At the time of the last economic crisis, about 6 years ago, due to the difficulty of financing projects many maps that were being prepared under the Subdivision Map Act were terminated. Yet, during the preparation of these maps many tags were set, and, of course, are now being found by other surveyors.
My question is this: under the California Land Surveyor’s Act do Corner Records or Records of Surveys need to be filed on these tags? It seems that many people think so. Yet section 8765 (c) of the California Professional Land Surveyor’s Act, states that a record of survey is not required “When a map is in preparation for recording or shall have been recorded under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act.” Or maybe a RS is not required, but corner records are? Any comments?
> At the time of the last economic crisis, about 6 years ago, due to the difficulty of financing projects many maps that were being prepared under the Subdivision Map Act were terminated. Yet, during the preparation of these maps many tags were set, and, of course, are now being found by other surveyors.
>
> My question is this: under the California Land Surveyor’s Act do Corner Records or Records of Surveys need to be filed on these tags? It seems that many people think so. Yet section 8765 (c) of the California Professional Land Surveyor’s Act, states that a record of survey is not required “When a map is in preparation for recording or shall have been recorded under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act.” Or maybe a RS is not required, but corner records are? Any comments?
An RS would be required. If the subdivision was not recorded, those lines or streets don't exist. In CA you can't file a corner record on lines or points not shown on a previously recorded RS, Sub map or Official Map. If the map expired or was cancelled, then it is not "in preparation for recording..." and an RS would be required. If the map is just sitting there and is still alive under the time extensions given over the last few years, then it is still considered active and technically is still "in preparation for recording...".
Good questions, Ryan has a good response. I suggest you read the article by Ray Mathe pertaining to this subject in the Fall 2012 issue of the California Surveyor by CLSA:
http://www.californiasurveyors.org/calsurveyor/CalSurv171.pdf
Thanks Rick. Good article by Ray.
Ryan,
You seem to be assuming that all maps under the Subdivision Map Act create property lines where no property line/right of way lines had existed before. This is true in some cases, but not all.
Thanks Ric,
That was an interesting article, and seemed to be directed at my question. Yet, I think that 8765 (c) is at least ambiguous in regard to the time frame. In the Act, rather than “When a map…”, “While a map…” would have expressed Ryan’s point. ‘When’ can refer either to a moment in time, or a continuous span of time. ‘While’ refers to a span of time, typically linked to some other event, activity, or process.
Still, the article does indicate how this will tend to be viewed by the BPELSG. Given this, I suppose that in forming a contract for work on a proposed subdivision a ‘termination fee’ might need to be added to cover the potential extra costs if the project is ended before the map records. This might not ‘square’, though, with the ability of a client to terminate the job within 30 days, only paying for work completed.
Also, Ray’s logic is more than a bit confusing (note his paragraph 5). Apparently, according to him, simply preparing a tentative map will require either an RS or Corner Record(s). But why? Nothing triggering an RS might have been disclosed on the tentative map (or a previous map of record contains what might trigger a RS), and no points may have been set.
Lewis,
True. Like a single lot condo map or something similar. Then a corner record could be the appropriate document. The point is that it would have to be documented.
Good question.
Sorry for your confusion Lewis. The key to the requirement to file a record of survey is not the drafting or preparing of a tentative map, it is actually the performance of the field survey mentioned in the preceding paragraph of the article. The tentative map is merely evidence that a final map was being prepared under the provisions of the SMA. Once the tentative is dead and no other qualifying map is in process the exemption no longer exists and therefore it is time to file the record of survey.
Here is a twist to the situation to consider, say that you performed a field survey of a client’s property that they intend to subdivide. Your survey was of a deed lot that falls under the requirement to file a record of survey pursuant to section 8762(b)(4) of the PLS Act. You prepared a tentative map for your client and the local agency conditionally approves the project. Your client then sold the property to another developer and that developer had another surveyor (for example, Ryan) that they wanted to have prepare the filing of the final map, provide construction staking, final monumentation and be a part of the project all the way through the selling of homes. Ryan does his own boundary survey for the preparation of the final map. At this point, do think that you have a mandatory requirement to file a record of survey for your field survey?
