Surveyor Verification/Certification Letters

[E_Page]

Dane, you are the first one to have put tje problem into the context of cutting cormers to meet an inappropriately low budget.

Why would you insult me and others like that? That's not what we've suggested. We have been describing a professional assessment of tje proper methods to adequately and appropriately answer the question being asked.

If the only question that is being asked is whether the building clears the setback, then whatever method answers that question is what is needed. If your client owns an entire section bounded ny roads and is putting his house on top of the Center of Sevtion, are you still going to insist on performing a full boundary survey?

You apparently would, even if you had recordaps in hand, saw the section and quarter corner mons with your own eyes and saw that they matched record descriptions, you apparently would still want to perform the full survey just to ne certain that about 2600' is really farther away from the boundary than 20'.

One who seems to be incapable of exercising professional judgment under varying circumstances should not be practicing independently. Or at least should never consider venturing out of his little corner of the world, and render opinion only within those very limited circumstances he is familiar with.

Ian explained it here, clarifying the question that needs to be answered very much as he did for me in the story I related in my earlier post.

[dmi]

What did I say earlier? THE FACTS OF THE SITUATION MATTER, change the facts and my opinion of what the requirements are to meet the needs of the client would change as well.

I voiced my opinion based upon principles expressed in textbooks, that we have all read and board rules related to the expression of opinion by a licensee, with respect to the question of whether or not surveyors have to definitely locate property boundary lines when the facts of the situation are that " Obviously you need to know where the property lines are to be able to write a letter regarding minimum setbacks."

I ask questions because I am trying to learn something. I have stated specifically what my opinion is and how I arrived at the opinion. One may try to infer from my questions or some tangential comment what my opinion is ,but they would be mistaken if the come up with something other than what I have stated it is.

[dmi]

It is NEVER EVER GOING TO HAPPEN IN REALITY, that I am going to dupe the property owner into paying for service that they do not need.Because I operate in the marketplace where if my fee is too high I simply will not get the job. Time and again it happens that I will get a call for a setback letter and the FACTS are such that the mandate for a record of survey has been triggered. The client will respond that they do not record of survey, they just need a setback letter and they will go find another surveyor who will give them just what they asked for a setback letter.

Don't take my word for it ask other surveyors,who held the opinion because of the FACTS that in order to properly fulfill their duties and issue a setback letter, they would be required to file a record of survey.

[E_Page]

No Dane, it's quite obvious you have no desire to learn anything in this thread. You have equated the use of less preciae methods used in appropriate circumstances to guessing, as apparently Woodcutter does as well.

Neither of you have exhibited very good reading comprehension because nowhere in this thread has anyone suggested that a guess or a "by gosh and by golly" opinion os ever appropriate.

If you think that a guess is the same an informed and educated estimate, then you are in need of some remedial training to bring that area of your knowledge up to minimal competence.

The situation described by woodcutter is not what anyone here has suggested. If there is a reasonable possibility that the errors in the method considered may approach the amount by which an improvement appears to be clear, then you no longer consider that method but use a more precise one instead.

The situation described by Woodcutter is one where the person certifying either made a mistake in idemtifying boundary evidence, chose an method inappropriate to the situation, or simply falsified their findings to benefit a client.

Saying that your trying to learn when it's clear that all you've done is disparage the practice of others under circumstances you are unfamiliar with is being quite disingenuous.

[dmi]

Evan, we disagree on this matter. Is our disagreement any reason to keep up the baseless comments that are not addressed to the SPECIFIC terms of the topic under discussion?

If anyone read my comments as calling into question anyone's professionalism or ethics then they mis-read and misunderstood my posts entirely.

Clearly, there ARE rules. There are EXCEPTIONS to the rules.

[Jim Frame]

The owner should be able to get a waiver of the obligation without a surveyor

"Should be able to" and "can" are two very different things in the real world. Trying to convince a public agency that their procedures don't comply with statutory or common-sense requirements is often a quixotic exercise, as well as a good way to kill a project.

