Surveys Surveys Surveys

[jar546]

I lived most of my life in Pennsylvania and worked with a lot of zoning officers when I was a building code official in multiple municipalities. Overall my experience of the zoning officer was a bit negative. Some never visited a jobsite and some never required plans to scale or a survey. Some even allowed things that were not allowed and others denied everything and let it go to a zoning board hearing because they did not want to take on the liability of making a decision. Yeah, there were a few professionals but overall, it was a job that was never really given to a "qualified individual." In one instance the municipality's zoning officer was so pathetic, they(muni) were riddled with lawsuits and created homeowner disputes and lawsuits due to the zoning officer's lack of doing their job.

Then I moved to Florida about 6 years ago. Wow! What a difference. There was the zoning officer who you never really saw and below the zoning officer there were workers who were trained and competent. The one surprise to me, however, was the requirement for surveys. I built a house a few years ago and this is how it went: (to the best of my knowledge)

Survey One: When the developer created different lots.
Survey Two: Required in order to issue a building permit
Survey Three: Required after the footer/foundation was poured
Survey 4: Required for final and C of O

After seeing what went on in Pennsylvania, I completely understand why these surveys are required.

S1: It is obvious why this is required, no explanation needed.
S2: I think is is to double check to make sure that all of the construction did not screw up the pins and the building is actually building where they said they were.
S3: Making sure the house will be exactly where it is supposed to be and the correct size.....
S4: With all landscaping, Condensing fan, generator pads, ensuring that none of that encroaches on other properties or right of ways.

To me it makes sense and I don't have a problem with it. In PA, many munis create their own problems by a lack of surveys and competent zoning enforcement.

 

[Min&Max]

If you need that many surveys then A). the contractors are not worth a damn, B) the inspectors are not worth a damn or C) a combination of A & B. I will go with C.

 

[SCBO1]

You know like in Utopia: an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect.

Congratulations, you made it!

 

[mtlogcabin]

S1 required as part of the platting process
S2 a waste of money when lot pins are already in place from the S1 requirement. The contractor needs to identify the lot pins and string the lot lines to verify correct setbacks before foundation pour.
S3 should be done after the first floor is installed to document compliance with the elevation requirements of the flood zone.
S4 not necessary

 

[north star]

@ ! @

While it makes sense in a CYA Factor, that many surveys;
in a lot of jurisdictions, would not fly !.......Costs too much
in money & time for a Developer \ Contractor to be that
conscientious [ i.e. - just let the end user \ homeowner ]
be the one to pick up the tab for any errors \ discrepancies.

Also, in one jurisdiction I previously worked in, the actual
surveys were not accurate.......They started at one point,
but did not end up returning to that same point at the
completion........Very sloppy recording of all of the angles.

@ ! @

 

[Keystone]

Jeff,

I feel your pain on all fronts when it comes to zoning. I see all of it, over zealous officials who have been trained not to make a decision on there own and this is a known and accepted practice by the participating municipality and those other officials that are nonchalant and truly inactive through the entire process except when it comes time to collect the payment.

IMO, S1 & S2 should be combined as the first. The boundary and offset house stakes which include finished floor elevation can be placed at one visit. S3 & S4 should be combined as the final. If stakes get knocked out or thought to be altered then call for a re-stake. If the structure is not as intended then it is up to the builder to rectify his/her own layout and conform to the originally approved survey.

Fences and sheds, that's an entirely different part of zoning I wish would be revamped. If a municipality is going to charge a fee for that fence or shed then I'd expect they will conduct a site inspection and sign off its final placement. The municipality will demand and have specific requirements regarding placement and heights but will assume no responsibility once they issue the permit, they wash there hands of it at that point.

I'm going to play devils advocate with myself, so if a homeowner wants a sign off on final placement should then the municipality require a site survey?

Municipalities already have every class and district broken down by area via addresses so why not have easily accessible information on fence and shed set backs and height restrictions available and offered to anyone who seeks the information without further forms and associated fees and wait times for issuance. This aspect of the zoning permit process has the appearance of being a money grab when all the information is already known by a municipality.

 

[JCraver]

One survey is plenty.

