Record of Survey - Part Deux

Norman,
Besides the County reviews, I am getting reviews from the local jurisdictions on land divisions. They seem to think that it is in their rights to redline drafting issues and other things that have nothing to the property being divided. I have had them ask for corrections 3 blocks away from the lot itself.

Give a guy a red pencil and everything on the map is fair game!

joe

At PLSO some time back Bob Hovden noted that some red comments were only suggestions. The trouble is that there is no way for the surveyor to tell the difference. They should use different colored markings for suggestions and for critical items. I think that if you call the reviewer to discuss which are necessary and which are merely preferences, thereby making them more conscious that you are a real person, you may get less red drool on your plans in the future.

When I review a map I always differentiate a suggestion by writing "suggestion only" and outlining the entire comment in a revision cloud.

> At PLSO some time back Bob Hovden noted that some red comments were only suggestions. The trouble is that there is no way for the surveyor to tell the difference. They should use different colored markings for suggestions and for critical items. I think that if you call the reviewer to discuss which are necessary and which are merely preferences, thereby making them more conscious that you are a real person, you may get less red drool on your plans in the future.

When I find a redline I disagree with or one that simply may be a question from the reviewer that needs more information, I always call to discuss or simply note in a different color on the check print the information or that my stance/opinion has not changed. Thus far in my limited experience;-) This is working.

I did work with PDG on a survey that had comments driven from cartography that the client needed to prepare quit claim deeds prior to approval of the boundary line location to be accepted as we showed. After a few lengthy emails and a face to face sit down with the cartographer and a high priced land attorney our client, and boundary line prevailed.

Great post Norman.

In the world I live in a Basis of Bearing is something between 2 found and accepted monuments. North, East, West, who gives a rat patootie if it's got some minutes & seconds in it. It is what it is, and now you know where you are in relation to the other guys world who was there before us.

Some here think the BOB should be based on some mythical signals from the cosmos. I prefer a line that I can actually retrace to follow the deed and/or the other guy who did it in the first place.

Our Records of Survey are not reviewed by the County Surveyor. Our Plats however are looked at pretty hard. We prepare a response letter detailing our action or justification for leaving it as is. For the most part our products are reviewed by Professionals (or technicians who probably could be). I count my lucky stars on that one...

There are maybe half a dozen regular practitioners in our jurisdiction and the occasional out-of-area surveyor who usually has some sort of personal or business tie with a local client. Of the locals, there are only one or two whose maps are ever reviewed before I see them. They are very appreciative of my efforts and they know that I’ve saved them countless times from recording embarrassing mistakes. There are only two of us, my boss the County Surveyor and me. We have the respect of the local land development and surveying community because we both have extensive local knowledge and experience in the private sector. When we see a map from someone new to our county, we often invite them to come in and chat; just to get to know each other and get a feel for their attitude and their approach to the project. It always works out well, but we haven’t run into anyone truly arrogant yet.:-)

Don

It might be an idea to make your suggestions in blue pen and required change comments in red. There is some academic research that shows that people react to colors used in marking test papers differently.

"...mythical signals from the cosmos"

Too funny!!

I had an office manager from a competing firm call me once and ask me if I could explain to him the statement his surveyor was placing on their survey maps. I truthfully told him that I had absolutely no idea what it meant. He kind of laughed and said that was what others had said also. Four years later the same statement is still in use. I'm not quite sure I understand why...

Well Jim, if it wasn't true then it would be even funnyer. (ok, that's not a word, but it's still funny)

Point A to Point B is pretty definitive. But some don't think so because their respective black or yellow box with too many buttons and that cosmic message says it's different.

I don't get it either, nor do I understand the problem some have with it. The concept is pretty easy IMO. I think they call it "follow the footsteps", or some such thing. Kind of along the lines of don't fix it if it ain't broke.

Reviews should only be performed by licensed land surveyors with extensive experience within the specific area of the boundary survey to be reviewed. That requirement alone would eliminate about 90 percent of the categories for which most posters here have complained. I believe it is best if the reviewer has walked in the same shoes as the one presenting a survey to be reviewed. It is also essential that the reviewer adhere to the Golden Rule.

In my State the review process goes back to a time when there was no licensing of land surveyors and the only authority on boundary surveying was the County Surveyor/Engineer. Anyone else performing boundary survey work was, for all practical purposes, subordinate to the County Surveyor/Engineer. That office was the source of virtually all historic boundary survey information for that specific County. Once the licensing act was passed, the newly licensed land surveyors were extremely dependent on the resources within that office. It made perfect sense that those who were benefited by the County files should provide their newly gained information, in the form of survey plats, to be added to the existing files so that EVERYONE could work from a full data set. A few selfish pigs attempted to hoard their data while working from the common data on file at the County office. Others recognized this as being improper. The recording requirement came along to try to stop such foolish behavior.

Once the recording requirement was being enforced, some slipshod operators found that they needed to do proper work or become subject to various penalties. They whined loudly. Some still whine today.

Yes, there can be overzealous reviewers. However, most with whom I have had contact are simply attempting to assure that the minimum requirements stated within the adopted Minimum Standards are being met. The extremely picky crowd must primarily exist in certain areas of California, with a few scattered elsewhere. There is no sane rationale for extorting huge sums and lengthy recording delays when the review process is actually fairly simple and straight forward.

It has been my experience in reviewing survey plats in several counties that over ninety percent of those submitted need no further attention. Much of the other ten percent is represented by outright errors that should have been caught by the submitting surveyor. Errors like having the wrong county or the wrong section or the wrong township and/or range or the wrong subdivision title or having an incorrect number(it must be incorrect because it does not match the same number elsewhere on the same plat) or reversing a bearing or leaving out a course in a description or having a description that is incomplete or.............. There are hundreds of different errors that have nothing to do with reviewer opinion. We all make such errors. Having them pointed out may be embarrassing but such errors truly need to be corrected sooner rather than later.

