 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
 |
 |
|||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2012. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 16
Current Status of
Cadastral Efforts
While the need for an integrated land-information system, or multipurpose
cadastre, has been set forth, implementation of improvement activity has
been largely characterized by single-purpose approaches to only selected seg-
ments of the total system. In other words, these efforts proceed without a
concept of a land-information system as the foundation. This situation is evi-
denced by the disparities in current efforts to improve land-record systems.
Some of the more notable efforts are described in this chapter without at-
tempting a comparative analysis.
2.1 THE UNIMPROVED STATE OF AFFAIRS
Land-information systems in North America today can be characterized in
general as title- and assessment-records systems, most of which have under-
gone only relatively small changes in the last 100 years, and land-planning and
-management systems which have evolved largely since the mid-1960's.
Title- and assessment-records systems are labor intensive and do not pro-
vide necessary information about the land in a timely, unambiguous, authori-
tative, and economical manner. Land-management information cannot readily
be integrated with title and assessment data. Foremost among the problems
inherent in the current arrangement of these systems is that required informa-
tion is generally not accessible in any one location (Ayers and Wunderlich,
1973; Clapp and Niemann, 1977~. A study in Wisconsin, entitled Larld Rec-
16
OCR for page 17
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
17
ords: The Cost to the Citizen to Maintain the Present Land Information Base.
A Case Study of Wisconsin, was designed to report the costs associated with
obtaining and maintaining governmental information about land. As reported
by Epstein (1978), Wisconsin residents in 1976 paid approximately $17 per
person ($34 per taxpayer) for information about the state's 35 million acres
of land. At the county level, the form of land-title recording remains essen-
tially unchanged from the 1800's. At the state and federal levels of govern-
ment, many different agencies collect a great deal of raw data without effec-
tive coordination or integration, thus collecting again and again the same basic
information about essentially the same areas of land (Larsen et al., 1978~.
2.1. l Land Transfer
The land-ownership system that has developed in the United States depends
almost entirely on the recording of documents as evidence of land ownership
and land-ownership transfer. A typical land-title-recording system is a register
of evidence of title. Access to individual documents usually is obtained by
searching alphabetical indexes of the names of grantors and grantees or by
searching a tract index. The tract index is usually not a parcel index but an
index by block or township. The location of a particular document in the
register often is indicated by a numerical identifier that refers to the appro-
priate volume and page of the register. Other times, the reference is a docu-
ment number (Army, 1979~.
Land-title recording typically is a function of county government, except
in three New England states (Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Vermont), in
which it is a function of city and town governments. Hence, there are about
3000 land-title-record systems organized on a county basis and about 500
organized on a city or town basis. Land-title recording may be the responsibil-
ity of a separate, often elected, official, such as a recorder or registrar of
deeds, or the responsibility of the county, city, or town clerk or other official
with additional duties. Estimates of the annual number of transfers of real
property range between 4.5 million and 8.1 million (Army, 1979~.
The efficiency of the system has been severely threatened by more wide-
spread ownership of land, a faster turnover rate in ownership, use of the verti-
cal space dimension in the division of rights in condominiums and for mineral
and air rights, and use of the temporal dimension in which a single parcel,
such as an apartment in a resort area, may have different owners for specified
time periods of each year (Moyer and Fisher, 1973~.
Land-title recording and the related conveyancing process use and produce
the most important data about land. There is an ownership turnover of nearly
10 percent of all parcels in the United States each year, resulting in transfer
costs for real-estate brokers, attorneys, abstracters, title insurers, lending in-
OCR for page 18
18
NEED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE CADASTRE
stitutions, and other information service professionals. These costs in 1974
were estimated to exceed $17 billion in the United States for residential and
farm real estate (Aloyer, 1977~. In addition, operation of land-title-recording
offices and other government offices maintaining land-ownership information
add substantial expenditures to the total land-record-system cost. In Wiscon-
sin, for example, land-related data files maintained outside the recorders office
include (Moyer, 1977) (1) delinquent taxes and special assessments (County
Treasurer); (2) judgment liens, mechanic liens, and pending court actions
(Clerk of Circuit Court); (3) judgment liens (Clerk of Special Courts of Rec-
ords); (4) inheritance liens and probate proceedings (Probate Branch of County
Court); and (5) zoning ordinances and building codes (County Clerk).
A land-title record specifies a certain property right and identifies the per-
son claiming the right. Each parcel of land has several current records that
contain information about the status of title. Title records include various
claims ranging from ownership based on deeds and wills and security interests
based on judgments, mortgages, and construction liens to easements and util-
ity rights of way. A transfer may occur in the entire bundle of property rights
or one or more of them. In each land transaction, a complete examination of
the status of the land title is usually required (Moyer and Fisher, 1973~. Trac-
ing the transaction history is performed typically by an attorney, an abstrac-
tor, or title insurance personnel using the grantor-grantee index, tract index,
or title plant. The recording process throughout most of the United States is
primarily a manual operation, with not more than 15 percent of the jurisdic-
tions reporting use of electronic data-processing equipment in 1971 (Bureau
of Census, 1974~.
The basic elements of the recording process are (1) receiving and entering,
(2) indexing, (3) transcribing and reproducing, (4) storage of work and secu-
rity files, and (5) retrieving.
The most important phase of the recording operation to the system user is
document retrieval. The use of computerized indexes and microfilm reader-
printers has significantly reduced the time and costs to local government for
storing these records. However, the use of this technology has often, in fact,
delayed addressing the real problems of long-needed reform in both land-title-
recording techniques and land-transfer processes.
Over 25 percent of the jurisdictions still hand copy or type some of their
documents. Although photocopying in one form or another is widely used, it
is often expensive and poorly managed and involves much manual operation.
In general, the methods used in the offices of recorders and registrars remain
little changed from those of 100 years ago. Not only have most recording
offices failed to modernize the procedures associated with conveyancing, but
practically all of them also have failed to combine their functions with those
of other local government offices (Ayers and Wunderlich, 1973~.