Ray,
Thanks for the clarification of your article. I would be happy to give my opinion regarding your hypothetical example. But first I need to ‘fill in’ some of the details.
1. Were the lines shown on the Tentative Map based on the results of this field survey? If not, was some appropriate note placed on the Tentative Map?
2. Did I set monuments on the line or lines in questions (i.e., the deed line(s))?
3. Was the first submittal of the parcel (assuming field PM) or tract map made to the County?
4. Were the results of this field survey disclosed in the form of a map, report, or other presentation to any party outside of the surveying company?
5. Was the field survey the basis of construction staking?
6. I believe that there is some ambiguity in the use of the term ‘field survey’ in your example. Of course, we all know (or believe that we know) what this means in regard to the LS Act, although even here it is coupled with the words “… in conformity with the practice of land surveying”, which I believe refers to issuing of maps, etc., in the carrying on of our land surveying practice. But ‘field survey’ out of this context might just mean that I sent out a crew to make a few measurements (maybe even, god forbid, with a rag tape) in the field to satisfy me that the eventual boundary will ‘work’. In this case field survey might not even result in a boundary ‘solution’. Do you mean ‘field survey’ in the LS Act sense, or the looser meaning?
Or maybe you think that these questions have no bearing on a suitable response to your hypothetical?
While we are sorting this out I have two hypotheticals of my own. I put these forward because I think that the bear on our initial question.
(A) A very large prospective client asks for a bid on a new, and very large, project. This is in a part of town that I know to be difficult from a boundary perspective, and, should I eventually do this job a RS will be required. It is worth it for me to send out a crew to take some shots around to see what sort of problems I should anticipate in my bid. Based on the shots I analyze the boundary to the point where I actually have what I feel to be a satisfactory solution (OK work is slow and I am sort of curious if everything works). I bid the job, but don’t get it. I don’t set any points and no map, or report is issued by me. Another surveyor gets the job and calls me. He comments that he noticed quite a bit of crew activity on the site, and some monuments were even painted up and numbered. I tell him of my ‘field survey’, and he responds that I am required to file an RS. I think not. What do you think? Are things changed if the ‘prospective client’ became an actual client at the bid stage by agreeing to pay me a little so that I could have enough information to put together a sensible proposal? What if I sent a copy of my boundary solution to an architect friend who was also bidding the job?
(B) My client, a developer, is considering the purchase of an odd shaped parcel of land, which was created by deed and does not show up on any map of record. Besides being an odd shaped parcel the title report lists 20 easements. He hires me to tell him what sort of usable land he will have left for building. He assures me that an area +- 5% will be satisfactory, and this is put in our agreement. I send out a crew to survey the parcel of land and later issue a written report telling him that he will have an approximately 2 acre, more or less rectangular parcel on which to build. No map is issued, and no points are set. Is an RS required? I think that this falls in an ambiguous area, and I would probably look for input from others. What do you think?
As you can see, I don’t think that the point at which a RS is required is entirely obvious. And where we draw this line will bear on the original question.
> Ray,
> Thanks for the clarification of your article. I would be happy to give my opinion regarding your hypothetical example. But first I need to ‘fill in’ some of the details.
>
> 1. Were the lines shown on the Tentative Map based on the results of this field survey?
Your choice
> If not, was some appropriate note placed on the Tentative Map?
What note would you put on the tentative map?
> 2. Did I set monuments on the line or lines in questions (i.e., the deed line(s))?
If you set monuments it would trigger 8762(b)(5)
> 3. Was the first submittal of the parcel (assuming field PM) or tract map made to the County?