The property owner in Contra Costa County has 2.5 acres, 330’x330’, the setbacks are 20’ and the structure is 100’+ from the nearest boundary line or property line...I believe the professional has no role in providing a certification by guesstimate for the above described scenario.

When looking at a distance of 100'+, it's not a guesstimate to say that the distance is more than 20'; rather, it's a professional judgment. If a licensed land surveyor doesn't believe he can make that judgment with certainty, then he should decline to issue a certification. If he's comfortable with that judgment, then I see no bar to so certifying.

In general, I think this discussion is of little practical import. There probably won't be many instances of conditions in which the boundary is suitably clear and the differences between setback and building location sufficiently large to allow the eyeball approach to be employed. But under the right conditions, I see no reason to upsell a client on a boundary survey when all he wants is a setback cert.

P.S. The CBC section that Dave references is something I've never seen before. I don't think it's been seen by any of the building departments with which I'm familiar, either. I believe its strict enforcement would be a welcome change to business as usual.
.

[Stephen Johnson]

Several good points made here.

[land butcher]

Dave's reference to the CBC and the number of people on here that have never seen it shows that we just have tooooooooooo many laws on the books.

Like the guy in Idaho who received a variance in 2007 from the city or country to build a tree house. Now the Corp of engineers is saying the tree and tree house are a danger to the river levee and are removing both.
Good bye $14,000 tree house. Yeah, the pics showed he had a great view.

[Jim Frame]

[E_Page]

[quote="Woodcutter"]A monument does not always equate to a corner. [/quote]

Hopefullythe surveyor assessing the evidence can properly judge when he has sufficientevidence to recognize when that may be the case. If I have a section corner or ¼ corner withrecord BTs or other witness points, or if I have other nearby monuments that Ican easily determine the relationship of to the monument I presume is at acorner of the parcel in question, I’m pretty confident.


[quote="Woodcutter"]Initial assumptions frequently prove to be incorrect upon completion of acomplete investigation. [/quote]

So don’tfinish the work based on assumptions. Noone here ever said that you should base an opinion on assumptions. You can develop presumptions in the course ofyour work, and you should seek evidence to verify them. Sometimes that requires measurement,sometimes it doesn’t.


[quote="Woodcutter"]Prior surveys are not always correct or reliable. [/quote]

And if youdon’t have some corroboration of that particular record, or if you have furtherreason to doubt the evidence you have, do further work. No one has suggested that you should rely onsuspect data or base an opinion on records you have reason to doubt.


[quote="Woodcutter"]Landowners do move corners. [/quote]

And it’susually obvious. When it’s not, it’salso not obvious enough to have reasonable certainty that you’ve identifiedoriginal corner monuments in their original positions, so proceeding on avisual or on less precise measurementsis no longer an option.


[quote="Woodcutter"]Surveyors do make mistakes. [/quote]

So don’tproceed on data that you don’t have agreement between multiple records, whereyou are unable to determine by visual inspection that a monument has not beenmoved or where you have reason to doubt the veracity of the records you haveuntil you have performed enough work to give yourself comfort.


[quote="Woodcutter"]2 recent examples:

Client wantsto build on a 40 acre parcel. … [/quote]

Obviously,something did not seem right in that case. If the survey was 100’ out, you probably did not have other records tocorroborate the one you had. Not theappropriate circumstances to proceed without further verification.

[quote="Woodcutter"]2nd example. 10 acre lot. Owner wants to build a house next to a flood plain… [/quote]

In the vastmajority of subdivisions, performing some simple checks by rough measurement tonearby adjacent corner monuments would discover this mistake. It’s a good thing that you didn’t justblindly take an absentee owner’s word for where his lot was and instead didsome basic checks.

Anyresponsible surveyor would have done the same.


[quote="Woodcutter"]Long story short, be careful out there. You never know what might bite you, oryour client. [/quote]

No oneadvocated NOT being careful.

[quote="Woodcutter"]Certainly there is such a thing as a sure thing. You know, the obviouscircumstance that really doesn't take much analysis or investigation to"guesstimate".