OCR for page 19
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
2. ~ .2 Property Assessment
19
Property assessors are responsible for (1) locating and describing properties,
(2) appraising or estimating the value of properties, (3) keeping records link-
ing properties to their respective owners, and (4) designating the official value
of properties for tax purposes. To perform these functions, assessors collect,
store, retrieve, and analyze information that is related to the ownership and
use of land parcels. Separate files, linked by parcel identifiers, are commonly
maintained in the areas of legal descriptions, property characteristics, market
data, and ownership data (Almy,1979~.
The basic framework of a property-tax system is established by the statutes
of each state, with local government responsible for the administration of the
property tax laws in all states except Hawaii, Maryland, and Montana. How-
ever, [Iawaii plans to revert to local administration of the property tax in
about 1982. Largely because of overlapping assessment districts, the precise
number of districts is not known. Recent estimates total 13,432, with 9205
at the township level, 1777 at the municipal level, and 2414 at the county
level (Army, 1979~. Property taxes in 1977 produced six out of every ten mu-
nicipal tax dollars and eight out of every ten county tax dollars, decreases of
14 and 12 percent, respectively, from fiscal year 1967. Property taxes ac-
counted for 22 percent of all state and local general revenue in fiscal year
1977, down from a corresponding 28.6 percent in 1967 (Behrens, 1980a).
Equitable assessment remains a primary concern; even as revenue shifts, in-
flation and other influences on value estimation hinder its achievement. The
first requirement of a good assessment system is a complete set of tax maps.
Assessment maps are now required by law in 32 states. A standard parcel
identification system is required in 14 states, and 15 other states have a rec-
ommended system. State requirements provide a measure of standardization
of assessment maps and parcel identfiers within states. There is, however'
little evidence of standardization among states.
Computerization of assessment maps has been limited to system develop-
ment in a few locations. Computerization of assessment records, on the other
hand, has grown significantly since the mid-1960's. Results from a survey
made in 1975 indicate that over 70 percent of assessment districts make use
of electronic data-processing equipment, with the responses revealing a high
correlation between computer use and jurisdiction size. Of those districts
making use of the computer, over 70 percent are involved in the printing of
assessment rolls and valuation notices, over 11 percent support the appraisal
process (e.g., regression analysis), and nearly 7 percent are devoted to sales
analysis, including assessment-ratio studies (Almy,1979~.
The need exists for improved cooperation between the offices of assess-
or and the recorder or registrar of deeds. Both handle much of the same
OCR for page 20
20
NEED FO R A M ULTIPU RPOSE CADASTRE
land data and normally occupy offices in the same government building.
Consolidation of data files and handling activities would greatly assist the
modernization process.
2. ~.3 Land Management
Land management encompasses a broad range of activity that revolves around
the land-resource assessment, planning, and regulation processes including
zoning. In addition to policy decisions in connection with the management of
land and environment, local communities, particularly cities, need detailed
land data by parcels and points for the day-to-day operation of their street,
water, and sewer departments and the administration of building, zoning, and
other land-use ordinances.
Many land-management information systems have been developed since
the mid-1960's to support regional, state,federal, and private decision making.
In most cases these systems are highly automated. They are designed, how-
ever, to meet requirements that are limited in scope. While land ownership
and valuation are important factors in land management, much of the data of
concern, such as geology, soil and vegetation types, available natural resources,
flood plain areas, wildlife habitats, and other environmental patterns, are not
naturally attributed on a land-parcel basis. Therefore, these data are often
organized using a grid cell structure, based, for example, on a selected cell size
such as 2~ acres. The principal flaw is that systems covering the same geo-
graphic region are not able to integrate their land information. Duplication of
data and gaps in data lead to waste in spending and to decisions based on in-
adequate information (Clapp and Niemann, 1977~.
Significant in the data-collection process for land-management-information
systems have been the volumes of remote-sensing data collected since 1972 by
the Earth Resources Technology Satellite and Landsat systems. The 185 km
x 185 km photographic coverage of a single frame is a useful format for multi-
county urban planning agencies, often organized in Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Areas.
2.~.4 Private and Public Boundary Surveys
An area of concern, as property values escalate, is the general poor quality of
existing property boundary surveys and records. A reliable boundary survey,
properly recorded, serves again and again as the basis of legal reference with
each succeeding transaction, thereby relieving future buyers from that por-
tion of escalating costs due to resurveys. But, precise boundary surveys are
costly, which presents the present land owner with the unfortunate dilemma
OCR for page 21
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
21
of bearing the entire cost for such a survey even though the land parcel may
be sold many times in a decade.
The failure to distinguish between precise and unreliable surveys or the dif-
ferent classes of survey reliability of land records and to attach proper warn-
ing signals to plats further aggravates the problem. Mulford (1912) stated that
in the solution of boundary problems, no general rules can be laid down and
that "each man must work out his own salvation." Unfortunately, even today,
established accuracy standards are seldom enforced. Also, because of the ab-
sence of a cadastral survey authority, isolated land surveys, where standards
are adhered to, are of limited value to the general public.
Thirty states have been created out of the public domain and are function-
ing under the Public Land Survey System. Millions of acres have been deeded
to private owners since 1785. Modern subdivision and suburban land develop-
ment tend to move away from the rectangular boundary system toward ir-
regular boundary lines for private land holdings. Precise surveys in such cases
are more difficult to achieve, but in all cases there is an urgent requirement
for accurate property boundary referencing procedures.
The Bureau of Land Management estimates that over 50 million acres in
the western states are urgently in need of resurvey. This is due in part to
fraudulent or inadequate original surveys done prior to 1910 (Committee on
Appropriations, 1979~.
A 1977 Agricultural Department audit of the Forest Service land line loca-
tion program found that failure to locate and mark boundaries properly had
resulted in over 50,000 cases of trespass on national forest lands. It was esti-
mated that it will cost $1 12 million to resolve those problems (Committee on
Appropriations, 1979~.
2.2 PROBLEMS
The problems that characterize current land-information systems may be
categorized as those of accessibility, duplication, aggregation, confidentiality,
and institutional structure (Larsen et al., 19783.
