Record of Survey for LLA

[khuerth]

I always push my clients to file a record of Survey after a LLA is completed, we have to monument the new lines, right? Since it is not required, I inform them that it is optional, but nothing will be set marking the new line's location if they don't agree to an RS.

My County requires a $2500 deposit to review an RS, how many clients are going to go ahead with that RS? I am going to guess not very many. Although I shouldn't complain, the deposit is down from over $3,600...

How do you convince your client's that this is a crucial step in the process and shouldn't be skipped?

We need that RS review fee cap pushed through and fast.

[David Kendall]

How do you convince your client's that this is a crucial step in the process and shouldn't be skipped?

We need that RS review fee cap pushed through and fast.

I try to evaluate their specific establishment needs during the proposal phase and decide for myself if the record of survey is triggered. If it is then I don’t give them a choice, they can either pay me to monument and file or find another surveyor to do the job. If they try to negotiate that point then I explain my reasoning and say maybe they can do that but I cannot.

I find the LLA situations that don’t require a record of survey to be rare.

Anyone that does this is kicking an expensive can down the road for their heirs or buyers to come in and recreate the situation later. It’s certainly not a prudent approach in most cases and I never appreciate the surveyors that do that when I have to come in and file later to wipe their backside. I find it tacky and unethical to record deeds and run in most cases.

Still for some weird reason I resent the counties and cities that try to put the RS as a condition of LLA approval. I’m told by attorneys that they can’t make you file but I haven’t tried to test that theory yet, mostly because I usually file anyway.

Agreed on the review fee cap, $2500 is way out of hand. Unfortunately I don’t believe it is going anywhere anytime soon.

You might consider filing a BPELS complaint against the board of supervisors? (maybe not if you live there) I’ve been told that our executive officer supports this remedy….

[LA Stevens]

If the approving agency requires you to map the existing topographic features/improvements adjacent to the existing and proposed boundary line, the trigger to file the Record of Survey occurs when the deed is executed that changes the boundary line. Thus far, it is not required that you monument the new boundary line. The requirement to file a Record of Survey documents what evidence was used to establish the proposed boundary, in case you did not set monuments. Sometimes the agency requires a certain distance from an existing structure, that setback distance along with the structure, should be on the R/S. How else can one be certain they are retracing the parties intentions for the new boundary line.

If they are selling the north 100 feet of an unimproved large parcel and the agency doesn't require a site plan of the existing conditions, there are no triggers to file a record of survey.

I'm with David, you can't give them a choice when the law requires a Record of Survey and should be included in your proposal.

[DWoolley]

...
We need that RS review fee cap pushed through and fast.

The Orange County Chapter, a practice based chapter, submitted an agenda item for next CLSA Board of Directors' meeting that included the following:

"Motion:

Request the Legislative Committee to return language to modify the Business and Professions Code Section 8766.5 to $750 maximum with an annual adjustment tied to an economic indicator - not to exceed 2% - for the Board's approval and have a bill prepared before the legislative deadline in February 2024.

Background:

California has 58 counties. Approximately 54 counties currently charges less than $750 to review a record of survey. The counties are not required to raise their rates, but can not exceed the rate given. There are only four counties that may oppose this legislation. One of the four has express their support for this limit in fees."

khuerth, which county are you working in? Wanting to set monuments and file maps, that doesn't sound very surveyor-ish. Are you catfishing the surveyor's forum? You clearly have never heard of the Carl Lewis.

DWoolley

[Derek_9672]

Mendocino County just raised ROS checking fees from $550 first sheet +$150 each additional sheet up to $1464.96 first sheet + $150 each additional sheet. I daresay they are trying to cover some county budget shortfall in one swoop. The fact is they will probably only get 1/3 the ROS submittals going forward.

[DWoolley]

FYI, about 30 years ago there was an Attorney General's opinion that stated cities or counties cannot required a field survey as a condition for a lot line adjustment. However, the same opinion allows for checking the zoning and building compliance. The checking for compliance of zoning and building requires a site plan (to verify setbacks and building locations on the property relative to the new lot lines and the old lot lines). As a reviewer, we also need to see the points of access - we had a LLA that was cutting of the driveway and the relocation of a new driveway was not possible due to proximity to a freeway onramp. At the end of day, the site plan often triggers a record of survey. Our ordinances require the site plan.

One city in Orange County has an ordinance that LLA must be monumented. This ordinance triggers a record of survey.

DWoolley

[pls5528]

Mr. Woolley, I applaud your comments. I have advised this to multiple agencies and clients in the past when going through a LLA process. The benefits to the public and future surveyors are huge. I can't tell you how many times I get a call from a land owner requesting a property line to be marked, only to find out a previous LLA had been done (with no monuments or RS). These land owner's many times do not understand why they have to spend more money since they already paid for an LLA?

[Ian Wilson]

"If the approving agency requires you to map the existing topographic features/improvements adjacent to the existing and proposed boundary line, the trigger to file the Record of Survey occurs when the deed is executed that changes the boundary line."

§8762(b)(4) triggers the filing of a Record of Survey when lines are established. If the site plans is required to prove setbacks, etc., the trigger is immediate, not down the road when the deed is recorded.

Of course, you could just contact MySitePlan.com and get the job done very cheaply...

[khuerth]

This is why I love this forum as a solo guy, I like seeing things from other, more experienced perspectives. The current proposal I was working on that sparked the post is just moving a line between two empty lots without any improvements. Coincidentally, my first LLA proposal while in business for myself. The typical trigger of showing a distance from a fixed object to the property line wouldn't apply to this instance. Thank you all for your two cents.

khuerth, which county are you working in?

I am in Santa Barbara County, the kicker is they charge a $2,500 deposit for RS that are located within an incorporated City and $611 for ones in unincorporated areas of the County. They feel that the City's should subsidize their review fees.

Of course, you could just contact MySitePlan.com

I tried calling them, but my California phone number seemed to be blocked?

[Derek_9672]

I think the argument would be that the field survey did not disclose a deed-described line. The deed-described line was created subsequent to the field survey, therefore the next guy who comes and establishes that line is the one who is on the hook. It is the same situation when performing topographic mapping for a right-of-way acquisition. The mapping provides the basis for designing the new line. The line then exists in AutoCAD and is used to design the improvements. But it did not exist in the field at the time of the survey.

For me, both situations should require a record of survey so the next guy doesn't have to do any guessing. I just don't think the language is black and white in the PLS Act -- I wish it were so we could put this discussion to bed. If the Board has issued an opinion on the subject I would like to see it.