No
> 4. Were the results of this field survey disclosed in the form of a map, report, or other presentation to any party outside of the surveying company?
Yes, to your client as contractually obligated
> 5. Was the field survey the basis of construction staking?
Ryan's field survey was the basis for has construction staking
> 6. I believe that there is some ambiguity in the use of the term ‘field survey’ in your example. Of course, we all know (or believe that we know) what this means in regard to the LS Act, although even here it is coupled with the words “… in conformity with the practice of land surveying”, which I believe refers to issuing of maps, etc., in the carrying on of our land surveying practice. But ‘field survey’ out of this context might just mean that I sent out a crew to make a few measurements (maybe even, god forbid, with a rag tape) in the field to satisfy me that the eventual boundary will ‘work’. In this case field survey might not even result in a boundary ‘solution’. Do you mean ‘field survey’ in the LS Act sense, or the looser meaning?
A field survey is not about technology, it is about representation. If you are in the field doing something that is required to be done by someone authorized to practice land surveying...I would call that a field survey.
> Or maybe you think that these questions have no bearing on a suitable response to your hypothetical?
That is true
>
> While we are sorting this out I have two hypotheticals of my own. I put these forward because I think that the bear on our initial question.
> (A) A very large prospective client asks for a bid on a new, and very large, project. This is in a part of town that I know to be difficult from a boundary perspective, and, should I eventually do this job a RS will be required. It is worth it for me to send out a crew to take some shots around to see what sort of problems I should anticipate in my bid. Based on the shots I analyze the boundary to the point where I actually have what I feel to be a satisfactory solution (OK work is slow and I am sort of curious if everything works). I bid the job, but don’t get it. I don’t set any points and no map, or report is issued by me. Another surveyor gets the job and calls me. He comments that he noticed quite a bit of crew activity on the site, and some monuments were even painted up and numbered. I tell him of my ‘field survey’, and he responds that I am required to file an RS. I think not. What do you think? Are things changed if the ‘prospective client’ became an actual client at the bid stage by agreeing to pay me a little so that I could have enough information to put together a sensible proposal? What if I sent a copy of my boundary solution to an architect friend who was also bidding the job?
Is it only surveying if you have a client? Your actions are the issue, not your contract. If you are in the field and based on your professional opinion you discover or by your actions trigger one of the situations detailed in 8762(b)(1-5) you are required to file a record of survey. The legislature has decided that you have a responsibility to let the public (including other surveyors) know the results of your field survey in these specific instances.
>
> (B) My client, a developer, is considering the purchase of an odd shaped parcel of land, which was created by deed and does not show up on any map of record. Besides being an odd shaped parcel the title report lists 20 easements. He hires me to tell him what sort of usable land he will have left for building. He assures me that an area +- 5% will be satisfactory, and this is put in our agreement. I send out a crew to survey the parcel of land and later issue a written report telling him that he will have an approximately 2 acre, more or less rectangular parcel on which to build. No map is issued, and no points are set. Is an RS required? I think that this falls in an ambiguous area, and I would probably look for input from others. What do you think?
Clearly you issued a report to some degree of accuracy based on your understanding of land surveying principles together with field data collected under your responsible charge. Just because it is a low accuracy survey it still is a report and if the results of your field survey discover or trigger one of the situations detailed in 8762(b)(1-5) you are required to file a record of survey. The legislature has decided that you have a responsibility to let the public (including other surveyors) know the results of your field survey in these specific instances.
>
> As you can see, I don’t think that the point at which a RS is required is entirely obvious. And where we draw this line will bear on the original question.
I looked at all of your questions and began a detailed response to each and then decided to just provide you the brief responses you see above. I realized that your questions are of a similar vein that many surveyors have when dealing with issues relating to our practice. There is often times a wish to debate the esoteric exceptions rather than deal with the real questions or issues. First, you as a Licensed Professional Land Surveyor in California have been given an authority to practice land surveying in this state by the Board. Unlike most other licenses that I know about, land surveyors are given specific reporting requirements when certain situations arise in the course of performing their surveys. Section 8762(b)(1-5) of the PLS Act is one part of the laws we must adhere to when we practice. I don’t really think it is that difficult to understand, unless you are just looking for a way to avoid the filing requirements.