But, thingsaren't always what they seem. Too many times I have found that to be more therule than the exception.[/quote]

Again, wheredoes the concept of guessing come in? Ifyou are ever guessing as a basis of your opinion, you are practicingnegligently.

It is theobvious circumstance that I have been referring to when saying that lessprecise methods than GPS, total station traverse, complete boundary survey maybe appropriate.

If you havethe situation that the corner monuments are unique somehow in the record,appear to be obviously unmoved from their original positions, have multiplerecords referencing the same points and agreeing as to relative position, ifthose records would have to share a common highly unlikely error for the pointsto have been placed wrong to begin with, if the improvement is several timesthe distance of the applicable setback from the boundary, then you have thecircumstances in which less precise methods may be appropriate.

[E_Page]

[font="Calibri","sans-serif"]... in both reading comprehension and in the definitions of basic terminologyas it pertains to evidence and opinions.[/font]

[font="Calibri","sans-serif"]You may also need to seek guidance on what actually is or is notpertinent to the service being provided.[/font]


[font="Calibri","sans-serif"]Read slowly, and then re-read each post a couple more times. Take notes if necessary. That may help reading comprehension.[/font]


[font="Calibri","sans-serif"]Definitions:This is from Wikipedia regarding measurement and is basic tothe knowledge that surveyors must have of [/font][font="Calibri","sans-serif"]measurements[/font][font="Calibri","sans-serif"]:[/font][font="Calibri","sans-serif"] [/font]


Informationtheory recognizes that all data areinexact and statistical in nature. Thus the definition of measurement is:"A set of observations that reduce uncertainty where the result isexpressed as a quantity."[footnote omitted] This definition is implied inwhat scientists actually do when they measure something and report both themean and statistics of the measurements. In practical terms, one begins with aninitial guess as to the value of a quantity, and then, using various methodsand instruments, reduces the uncertainty in the value. Note that in this view,unlike the positivist representational theory, all measurements are uncertain, so instead of assigning one value,a range of values is assigned to a measurement. This also implies that there isnot a clear or neat distinction betweenestimation and measurement. Ascertainingthe degree measurement error is also a basic facet of metrology, andsources of errors are divided into systematic and non-systematic.

[End Wikiexcerpt]

Note theonly difference is that unlike in many scientific experiments as the articlerefers to, surveyors do not begin with a guess but rather begin with a valuedetermined by one measurement method or another.

Accuracy: the degree of closeness of measurementsof a quantity to that quantity's actual (true) value.

Precision: the degree to which repeatedmeasurements under unchanged conditions show the same results

If you do not recognize that the disagreements in this thread are based upon the level of precision required to answer the question, then you've completely missed the point.

If you believe that it is all about the evaluation of evidence, then your experience is far too limited to be able to comprehend that there are circumstances where boundary corner evidence can be adequately evaluated sans measurement.

Guess: to form an opinion about somethingwithout enough evidence to make a definite judgment; syn. conjecture,supposition, speculation.

If you think that there is a valid reason to base a professional opinion on a guess, quit surveying. If you equate basing an opinion on measurements whether relatively precise or imprecise to guessing, you're less than minimally competent. Sorry to be so blunt, but that's how it is.

Estimate: to form an approximate judgment oropinion regarding the worth, amount, size, weight, etc., of; (Mathematics & Measurements / Surveying)to form an approximate idea of (distance, size, cost, etc.); calculate roughly;gauge; (Mathematics & Measurements /Statistics) (tr) Statistics to assign a value (a point estimate) or range ofvalues (an interval estimate) to a parameter of a population on the basis ofsampling statistics [they’re referring to measurements here in case you gotlost]; syn. compute, count, reckon,gauge, assess, value, evaluate, appraise.

Note thatan estimate is generally based upon some data that you can quantify, unlike aguess which is devoid of any underlying data or reasoning. The uncertainty of an estimate can also be reasonably quantified. If you lake the very basic skills of being able to line an object up between intervisible objects (monuments), or produce repeatable rough measurements by pacing, then those tools are unavailable to you when that level of precision would suffice to provide an answer. You have no choice but to employ a more precise method.