Accessibility problems arise when a government official or private citizen
cannot obtain information for a variety of reasons. The information may sim-
ply not be available, or an unreasonably lengthy search is required. Specific
gaps exist in what is known about the land, or how the land or water is actu-
ally being used. Who owns the land? Are all lands identified and assessed for
taxation purposes? The information to answer these questions may not be
held by public agencies. Too often the data are structured in poor classif~ca-
tion systems with data arrangements and files that limit access to existing
OCR for page 22
22
NEED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE CADASTRE
information. Specialists often do not know the extent of publicly held land
information. Information rightly available to the public can often only be
retrieved by specialists and therefore is only available to those who have the
financial resources to ferret it out. Some government information is so in-
accessible that it is nearly "confidential." Ultimately, public and private land
decisions are made in ignorance of the facts.
Duplication problems occur when the same land information is collected
and/or maintained by two or more governmental or private entities. One or-
ganization is not aware of what land data another may already have or is
planning to collect in a mutually suitable time frame. Data classification sys-
tems are not compatible between user agencies, thereby resulting in the judged
need for duplicate coverage. The obvious result of duplication is excessive
waste.
Aggregation of land information is a problem resulting from the fact that
our current information systems are generally not designed to serve the needs
of individuals, while continuing to meet the needs of local, state, and national
agencies. Information is often gathered at the national or state level, with
products provided to smaller governmental units. However, at the county,
town, and municipal levels, where basic decisions are made, the prevalent re-
action is that state and federal products are too general or inappropriate in
scale, resolution, and information detail. The flow of information downward
occurs because we have problems integrating records at the local level. These
problems prevent the aggregation of information upward. Different types of
data relating to the same geographic area are described in different ways.
Physical land data describing the geology and soil type, for example, are gen-
erally not related to land parcels, as are land title and assessment.
Problems of confidentiality occur because access to some segments of a
land-information system should legitimately be restricted. Concern over these
restrictions, and the ability of a system to guarantee them, limits the infor-
mation available to the system. In addition, unclear or conflicting standards
specifying just how public so-called "public information" really is lead to var-
iation in the accessibility of information.
Institutional problems arise from the apparent mismatch between the typi-
cally vertical structure of existing governmental organization and the inher-
ently horizontal nature of land information. For example, in state govern-
ments there typically are several offices organized around land-related tasks
such as property assessment, highway planning, and solid-waste management.
Each of these offices requires land information, and each typically maintains
its own system separate from the others. In the private sector, parallel opera-
tions also exist within the utility companies and title insurance companies, re-
sulting in further duplication of information-systems activity (Larsen et al.,
1978; Epstein, 1978~.
OCR for page 23
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
2.3 IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITY
23
Recognition of the need for improvement in land-information systems has re-
sulted in activity for nearly two decades at local, state, and federal levels of
government, in the private sector, and within meetings of concerned profes-
sional organizations. Recent activities for improvement of land-information
systems among professional organizations began in the early 1960's. There
followed the Tri-State Conference in 1966 at the University of Cincinnati
College of Law (Cook and Kennedy, 1967) and in 1968 the Mackinac Work-
shop in northern Michigan (White, 1968~. Also in 1968, the Canadians con-
vened their first general conference on the subject at the University of New
Brunswick in Fredericton, New Brunswick (Canadian Institute of Surveying,
1968~. In 1972, the Conference on Compatible Land Identifiers—the Prob-
lems, Prospects and Payoffs was held in Atlanta, Georgia (Moyer and Fisher,
1973), and a second Canadian Conference was held in Ottawa in 1974 on the
Concepts of a Modern Cadastre (Canadian Institute of Surveying, 1975~. In
the fall of 1974, the North American Institute for Modernization of Land
Data Systems was incorporated and held its first conference in Washington,
D.C., in the spring of 1975 (North American Institute for Modernization of
Land Data Systems, 1975~. A Land Records Symposium was then held in
Orono, Maine, in 1976 (university of Maine, 1976), a joint Symposium on
Modern Land Data Systems was conducted by the American Congress on Sur-
veying and Mapping and the American Society of Photogrammetry (1977) in
conjunction with their annual meeting in March 1977, and in October 1978
the North American Institute for Modernization of Land Data Systems (1979)
held its second North American Conference. The Land Information Institute
had its organizational meeting in March 1978 and later joined the Surveying
and Mapping Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers (1980) to
cosponsor a Specialty Conference in June 1980 on The Planning and Engi-
neering Interface with a Modernized Land Data System.
The forum of these conferences has provided a means of idea exchange
and an opportunity to monitor some of the projects in which improvement
activity is being implemented. In general, however, implementation of im-
provement activity in the United States has been characterized by single-
purpose approaches to selected elements of the total system. These efforts
have addressed specifically the problems in land transfer, property assessment,
or land management. Only tangentially have the problems related to the ref-
erence frame, base maps~and cadastral overlay been considered.
Numerous efforts elsewhere in North America are under way in continuing
attempts to modernize land-information systems. The largest and most com-
prehensive is the Land Registration and Information Service of the Maritime
Provinces (New Bruswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island) in Canada.
OCR for page 24
24
NEED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE CADASTRE
Other Canadian efforts include the Province of Ontario Land Registration Infor-
mation System; activities in the cities of Calgary and Edmonton, Alberta; and
the City of Toronto's Central Property Register, an operational computerized
file system referencing all property-related data from assessment and taxation
records to zoning regulations and building permits. In Mexico an automated,
multipurpose land-record system has been under development for over a decade.
2.4 STATUS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL
The following paragraphs describe the complexity of the federal activities in
the three basic components of the multipurpose cadastre—reference frame,
base maps, and cadastral overlay. Primary responsibilities for geodetic control,
base maps, and cadastral surveys of federal lands are clearly assigned to the
National Geodetic Survey, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Bureau of
Land Management, respectively. However, there are many other federal
agencies whose programs require geodetic, mapping, and cadastral support
and that maintain land information and data files.
