Page 1 of 1
Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Wed May 22, 2024 2:36 pm
by kwilson
Now that we are doing more Parcel Maps (SB9 etc) and submitting these to various cities, it seems that some jurisdictions are not equipped to handle the workload.
Question: If a jurisdiction's map checking process is incompetent can the Engineer of Record or Surveyor or Record (the one signing the map) be held responsible? (Complaint to the Board). Is the review of the certificates on a map the responsibility of the City Engineer or City Surveyor?
Example 1: Map corrections show lack of understanding of surveying practices and procedures resulting in completely off the wall corrections. Did the surveyor of record actually approve the correction or are they not exercising responsible charge?
Example 2: The process of providing corrections is disorganized, not decipherable and grossly cumbersome costing clients and surveyors time and money. For example, we received 10 sets of corrections and 7 of them were corrections made to previous versions of the map. Or multiple corrections of the same thing. Or corrections that remain which we have already taken care of. Or individual corrections from various persons all on different sheets and some not in agreement.
Is it a requirement for a Civil Engineer to be an organized person? Or maybe that's not something an engineer does.
I am not making this up. What happened to one redline?
Re: Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Wed May 22, 2024 7:35 pm
by David Kendall
kwilson wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 2:36 pm
Now that we are doing more Parcel Maps (SB9 etc) and submitting these to various cities, it seems that some jurisdictions are not equipped to handle the workload.
I have had some similar experiences lately and I agree with your assertion that the jurisdictions are not capable of handling the work load.
I do not believe that our licensing board has discretion over the timelines or review qualifications, beyond that spelled out in the LS act.
I have been wondering about the mechanism of SMA enforcement myself, it appears to be a self regulating system. Even the streamlined subdivision has a blank check for the agency (engineers, surveyors and planners) to take as long as they want and charge for whatever they care to.
I feel like if I treated my clients that way then I would lose my license for contract violations. I can’t understand how the agencies get away with this behavior and shrug it off with no accountability.
Re: Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Wed May 22, 2024 8:53 pm
by hellsangle
Re: Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Wed May 22, 2024 9:26 pm
by David Kendall
hellsangle wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 8:53 pm
Doesn't 65956(b) apply?
Seems like too many moving parts. I’m waiting over 90 days for the assessor to calculate the taxes due for the new year. Everyone else has signed off. The map was finished in August so going on 9 months of agency nonsense and of course they bill hourly.
I think the agency has discovered that no one is held accountable for violating the government code
Re: Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Sat May 25, 2024 4:52 pm
by CBarrett
Is this a tentative map review or a final map review?
Tentative maps usually go through multiple departments and receive multiple redlines.
Re: Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Mon May 27, 2024 1:32 pm
by David Kendall
CBarrett wrote: ↑Sat May 25, 2024 4:52 pm
Is this a tentative map review or a final map review?
Tentative maps usually go through multiple departments and receive multiple redlines.
Mine is a parcel map filing. SB9 “streamlined”…. Not sure about the OP but it sounds like he has several experiences with different agencies.
I never heard of a property tax payment in support of a TM application or review but maybe they do it differently in Southern California
Re: Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Tue May 28, 2024 1:03 pm
by Ric7308
kwilson wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 2:36 pm
Now that we are doing more Parcel Maps (SB9 etc) and submitting these to various cities, it seems that some jurisdictions are not equipped to handle the workload.
Question: If a jurisdiction's map checking process is incompetent can the Engineer of Record or Surveyor or Record (the one signing the map) be held responsible? (Complaint to the Board). Is the review of the certificates on a map the responsibility of the City Engineer or City Surveyor?
Example 1: Map corrections show lack of understanding of surveying practices and procedures resulting in completely off the wall corrections. Did the surveyor of record actually approve the correction or are they not exercising responsible charge?
Example 2: The process of providing corrections is disorganized, not decipherable and grossly cumbersome costing clients and surveyors time and money. For example, we received 10 sets of corrections and 7 of them were corrections made to previous versions of the map. Or multiple corrections of the same thing. Or corrections that remain which we have already taken care of. Or individual corrections from various persons all on different sheets and some not in agreement.
Is it a requirement for a Civil Engineer to be an organized person? Or maybe that's not something an engineer does.
I am not making this up. What happened to one redline?
The Board does possess the authority to investigate any complaints related to ensuring that the appropriate licensee if performing, or in responsible charge of, the aspects related to PMs as it applies to their respective license. Feel free to submit a complaint.
Re: Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 7:19 am
by PLS7393
David Kendall wrote: ↑Mon May 27, 2024 1:32 pm
Mine is a parcel map filing. SB9 “streamlined”….
What is a SB9 Streamlined?
SB9 is still a subdivision and goes through the same process with a tentative map.
To my understanding the SB9 process is suppose to be an internal agency streamline, but we never see that, only delays.
I do agree that the lack of the "Redline" process is due to technology, laziness, and the reliability on a computer.
I've seen comments that make one think what they truly want, instead of a simply "Redline" markup.
I've had the excuse that "My handwriting isn't good, so computer markups are better for me". Makes one think, . . . Drafting 101 ? ? ?
Don't get me started, LOL
Re: Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 7:31 am
by Ric7308
PLS7393 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 7:19 am
David Kendall wrote: ↑Mon May 27, 2024 1:32 pm
Mine is a parcel map filing. SB9 “streamlined”….
I do agree that the lack of the "Redline" process is due to technology, laziness, and the reliability on a computer.
I've seen comments that make one think what they truly want, instead of a simply "Redline" markup.
I've had the excuse that "My handwriting isn't good, so computer markups are better for me". Makes one think, . . . Drafting 101 ? ? ?
Don't get me started, LOL
I tend to agree. Just like years ago when a licensee who worked at a city wanted to control how large the brass disk was to be set on a monument. Totally ridiculous and a waste of review time.
Re: Subdivision Map Checking
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 8:01 am
by DWoolley
PLS7393 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 7:19 am
David Kendall wrote: ↑Mon May 27, 2024 1:32 pm
Mine is a parcel map filing. SB9 “streamlined”….
What is a SB9 Streamlined?
SB9 is still a subdivision and goes through the same process with a tentative map.
To my understanding the SB9 process is suppose to be an internal agency streamline, but we never see that, only delays.
...
Don't get me started, LOL
There isn't supposed to be conditions of approval i.e. tentative map and/or planning commission meetings on an SB9 map. The point of the law was to remove local jurisdiction discretion (ministerial action) - this is the streamlined process. In one of my City Surveyor positions I do not sign the waived parcel maps - they are processed similarly to a LLA.
Over the weekend I listened to this podcasts concerning SB9.
https://youtu.be/znMcvAxt-xQ?si=FMVAxEHvhIlUDvRd
It might not matter now, a judge recently overturned the law. The ramifications are unclear to me.
DWoolley