If I amasked whether or not a set of foundation forms placed upon a parcel indicatesthat the foundation that will be poured within them will comply with thesetbacks designated in the local zoning code, I don’t give a rip-snort what §106.2of the CBC says. I’m not being asked toprepare a site plan, I did not prepare the site plan for the project, it is notwithin my authority to enforce the provisions of the CBC. The CBC is totally immaterial to what I am beingasked for. It applies to those whoprepared the site plan and construction plans, and to those performing theconstruction. It is a matter for thelocal building department to enforce and I have no authority to compel thoseother parties to comply or to compel the agency to enforce the CBC.

I amprovided with certain info: the parcel identification, the location of animprovement being constructed, and the applicable setback. I am being asked only if that improvement isat a distance from the boundary which is greater than the setback. Is A > B. That’s it. A question which onlyrequires a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response.

If youthink that the CBC applies to that question, you do not understand what theextent of the question and the extent of your duty is and will end up providingunnecessary and costly services to a client who may have no use for them. That can seem like fraudulentmisrepresentation for the primary purpose of obtaining additional fees.

If thequestion also is whether or not the project as it exists in progress is inaccordance with the plans, that will require additional responsibilities, thefirst being whether they intended to ask as broad a question as that is. If so, there are too many aspects relative tobeing “in accordance with the plansâ€￾ that are outside of a surveyor’s expertiseand practice authority to be able to properly answer the question. When this is pointed out, the agency shouldnarrow the focus to information actually required or the surveyor should passon the assignment, or at least those portions he can’t provide services for.

Negligenceand negligence per se: To be negligent, it must be shown that 1) theprofessional owed a duty, and 2) the professional breached that duty. If not providing services which fall underthe purview of the CBC, adherence to the CBC is irrelevant in establishingnegligence per se.

[Jim Frame]

Curiosity question for Evan: What sort of device have you been posting from lately? It appears (on my system, anyway) to be using a non-default font and randomly (or in a pattern not apparent to me) omitting spaces between words. It's kind of hard to read.

.

[PE_PLS]

Thanks for your consideration of my original posting. Is there a reason you attached a "Variance Permit Application" instead of a more general building permit application?

You have attached the county requirements. In my experience at least 50% of projects I work on in CCC do not meet the county requirements, ie there is no survey done preceeding the building permit. Usually the calls come in at the time of foundation formwork inspection..."hey we need a certification letter right now, we're going to pour tomorrow."

It is readily apparent that the county building department does not follow their own guidelines/requirements.

My original question stands as asked originally. When asked to provide a setback verification letter there is no requirement to provide any plat or any dimensioning or any actual measurements.

The letter need only contain one line:

The improvements meet minimum setbacks in accordance with the approved plans. Or some variation thereof.

By the way, the nature of my question does not have anything to do with ROS triggers. If the work I perform requires a ROS, then I file one. This question is not asked to try and find justification for violating the law.

Regarding client value: I asked this question after someone called me asking for one of these letters. The person was building a very simple deck in the back yard. The deck was approx. 30' from the side setback, with an allowable side setback of 10'. This is in a modern era subdivision with readily identified street monuments. And yes, one could probably do this certification letter with simple pacing or a tape measure since the street monument was in front of the house. I did not get the job, my fee was much too high.

When survey costs exceed the cost of the project, something is probably wrong.

[E_Page]

Jim,

Some of it is fat thumbs on a mobile (android). The longer posts have been typed in word and then something goes haywire with the formatting in the cut-n-paste to the forum. Extra returns appear, spaces between words disappear. I've tried to catch them, but sometimes they don't even appear until after I post the response. If I have time, I go back and put the spaces in. quite often I don't have time. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Maybe that explains why some of these guys seem to be responding based upon assumptions of what I may have written as opposed to what I've actually written.

[E_Page]

Dylan, the best way to know whether that response is appropriate in your jurisdiction, specifics of site conditions aside, is to clarify with the local agency what question they really want the answer to, and then verify that the type of answer you propose under the circumstances you've identified is acceptable to them.