Strong efforts are being made toward effective coordination. Various pro-
posals have been made for the consolidation of the major groups into a single
group—a civilian agency for mapping, charting, geodesy, and surveying—yet
no action has been taken. For the three basic components of the multipur-
pose cadastre—reference frame, base maps, and cadastral overlay—to respond
to a single land data system, it is essential that the key federal services be uni-
f~ed. The strategy of the federal government with respect to a multipurpose
cadastre must include recognition of this need for reorganization plus the
requirement for enabling legislation that would delegate the lead authority
for each of the basic components.
In an effort to achieve the maximum coordination within the present orga-
nizational structure for these activities, the Executive Office of the President,
through its Office of Management and Budget, has designated lead agencies
for two of these functions—geodetic surveying and topographic mapping. The
Administrative Directive, Office of Management and Budget Circular No.
A-16 (4/21/75, #1753), fails to recognize the fundamental role of the Public
Land Survey System. This omission, plus others, would suggest the need for a
major revision of the document.
We recommend that the Office of Management Budget designate a lead
agency for the multipurpose cadastre.
2.4.1 Geodetic Reference Network
The Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-16 does recognize "Na-
tional Networks of Geodetic Control," assigning the responsibility for coordi-
OCR for page 25
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
25
nation to the Department of Commerce, which has in turn assigned this re-
sponsibility to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The
geodetic and related surveying activities of the federal agencies are coordinated
through a Federal Geodetic Control Committee, with representation from
various agencies such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Defense Map-
ping Agency, the Federal Highway Administration, the Forest Service, the
International Boundary Commissions (U.S. representatives), the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), the Soil Conservation Service, the Tennessee Valley
Authority, and the U.S. Geological Survey. The U.S. Geological Survey,
as the representative for the Department of the Interior, transmits the re-
quirements of the Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service.
The Federal Geodetic Control Committee Coordinator is the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NoAA) Assistant Administrator for
Oceanic and Atmospheric Services, and the Deputy Coordinator at present is
the Director of the National Geodetic Survey in the National Ocean Survey of
NOAA.
To conform to the directives of the Office of Management and Budget Cir-
cular No. A-16, the Federal Geodetic Control Committee (1974, 1980) has
published two documents: (1) Classification, Standards of Accuracy, and
General Specifications of Geodetic Control Surveys and (2) Specifications to
Support Classification, Standards of Accuracy, and General Specifications of
Geodetic Control Surveys. The National Geodetic Survey (NGS) has the re-
sponsibility for the development and extension of the national horizontal and
vertical control networks and provides technical direction to federal, state,
and local agencies for field surveys. Most of the primary work is accomplished
by NGS personnel. A great amount of the secondary work, whichis referenced
to the national nets, is accomplished under cooperative agreements with other
federal agencies or with state groups.
Supplemental surveys, which are made by the U.S. Geological Survey for
its mapping programs, by the Bureau of Land Management for its cadastral
survey of Alaska, and by the National Ocean Survey for nautical charting, are
reviewed for quality control and adjusted into the national networks by the
NGS. The results are then made part of the geodetic data base. The Federal
Highway Administration, through its close liaison with state highway depart-
ments, is a primary user of geodetic control and contributes to the national
geodetic data base. The Washington office of the Federal Highway Adminis-
tration encourages the state and local offices of the respective highway de-
partments to take an active part in these programs, and by such action can
contribute to the effectiveness of a national cadastre. The planning of new
highway routes, the acquisition of property, and the monumentation of the
rights of way benefit from and contribute to the national geodetic data base.
OCR for page 26
26
NEED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE CADASTRE
The maintenance of these geodetic networks is a significant task. The loss
of monuments due to natural causes or to acts of man exceeds 5 percent per
year. The NGS with its limited field force is unable to keep up with this main-
tenance and so seeks the cooperation of other surveying and engineering
groups (federal, state, local, and private) in re-establishing these marks. If it is
known that a survey monument is to be destroyed because of construction,
its coordinates and/or elevation can be transferred to a new monument at a
small fraction of the cost of resurveying from a distant point.
In addition to classical surveying techniques, analytical aerotriangulation
and Doppler satellite and inertial surveying systems can be used for densifica-
tion of control. These systems provide positions in three dimensions and
promise to be of economic benefit for the development of a multipurpose
cadastre. The Global Positioning System, to be fully operational in the mid-
1980's, will also provide an accuracy in three-dimensional positioning of a
small fraction of a meter with only 2 or 3 hours of observing time.
An engineer who is providing the control surveys for a local project Still
frequently criticize the federal system for the lack of control near his project.
This is especially true for land surveyors. The recommended spacing of pri-
mary and secondary control generally conforms to the value of the land. The
minimum density for various orders of control as specified by the Federal
Geodetic Control Committee (1974) is much less than that suggested by
McLaughlin (1975) and Ziemann (1976a) for the support of an ideal national
cadastre, but actual needs should be reviewed and specifications prepared.
To meet the requirement for closer spacing of geodetic control, local (or
state) governments seek the cooperation of the federal government. Recent
examples of cooperative programs are those between the NGS and Cook
County, Illinois, and the NGS and the states of Connecticut and Georgia. A
similar cooperative program is described in Section 2.6.3.1.
The data incorporated in the horizontal and vertical geodetic networks
have improved with the development of more-precise instrumentation; appli-
cation of corrections for systematic effects; and improvements in observing,
computing, and analysis techniques. To provide a more consistent geodetic
network, the NGS has undertaken new adjustments of both the horizontal
and vertical control networks. It is anticipated that the new horizontal datum
for North America will be available in 1983; the new datum will involve a
shift in latitude and longitude at each control point. In addition to new lati-
tude and longitude, coordinates in the State Plane Coordinate System and the
Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinate System (standard 6° zones), in feet
and in meters to 1983 and only in meters after 1983, will be available for
each horizontal control point. The new adjustment of the vertical control net-
work will be completed at a later date.
OCR for page 33
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
33
able basis to survey first- and/or second-order control networks and instructed
the state surveyors to provide further densification. In an agreement with the
Maine Department of Transportation, NGS provided only a skeleton field
party, which was supplemented by state personnel to simultaneously survey
first- and second-order networks.
