Subdivision with no lot corner monuments

s murphey · Post by **s murphey** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:03 am

I am working on a proposal to stake house foundations in single family residential subdivision in a City that I have never surveyed in. The final map is recorded and the subdivision improvements are installed. The developer has plot plans for each of the lots. The final map indicates that there are no monuments at lot corners, only the street centerline monuments were set. A field site visit confirms this, however there are cuts in the curb at what appears to be property line, though this isn't indicated on the map.
Every municipality in which I have done subdivision work in the past has always required lot corner monuments.
It looks like I will have to include Corner Records for each lot in addition to the staking in my proposal. I’m wondering if this is a common occurrence in Cities that don’t require monumentation at the final map stage. On large sized subdivisions, the Corner Records must really stack up at the Surveyor’s office. Is there something I’m missing in that corner records aren’t required? The developer is looking at it like a staking project with wood stakes and could care less about iron pipes and corner records. Is anyone familiar with subdivisions without monuments?

pls7809 · Post by **pls7809** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:25 am

This is all over the place down here in So Cal. I believe that LA County does not require full monumentation, but I'm not positive. Many cities allowed the Record Data only Parcel Maps for a long time, but that seems to have reduced in recent years.

Sounds like a CR is required, at a minimum.

Peter Ehlert · Post by **Peter Ehlert** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:48 am

s murphey: let me ask... why do you feel that corner records would be required for staking buildings?

pls7809 · Post by **pls7809** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:54 am

My assumption in my post was that he was staking PL which would require CR's. I misread that. Whether or not he needs the PL's to stake the houses, who knows? It depends on the plans, but if I were doing the work, I would want to make sure the house fits on the lots per the plans and setbacks. Can't really do that without the corners.

LA Stevens · Post by **LA Stevens** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:35 am

Most of the older subdivision maps I have looked at didn't show any monuments at the corners. However, I have uncovered the field notes of many of the subdivisions and found that they set the lot corners or R/W angle points.

I have also found subsequent surveys which state that they were finding original corners. Some times just a few years after the map was created.

It's unfortunate so little value is placed on the original files of the surveyors who created the maps. If you are able to find the original file, you'll have opportunity to accurately retrace the work of the original surveyor.

Good luck,

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:38 pm

I guess it's a loophole in the SMA but I can't see where approving a subdivision without setting of lot corners is a benefit to the public.

At least you have cl mons, in LA county those are not required either. Baldwin Hills comes to mind.

"why do you feel that corner records would be required for staking buildings?"

Should be a requirement that the lot corners be set and a CR filed. Without establishing the PLs how can you set the building setback lines?
It doesn't require that much more work and if required would increase our income more so and be of more benefit to the public.

Coy Glasscock · Post by **Coy Glasscock** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:18 pm

If you are in OC, I would say it is normal to have no Lot mons, and the cuts in the curb where placed by the contractor so his brother will know where to mark the Lot Lines so his so his cousin can come install the fence that was sold to him by his father's company that is run by his sisters new husband, which was all financed by his grandfathers mortgage company, but to verify that you will need to speak to his wife who is the real estate person selling the lots.

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:29 pm

Actually OC is very well monumented, it's LA that doesn't require lot corners.

Anthony Maffia · Post by **Anthony Maffia** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:31 pm

Why would lot corners be required? The city didn't require them.

Around here, center line & tract boundary monuments are a good thing and allows each lot to be located. At bit of CAD work is required, but hey.

Perhaps you can list the cost of setting property corners as an option. The contractor can then compare your staking price against other bids. LB, the revenue increase will only materialize after the bid is accepted and contract signed.

TIB · Post by **TIB** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:06 pm

Every lot (& CL too) should be fully monumented. It's a cryin shame to not be required. I can just picture a new 50 lot sub'd, with 50 new homeowners, hiring 50 (or less) different surveyors to set their lot cors so they can build fences/walls. What could possibly go wrong there? geez lu eez

MFORD · Post by **MFORD** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 9:58 am

LA Stevens has a good point about going to the field notes or unfiled survey maps of the original surveyor to retrace the location of lot corners in old subdivisions. In a lot of cases those surveyors set the lot corners but didnâ€™t bother to show them on the subdivision map, which is now and was then in violation of the PLS ACT. Whether or not those lot corner monuments can be considered original is another question. However, had the original surveyor not violated the PLS ACT and shown all the monuments on the original subdivision map there would be no need to try and find the original field notes and/or unfiled maps.

This discussion thread dove tails into the â€œunrecorded mapsâ€ legislation discussion in another thread. The owners of the unrecorded maps and field notes LA Stevens refers to have an obligation to get this information into the public record when the situation or opportunity arises. Thank you LA Stevens for reinforcing the idea that un-filed maps need to be utilized when practical.

Semper Fi 713 · Post by **Semper Fi 713** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:51 pm

I live and work in San Diego County. Most if not all Subdivisions in San Diego County are fully monumented e.g., centerline mons, lot corners, pc, etc.

In 2004 I attended a Land Surveying Law seminar in Riverside County. The instructors were Paul Cuomo and James Lantry. The seminar was so good, that we had a part (2) a few months later. We used the Land Surveying Law textbook by John E. Keen, PLS.

I remember James Lantry mentioning that the City of Los Angeles DID NOT REQUIRE Land Surveyors to monument the lot corners of Subdivisions, only CL Mons as in this case that we are discussing. James also mentioned that Corner Records are required to be filed for each individual lot, as it is developed. I was appalled to hear that this was the SOP (standard operating procedure) for such a large public agency that should be setting an example for others to follow.

I agree 100% with TIB's comment that every lot (& CL too) should be fully monumented. It's a cryin shame to not be required. I can just picture a new 50 lot sub'd, with 50 new homeowners, hiring 50 (or less) different surveyors to set their lot corners so they can build fences/walls. What could possibly go wrong there? geez lu eez.

I also agree with the land butcher "I guess it's a loophole in the SMA but I can't see where approving a subdivision without setting of lot corners is a benefit to the public."

My recommendation for a solution to the overall picture is that we (CLSA members) lobby for a revision to the SMA that would require ALL new subdivions and parcel maps to be fully monumented as done in San Diego County and hopefully in some of the other California Counties.

Thanks for allowing me to chime in on this topic.

Semper Fi 713
Jack Gechter-PLS
jackgechter@cox.net
(619) 852-5440

TIB · Post by **TIB** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 4:16 pm

I live and work in SD also. The more Counties I work in, the more impressed I am with San Diego County, now that I have some practical experience to compare them to. Full monumentation as Semper Fi noted, ease of research and a pretty good, user friendly web site for map research come to mind as good things.
If they could only do something about high plan and ROS checking fees, and give free map downloads (like LA County) instead of $4/sht, all would be well

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:46 pm

Never liked working or doing research at SD county. A SD employee, new to the office, was trying to find some mon info for me and the guy that set up the system came along and even he got lost so many times the new guy could not keep his notes straight.

And the neat sketch they plotted was off about 200 feet and basically useless.

California Surveyors Forums

Subdivision with no lot corner monuments

Subdivision with no lot corner monuments

set em all

San Diego