2010 CA Building Code: Site Plan Requirements -- Wake Up Surveyors and CLSA

[subman]

SMA 66424.5 always gets me. A map made for the purpose of showing the design and improvement of a proposed subdivision and the existing conditions in and around it AND NEED NOT BE BASED UPON AN ACCURATE OR DETAILED FINAL SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY.

Leads you to believe there is something called an "inaccurate preliminary survey"...

I believe this is part of the culture that allows for record boundaries as part of a topography survey. Oh, its just for a tentative map!

[Lee Hixson]

Excellent point.

[LS_8750]

So SMA 66424.5 is in conflict with CBC 107.2.5? Typically the more stringent controls.

What gives here?

[subman]

Would seem they are for two different purposes. One in conjunction with a building permit application, the other for the purpose of preparing a tentative subdivision map.

[LS_8750]

And so the topic arises again.
It is still there in the 2016 CBC.
Section 107.2.5 - Site plan.
Chapter 1, Division 1, Section 107.2.5:

"107.2.5 Site plan. The construction documents submitted with the application for permit shall be accompanied by a site plan showing to scale the size and location of new construction and existing structures on the site, distances from lot lines, the established street grades and the proposed finished grades and, as applicable, flood hazard areas, floodways, and design flood elevations; and it shall be drawn in accordance with an accurate boundary line survey. In the case of demolition, the site plan shall show construction to be demolished and the location and size of existing structures and construction that are to remain on the site or plot. The building official is authorized to waive or modify the requirement for a site plan when the application for permit is for alteration or repair or when otherwise warranted."

Why are so many building officials, planning directors, engineers, architects and surveyors unaware of this?

[Jim Frame]

I suspect that many building officials and planning directors are simply waiving the requirement.

[Proud7191]

My favorite was when the site drawing was severely lacking information but before a certificate of occupation was granted an as-built certification was required by the building official, certifying building setbacks that were never mentioned within the site drawing. Sure puts the certifying LS in a precarious position if he did the building addition layout that was never tied to the pl and only shown in relation to existing building. Been there done that, and totally agree that a proper site drawing should be prepared before construction not afterwards :). Jp

[LA Stevens]

Marin County Planning requires the plan submitter to document that the fence (shown along the property line) is more than one foot beyond the setback. In that case, no survey is required. I've heard architects say that they just show the fence along the boundary and the proposed addition 1' beyond the setback requirement. Requiring a survey is a flip of the coin.

[subman]

I have been retired from Los Angeles County Public Works for about 14 months now. The Los Angeles City building inspectors generate about 50% of my work. They are very diligent when scheduled for an inspection of the foundation forms to request on their corrections a boundary survey (show me the monuments) and setback certification from a surveyor (wet stamp and original signature) before signing off for the concrete pour. After framing, they ask for a building height certification. A number of builders have been burned by over-excavations done in the wrong place, forms needing to be moved and building heights exceeding code allowance so they have adjusted their business plans to add the cost of surveying to their bottom line. I have about five builders I do repeat work for where I do prevailing setback surveys, boundary, topo, over-ex staking, foundation staking/setback certification and building height certification. They know the inspector is going to ask for it so they plan for it. Being able to give them next day response time as opposed to being shut down for two weeks while they try to get a surveyor under contract has made good business sense for them. I usually have 6-10 houses under construction at any given time. Surveying has been very very good to me...