The trend in cooperative agreements is toward only providing general ad-
v~sory services or specific inspection or instruction services. New York, Geor-
gia, Louisiana, Arizona, and South Carolina currently have resident state geo-
detic advisors provided by the NGS on a cost-sharing basis. Several other states
have agreements for reimbursable advisory services on an as-needed basis.
2.5.2 Base Maps
There are at least 12 states that are actively involved in establishing statewide
property maps: Alabama, Florida, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, New
Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina,
and Vermont. The programs in each of these states provide a wide variety of
assistance to local jurisdictions, from funding of aerial photography for map-
ping projects to complete statewide property-ownership mapping programs.
State involvement has encouraged the applications of modern technology into
the mapping process, particularly in the areas of automated (computerized)
mapping and map maintenance. Some of these attempts at automation, how-
ever, have not been entirely successful or cost effective. Often inadequate
attention is given to the maintenance of mapping systems once the initial
front-end costs have been absorbed. While National Map Accuracy Standards
exist for map production, there currently are no national standards for map
maintenance.
Cadastral Overlays
Several states, most notably North Carolina, Oregon, and Massachusetts, have
made significant progress in their efforts to prepare enabling legislation and to
modernize their land-records information systems. In 1976, then President-
Elect Ellsworth Stanley of the American Congress on Surveying and Mapping
(ACSM) wrote a letter to each of the 50 state governors identifying the rec-
ommendations from the Symposium on User Requirements for Land Records
and Resource Information, held in Orono, Maine, in August 1976. Stanley
urged each governor to seek the accountability from the public agencies in
their state for their expenditures for land-based information and for the qual-
ity of the results. He also suggested that ACSM could work with any of the
states toward their development of land-based information systems. Seven
substantive responses were received from Florida, Massachusetts, Missouri,
OCR for page 34
34
NEED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE CADASTRE
Montana, New York, North Carolina, and Tennessee. Many of the remaining
27 replies were cordial acknowledgments of the receipt of the information.
This apparent lack of concern at the state level indicates one of the major
problems in the development of a multipurpose cadastre.
A principal concern at the state level should be the coordination of land-
information improvement efforts in the areas of land transfer, property
assessment, and land management. Few states are combining or coordinating
the activities of land-transfer and property-assessment improvement programs.
No state has attempted to coordinate all three of the major components (ref-
erence frame, base maps, and cadastral overlays) of a multipurpose cadastre.
Leadership exists at the state level for the improvement of boundary sur-
veys in the organizations of the Professional Land Surveyors. Through the ini-
tiative of ACSM, these groups have banded together to voice opposition, at
the national level, to legislation that has not been in the best interests of land
surveyors. Under the leadership of their state land-surveyor societies, several
states have written legislation establishing statewide surveying standards.
These standards specify minimum levels of accuracy for various types of sur-
veys and dictate requirements for tying surveys into the State Plane Coordi-
nate System. This legislation may serve as a model for enabling legislation
necessary in the evolution of a modernized land-data system. The state orga-
nizations of land surveyors could provide the necessary support for such
legislation.
2.5.4 Improvement Implementation at the Provincial and State
Level
Three representative examples of improvement activities are described. They
reflect a concern for the development of provincial and state-level land-
information systems based on cadastral parcels.
2.S.4 1 Maritime Land Registration and Information Service
The Maritime Provinces of Canada encompass an area of approximately
52,000 square miles with over 1.6 million population and an estimated
800,000 legal parcels of land (Roberts, 1980~. The first step in the long pro-
cess of cadastre modernization in the Maritime Provinces was the statement
of need in 1944 by the New Brunswick Forest Products Association to the
New Brunswick Committee on Post-War Reconstruction for "the organized
and supervised survey of property boundaries with adequate monuments so
that boundaries can be renewed without dispute . . . for up-to-date accurate
property maps for municipal taxation purposes. Control surveys are necessary
as a framework for making line maps, and the survey of municipal and prop-
OCR for page 35
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
35
erty boundaries can be combined with control surveys and used for this pur-
pose." The development of electronic distance-measurement instrumentation
in the mid-1950's allowed for the economical beginning of such a densified
control system. In 1958, the New Brunswick Coordinate Survey Program was
formally organized within the provincial Department of Land and Mines; and
in 1967, a provincial Surveys Act was passed, legally defining a control coordi-
nate system and providing for its continued maintenance. In 1968, the Cana-
dian federal government committed $4 million to the Atlantic Provinces to
underwrite a two-year effort for a control-surveys, base-mapping, and land-
registration program, followed by another $5 million in 1970. In 1971, the
provincial governments of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward
Island agreed to establish the Council of Maritime Premiers, through which
they could provide a formal framework for promoting unity of purpose, for
improving intergovernmental communications, and for implementing joint
programs. An early area of interest for the new Council was the matter of
land use and land ownership. In 1973, the staff previously employed in sur-
vey programs by the provinces formed the nucleus of a new regional organiza-
tion, the Land Registration and Information Service. The Council of Maritime
Premiers succeeded in gaining strong support from the federal government
through the Department of Regional Economic Expansion, which provided
funding for 75 percent of the program cost through mid-1979.
The Land Registration and Information Service program consists of four
component phases:
Phase I. Extension and densification of a second-order control survey sys-
tem based on the primary geodetic survey network provided by the Federal
Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. The primary network consists
of 396 monuments at an average spacing of 30 km It is intended that all
properties and land-related information be integrated with this system. Den-
sity of monumentation depends on land value and the extent to which the
transportation systems in the country have been developed. As a general
guide, monument spacing (both horizontal and vertical control) in urban
areas is 400 m, in suburban areas is 750 m, and in rural areas is 4 km, or each
1 km along highways. The final secondary network contains nearly 41,000
monumented stations, with coordinates and their associated confidence infor-
mation available. Over 12,000 new monuments have been placed by this
program
Phase II. Production of a uniform series of resource, urban, and property
maps with scales varying from 1:1000, 1:2500 and 1:5000 for urban line
maps with contour intervals of 1 m and 2 m to 1 :10,000 for resource ortho-
photo maps with a 5-m contour interval. Property maps are compiled on the
resource map series in rural/forested areas and on the urban series, where the
OCR for page 36
36
NEED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE CADASTRE
parcel density is higher. Nearly 50QO resource and urban maps have been pro-
duced since 1973, more than doubling the map base available. As of April
1979, 64 percent of the resource mapping, 77 percent of the urban mapping,
and 39 percent of the property mapping had been completed.
