California Surveyors Forums

I am doing a boundary survey in a city where there are many survey plats from the city surveyor in the 20's and 30's. The survey I am doing is a retracement of one of these plats where I used record monuments to determine the boundary. These plats are readily available at the planning department of the city and are accessible to the surveyors in the area performing research. For the purposes of Sec. 8762 am I required to perform a Record of Survey? It would seem to me that these plats could be considered "official surveys" but they aren't recorded or organized at the county level, only the city level. Every surveyor in the area knows they are there and uses them when they do a survey in the city because these are the only surveys around, and they were performed by the original city surveyor. The city surveyor position in this city no longer exists, so thats why the plats are on file with the planning department.

In short, this is a simple retracement of an existing city surveyor plat, but maybe I still am required to file a ROS because it doesn't satisfy the letter of the law in 8762. These plats are treated as official surveys in every other sense of the word except that they aren't on file at the county level. What do you folks think?

Dylan Gonsalves, PE, PLS

Sec 66499.50-.58 covers official maps. It states that it is an official map AFTER being filed at the County Recorder and not before.

But that's no reason to not use it.

It sounds as if you are on the hook for the RS. The problem with a pile of old survey maps that are not officially organized and indexed is that too often, some non-surveyor bureaucrat at some point in the future will be tasked with making space for new paper and to get rid of all the old paper that no longer has any value. Old surveys are sometimes mistaken for such valueless paper and get tossed in the garbage.

Then the only record will be the surveys filed that were based upon these old unrecorded maps and notes. That's part of why the law is written as it is.

Attached is a Record of Survey, (formerly called Official Surveys - if I can figure out how to attach!) of a "Zoning Map" in the Marin County town of San Anselmo. It delineates all parcels within the entire Town, at the time of filing.

Although it is an "Official Survey" recorded in Book 2 of Official Surveys, at Page 187 . . . it seems its intent is a "ZONING MAP".

The letter of the law (LS Act) certainly doesn't remotely compare with the spirit of recording a Record of Survey in this case.

That said, it could be "claimed" by some that we are charged with health/safety/welfare of public . . . and the welfare of the "public" would not be properly served by filing a Record of Survey, (think $s) when a Corner Record might be "legal".

Personally, and professionally . . . I think not.

However, this recorded map may aid in Certificate(s) of Compliance application(s), non?

Phil - Sonoma

attach the map, Phil!

Hmmm...no engineer's or surveyor's certificate, license # or stamp, not prepared for "...the purpose of sale or transfer..."

Doesn't look like the map meets any of the standards of preparation required under §66499.52.

Bzzzz...

Thank you for playing our game! Tell this contestant what the consolation prizes are and send in our next contestant, please!

If that's the "Official Survey" refered to in the first post then I agree with others that an RS is required. That map is for zoning purposes and is probably created from the assessor maps, which always show deed lines without benefit of a survey.

Looks like a zoning map from assessors plats to me.

Unless you find out otherwise, ya'might wanna file a ROS on your corners.

"good" Luck ^^
00
_

Thanks folks....by the way, the sample furnished wasn't by me but someone else as an example of an official survey. The old surveys I was looking at were true boundary surveys by the city surveyor, but they had never been recorded. It is clear to me that since they were not recorded they can not be used for a corner record. Record of survey it is....

maps and both of them had bearings and distances on the lots and streets. At least that's how I remember it. The zoning map that I saw in this thread didn't tell me a thing about anything except that there was a bunch of Lots over there and some more over there. There was even numbers on the Lots. How lucky can you be. Pull out the scale and protractor.

Well, now wait just a tang-dang minute, did you say these maps were done by the city surveyor ?

Theres a big grey area here about public agency stuff that I dont have a good grasp on, but i thoughten them were excempt from certain stuff that us wee folks cant avoid.

Hmmmm Surveys performed and obviously mapped by the city surveyor might just indeed be "official"

Might wanna dig into this just a little bit more ? no ?

O. "Fish" Ionado

The maps were done by the city surveyor in the 1920's and 1930's. The city surveyor position no longer exists so the planning department has them on file. The records don't look any different than a private surveyor, except they were done by the city surveyor. Thats why I asked the questions, since they were done in an official capacity, does that make these surveys "official surveys"? What I've heard is the answer is no because they aren't recorded at the county level as an "official survey". Well, why don't we record them and then they would be official? I know it would be strange to record a document 80 years after the fact but could it be done?

"Hmmmm Surveys performed and obviously mapped by the city surveyor might just indeed be "official"

Might wanna dig into this just a little bit more ? no ?"

The means, intent, application, content and purpose of "Official Maps" are carefully laid out in the Sub Map Act. See §66499.50 to 66499.58.

Just because a map is prepared by a "official" of the City or County, it doe not necessarily mean that it is an "Official Map".

Yeah,

I'd have to dig a littile bit to see what those maps were all about. Did they map property already owned by others ? Did they lay out lots for sale and by which people took title to said lots persuant to these "official" maps ?

If so, then a deed may reference these maps. If the map is not official, and parties took title persuant to said map, then is their title valid ?

If a deed states it is lot 49 of the official map of the city of Kalamazoo, county of Whatchmacallit, State of Calzonia, there may be som ereal officialness to it. The Maps shouldve been recorded, however, we must remember when these maps were done, which country had jurisdiction ovwer the area, and what were the rules they were playing by. The 20's-30's were depression eras.
Mugsy Malloy, the owner of the local speak easy, and town commissioner, may have had a hand at the creating of these maps.
If you have an opportunity to look at some older deeds, it would be interesting.

Meanwhile, to not waste time, I'd just prepare and file a ROS. The rest is semantics. . . . very interesting, but semantics none the less.

Dave "bugsy" Goodman

This is probably what you're thinking of Good.

§8765 A record of survey is not required...

(a) When it has been made by a public officer in his or her official capacity and a reproducible copy thereof, showing all data required by Section 8764, except for the recorder's statement, has been filed with the county surveyor of the county in which the land is located. Any map so filed shall be indexed and kept available for public inspection.


In this case, the City Surveyor apparently prepared these maps in his official capacity. But since they were not filed with the County Surveyor, they don't meet the requirements of this section. They remain useful but unrecorded and unofficial (in it's official meaning) surveys.

Aaah yes my good man,

Thats what I was thinking of. Well the good guys win again, Old PE"o"PLS
will do a record of survey based upon the deed, but he can reference the "official" plats as unrecorded.

sorry for not digging that up myself, I'm fighting for my third "pink" ribbon.
test results not back but the doc's are taking an aaaawwwful long time in review this time :D

as my dad says, " pipe locator"? "hel# kid, the best one you got is the shovel, now dig" !!!

"good"