Once the stakes are there, in IL, it's a felony to move them unless you're a surveyor. So after the initial survey when the stakes are placed, everything can (and should be) done off the string lines. If the contractor and/or inspector can't use the strings and read a tape measure, they should both look for other employment.

 

[JCraver]

<snip>

Fences and sheds, that's an entirely different part of zoning I wish would be revamped. If a municipality is going to charge a fee for that fence or shed then I'd expect they will conduct a site inspection and sign off its final placement. The municipality will demand and have specific requirements regarding placement and heights but will assume no responsibility once they issue the permit, they wash there hands of it at that point.

I'm going to play devils advocate with myself, so if a homeowner wants a sign off on final placement should then the municipality require a site survey?

Municipalities already have every class and district broken down by area via addresses so why not have easily accessible information on fence and shed set backs and height restrictions available and offered to anyone who seeks the information without further forms and associated fees and wait times for issuance. This aspect of the zoning permit process has the appearance of being a money grab when all the information is already known by a municipality.

We do an inspection, verifying placement. If you put it in the wrong place, you move it.

Are there muni's out there with active building/zoning departments that don't offer "easily accessible information on fence and shed set backs and height restrictions available and offered to anyone who seeks the information without further forms and associated fees and wait times for issuance"? If so, that should be criminal. What is your purpose as an employee of a building/zoning dept., if not to give the residents that information when they ask for it?

 

[JCraver]

This is why I'm a proponent of having the zoning and building departments combined. There is no valid reason the guy issuing the permits shouldn't know the zoning requirements. There is no valid reason the guy inspecting projects shouldn't know the zoning requirements. And if both of those are true, then there is no valid reason to have a guy who just does "zoning", because his job doesn't then make any sense.

 

[Keystone]

We do an inspection, verifying placement. If you put it in the wrong place, you move it.

Are there muni's out there with active building/zoning departments that don't offer "easily accessible information on fence and shed set backs and height restrictions available and offered to anyone who seeks the information without further forms and associated fees and wait times for issuance"? If so, that should be criminal. What is your purpose as an employee of a building/zoning dept., if not to give the residents that information when they ask for it?

In Pa. as Jeff states, zoning and building codes, even with the adoption of I Codes is still randomly enforced as seen appropriate by the AHJ. The building codes have gotten muchhhhh better throughout the state but there is still a long way to go.

We have zoning and building offices throughout Pa. that may only be open on part time and limited days per week and no not all information is readily available. I feel if Pa. combined municipalities this would eliminate the burden of such issues.

 

[RJJ]

Well First I required an approved, time stamp copy of the Sub division / Land development plan. Next the site and foot print are staked for construction by a surveyor. Once footings are place you must produce an as-built with in 30 days. If the building is wrong I make them move it.

 

[BayPointArchitect]

Don’t get me wrong. I like surveyors. They do not charge much for the work they do. But our little village of 275,000 people have only a handful of surveyors. Call a surveyor then wait a month.

 

[jar546]

Don’t get me wrong. I like surveyors. They do not charge much for the work they do. But our little village of 275,000 people have only a handful of surveyors. Call a surveyor then wait a month.

Then there is room for competition and more surveyors

 

[mtlogcabin]

SETBACK VERIFICATION​

Prior to the footing inspection, submit the following verification to the City of Kalispell Building Department. Email the completed verification to bldgdept@kalispell.com before you schedule the footing inspection.



Name of project or property owner:____________________________________

Street Address:____________________________________________________

Legal Description:__________________________________________________

Building Permit Number:____________________________________________



I hereby certify that I have (1) located the property pins for the property; or (2) have determined that property pins do not exist and have taken the following steps to identify all property lines based on the best available information: ___________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

I have reviewed the site plan approved by the City of Kalispell as part of the issued building permit and have located the foundation on-site in conformance with the approved site plan. I can verify that the improvements, including all extensions of the building, such as eaves and decks, will meet the applicable setbacks as shown on the approved plans

I understand and agree that I am responsible for placing the foundation and structure in a location on the property that complies with all applicable regulations relating to those site improvements.



________________________________________

Print Name of General Contractor (if no general contractor, name of property owner)





________________________________________ _____________________________

Signature Date


This is all that we require

 

[my250r11]

We will Eyeball the set backs, if looks wrong will get a tape. In reality here it is the contractors/Owners responsibility to locate in the right spot and elevation above curb or floodplain. I have caught a few. Some are caught by the developer or HOA.