I reviewed proposed subdivision plats for 22 years and learned something new every time. I also spent many hours listening to privateers' AND governments complaints and tips about the process.

On one side, I can say that about 20% of what I saw was scary. Recording these plats would have caused major legal problems for all adjoiners, plus the county. Invariably, the WORST cases I saw resulted in the most steadfast resistance from the surveyors. Some of these cases involved multiple monuments which I now know are illegal, but in my younger years, I was too timid and "cordial" to force the surveyors to change their plats because my duties do NOT allow me to check surveyor's judgement. (YES, Multiple monuments for a proposed subdivision in Colorado are illegal - violation of written statute law).

So, the lesson I learned is that we NEED surveyors to review plats to screen out the 20% of the group that is WAY outside the norm.

The other 80% were usually fine, some with minor omissions, and got changed by the surveyor with gratitude.

On the other side are departments around the state that have no checking, or worse, have their planning employee check plats. That means in most of the smaller cities in my state, about 20% of the plats that get approved are HORRIBLE, ILLEGAL surveys after getting checking and reviewed by laypeople.

Now, for the group of my peers who go overboard with your very important checking duties: Lighten up. You are not doing a good service to this profession, to the government, or to the public. Stop acting like a government hack by acting as if you are afraid you will lose your job if some lawyer finds a typo in the future. You are pigeonholing the great profession of surveying into your own, egotistical and warped sense of what your duties are. Quit frustrating the 100% of our great profession, forcing them to lower their standards for your own warped little ego - and start looking for that 20% out there that NEED to be reviewed, so that the public can start having a favorable view of our great profession in your area for a change! Stop the forces of the public that HATE reviewers, and have the power to legislate us all away!

ww CO PLS

As far as I know, you don't need bearings in CT. Interior angles are fine.

Wow. Warren Ward, you are the public servant who actually understands your role.
I would have liked to copy and paste such an insightful message and send it to our county surveyor a few years ago when he arrived in dodge.

He told everyone it was not his job to tell people how to survey. But he has done just that. Said it was his job to get rid of the bottom-scrapers. I think there has been some benefit from him trying to make life hard on the bottom-scrapers. But along with that are his and his trained assistant's desire to have us illustrate and explain far more than is needed.

To sum up, I think he has done an equal amount of good and bad. This is a very grey area, the so called review process.

Fortunately, we have a code section in CA where the practitioner can tell the county LS to go pound sand. It requires leaving space on the map for him to explain his difference of opinion. I do not know how many surveyors have used that section of the law or even know of it.

Bhiker19 - thanks!

If I could sum it up in one sentence -

In Colorado, planning departments are required to regulate subdivisions so the public is ensured that when they buy a Lot in a new subdivision - it is free of legal problems.

If reviewers understood that one concept, the system would work, and, the legal problems caused by SURVEYORS who insist on setting multiple monuments, or by neglect due to underbidding, would be greatly reduced.

I have seen great outcry in my state by overzealous reviewers who have had their jobs eliminated by the authorities. It gives us all a black eye. I have also seen steadfast overzealous reviewers in my state get away with it - and surveyors in their area triple their bids because of it. Its not good survey practice. It is one guy stroking his ego at great cost to the rest of us. They know who they are.

This is the type of mindset I wish all checking agencies had. Thank you for being reasonable.

In California, the ROS isn't impossible to get recorded as Bhiker mentions above. Simply say record it as it stands and leave room for a rebutal by the reviewer (1 square inch is enough) (: . Where I have a problem is the cost. In the OC it is anywhere from $0 to nearly $2200 to file one. All depends on the purpose. Many clents do not want to file when that is added to the bill. But the law prevails and it has to be done. Sometimes leaving the surveyor stuck with the bill. Because they don't have a provision to ensure that we are reimbursed, but we are required to file. Luckily, the higher fee is for subdivision reasons and that is typically a recoverable backcharge. Usually know when that is going to happen and can inform the client before work is started. No surprises is best.

Warren

"(YES, Multiple monuments for a proposed subdivision in Colorado are illegal - violation of written statute law)."

This is very interesting - can you provide a link or something so I can read this?

Thanks

>
> So, the lesson I learned is that we NEED surveyors to review plats to screen out the 20% of the group that is WAY outside the norm.
>
> The other 80% were usually fine, some with minor omissions, and got changed by the surveyor with gratitude.
>

>

>
> ww CO PLS

I too review maps and find the same thing! If the 20% are allowed to continue it forces the professional practices of 60% of the other 80% down to a lower level in order to compete or just in general attitude. I was confused for the first couple of years checking maps in a new state because of the term "local practices" then I went back and read "Clark and Brown" and am now in the process of saying "phewy" on local practice! Surveyors have a duty to be accountable as a professional for the sake of the public! My 2 cents, Jp

Warren

Jim, here is the short answer - there are numerous variances in jurisdictions -

In Colorado, any new parcel of land less than 35 acres is defined as a subdivision, and must be regulated by a planning department.

Once the plat - which can only be monumented and stamped by a Professional Land Surveyor - gets signed by commissioners and recorded, then title is established.

To change or amend a record line also requires the same process.

The perimeter of a larger subdivision must be monumented also.

When a surveyor sets a multiple monument for whatever reason along either an existing recorded line, or around the perimeter of a proposed subdivision, they are changing a record line illegally unless they make that CHANGE through the legal process.

When a surveyor records a plat that includes multiple monuments, the act or recording is the same as circumventing the statute subdivision regulations.

In my experience, it is the surveyors who intend to set multiple monuments that are generally the most steadfast in their resistance to me requesting that they honor the original monuments -

ww co pls