California Surveyors Forums

I trust everyone is safe and well as we move forward in this new year. I have a question related to civil engineering matters as they relate to agency review.

As we know, the PLSA provides for a City Surveyor or County Surveyor to review land surveying documents, i.e., Corner Records, Parcel Maps, Subdivision Maps and Record of Survey Maps. What I am trying to understand is, is there a comparable provision under the Engineers' Act (PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS ACT - Business and Professions Code §§ 6700 – 6799)? Per the PLSA:

8766. Record of survey – examination
(a) Within 20 working days after receiving the record of survey, or within the additional time as may be mutually agreed upon by the land surveyor or civil engineer and the county surveyor, the county surveyor shall examine it with respect to all of the following:
(1) Its accuracy of mathematical data and substantial compliance with the information required by Section 8764.
(2) Its compliance with Sections 8762.5, 8763, 8764.5, 8771.5, and 8772.
(b) The examination pursuant to this section shall not require the licensed land surveyor or registered civil engineer submitting the record of survey to change the methods or procedures utilized or employed in the performance of the survey, nor shall the examination require a field survey to verify the data shown on the record of survey.
(c) Nothing in this section shall limit the county surveyor from including notes expressing opinions regarding the record of survey, or the methods or procedures utilized or employed in the performance of the survey.
(d) The examination pursuant to this section shall be performed by, or under the direct supervision of, a licensed land surveyor or registered civil engineer.

When a civil engineer prepares a set of plans and submits them to a municipality, what are the rules regarding reviewing and approving the plans? Whereas the PLSA has some very specific provisions to be followed. Although I may have missed it, I did not see anything in the PE Act. If I missed it, if someone can point me to that section, I would be grateful.

When an agency reviews a set of civil plans, what is being reviewed and what are the applicable standards? Are there any state law provisions that govern this review? Because this is a review, presumably by a licensed person, would he/she not be required to provide their license number and stamp? If state law does not provide for this review, can anyone check the plans? Do you need a license to do this? Can a secretary review a set of civil plans?

If there is a disagreement between the design engineer and the municipal employee as to what should be included, how is that resolved?

Under the PLSA, specific language is employed. Are engineers required to employ specific language when reviewing and approving plans? What purpose does a review by a city engineer serve if there is no basis in law or related standards? What is he/she reviewing?

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Be safe.

Excluding State agencies, the typical municipality has the Building Official, Planning Director and the Public Works Director.
Being civil/survey, I typically work with the Planning Director and the Public Works Director.

Usually, the Planning Director and knows about the sensitive habitats, flood plains, etc. Sometimes the Public Works director is aware of these things too.

Public works is usually fairly standardized and follows a set of rules for which we consultants abide by. We have the California Building Code, CalTrans Standards and local standard plans/details and specifications. Several Jurisdictions adopt CalTrans.

So, say we are tasked with designing a Walmart in a wetland area and need to run roads/streets and a rail line out to it, it will be the Planning Director that says Hell No to the Walmart in the middle of the wetland. But is it truly a wetland? Lawsuit is how you go about answering that. Roads out to the Walmart, parking lots, civil works, grading and drainage, all that stuff falls under the purview of the Public Works standard plans, details and specifications. We sometimes get into beefs with the Public Works director over little semantic things but normally work them out.

The Public Works Departments sometimes have outside consultants reviewing plans, etc. They seem to get paid by the comment. Stupid tit for tat shit that fills the typical set of comments is just dealt with, but if something catches my eye I go straight to the Director and work it out.

And if you can't get past the Public Works Director, you just corrupt them:

https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/mohamme ... ed-by-fbi/

Thanks! When these reviews occur, does the plan checker sign and stamp the work, as required by state law? Does it say, "Reviewed by Joe Smith, Registered Civil Engineer, No 1000?" or something like that? When you mention following standards, are there any uniform standards as to what they are reviewing, as is done with a land surveyor review?

Typically the reviewer is looking at Codes, ordinances, etc., sometimes open to interpretation. The engineer often jumps into CBC Chapter 16 - Structural Design, which is gonna reference several other sections of the Code. Same with Chapter 18 - Soils and Foundations. Chapter 11B is the ADA Code. Caltrans even tightens up Chapter 11B a bit, and Cities and Counties might adopt more stringent standards than those contained in the above. Counties often have their own grading and drainage Ordinances that supersede CBC. Quite the maze to navigate. The reviewers typically have their checklists and/or if/then cheat sheets.

So, yes, the standards are fairly standard.

I don't recall document/plan reviewers stamping review letters or anything. They'd rather not invite the liability of claiming their work as an engineering document per 6735. Caltrans has this trick where the design engineer signs and stamps some form promising to design to their specs, and then the engineer also has to sign and stamp a certification form after construction completed.