Phase III. Implementation of an improved system of land-title registration
utilizing modern technology for storing, retrieving, and processing land regis-
try data. Reference of a parcel to the control reference system (Phase I), us-
ing current ownership maps (Phase II), supports development of a computer-
based land-title system which will be progressively updated from the present
grantor-grantee indexing to a parcel index system and then to a land-title sys-
tem fashioned on the Torrens principles of title registration (Bureau of Cen-
sus, 1974~. All title information will be stored on computer files and be im-
mediately accessible from any land registration office within the Maritimes.
The cost of producing only the land-parcel computer file and associated prop-
erty maps was estimated in 1978 at $23.60 per parcel.
Phase IV. Establishment of a computerized land data bank, integrating in-
formation on land use, resource, geology, soil, and other factors with the
ownership data, thus developing the multipurpose cadastre records.
In addition to the $9 million funding of the Atlantic Provinces Surveying
and Mapping Program in 1968 and 1970, costs since 1973 are estimated at
$27 million, shared principally by 75 percent Canadian federal funding and
25 percent through the Council of Maritime Premiers (McLaughlin and Clapp,
1977;0gilvie, 1977~.
2.5.42 North Carolina Land-Records-Management Program
The North Carolina General Assembly enacted legislation in 1977 creating a
state land-records-management program to provide assistance to counties de-
siring to improve their land-records system. This legislation provided for the
implementation of a system of land-parcel identifier numbers and established
a program to provide financial assistance to counties for the modernization
of their land-records system and for the preparation of new base maps and
property maps. The three bills passed by the General Assembly were the cul-
mination of effort at the state level that began in 1974 when the North Caro-
lina Bar Association created a special committee to study land records. Funds
were raised through donations, and the Institute of Government of the Uni-
versity of North Carolina was retained to conduct the study. The report of
the study recognized that (1) there was little uniformity among the state's
100 counties in the handling of land records; (2) the current system was in-
suff~cient to meet current and future demands; (3) the costs to the individual
counties to improve their systems would be great, and 100 separate and in-
compatible systems might develop if a statewide study was not conducted to
OCR for page 37
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
37
induce uniformity; (4) only five counties had high-quality mapping systems,
and 32 counties had no mapping systems; and (5) the recording of maps was
not uniform. In 1975, the study group unanimously recommended that a
legislative study commission be created, resulting in the Legislative Research
Commission of the General Assembly forming the Committee on Land Rec-
ords Information Systems, made up of both legislators and public members.
The General Assembly appropriated $150,000 in 1975 to the State Depart-
ment of Administration for the purpose of research and development of a
modernized land-records-information system. The General Assembly appor-
tioned $125,000 of the funds in support of a pilot county project in Forsyth
County (Winston-Salem area, 419 square miles, 140,000 parcels) (Ayers,
1980~; the remaining $25,000 supported the Legislative Research Commis-
sion Study. Forsyth County has received another grant of $210,000 ($10,000
from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and $200,000
from the Appalachian Regional Commission) (Ayers, 1980~.
The Forsyth County Land Records Information System had been concep-
tualized in the late 1960's by Register of Deeds Eunice Ayers, with active de-
velopment beginning in 1974. The system has had as its goal the centraliza-
tion of records and maps that have historically been kept by eight different
departments in three separate buildings. The system features an automated
parcel indexing system, automated grantor-grantee indexing system, parcel-
level base maps, standard recording forms, rapid instrument processing, and
micrographics storage and retrieval. The system is being implemented on a
Burroughs 6800 computer, with both the City of Winston-Salem and the pub-
lic school system also sharing in its use. Title-related data are on-line and
accessible in the Register of Deeds office and the Tax Supervisors (assessors)
office. A 30-year chain of title has been captured, and as deeds are recorded
the new ownership and deed book and page are added to the system via on-
line terminals. Tax records for each parcel are also accessible on-line by
owner's name or tax block and lot. Eventually parcel identifiers and property
address indexes will be added.
Since 1974, nearly $3 million has been budgeted for the software develop-
ment, data conversion, and digitizing of the property parcels. This figure does
not include expense for editing, monumentation, and ground control.
Property maps are being prepared on orthophoto base maps using photog-
raphy flown in 1974 and referenced to geodetic control of the National Geo-
detic Survey and the North Carolina Geodetic Survey. The property maps
have been digitized, and an interactive graphics system has been purchased to
support the need for updated graphic products (Ayers, 1978; Jones, 1978;
Forsyth County Land Records, 1975-1976~.
A critical impetus in the favorable reception that land-records improve-
ment legislation received in North Carolina was the requirement for property
OCR for page 38
38
NEED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE CADASTRE
revaluation every eight years and the concern at the local political level for
equitable property assessment, given the widespread lack of good property
maps. With the passage of legislation in 1977, the North Carolina Department
of Administration's Land Records Management Program distributed docu-
mentation to assist individual counties in preparing a long-range plan for
county land records, including regulations governing State Grants for Improve-
ment of Land Records. Also distributed were documentation for Model Spe-
cif~cations for County Base Maps, Model Specifications for Cadastral Maps,
and Practical Aspects of the Uniform Parcel Identifier.
Base mapping scales used are 1:1200 in urban, 1:2400 in suburban, and
1:4800 in rural areas. The 14-digit land-parcel identifier specified for use is
based on the North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System.
