e-survey Forum

We have recently been requisitioned for incorrectly capturing secondary parcels (the sole purpose of which is ROW), as being of 'type'-'Right of Way', where LINZ are directing that they be captured as having the 'type' of 'Marked' or 'Easement' only.
In our case, this has arisen from assigning new parcels created in 3rd party software the designation ROW, which helps us attain clarity and accuarcy within our office, and our internal records, and also follows common sense. However, when these parcels are imported to LOL, they are automatically linked and given a parcel intent - ie Easement, but the incorrect type - ie ROW, as opposed to easement or marked. This has then been overlooked when checking the parcel list, because the parcel description seems perfectlty reasonable.
In what situation do LINZ expect us to be able to assign a newly created parcel the type - ROW ?? and if, as one helpline staff member says, this is an internal designation for LINZ use only, why is it an option that is available to the surveyor?? especially when it is the most obvious and common sense description to assign a new parcel with the sole purpose being right of way??
Are there any other parcel types that are not allowed to be used by the surveyor, yet appear in the list of options when creating a parcel?? and can these be removed so as to avoid any confusion as to what is and is not an acceptable "type" for a new parcel??

The Parcel Type list contains both current and legacy parcel types. Legacy types are required for historic purposes only and shouldn’t be used by external users unless advised by LINZ. This may be confusing to both internal and external users. Although the list is long, it has been constructed so that the five most commonly used current parcel types are at the top:

• Lot
• Section
• Unit
• Flat or
• Marked

A sixth Parcel Type – Accessory Unit – can still be used when capturing unit plans.

Changes are proposed to make parcel types other than the above six non selectable by external users, which will alleviate this confusion.

The parcel you have described would need to be given the Parcel Intent of ‘Easement’ and Parcel Type of ‘Marked’. All easements need to have a Parcel Intent of ‘Easement’.

The benefits of the designation ROW in 3rd party software are acknowledged. Where 3rd party software provides alternative Parcel Type options, you may use these if it helps you attain clarity and accuracy within your office, but you must remember to amend the parcel list in Landonline when the XML file is imported.

In case others have had the same issue, we are going to publish the above advice as a Best Practice e-survey tip and hint in February’s Landwrap.

Calling Easements and Covenant Areas "Marked" is ludicrous.

I understand the reasoning as it allows better transition to e-dealing which uses this terminology, but I'm sure everyone else agrees it is often inappropriate to have the easement annotated on the digital plan as Marked A. This annotation simply creates confusion for anyone other than those professionals using Landonline in their business.

A better annotaion would be "Area"

That way e-dealings could read - ...Area A on the plan... and the plans would show Area A which is much more sensible. We could then refer to Easement Area A or Covenant Area X etc.

Comments?