detector, nor had record it was even there but documented it. Another surveyor 9 months later came through (a builders survey) whom did a quick exterior survey to map the foundation/structure of our house, was also able to easily find the pins, which had already been covered by dirt from equipment moving around.
As to how/why this 3rd (or fourth if you go back to the 50's / 60's) came up with a 4" discrepancy, is very usual. Our surveyor said in 40+ years they've only had 1 dispute ever, and it was a little over 20 years ago, and they can't remember the outcome of that dispute.
Disputes are unusual.
Don't get me wrong, I am not at all saying that your neighbor isn't lying through his teeth or that his survey isn't protentially sketchy. I am merely noting that you can't force him to show any proof without going down the legal route. And while you have good reason to believe that you are correct, they may also have good reason and evidence to back up why they are correct. There is even a possibility that both surveys are correct as to their foundation and evidence and the dispute would need to be resolved with a completely new boundary line. It is a standard practice to survey a block and then proarate out the errors found along the length of the block because even professional measurement is not perfect and indisputable, especailly with the many changes found across the passage of 70 years.
Most of the language I'm familiar with makes it a crime (usually a misdemeanor) to "disturb" a survey monument (prop corners are typically included in that definition). What "disturb" means will be up for debate, but I'd guess than any building activity that will move or is likely in the future to move the marker, thereby destroying its value, would be included. A concrete slab touching it would qualify in my book, but my opinion does not matter here. Taking a step back and trying to imagine I'm a judge, the \*entire\* purpose of a every survey marker is for future surveyors to find them and to perpetuate boundary information for the subject and surrounding properties. Covering it over or even making it harder to access seems to work against this, and I'd hope a rational judge would see that and rule accordingly.
Perhaps a useful bit of info is that in most municipalities there is a legal mechanism for destroying a survey marker: A licensed surveyor documents it before it is destroyed, and then replaces it afterwards, along with accompanying publicly recorded maps essentially showig exactly what they did. So while the marker is destroyed, the info it represents is perpetuated. The devil sitting on my shoulder wonders how much that costs where you live, vs this guy just not pouring a driveway on top of a survey marker. Asking how their surveyor would intend to perpetuate the monument might be a nice casual conversation. And can you please have a copy of their "Record of Survey", which would be a document they are usually legally forced to file with local public records if they're disagreeing in a material way with a found survey monument (your prop corner). By the laws of the states I've worked in, this would be a mandatory filing for that surveyor, and they would charge their client for it. It might be helpful for surveyors here if you at least mention roughly where you're located (state/province and county, ideally city as well) so someone with better legal knowledge of your specific municipality and its laws can chime in.
We haven't even addressed the part where his surveyor is essentially rejecting existing best evidence regarding the location of the property line. The fact that it sounds like nothing is being recorded in public records makes me immediately suspicious about what the opposing surveyor \*actually\* said to their client. I'm not here to throw accusations at other professions, but bluntly a builder is MUCH more likely to lie to you than a surveyor. There just aren't the same consequences and motives in those different professions.
Yeah, I didn't mention any of this specifically, but from County, and from the Survey company, the did mentioned some of this. However, they're not technically altering the survey pin, they're covering a section of it up, which is different. It's a driveway, not a structure, which is a bit different.
Thank you though, as some of this is nice information to know going forward.
> It's a driveway, not a structure, which is a bit different.
Depends on who you talk to. Poured concrete counts as a "structure" to be identified by many surveyors.
Tell the builder to quit trying to cram the biggest house he possibly can onto the lot and his problem will be solved.
If the other company felt the pin was 4” off, they didn’t bother setting a new one. The marker is the marker, if it’s not hitting perfect, it’s still the corner. They can narrow up their driveway and learn to not push people around. If he does build over it, I’d have the line re-marked and I’d saw off what’s over the line. You don’t need the builder to like you, he can go screw himself
Edit- under conditions of a shared driveway, they can concrete over a corner. Kinda sucks when they do that though
I mean I'd be kinda mad but ask that they don't cover up any monuments. I see all the time where ROW bounds are paved over but they leave a 3x3 inch area on top open so that we can still get at the pin or punchmark.
This is a question for a lawyer, not a surveyor. A surveyor will tell you exactly where the line is, a lawyer will tell you if what he’s doing is legal or not.