The State General Assembly has appropriated $75,000 each of the last
three years for distribution as grants to counties for the improvement of their
land records. Thus far, 15 of the 100 counties in North Carolina have bene-
fited from the program (Campbell, 1975; De Ramus, 1978; North Carolina
Department of Administration, 1978~.
Also established in North Carolina as a result of the State Land Policy Act
of 1974 was the Land Resources Information Service to support the planning
activities at all levels of state government. A minicomputer interactive graphics
system has been operational since 1977 digitizing available orthophoto and
topographic map products geographically based on the North Carolina State
Plane Coordinate System. A common working scale is 1:24,000 though both
smaller and larger scales are used for various requirements.
2.S. 4 3 Oregon Department of Revenue Standard Cadastral Map Program
In order to achieve equalization and uniformity in ad valorem taxation, in
1951 the Oregon State Legislature approved a statewide reappraisal program.
It was immediately found that the real property inventory in most counties
was incomplete and that the cadastral maps were inadequate for appraisal
purposes. Furthermore, there was no uniformity between county map sys-
tems. Tax administrators realized that equalization could not be achieved by
reappraisal alone; map standards had to be developed and employed in a mas-
sive statewide reappraisal program. In 1952, the Legislature authorized the
State Tax Commission to install and assist in the preparation and mainte-
nance of map standards, cadastral maps, and standard record systems in the
offices of the assessors, also providing for the sharing of expenses of the map
and records projects. Thus began a cadastral map program, which has now
evolved into the Computer-Assisted Mapping System, developed and operated
by the Urban-Rural Mapping Unit of the Assessment and Appraisal Division
of the Oregon Department of Revenue. The responsibility of the Urban-Rural
OCR for page 39
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
39
Mapping Unit is to (1) develop and maintain Oregon State cadastral map
standards; (2) prepare and install standard cadastral map and record systems
in the offices of the county assessors, on a 50-50 cost-share basis; (3) make
status studies of county cadastral map systems and recommend procedures
for correcting system deficiencies; (4) assist county assessors and cartog-
raphers with technical map and ownership problems; (5) train county cartog-
raphers, appraisers, and other assessment officials in the preparation, mainte-
nance, and use of cadastral maps; (6) maintain tax code maps; (7) make soil-
type maps; and (8) maintain cadastral map and record systems in 13 counties
where workloads are insufficient to require a full-time cartographer. These
responsibilities are carried out by a work force of 18 cartographers and one
clerical assistant under the direction of a manager and an assistant manager.
Base-mapping scales used range from 1 :1200 for urban areas to 1 :24,000
for resources mapping. Geographic referencing for all maps is the Oregon
State Plane Coordinate System.
Two counties in Oregon have, or are in the process of developing, advanced
systems. These are Lane County, including Eugene, and Marion County, in-
cluding Salem (Mead, 1977;Penfold, 1978~.
2.6 STATUS AT THE LOCAL AND PRIVATE LEVELS
2.6. ~ Geodetic Reference Network
At the regional, county, and local levels, geodetic control activity is carried
out most commonly by private surveyors and engineers in response to the
needs of specific projects and long-range objectives of regional and municipal
control densif~cation. As at the state level, technical support and cooperation
from the National Geodetic Survey is available to support regional and local
control densification. Recent cooperative agreements have been designed for
Jefferson County, Colorado; Portage County, Ohio; King County, Washing-
ton; Ada County, Idaho; Ingham County, Michigan; three counties in both
Florida and New York; and the Chicago, Illinois, and Washington, D.C.,
metropolitan areas.
2.6.2 Base Maps and Cadastral Overlays
Most states and many local governments have active mapping and land-record
programs that could be incorporated into a multipurpose cadastre. Generally,
these efforts are undertaken to solve mainly local problems without consider-
ing the need for compatibility with systems in adjoining jurisdictions or at the
OCR for page 40
40
NEED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE CADASTRE
state and federal levels. State mapping efforts are usually undertaken in co-
operation with the USGS, but the very-large-scale maps are accomplished
under contract to private surveying and mapping companies. Cadastral over-
lays prepared in local offices range from being complete and up to date to
being barely usable.
One of the major functions of each of the Offices of Land Information
Systems, proposed for local and state governments elsewhere in this report,
will be to examine the status of base maps and cadastral overlays within its
jurisdiction, determining items of commonality and building on these a com-
patible network of multipurpose cadastres.
2.6.3 Improvement Implementation at the Local and Private
Level
There are many improvement activities at the local level within county juris-
dictions. Notable examples are in Forsyth County, North Carolina; Lane
County, Oregon; Fairfax County, Virginia; Racine County, Wisconsin; Henne-
pin County, Minnesota; Nassau County, New York; and the City of Houston,
Texas. Significant cooperative efforts are also being carried out at the local
level in Memphis, Tennessee, under the Computer-Assisted Mapping and Rec-
ord Activities Systems Project and in Southeastern Pennsylvania under the
Regional Mapping and Land Records Program.
Several local governments have minicomputer-based interactive graphics
systems implementing automated mapping. Among the earliest such installa-
tions was that of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee, in 1974 for the
creation and maintenance of a comprehensive planimetric digital data base for
all 700 square miles of Davidson County. The data base includes topographic
data, parcel boundaries, and utility inventory, all correlated to the State Plane
Coordinate system. The data base was developed over a one-year period from
a 1:2400 map series, with 2800 individual one-quarter-square-mile map seg-
ments.
Other interactive graphics systems have been implemented in Santa Rosa,
California; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Virginia Beach, Virginia; and Chicago, Illi-
nois (Kevany, 1979~.
In the private sector, numerous title insurance and utility companies are
the proponents of land-info~n~ation-systems improvement.
2.6.3.1 Southeastern Pennsylvania-Regional Mapping and Land Records
Program
The Regional Mapping and Land Records (RMLR) program is an example of
a cooperative effort between private and public utilities and local government.
