Re: Building Official Ignores Land Surveying Requirement
Posted: Mon May 09, 2022 11:56 am
Here's the thing about this latest inquiry on this...the surveyor closed a traverse around the block, recovered evidence from the original subdivision and a recent RS for a neighboring lot, depicted the property lines/found monuments on the topographic survey map, and referenced both maps with a boundary note. Survey had already been delivered to client and architect. The surveyor was simply complaining about the local agency requiring the boundary to be shown and to add reference to that in the title to the map.DWoolley wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 3:51 pmA land surveyor has to be one of the only professions in which the professional actually does not want to work. In the instant example, why would a land surveyor complain about having to establish and monument property lines? As a matter of protecting the public from the harm of bad design that may encroach or violate setbacks or result in demolition of the adjacent owner's property, a proper boundary survey and monumentation is practically beyond reproach. As a business, it is much more profitable to continue on an existing project than to initiate a contract and begin another project - especially when the local agency is mandating the work to be completed. If we were impalas in the wild, predators would have made a snack out these folks before they could reproduce.Ric7308 wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 1:46 pm FWIW - we sometimes receive inquiries from land surveyors with exact opposite concerns of those expressed in this thread (one just this week). They are upset that a local public agency is requiring the property lines be shown on the topographic map and that corners are marked in the field, arguing that the agency is beyond their authority causing unnecessary costs to their clients and they want the Board to do something about it. And in many cases, despite the fact that they have already provided a "topographic map" with the property lines shown.
Suggest you get it straight within your own group so the message(s) being conveyed to the local agencies on this topic is clear and the surveyor community at least appears to be in reasonable sync with one another.
The Board staff should ask for a copy of their ""topographic map" with the property lines shown" and cite them for an unsubstantiated boundary, failure to file, insufficient monumentation or a host of any other infractions that are likely to exist. Again, there is no such thing as a "record boundary" in connection with a field survey for a site plan.
If the land surveyor believes the costs are "unnecessary" or unjust, there is nothing that states the land surveyor has to charge for these services (you can tell them that next time they call). Also, it is unlikely the property being surveyed has a value of less than $1M and the reason for the boundary and topographic survey is for improvements that will likely be 10x the cost of the survey.
Lastly, as I have said many times, a person does not need a survey to build a fence - a ball of string - for a straight line - will suffice. Want the fence relative to the boundary line? Well, that is another matter.
Good grief.
DWoolley
PS Why the heck would these folks call the board to protest having to survey? Weird. 911 would almost seem more logical.