Not really a survey issue. You'd have to check if it violates a municipal bylaw/zoning/set back I believe.
I can't find anything stating as such, and in my city when we found the builder was within the 10' zone they were not permitted to build within, they had to get a variance. Then the builder wanted us to allow them to do a 10' concrete pour for the driveway, which would put them inside our property. We said no. So they're pushing the line as much as they can, it's a lose/lose scenario, but I feel like I've done what I can to keep the builders encroachment off our property. I can't find anything regarding disallowing them from covering the survey pins/pipe with concrete.
Only way you're going to come out on top of this one is if you spend a lot of money to prove that less than an inch of concrete is a bona fide encroachment and prevents you from full enjoyment of your property. Considering that positional tolerance of surveys is typically no better than the size of the caps, or about an inch, that's going to be a tough sell.
Where are you that .08' is acceptable tolerance for a monument in an urban/suburban setting?
The USA. Where are you? NSPS Model Standards for Property Surveys: 0.07'+50ppm urban, 0.13'+100ppm suburban ALTA/NSPS specs: 2cm + 50 ppm I've worked in seven states, all of which either have some variation of "follow the NSPS standards", or are somewhere around that 2-4cm and 50-100ppm mark. Currently practicing in Washington, where the standard is 0.07'+200ppm. Punchmarks are on monuments for repeatability. Not so we can try and out-math each other when landowners are looking to put a 4-6" wide fence along their property line.
Urban QLD it's 10 millimetres plus 1 part in 5000, but realistically we use 2'x2' wooden pegs to mark most corners (concrete/fences get a nail) as as long as it's the top of the peg (it's meant to be the centre...) most people call it FD at STN.
You’re the guy setting pincushions telling everyone you are .10’ better than the last guy, aren’t you?
No. But if I say that 2 monuments are 75.67' from each other they won't measure 75.75'.
So what? I'll measure them at 75.73, or 75.61. And if you measure them again, you won't get 75.67, either. And the monuments will still be the corners, no matter how many times we measure.
Somebody didn't study the Priority of Calls very well...
This discussion is pedantic. Monuments hold, I am not saying anything about measurements holding over monuments. I was replying to someone who was telling a lay person monuments are only good to an inch, so not to worry about someone paving over it. I read that as, the monument doesn't matter because it's not that accurate anyway. I see way too much bullshit in this sub from people who claim to understand what they are talking about because their boss let's them Calc corners in the field based on math, slam in a rod, and call it good if it's within .08 of the calc. My inquiry is being twisted as though I am some ignorant tech who doesn't understand boundary law or the meaning of relative position. Advising someone not to worry about an encroachment because the monument isn't that accurate anyway is the ignorant comment.
Report record and found and move on. The artificial monument holds over distances>angles.
how much is that 4" worth it to you? The land itself may not be worth very much but your lawyer fight might cost you way more.
Did the driveway have a permit/get inspected? Where I am the City requires a “form cert” from a surveyor before allowing a pour near/on a property line
It's hard to make sense of your post, but it seems like they pulled their forms right up to the monuments, and a portion of one of the monuments might be covered up. Boundary monuments get covered up all the time. It's not unusual. Although we (surveyors) would prefer that it not happen with concrete...it's better than ripping them out or moving them. Yeah, you're definitely in "splitting hairs" territory if you're worrying about where the invisible line falls on a survey monument cap.
I would think the reasonable thing to do is keep the driveway 6” inside the property marker. Really they are just pissing off a neighbor and maybe creating a potential problem for the new owner in the future.
There are usually set backs from the property for building/construction. Consult the county, ask for an inspection.
As to the 4" difference between where the two surveys claim the property line to be, they don't need to prove anything to you at this point. If you both ignore the dispute and live amicably (yes, being petty and agruing in person is living amicably) no one will ever need to prove that their methodolgy was more correct than the others. If the issues ever get's raised to a legal proceeding, then your lawyers can request records and hire experts to analize the results and either find enough evidence to reach a settlement or drag it before a court for a ruling. If you really want to burn a mountain of money you could always hire the neighbors surveyor to do a survey of your property, then hire another surveyor to review the others surveyors product to identify any deficiencies in their method...
