8/9/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Woodard had no problem with that but believed the title companies would not be too happy with that arrangement. Chairman Scurlock asked about the possibility of adjusting the fee structure in order to get the piece of equipment discussed, but Mr. Woodard advised that the fees are set by statute and can't be changed. Engineers and surveyors Robert "Flip" Lloyd, Jim Young and =_ Dana Howard, all expressed their support of Mr. Musick's statements. Mr. Howard noted that every time he buys a plat, he buys the full size, and Mr. Woodard believed he had said that almost everyone except surveyors wants the smaller size. Mr. Young continued to discuss the print size and the possibility of getting the document which was photographically produced and submitted by Mr. Musick reproduced commercially which he felt could be done fairly inexpensively. He stressed his preference for one page plats and pointed out that every time you have to table, you open yourself up to an error because if you start going from a drawing to a table, you are liable to go to the wrong line. He asked that the Board allow some extra time to check into his suggestion. George Cathey, surveyor, informed the Board that he has been in several jurisdictions in the United States that had similar problems. He felt one thing that can be given consideration is making an auto -positive to 11 x 17 and require that to be filed simultaneously with the plat. Many attorneys require that automatically. The auto -positive could be kept in a book and indexed in several different ways; it can be reproduced either with a Xerox or a blueprint and it will still have the clarity. He believed the life is about 300 years and felt you can specify the archival length you want. The Chairman noted that it seems -there are several alternatives. Assistant County Attorney Collins pointed out to the Board that there are two other revisions to the ordinance which are 26 ROOK ( 3 FA; . . AUG199 ,�77