California Surveyors Forums

> Can you explain to me how a professional's reliance on an erronous survey fulfills our duty to protect the public?

A professional wouldn't. If you know it's erroneous, then it become a different situation.

How much checking must be done to determine the survey is fine and the risk minimal? Assuming every other surveyor's work is NFG will prohibit you staking another professional's job.

> our job is to protect the public.
That would be the police, fire fighters, FBI, etc.

We should be held to no greater standard of care or liability than civil engineers.

8710.1. Legislative Intent – Protection of the Public

Protection of the public shall be the highest priority for the Board for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors in exercising its licensing, regulatory, and disciplinary functions. Whenever protection of the public is inconsistent with other interests sought to be promoted, the protection of the public shall be paramount.

Just for clarity, I never indicated what I thought of the quality of anyother surveyors' work. My comments were directed specifcally to my opinions as to duties of a surveyor engaged in boundary surveying where that boundary has an impact on construction staking.
Further, I try never start a job with an opinion formed before I even begin the process. I have on ocassion retraced boundaries where I had a high regard for the surveyor that went before me only to find a hugh mess, other times foiuo nd agreement with a surveyor that had their license revoked for negilgence and incompetence.

I do not believe that we are held to a higher standard than civil engineers.

As far as what has to be done to check the boundary,previously established, it depends... some are relatively easy and some are difficult and generally it involves more than measurement evidence.

If another surveyor has performed the boundary survey and there is a filed map, then I don't see the issue referred to by Mr. Maffia. Checking the survey is nowhere near redoing the survey, assuming that the previous map adequately and accurately documents the survey that was performed.

Check a few monuments as you run control, verify that they match what's on the map, and continue.

This is not the same thing as working from a set of plans based upon a "record" or "paper" boundary. With a plan boundary based upon a recent survey (especially if you know the surveyor is reputable) inspires a certain level of confidence. Plans based upon a "record" boundary insires none.

Ric7308 wrote:Keith,

"Remember, surveyors do not review documents involved with lot line adjustments or mergers here."

Who performs the review of the legal descriptions associated with these functions at your county? If it is not a land surveyor, that is in direct violation of the law. Try education first, if that doesn't work, you know the right thing to do. Is anyone protecting the public by knowing this is happening (if it is) and not acting upon it?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes Ric, education, education, education, but I've been quoted that "They have been doing it this way for decades, so why change now"? I have brought up some potential descrepancies in their process and "approval", per Section 8761(e) B&P Code. In response, I've been called a "Busy Body".

Maybe the Leg. Committee can add a new term to Section 8708 of the B&P Code to include "Busy Body", LMAO!

Unfortunately, until there is a court case against them for their practice, I do not see much change. I have mentioned this to some surveyors, and they don't want to ruffle any feathers, cause that could cause their clients additional hardships.

I recently made some additions/sugestions for a revised "A Guide to Applying For a Building Permit". Lets see how they take the issue of "Filing Appropriate Mapping with the County Surveyor" when showing setbacks on their plans.

It is a sad Standard of Care, but I do what I can, when I can.

Keith,

What about having the local JPPC send a letter to your planning department and if that doesn't work, then get the Board involved? It might work.

Ryan.

Someone mentioned the planning depts.

I know one Orange county planning dept that if you are building to the setback line the property corners need to be in place. But build a foot short of the setback as delineated on the building plans without a survey (6ft from PL instead of 5ft sideyard) and the property corners do not have to be in place and no setback cert needed.

Someday someone will have to explain that logic to me.

pls5528 wrote:If that doesn't "Establish" a property line, I don't know what does?
Thanks Keith

Podunk County Building Depertment
100 Oak Street
Tomatoville, CA 9xxxxx

RE: Setback Verification of Proposed Single Family Residence on APN XXX-XX-XXX, Podunk County


To Whom it May Concern,

I have measured the foundation forms as they existed on the above referenced property on August 18, 2010 and found them to be more than [setback distance per current zoning] from the nearest property line based upon existing monumentation and record maps.







There, it's not a monument.

The Line and Grade of the forms for the concrete footing for the structure at 1234 Main Street have been constructed in substantial conformance to the approved plans for the project.