If you (or someone under your responsible charge) is in the field surveying (doing tasks that require authority to practice land surveying) and you discover or trigger one of the situations detailed in 8762(b)(1-5) of the PLS Act you are required to file a record of survey. The legislature has decided that you have a responsibility to let the public (including other surveyors) know the results of your field surveys in these specific instances. It is not about methods, technology, precision, or even payment by our clients … it is about representation. If you are doing something that land planners or contractors can do it isn’t land surveying. Let’s not race to the bottom, if you are providing services that require the authority of a licensed land surveyor then let’s not apologize about it and do the right thing.
Good question & answer thread with the BPELSG surveys. Printing & saving this one.
Ray,
I think we have defined things a bit. You think that there is only one possible meaning of ‘field survey’, which links it to the need to file a RS in specific cases (i.e. deed lines, etc), I think that there may be at least one other possible meaning of field survey, which does not require a RS.
Why did this issue come up?: You asked my opinion regarding the necessity to file a RS in a specific case of a ‘field survey’. Obviously, a RS is required if the field survey is within the meaning of ‘field survey’ per the PLS Act. I am questioning whether there is another meaning of ‘field survey’, which might apply to your hypothetical.
Why is this important?: If my position is valid, or at least within the realm of reason, then we may need to distinguish between these two cases of ‘field survey’ to figure out whether a RS is necessary. Is it having a contract requiring the survey of the line(s) in question, releasing maps of them, referring to them in reports, using them for construction staking or certifications, etc., etc.,etc?
Since you don’t think that any details matter regarding the need to file an RS as long as a licensed land surveyor is using his land surveying skills and discovering say a deed line lets just look at one example. I am out for a walk and get curious about a line of occupation that appears to be a deed line. Luckily I have my equipment nearby. I make some measurements, all on public property, and not interfering with traffic, do a bit of research, make some calculations and conclude that indeed this line is per the deed that I have obtained from the Recorders Office. And of course, per my example the line does not show up on any map of record. I have no client, have not issued any reports, or maps, and have not even told anyone about this. Per your reasoning I have a legal and professional responsibility to file a RS. That seems to be an odd conclusion, and one that I think most surveyors would not accept. In logic there is a principal of ‘reduction ad absurdum’. If accepting a principal leads you to a conclusion that seems to be incorrect, then you need to at the minimum seriously doubt the principal.
One thing that this example highlights is that it is hard to see the need to file a RS if I don’t have a client. How is this different from having a client for a project, but the field survey is not in the contract? In effect, I don’t have a client for the field survey. This might well be the case in a map for subdivision purposes (note your example) where I may only be hired to produce a Tentative Map, which can be done per record data, and I have, in my internal files completed a field survey. I have provided other examples in a previous post on this thread.
You might find my style of reasoning ‘esoteric’ . But it is very common in legal matters to have ‘though experiments’ to test a principal. And here we are dealing with legal matters. Where you see black and white, I see mostly black and white but also some grey. In other words, I am sure that most cases of needing to file a RS are fairly straightforward, but I doubt that all are. I can, however, given your position with BPELSG, appreciate your interest in not ‘opening the barn door’ for exception to filing a RS.
It seems that no activity in itself constitutes Land Surveying. Regarding Section 8726, which is titled ‘Land Surveying Defined’, please note that land surveying is, in fact, not defined. What is defined is Land Surveyor. At any rate, there is a difference. I think it is clear that certain activities need to be done by someone licensed to practice land surveying only when done in the course of a land surveying practice, i.e., business. This triggers some of the issues and complexity noted above.
