California Surveyors Forums

I am running a poll to query other surveyors about preparing ALTA surveys and other maps. I am working with Gary Kent on this. The question involves whether or not it is a violation of the PLSA for a surveyor to plot a geologic hazard such as fault lines and unstable areas. It is to be noted that the geologic hazards are determined by others; the surveyor is merely tracing them.

Also note:

GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV
TITLE 7. PLANNING AND LAND USE [65000 - 66499.58]
( Heading of Title 7 amended by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. )
DIVISION 2. SUBDIVISIONS [66410 - 66499.38]
( Division 2 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. )
CHAPTER 2. Maps [66425 - 66450]
( Chapter 2 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. )

ARTICLE 2. Final Maps [66433 - 66443]
( Article 2 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. )
66433.
The content and form of final maps shall be governed by the provisions of this article.
(Added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536.)
66434.

The final map shall be prepared by or under the direction of a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor, shall be based upon a survey, and shall conform to all of the following provisions . .

(a) On or after January 1, 1987, a city or county may, by ordinance, require additional information to be filed or recorded simultaneously with a final or parcel map. The additional information shall be in the form of a separate document or an additional map sheet which shall indicate its relationship to the final or parcel map, and shall contain a statement that the additional information is for informational purposes, describing conditions as of the date of filing, and is not intended to affect record title interest. The document or additional map sheet may also contain a notation that the additional information is derived from public records or reports, and does not imply the correctness or sufficiency of those records or reports by the preparer of the document or additional map sheet.

(b) Additional survey and map information may include, but need not be limited to: building setback lines, flood hazard zones, seismic lines and setbacks, geologic mapping, and archaeological sites.










Thanks all.

Not if the nature and location of the hazard is determined by a geologist and plotted under their direction.
They point to it and explain what they want to call it, we can pick up the ground location and place it on a map.

When tracing, a concern would be where the information is coming from, and how current or significant it is. Surveyors are not qualified to determine those parts without a geologist direction of some sort. I suppose a lot would depend on where the information is coming from.

If we trace and re-publish it, even with reference to original, the 'information chain' could be broken, and we are not qualified to judge it's significance. For example, if I take a 9 year old soils report and trace a few linaments and show them on my topographic survey, with a reference to that 9 year old soils report, not knowing ins and outs of geology, I don't know if I am doing someone a disservice.
While we are not likely to plot it in a wrong place (like realtors do with boundary lines), we may miss something else that is significant. How thorough was that soils report, what has changed since then on site, any additional seismic or erosion activity, something else that happened in last 9 years that affected the findings.
(I worked for a geologist for 3 years, I know just enough geology to be extremely dangerous)

In case of Flood zones (FEMA) the precedent is set that FEMA has officially published their information for certain types of use.
With geologic hazards, a lot may depend where the data is coming from.
Land surveyors are certainly qualified to plot ground located features on their maps, or to trace them accurately.
Land Surveyors are not trained to know how to tell a difference between a landslide linament and a crack in their ... GPS antenna.

Well said!

I agree with Cbarrett's statement above. I have yet to work with or know a surveyor who is well versed in Geology. With that, in part of what he said "If we trace and re-publish it, even with reference to original, the 'information chain' could be broken, and we are not qualified to judge it's significance." may be the key here, but, I think we need to stay in our lane.

Hi, Thanks for your comments.

Are you familiar with the legislation CLSA worked on regarding this topic and the resultant change in law?

FEMA and USGS and private sector hydrologic engineers and geologists all like to use geodetic and state plane coordinates. Enter 8726. So who is qualified?

So it looks like SMA already accounted for potential need to plot geotechnical info on subdivision maps.
Are there specifics setting precedents for records of surveys, ALTA's and other product we create?
I'm still reading other posted articles when I can find time.

Paul Cuomo, Hal Davis, and I co-wrote the legislation allowing surveyors to plot this data. That was nearly 40 years ago. It was a CLSA sponsored bill.