Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Surveys Csm topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff recommend tighter certified-survey rules; proposal would widen CSM requirement to catch parcel discrepancies
Summary
Staff proposed revising county practice to require certified survey maps (CSMs) for more land divisions, citing inconsistent Plat of Survey (PLATSA) submissions, risks of mismatched acreage and mapping errors; discussion focused on possible threshold changes and implementation challenges.
Get email alerts on the Land Surveys Csm topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Richland County staff told the Natural Resources Committee they are researching changes to how certified-survey maps (CSMs) and Plat of Survey (PLATSA) submissions are handled and suggested raising the acreage threshold that triggers a CSM requirement.
Staff said some Plat of Survey submissions are not reviewed to the same standard as certified surveys, and that small differences in reported acreage can create “ghost parcels” and mapping errors that complicate deeds, tax records and future land divisions. Julie (Land Information) said she is preparing work instructions and consulting other counties before returning with a formal proposal.
Staff described options discussed with neighboring counties: some counties require CSMs for parcels under 40 acres, others use 35 or 80 acres depending on local policy. The staff recommendation under consideration would require a certified survey for divisions under 35 acres in agricultural-residential zones so the county can ensure correct legal descriptions and mapping.
Committee members noted trade-offs: requiring more CSMs would improve legal accuracy but could create bottlenecks and higher costs for landowners because there are few local surveyors and fieldwork is weather-dependent. Staff said moving forward will require an ordinance amendment and outreach to towns and surveyors; no vote was taken at the meeting—staff will return with concrete instructions and recommended ordinance language.
The conversation also covered the public availability of Plat of Survey files (kept in-office and posted on the county website) and the county’s need to avoid legal exposure by ensuring deeds and parcel boundaries are correct before recording.

