Couple of issues

[MikeTurnrose]

Issue 1--I've reviewed some plans for two construction staking commercial projects and the plans include ALTA surveys on both. The ALTA surveys appears to satisfy the ALTA requirements. My issue is that both of these properties are not shown on a recorded survey map and thus a record of survey maps should have been filed. I checked with the County Surveyor and there is nothing that has been submitted. The field survey dates on these were in Feb., 2012. I sent an e-mail to the surveying/engineering firm inquiring if an ROS was to be prepared and submitted. I have not received a response. I'm not expecting one at this point. Also the ALTA surveys only show a couple of found monuments and do not show any mons. being set nor how the boundary was determined. This makes things difficult as far as estimating, because I'm going to have to include an ROS in the bid. My hunch is the same engineering firm is probably submitting a bid also and thus has an advantage with the control. Is there any recourse with this kind of issue besides submitting a complaint with the Board?

Issue 2-This is one is fairly minor. I was asked to provide an estimate to determine the lot area of two subdivision lots. This is a requirement by the planning department as part of a submittal. I have not conducted any survey work on this property. My question is "What do others on the Board think about submitting calculations based upon record data rather than determining the area from a survey?" I asked this question of the planning dept. and they said it was up to the discretion of the surveyor. Obviously, a field survey would be much more costly. I don't think one is necessary as long as setbacks aren't being verified or the location of features on the property don't need to be shown in relation to the prop. lines. Comments??

[Ric7308]

Mike,

Here is the way that I see Issue 1...

Firm that completed the ALTA surveys will propose on the construction staking and continue to disregard the filing requirement. Or you will include filing an RS in your proposal, the client will balk at that since the previous consultant never mentioned anything about it and will accept the proposal from the firm that completed the ALTA surveys. Or...someone else, desperately searching for work, will propose on the project perpetuating the disregard for the filing requirement.

Either way, and IF you are correct that an RS is required, the responsible licensee is not intending to file anyhow.

Submit a complaint...or...just send us a copy of the ALTA and we will contact the firm if we believe filing is required. Then you can go on providing the consulting service that you need to do rather than spinning your wheels on these. Fighting compliance can quickly become an unnecessary expense for you, but worthwhile for the Board and one that will ultimately benefit everyone...including the original responsible licensee.

[Jim Frame]

With regard to Item 2, I see no problem in providing lot area calculations based on the subdivision map. Include a note to the effect that the calcs are record and aren't based on a field survey, and you should be good.

.

[Stephen Johnson]

On Item 2. I agree with Jim. I have provided that service for others several times over the years. With the note that everything is based on record information and not a field survey.

[bruce hall]

I agree with Johnson and Frame. With regards to item one, what Ric says sounds like the way to go.

[Ian Wilson]

i'm with Ric, Jim, Steve and Bruce on this one.

[MikeTurnrose]

As far as determining the lot areas, I have calculated them myself also per record data in the past. I was just wondering what others did and if it was standard.

Ric,

Check your e-mail.

Thanks.

[land butcher]

All sounds good to me, if anyone cares. :)