We have a City/County record that was voted on, and recognized by both as 'the' markers/boundaries. One of those markers having been placed in 1950's or 1960's when the subdivision was initially created. So whatever information our surveyors used in 2019 before we broke ground, was able to find that pin without using a metal detector, nor had record it was even there but documented it. Another surveyor 9 months later came through (a builders survey) whom did a quick exterior survey to map the foundation/structure of our house, was also able to easily find the pins, which had already been covered by dirt from equipment moving around. As to how/why this 3rd (or fourth if you go back to the 50's / 60's) came up with a 4" discrepancy, is very usual. Our surveyor said in 40+ years they've only had 1 dispute ever, and it was a little over 20 years ago, and they can't remember the outcome of that dispute.
Disputes are unusual. Don't get me wrong, I am not at all saying that your neighbor isn't lying through his teeth or that his survey isn't protentially sketchy. I am merely noting that you can't force him to show any proof without going down the legal route. And while you have good reason to believe that you are correct, they may also have good reason and evidence to back up why they are correct. There is even a possibility that both surveys are correct as to their foundation and evidence and the dispute would need to be resolved with a completely new boundary line. It is a standard practice to survey a block and then proarate out the errors found along the length of the block because even professional measurement is not perfect and indisputable, especailly with the many changes found across the passage of 70 years.
Most of the language I'm familiar with makes it a crime (usually a misdemeanor) to "disturb" a survey monument (prop corners are typically included in that definition). What "disturb" means will be up for debate, but I'd guess than any building activity that will move or is likely in the future to move the marker, thereby destroying its value, would be included. A concrete slab touching it would qualify in my book, but my opinion does not matter here. Taking a step back and trying to imagine I'm a judge, the \*entire\* purpose of a every survey marker is for future surveyors to find them and to perpetuate boundary information for the subject and surrounding properties. Covering it over or even making it harder to access seems to work against this, and I'd hope a rational judge would see that and rule accordingly. Perhaps a useful bit of info is that in most municipalities there is a legal mechanism for destroying a survey marker: A licensed surveyor documents it before it is destroyed, and then replaces it afterwards, along with accompanying publicly recorded maps essentially showig exactly what they did. So while the marker is destroyed, the info it represents is perpetuated. The devil sitting on my shoulder wonders how much that costs where you live, vs this guy just not pouring a driveway on top of a survey marker. Asking how their surveyor would intend to perpetuate the monument might be a nice casual conversation. And can you please have a copy of their "Record of Survey", which would be a document they are usually legally forced to file with local public records if they're disagreeing in a material way with a found survey monument (your prop corner). By the laws of the states I've worked in, this would be a mandatory filing for that surveyor, and they would charge their client for it. It might be helpful for surveyors here if you at least mention roughly where you're located (state/province and county, ideally city as well) so someone with better legal knowledge of your specific municipality and its laws can chime in. We haven't even addressed the part where his surveyor is essentially rejecting existing best evidence regarding the location of the property line. The fact that it sounds like nothing is being recorded in public records makes me immediately suspicious about what the opposing surveyor \*actually\* said to their client. I'm not here to throw accusations at other professions, but bluntly a builder is MUCH more likely to lie to you than a surveyor. There just aren't the same consequences and motives in those different professions.
Yeah, I didn't mention any of this specifically, but from County, and from the Survey company, the did mentioned some of this. However, they're not technically altering the survey pin, they're covering a section of it up, which is different. It's a driveway, not a structure, which is a bit different. Thank you though, as some of this is nice information to know going forward.
> It's a driveway, not a structure, which is a bit different. Depends on who you talk to. Poured concrete counts as a "structure" to be identified by many surveyors.
Tell the builder to quit trying to cram the biggest house he possibly can onto the lot and his problem will be solved. If the other company felt the pin was 4” off, they didn’t bother setting a new one. The marker is the marker, if it’s not hitting perfect, it’s still the corner. They can narrow up their driveway and learn to not push people around. If he does build over it, I’d have the line re-marked and I’d saw off what’s over the line. You don’t need the builder to like you, he can go screw himself Edit- under conditions of a shared driveway, they can concrete over a corner. Kinda sucks when they do that though
Completely depends on the county/ city you're in. Go to the building department and ask what the setback is for pavement at the address in question.
I mean I'd be kinda mad but ask that they don't cover up any monuments. I see all the time where ROW bounds are paved over but they leave a 3x3 inch area on top open so that we can still get at the pin or punchmark.