I think the issue is that most jurisdictions would rather reference a code/law instead of using some common sense or discretion. I've ran into this in many City projects where someone wants to build a deck. That will trigger a need for a site plan, then as a survey standard they require full boundary/topo survey with full Right-of-Way and utilities 150' in both directions beyond the property, along with 15' topographic overlap onto others properties (btw, here in WA state we don't have Right of Entry), all for a deck... I've seen Clients drop $20k-$30k on a Surveyor, Architect, Geo-Tech, Landscape Architect, etc just to get a deck permitted, yet alone build it.?ÿ?ÿ
Yeah, I know. I took a semester of GIS given by my state society. Some are better than others.
The client just sent email to tell me he went to the building department, and showed them the image I provided from their GIS. The building department then decided the client won't be needing a permit plan as a result. I am happy not to have to charge an exorbitant fee to show that a small garage in the middle of 17 acres will fit without violating the 20 feet setback rule.
Each time you navigate the maze of regulatory authority and skirt it for your clients it's a win. I've had a number of them this year and it's a feel good accomplishment.
We have the same problem with our official bureaucrats. If you want to build a septic tanks 300 feet from a seawall, you have to prepare a mean-high-water Survey to prove you are more than 50 feet from the 'surface water boundary'. Even if everyone knows the MHW Line is along the seawall. You know the MHW elevation within a tenth, you know it's going to be less than the 5 foot seawall top, you know it's going to be greater than the -2 foot sand bottom, but you have to submit a survey with a more precise value. The FDEP lady actually told me the MHW elevation could be 7 or 8 feet and be over the seawall. She must believe global warming has already melted the ice caps.
I made a goof on a site plan a few weeks back.?ÿ We are required to show contours and a proposed floor elevation for the house.?ÿ The low end of the lot contains a detention pond and the lot has a minimum floor elevation of 1121'.?ÿ The lot climbs so that the upper contour on the lot is 1130'.?ÿ I made a typo and showed the proposed floor elevation as 1031' rather than the intended 1131'.?ÿ With the contours on the site plan ranging from 1110' to 1130' the floor elevation is an obvious typo but the reviewer flagged it, kicked it back, and will likely start a new two week clock on issuing the building permit.?ÿ It's insanity when a quick call or email would have confirmed that it was a simple typo and a quick glance at a revised drawing prior to issuing the permit would provide CYA coverage for her.
We complain when people use GIS to locate boundaries all the time. Now we are complaining they won't?
I think it's a good policy to not rely on GIS. A surveyor familiar with the area and the GIS being used should be the best person to decide when GIS is enough and when it isn't.?ÿ
@norman-oklahoma I agree pretty much with Norman. I plot the ownership on a Google Earth image. Visit the site, determine the location on my GE image and verify the property corners locations on the image that would affect the setbacks.
Never trust GIS products.
Two hours time. You've got a photo quality image to show the Bureaucrats. You can scale the image on your CAD and display all the side line offset dimensions. Clients and Crats love the displays.
Sometimes I'm as smart as a cow????
?ÿ
@oldpacer Sounds like "the FDEP lady" needs a continuing education course!
I owned an aliquot quarter quarter (nominal 40 acres) about 17 years ago.?ÿ House (built by prior owner) was >200' from the west line; all 4 corners were in place by the "local go-to surveyor" and you could see down any boundary line from one corner to the other.
I went to add-on and modify the existing garage and was asked as part of the building permit process to submit a site plan.?ÿ In my "official" capacity as a Colorado PLS (Professional Land Surveyor), and the homeowner, I was quite comfortable in creating the site plan and showing that the existing garage corner was "greater than xx feet" from the boundary line where "xx" was several times larger that whatever the minimum setback was.?ÿ
Building Department was satisfied and I built the garage that the original owner should have built for a horse property out in the country, i.e. large enough for a pickup truck.
When I replaced the rotting deck on the back of my house with a bigger one (with help), I gave the building dept my own unofficial sketch showing distances from the lines of the fractional-acre lot, and they issued the permit.
