What Paper Size Would You Prefer for Records of Suvey?

[RAM]

the problem with 11x17 is it will double the number of sheets for a map. thus more map check fees in some places. careful what you ask for.

[hellsangle]

I voted 24x36. You'd be able delineate the boundaries with more clarity.

But I have an idea that the Recording Offices even get behind and everyone might be happy:

1). Make the map whatever size you want (within reason). 2). Like deeds, record, scan and mail the original back to the surveyor of record.

. . . and no, I'm not into my "cups". Ha

Have a good weekend, all.

Phil - Sonoma

[mpallamary]

If I may, a good place to focus our energy on is permitting the filing of multiple page Corner Records. The 2-sheet limitation is absurd. We used to be able to file as many sheets as we wanted. With the limitation to one drawing sheet, one compromises legibility. In many areas of the state, surveyors like to add a lot of data for a proper explanation. I never understood the logic behind this change.

[Olin Edmundson]

It's always nice to have more space and breathing room to work with. If a Corner Record requires multiple sheets for notes, explanantions and data, you'd probably be better off with a Record of Survey, but we opt for CR's because they are cheaper. I might suggest that an even better place to focus our energy may be a push to drastically limit these filing fees at a statewide level.

[Lee Hixson]

If I may, a good place to focus our energy on is permitting the filing of multiple page Corner Records. The 2-sheet limitation is absurd. We used to be able to file as many sheets as we wanted. With the limitation to one drawing sheet, one compromises legibility. In many areas of the state, surveyors like to add a lot of data for a proper explanation. I never understood the logic behind this change.

Good idea.

[William Magee]

Just a trip down memory lane regarding the issue of multi-sheet CR's.
See the postings where this was visited here:

http://clsaforum.californiasurveyors.or ... f=6&t=3315

I particularly agree with part of Dave K's post which states:

"I think we have bigger fish to fry than whether Corner Records allow multiple sheets. ....
The Record of Survey checking fees is a much larger issue that should be dealt with."

Paul Plutae liked to use multi-sheet CRs when he could get a CS to let him do so. Looks like Paul's license is a year delinquent. Hope he is doing OK.

No cost R/S's is the subject I would like to see pursued. They are for the public's interests and are an invaluable public resource. I myself would file more and would file less CR's. A lot of CR's I file I keep things to the bare minimum where if a R/S weren't so darn expensive I would file that instead and would show far more information then just what I can squeeze on the 8-1/2 x 11 CR.

[pls7809]

William,

I saw on RPLSToday's forums a few weeks ago that someone mentioned Paul Plutae had passed away. I haven't confirmed this, but I hope it's not true.

Thanks,
Ryan.

[btaylor]

Wow I forgot about Paul. He sure loved to post stuff. Something must be going on for sure.

[rpost]

I like 18X26. Whenever I see that sheet size, I know it is a survey document. Does anyone else use the sheet size? However, if we can talk San Diego into giving the recorded maps to researchers free of charge, I would vote for whatever size is free!