Map Checking Fees

I hope the progress bill was hand delivered along with a a deep, French kiss. 😉

Those charges seem way, way, way overboard.

A few years ago, I was under contract to provide plat reviews for a local municipality. I don't recall ever spending more than 8hrs on a review, and that was a complex plat.

So if the map checker is a city employee, is the city paying that guy $135 per hour? If they are billing overhead separately than the hourly rate, you have to presume that is the case. If so, what city is it and are they hiring map checkers?

If the map checker is a consultant, then that is probably a rate the consultant is charging the city per hour, but then all the overhead is incured by the consultant, correct? How does that work?

Wow, most of the city agencies around here charge a flat fee of $150-200 for an ROS review and that only includes LLA where a building permit or multiple permits may be at issue.

The main county I work in charges a mostly flat fee for Subdivision Plat reviews. It's usually $1100 plus $X per lot. That includes review for Code compliance, easement reviews, license agreements, closures, proper notes and it even includes the county lawyer reviewing the CC&Rs or Condo Decs. Most of them end up around $1500 but that also includes any subsequent reviews and visits, even if it takes 10 times to get it right. (hopefully that would never happen)

The county next door has a private LS contracted to review Subdivision plats and if memory serves me, that charge is somewhere around $250 plus $X per lot. No additional charge.

He's a City employee so all I can think of is that they're charging for clerical time logging in the submittal, sending out the bills and such. I guess I'll be finding out pretty soon. I assume his red ink supply is included in his charge-out rate.

Steve-

We used to have the same scenario in Ontario.

As an example I did a standard condominium for residential purposes that converted a shoe factory to a very nice residential apartment.

As part of the mix we had to prepare a Certification of Titles Act Plan in the form of a draft reference plan to be circulated [to most of the western world it seemed].

The condominium plan is a separate plan that follows illustrating the Units.

My first day on site included an internal measurement of thye structure.

Work crews were taking down the shop floor overhead lights.

We prepared the Certification of Titles Act Plan, submitted it with all the supporting documents on a rather simple, no title extent or quality dispute basis.

The CTA plan is needed to be blessed and sanctified before the Condo plan can be registered.

There were people moving in to their Units and the CTA plan still had not been approved due to blind incompetence and lassitude by the 'unaccountable to anyone' swivel servant.

(I've been a proud civil servant twice !)

I told this swivel servant point blank that this level of service to the people of Ontario was unacceptable and I was "going up the line" as he would not have a job if this service level continued.

He *crewed around more and with others.

Fortunately, in "going up the line" I discovered the party in power's Chief "Bagman", a developer of huge parcels and condos was also waiting for his developments' pieces of paper to be processed.

He too was unhappy to say the least and with aplomb, the process was mysteriously "changed" and the swivel servant became a 'fresh air' inspector and "retired" not too much later.

My suggestion is to ask for a check list and sample map/plan.

If nothing comes of this, go up the political ladder until you find a prominent politico whose ox is being gored by persons who obviously have been educated beyond their limit of intelligence, plead your case and tell the politico how the matter can be improved so that your area can be "Open For Business".

Keep us posted as "Rules and Regulations are made for the guidance of wise persons and the blind obedience of fools"

Cheers

Derek

We lost a very good client because of that delay

Steve,

We experienced the very same situation a few years back here in Comi-rado, namely the City of Lakewood.

Sounds the same, Plan Checker not liking types of font, note locations, size of arrow heads, line tpyes, etc.

After 4 revisions and 8 months of dealing with her cr@p we called her bluff and hired an attorney to draft a letter stating she was stepping beyond her authority and explicitly reminded her, her manager/s and the City Counsel what the responsibilities of a Licensed Professional Land Surveyor are and what her responsibility is.

The plat got approved the next City Counsel meeting.

BTW- See doesn't me

I would not pay any exorbitant fee to anyone unless they had the credentials hanging on their wall to prove their worth.

Being a city employee alone does not qualify anyone for checking a map.

The city department would need an "adopted" requirement facsimile or other standard to go by if they insist that certain details to making a plat are required. And by adopted I mean that it has been drawn up, put in print, voted on and endorsed by the local and professional community and available to anyone that needs to meet the requirements.

Included in all that there should be a fee schedule by drawing size and per page to let the public know what expense to expect.

Most every state, county or other office has a fee schedule in sight for everyone to see.

BTW, if their fees are that high, I would consider raising mine above theirs since I am the professional.

I would like to see the law amended so as to limit the agencies' reviews from commenting on style. When they start nitpicking North arrows, monument symols, linetypes and such, the surveyor should have the authority to tell them to move on without them unreasonably holding up the map for like or other matters as a consequence.

Review should be limited to compliance with the Tentative Map, technical correctness, and completeness of statutory content, and nothing else.

Commenting are your stylistic stuff would be like flunking Monet in art school because his paintings are blurry.

I don't even mind so much having to move some notes around or changing a line-type here and there. What I don't understand is how it could take him longer to tell me what he doesn't like about it than it did to draw it. And I really need an explanation on $1300 worth of "overhead".

A PM from an existing map would take me no longer than a half day. Things are slower than usual, so I expect the map checker is padding his time on your dime. I would ask where in the Map Act or City Ordinance is the justification for his comments.

My $0.02

Most excellent! Sometimes you just have to say no! It works for me 90% of the time.

> I would like to see the law amended so as to limit the agencies' reviews from commenting on style. When they start nitpicking North arrows, monument symols, linetypes and such, the surveyor should have the authority to tell them to move on without them unreasonably holding up the map for like or other matters as a consequence.
>
> Review should be limited to compliance with the Tentative Map, technical correctness, and completeness of statutory content, and nothing else.

The Surveyor does have the authority to say no. Just say "No!"

How does $135/hr, for one guy to check a map, not include overhead?

The trouble is that some places I work make the owner sign an agreement to pay for the City "services" by the hour, basically a blank check. Once they do it and send out a bill, you would have to prove they didn't stare at the map for 20 hours, and the more you talk to them about it, the bigger the bill gets.

I can understand minimum size requirements for plans in that when scanned at some parts per inch resolution, some type faces and lines may not be legible. Such requirements would easily fit on a single page of instructions that should be publically posted.

Seems like twenty-five cents might cover such costs to the checking authority.

>
> I'm just not seeing how reviewing this map took 2 1/2 full days. The client was understandably irate and once he cooled off a little he was going to call the City for an explanation and get back to me.

Steve, there are no words to describe this one. Totally insane.

I just got off the phone with the map checker. If I had blood pressure pills I would be taking a few now. What he did was he took the map that created our parcel and two adjoining maps, created an ACAD drawing of his own and beat his head against the screen trying to get them to fit together. As I showed on my map, the adjoining maps were measured from completely different found monuments and based on an entirely different block breakdown. The map that created the parcel I'm subdividing was recorded in 1966. I found every one of the original parcel corner monuments. The adjoining maps were done in the 90's. I showed their dimensions v. the 1966 dimensions. If he didn't understand what I did in the first hour of looking at it, why didn't he call me?

Now I've got a call in to the accounting department asking what in the heck "overhead" is and if they have some kind of itemization.