If the CBC or other regulation actually specifically addresses the verification of setback compliance (as opposed to the planning of it), I'd like to be pointed in that direction. To my knowledge, only some local agency ordinances address it, so there is no specific one-size-fits-all standard of care with regard to precision of measurements to violate when performing them.

[scarpa]

Woolley:

Can you provide a link to CBC 106.2 Site plan? I can not find it on the 2010 CBC; http://www.bsc.ca.gov/codes.aspx .

Jon

[E_Page]

For those who care, and in answer to he spouting off about it not being mentioned in any recognized texts, here it is in three that are/were widely used in the first and second year surveying curricula of most accredited land surveying degree programs across the US.

These are older editions, but the most recent editions of these books are still in wide use to educate freshmen and sophomores in basic land surveying measurement principles and techniques.

[Jay Wright]

I have never had to certify something that had more than a 10ft error budget so I have never had this particular decision to make.


Putting aside for the moment the CBC code which I had never heard of but will look at to put in my "toolbag of laws" for sure as it sounds definitive that any setback cert. needs a boundary survey. (Thanks Dave)

I think you can give your opinion as to setback compliance in the Originally Posted question but not conformance with the plans.

If the owner decides to build something else or split or adjust his lot in the future he has your stamped and signed certification that the building complies with the plans and the owner should be able to rely on that statement, and therefore the dimensions on the plan,for future planning purposes.

[Jim Frame]

Can you provide a link to CBC 106.2 Site plan?

Dave's citation appears to be out of date. The site plan is now addressed in §107.2.5, which can be found here:

http://publicecodes.citation.com/st/ca/ ... par006.htm

Note, however, that §107.1 (see http://publicecodes.citation.com/st/ca/ ... sec032.htm) states that construction documents shall be prepared by a licensed professional "where required by the statutes of the jurisdiction." That would appear to be the loophole used by the agencies I've dealt with, though I've never combed through their ordinances to see if they contain the professional requirement.

.

[LS_8750]

We should all be ecstatic about the CBC Site Plan mandate. Site plans for development projects are officially the domain of the LS, not the architects, engineers, or whomever else that tries to mickey mouse their projects through this increasingly difficult regulatory climate.

CLSA should be in the face of every planning/building director in every jurisdiction across the state. This equates to business for the LS community, and it also equates to a better served public leading to a less litigious environment due to the fact that the LS has domain over page one of any construction/development project. Property boundaries and property rights are protected by this CBC mandate. Finally, a point for the LS.

Thank you Mr. Wooley!

[hellsangle]

I had to laugh . . . Evan's Post brought back memories of long ago.

I still use the attached exercise from Hal Walker's Civil Tech program (SRJC). (Gambini, remember this?) One of the very first things we learned . . . and I still use it today.

I have the good fortune "in pacing" . . . of being almost exactly 2.5 feet per pace or "left foot to left foot" being five feet. "five, ten, fifteen, . . . " (Hope the math was correct. Ha!)

The unfortunate part of having short legs is . . , the barbed wire fence has taken care of my "pro-creating" skills. Ha!

Phil - Sonoma

[Jim Frame]

almost exactly 2.5 feet per pace

In the late '70s I worked with a guy who had that pace. One time he was heading up a 3-man crew on a drainage study job near Hayward, and we were all staying in the same motel room. On the first night I was awakened by his mumbling "five, ten, fifteen, twenty, twenty-five, thirty" etc. in his sleep. I didn't stay awake long enough to see how far he'd go.

.

[btaylor]

I also have 2.5 feet per pace, which makes for pretty nice math.

[Ian Wilson]

So, if your pace is 2.5', what's the length of your step? LOL

Althought this changes depending upon who you ask, I've always considered a step to be a single swing of one leg and a pace to be a pair of steps.

Also, do you find you need to recalibrate your pacing if you change boots? I'm finding that more and mor as I get older.

[Stephen Johnson]

That is correct. When I do it I have always called it steps per given distance not paces. BTW I average 3' and 6' respectively.