OCR for page 41
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
41
The participants in RMLR are the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Com-
mission; the Pennsylvania counties of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery,
and Philadelphia; Philadelphia Electric Company; Bell of Pennsylvania;Phila-
delphia Gas; Philadelphia Suburban Water; Pennsylvania Power and Light; and
the Philadelphia City Water and Sewer Departments. Following preliminary
informal discussions beginning in 1972, RMLR was initiated in 1976. To help
determine the best approach for achieving accurate base maps for common
use by the participants, a 50-square-mile pilot project in Norristown, Pennsyl-
vania, was defined. The $100,000 cost of the pilot project was shared by the
participants, with no participant contributing more than $15,000. Geodetic
control densification was carried out, in cooperation with the NGS, placing
50 new first-order stations. A private contractor was selected to perform the
pilot project. Base mapping scales of 1:500 and 1:1000 in urban and al :2000
in both suburban and rural areas were used. Products also include ortho-
photography, digital plan~metric mapping, digital contour overlays, and digital
property mapping. Production of the digital data base is accomplished using
direct stereo digitization of each stereo model. The mapping is performed at
8x magnification, producing the 1:2000-scale mapping from 1:16,000-scale
photography and the 1:500-scale mapping from 1:4000-scale photography.
Property boundaries are scissor drafted onto the orthophotography base and
then digitized for input into the digital data base. The interactive graphics
software provides great flexibility in looking at selected segments of the digi-
tal data base for any specified map area (Byler, 1978~.
The RMLR Norristown pilot project concluded in August 1979. Based on
cost data collected during that project, the City of Philadelphia conducted a
detailed cost analysis that initially indicates a favorable cost-benefit ratio in
land-data modernization. The City of Philadelphia has also defined its own
center city project covering 25 blocks in center Philadelphia, in cooperation
with the major utility companies (Hadalski, 1980~.
2. 6. 3.2 Memphis, Tennessee-Computer Assisted Mapping and Record
Activities Systems Program
The Utility Location and Coordination Council of the American Public Works
Association was authorized in 1976 to form a special task force on computer
mapping and records systems. The task force was charged to determine an
American Public Works Association-Utility Location and Coordination Coun-
cil standard for computerized mapping and to prepare a problem description
and definition report describing a test system for demonstration and develop-
ment of procedures and standards. As a result, the American Public Works
Association initiated in 1977 the Computer Assisted Mapping and Record
Activities Systems (CAMRAS) program in Memphis, Tennessee, at a funding
OCR for page 42
42
NEED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE CADASTRE
level of $1 million over a three-year period, supported by over 20 agencies.
The stated objectives of the program are (1) to develop, promulgate, docu-
ment, and implement suggested procedures, standards, and specifications for
jointly funded and shared-used computer-assisted geobased local record sys-
tems and (2) to assist city, county, and utility interests in initiating, develop-
ing, testing, and operating a working system to provide a wide range of mea-
surable and user-oriented data. Base mapping scales of 1:1200 for line maps
(3200 acres) and 1:2400 for orthophoto maps (325 square miles) were se-
lected, with maps of both scales being digitized (Bathke, 1978~.
The ultimate objective of CAMRAS iS technology transfer to the sponsor-
ing agencies through a series of over 25 technical reports. The first three
CAMRAS documents have been released and are entitled AerialPhotography
for Photogrammetric Mapping, Procurement Specif cations for An Interactive
Graphics System, and File Format for Data Exchange Between Graphic Data
Bases. Other reports will deal, among others, with such items as vendor evalua-
tion, data capture, and user guidelines and will be published as they are com-
pleted (Hinkle, 1980~.
2. 6. 3. 3 Metropolitan Common Data Base, Houston, Texas
The city of Houston, Texas, has introduced the Metropolitan Common Data
Base (METROCOM) system, an integrated collection of spatially related mu-
nicipal data (Hanigan, 1979~. All data are indexed to digitized versions of
planimetric base maps, which are being produced using standard photomap-
ping techniques. The data-base development is being accomplished using local
resources: a registered land surveyor for the ownership data base, a title com-
pany for boundary research and ownership verification, a mapping firm for
tax map compilation, an appraisal firm for property improvements and reval-
uation, and a professional engineer for facility mapping.
The geobase for METROCOM are the more than 5000 survey markers im-
planted at intervals of approximately 610 m, whose coordinates have been
determined from second-order, class II horizontal and vertical control surveys
(Federal Geodetic Control Committee, 1980~. The ~ :1200-scale maps are pro-
duced in planimetric and topographic series, compiled from 1:6000-scale
color aerial photography. All maps are compiled to the National Horizontal
Map Accuracy Standards of 1/40 in. at map scale for 90 percent of well-
defined points (American Congress on Surveying and Mapping and American
Society of Engineers, 1972~. At present, planimetric map data are entered
into the data base at ten data levels: roadways, railroads, drainage, sidewalks,
driveways, fences, parking lots, buildings, miscellaneous cultural detail, and
annotation. In the building and maintaining of the METROCOM data base an
interactive graphic mapping system is used.
OCR for page 43
Current Status of Cadastral Efforts
43
Major emphasis during the first year of the project has been on the devel-
opment of the geobase from available high-quality planimetric base maps. The
ready availability of these acceptable data provided Tax and Public Works De-
partments with time to familiarize themselves with the digital mapping sys-
tem's capabilities and limitations. At present, the nongraphic data file for
creation of ownership maps is under development, and work is under way on
design of the file structure for facility mapping (Hanigan, 1979~.
2.7 CONCLUSIONS
Although great progress in land-information systems has been made in some
localities, it is apparent that without constructive action at the various levels
of government, the land-record and land-information systems will become in-
creasingly unmanageable. A multipurpose cadastre, compatible on a national
basis, would go a long way toward resolving this situation. Input data to the
cadastre will develop at all levels of governments and from private individuals
and institutions. The free flow of data and information among all users re-
quires a compatible system of multipurpose cadastres that will make up a na-
tional network.
To achieve the degree of comparability required for a workable network of
multipurpose cadastres, improvements are needed in local, state, and federal
organization; in surveying and recording practices; and in local, state, and fed-
eral legislation. The technical problems to be resolved are discussed in Chap-
ter 3; the organizational problems are considered in Chapter 4.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
land records