 

[jar546]

We will Eyeball the set backs, if looks wrong will get a tape. In reality here it is the contractors/Owners responsibility to locate in the right spot and elevation above curb or floodplain. I have caught a few. Some are caught by the developer or HOA.

It is also the builder's responsibility to construct to code and we know how many failed inspections happen. Regardless of who is responsible, these things must be checked because the consequences of putting a building in the wrong location can be significantly worse than the cost of a survey. In areas where more surveys are required, the prices are lower anyway.

 

[Mark K]

Every property has a legal description that should allow for the creation of a dimensioned plan. The dimensioned plan should be provided as part of the permit application. In many instances it should not require a formal survey to verify that the building has the proper setbacks.

The verification form is CYA, creates additional cost, and doesn't change the liability.

While zoning and building department may be under a common agency they should be kept separate since legally these entities are quite different. Building codes are generally understood to be ministerial while zoning is much more discretionary.

 

[jar546]

Every property has a legal description that should allow for the creation of a dimensioned plan. The dimensioned plan should be provided as part of the permit application. In many instances it should not require a formal survey to verify that the building has the proper setbacks.

The verification form is CYA, creates additional cost, and doesn't change the liability.

While zoning and building department may be under a common agency they should be kept separate since legally these entities are quite different. Building codes are generally understood to be ministerial while zoning is much more discretionary.

You do understand that often, more often than you may realize, planning and zoning give approval for a project and what is submitted to the building department for the permit does not match the PZE approvals, right? No everyone out there is honest and not everyone builds where they are suppose to, hence the requirement of the form-board survey before the slab is poured. Do you work in any special flood hazard areas? There is another reason for a form-board survey.

I called out a project whereas the building was moved 2' to the north and no one submitted a revision to P&Z or the building department. The survey was in on it and never changed the dimensions on a follow-up survey. I discovered it because I was able to measure to a known fixed point that did not match the survey. We don't live in a perfect world where every design is carried out perfectly and everyone is honest. I would like to live in perfect world but right now I can't afford the ticket prices to get there.

 

[mtlogcabin]

10 years ago we inspected and approved the setbacks of the first home in a new subdivision based on the contractors layout. After the foundation walls where poured he came in yelling and screaming that we approved his project on the neighboring lot and wanted to know what we where going to do about it. I told him nothing it was a civil matter between him and the other owner. He wanted to know how we could make such a mistake and when I informed him the setbacks where correct he dug his hole in the ground on the wrong lot not us he left.

 

[SCBO1]

Might want to make that form an affidavit, not sure what certified means.

Is that like buying a certified car? We all can trust a car dealer can't we?

 

[mtlogcabin]

The city attorney wrote it so I can't change it


Definition of certify

transitive verb
1: to attest authoritatively: such as
a: CONFIRM
b: to present in formal communication
c: to attest as being true or as represented or as meeting a standard

 

[jar546]

10 years ago we inspected and approved the setbacks of the first home in a new subdivision based on the contractors layout. After the foundation walls where poured he came in yelling and screaming that we approved his project on the neighboring lot and wanted to know what we where going to do about it. I told him nothing it was a civil matter between him and the other owner. He wanted to know how we could make such a mistake and when I informed him the setbacks where correct he dug his hole in the ground on the wrong lot not us he left.

Hence why they need a survey to start and a form-board survey before they pour footers/slab

 

[jar546]

Might want to make that form an affidavit, not sure what certified means.

Is that like buying a certified car? We all can trust a car dealer can't we?

Affidavits are nice for after the fact but often worthless as most people are willing to gamble and sign them.

 

[Mark K]

I do appreciate that owners and contractors do play games but still the precision of 4 surveys is overkill. While there may be exceptions there are many cases where you can check setback against a known property line with a tape measure and not be off by more than 4 to 6 inches. While this may offend the zoning gods it probably does not make any real difference in the long term.

I do not believe that building officials should ever use the words certificate or affidavit. I do not see where they have the legal authority to require such a statement. In addition the submission of a permit application is an effective certification by the owner that the application complies with the regulations.

The building official should not play CYA, rather the building department should conscientiously inspect and enforce the regulations.