• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Construction not to Site Plan

J

jwilly3879

Sawhorse
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
171
Location
Olmstedville NY
I have been called in to review a permit issued in 2013 and completed in 2015.

The new owner purchased the property and had the lot surveyed and found that the home is 6' from the property line where 35' was indicated on the site plan. Additionally the absorption field for the septic is entirely on the adjoining parcel as well as a shed and driveway.

The Town has asked me to determine if the original owner and builder has any liability or does it fall entirely on the new owner to resolve the issue.
 
I don't think it is the town's obligation, or right for that matter, to determine who's "fault' it is. I say it is a civil issue at this point.

Does the towns inspection/permitting process determine/confirm setbacks? Perhaps the town has a share of the blame.
 
I agree with Fatboy - this is typically handled outside of the local AHJ. That is, until the AHJ is named as a liable party.
 
Sold as is?

No new surveys done??

I take it the next property is vacant?? Or is there something built on it??

If vacant buy it before the price goes up
 
The site plan as submitted met the setback requirements for the Zoning district. The ZEO/CEO went by the property stakes that were in place at the time of submission and all appeared fine. It was only after the recent survey that the problem appeared. The property is now on its third owner.
 
This is why we don't issue a permit for anything new without a site survey and then a form-board survey before the slab/footers are poured and then a final survey in order to get a C of O. It is the way it is because of issues like this. This method is worth it because the fix for something like this is ridiculous just in attorney fees alone.

Change your zoning and building ordinances.
 
jwilly3879 said:
The site plan as submitted met the setback requirements for the Zoning district. The ZEO/CEO went by the property stakes that were in place at the time of submission and all appeared fine. It was only after the recent survey that the problem appeared. The property is now on its third owner.
Click to expand...
Ok this is why property sales go through a title company. Should of been something in the title transfer; hopefully some sort of insurance.
 
Could to be that the first survey was wrong and zoning went by that before the house was built. The title company's insurance should pay and they will sue the survey company's insurance.
 
A zoning officer has nothing to measure from which is why all foundations should have a form-board survey before they are poured. A zoning officer is not a surveyor and can only go by what they are given. Everyone needs to start requiring form-board surveys and final surveys for new construction, additions, fences, generator pads, pools, etc. etc.

I have worked in dozens of municipalities and zoning is always an issue. When I got to Florida, the problems were minimalized due to the survey requirements.
 
Rick18071 said:
Could to be that the first survey was wrong and zoning went by that before the house was built. The title company's insurance should pay and they will sue the survey company's insurance.
Click to expand...

It does not matter. What matters is how we can prevent this in the future by requiring surveys for construction before during (form board) and after for final.
 
JAR -

What about in subdivisions where as a part of the platting process, a licensed engineer surveys in property pins. As long as the property pins are in and relocatable, why should the AHJ not perform inspections based upon string lines and setback measurements?

That is what we do locally.
 
In NY you say? Wouldn't city have known that the house was not on sewer? That being the case, why wouldn't they have requested the location on the site plan. I just noted that this is an existing house, who signed off on it originally?
 
jar546 said:
A zoning officer has nothing to measure from which is why all foundations should have a form-board survey before they are poured. A zoning officer is not a surveyor and can only go by what they are given. Everyone needs to start requiring form-board surveys and final surveys for new construction, additions, fences, generator pads, pools, etc. etc.

I have worked in dozens of municipalities and zoning is always an issue. When I got to Florida, the problems were minimalized due to the survey requirements.
Click to expand...

For anything other than brand new development/construction that's an insanity requirement. In my little town of 7000 people I should be asking for a $1000 survey every time I sell a $10 permit for a $400 fence in the back yard for the dog? That's not in the realm of things that are possible. It's not even in the same universe...

In all but the oldest parts of town, and sometimes even there, the steel pins in the corners of the parcels are findable. Rent a metal detector. Find the pins, string a line, measure your setbacks. Leave the strings up so I can see them when I come for the first inspection.

This is the same thing as requiring an engineers stamp on a prescriptive residential project. It's unnecessary CYA by the jurisdiction.
 
JCraver said:
For anything other than brand new development/construction that's an insanity requirement. In my little town of 7000 people I should be asking for a $1000 survey every time I sell a $10 permit for a $400 fence in the back yard for the dog? That's not in the realm of things that are possible. It's not even in the same universe...

In all but the oldest parts of town, and sometimes even there, the steel pins in the corners of the parcels are findable. Rent a metal detector. Find the pins, string a line, measure your setbacks. Leave the strings up so I can see them when I come for the first inspection.

This is the same thing as requiring an engineers stamp on a prescriptive residential project. It's unnecessary CYA by the jurisdiction.
Click to expand...

This is our thinking on this as well. Even on projects where the pins are not visible, you can usually see where one property owners stops mowing and the next starts. We also have property fabric overlays on orthos in our GIS software to see where the line is in comparison to existing structures.

We do not certify the project meets property setbacks without a plot plan sealed by a surveyor. We just confirm that the setbacks appear to meet zoning.

Our primary concern in requiring surveying for accessory buildings is that it will increase the rate of un-permitted work. Our feeling was that it was better to have some control over the most work possible than a lot of control on a little bit of work and a lot of enforcement to do.
 
ADAguy, the septic system was on the site plan and appeared to meet the setback requirements. Unfortunately the actual property lines were not where they were indicated on the site plan. On the survey map an iron pipe was found about 35' from the newly surveyed line. It would appear that this pipe was assumed to be a line marker and the site plan was drawn using this as a side line.

The new owner of the property is negotiating a boundary line adjustment with the neighboring owner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top