When the City of Glendale is going to be doing street improvements to the point that old sidewalk is being replaced they locate private survey monuments that are in the old sidewalk and tie them out.
After the new walk is placed the city then comes back in and resets these tied monuments into the new walk.
After this work is done shouldn't the city file a Corner Record showing what was found/tied and then reset?
I have yet to find anything on file, available to the public, when researching at the city regarding this procedure, either prior to the reconstruction or after the reconstruction.
How does anyone know that the same monuments are being reset back in the same position or even why a 1920 era LS number is in 2010 sidewalk.
Does California require this for all cities.
a Corner Record or RoS is required Prior to construction... Period.
The resetting of monuments also requires a Corner Record or Ros be filed... Period.
It is "...the responsibility of the governmental agency or others performing construction work..."
Many agencies have active programs in place, some are negligent.
see the PLS Act, Section 8771 (b) and (c) http://www.pels.ca.gov/licensees/pls_act.pdf
Around here, we would be dancing the "happy dance" if any monuments were reset after miles of bright white sidewalks were poured. Center line monuments in some kind of box, you have got to be kidding. We can't even get IDOT to actually search for section corners prior re-construction, let alone replacing them. CHICAGO
Peter is correct, they should file a pre, and post construction CR or ROS
Pre construction and after construction notes are done by the City of Los Angeles. Those are limited to just C/L monuments though. I have never come across any City of LA notes that tie out private monuments in a sidewalk before the walk is replaced.
I think the board has a blind eye when it comes to enforcing the law where cities are concerned.
They're getting better about perpetuating centerline monuments and filing corner records around here but when a sidewalk gets replaced, I don't think I've ever seen them perpetuate private property corner markers which sometimes just consist of a slash mark at the TBW. Also, the old ties to intx's are disappearing due to ADA ramps. As I've heard their methods described of marking new ties, we might be better off if they didn't try. The monuments that they put in wells or just county spike and washers aren't always very close to the monument that they are supposed to replace either.
A couple of years ago, I did a survey where all there was in the subdivision were the county spikes, submitted a Corner Record and the Co. Surveyor tried to reject it because they weren't original monuments.
The Board doesn't go around looking for trouble, but if you file a complaint, they can't just ignore it. You might have to wait around a few years for any action, though. Budget constraints, you know.
Yep you have to file a complaint. the board does not know about the situation, even though the folks running the City ought to know full well what is required.
The PLS act covers ALL MONUMENTS THAT REFERENCE BOUONDARIES OR RIGHT OF WAYS NO JUST MONMENTS of record and OF THE SHINEY BRASS DISK TYPE IN MON WELLS. Recently vertical control has been added to the list.... so bm's have to be referenced and replaced and records need to be filed.....
Frankly the public agency destruction of survey monuments is inexcusible and CLSA really ought to get busy with education and enforcement of agency referencing filing and replacing of mons.....
The problem is that surveyors are not usually PROJECT MANAGERS AND THEREFORE PROJECT MANAGERS ARE NOT HAPPY ABOUT ADDING UN-NECESSARY COSTS TO THEIR PROJECTS....
BEEN THERE DONE THAT SOLO NOW....
>...the board does not know about the situation....
Maybe they do, maybe they don't.
The city where I live is getting better about it, but the process is still imperfect. A few months ago I asked the Assistant City Engineer, who recently obtained licensure as a land surveyor, to notify local surveyors about pending sidewalk replacement projects in the downtown area. This is an area where there are no centerline monuments, and the blocks that have been surveyed are all referenced to monuments in the sidewalk. He agreed that it was a good idea, and thought that notification by e-mail would be cheap and easy to accomplish. However, to date it hasn't gone beyond the "good idea" stage.
Two weeks ago I noticed a bunch of street corners downtown painted up with USA (our regional one-call service) markings, and a couple that had already been demo'd for installation of new handicap ramps. I asked the Assistant City Engineer about it, and he said that he'd speak with the project manager to assure that §8771 requirements are met.
Last Friday I saw that one of the block corner monuments I set about 5 years ago was gone, and a new handicap ramp and sidewalk where it used to be. A private construction survey crew was working on a nearby corner, so I asked them if they had tied out the monument prior to demolition. They said no, the plans indicated one to be tied out, but they hadn't found it. (It turns out they were looking about 4 feet away from where it had been. It was a 1" brass disk flush with the sidewalk, and I had seen it less the two weeks prior, so they just hadn't looked very hard.)
One down, not sure yet how many to go on the project. I'm keeping track, and will provide the City Engineer with a list of obliterated monuments along with their record references once the project is complete. I've already explained to the Assistant City Engineer that the cost of replacing monuments that don't get tied out locally prior to removal is much higher due to the amount of surveying involved.
Who knows, I might even get some work out of it...
paul generally in genral terms.....
They are busy chasing down the Jimmy Jens of the world..... so in general terms they would not know about it..... unless you brought it to their attention....
It's a perpetual dilemma. When you tie out and replace a corner monument that controls boundaries, are you taking responsibility for that actual corner, or are you taking responsibility only for making sure a monument marks the same spot an old monument marked? What if the surveyor referencing the monument disagrees with it being the actual corner that the monument reports to represent (or as further example, what if there is more than one monument that reports to represent the same corner?) Do you have a right to take out a private surveyor's mark and puting the same mark back in the ground with that surveyor's number on it? What about the retracing surveyor? Do they use a monument as gospel that has been replaced? Do they have to do the same amount of surveying to confirm that monument's location as they would if the monument were never replaced?
In my opinion, there should be statutes in place that provide responsibility and guidelines for perserving locations of monuments that are going to get destroyed due to construction.
You can quote all the laws you want to about destruction of monumentation, but who is going to go after a government engineer who does not allow for the replacement of monuments? Who is going to go after a construction company that merely does what its contract allows?
Finally, how are you going to confirm that all the monuments were found and properly replaced? Are you going to work out a contract that makes it to the surveyor's advantage to "not see" the monuments? Are you going to find the monuments first and locate them, then contract out the monumentation of the specific monuments, and check to make sure the new monuments are in the same location? If you are doing all of that, is it just as well to reference the monuments outside the construction area and publish the locations of the destroyed monuments in relation to your references?
Just a few questions about how you should deal with this situation......
Tom
> It's a perpetual dilemma. When you tie out and replace a corner monument that controls boundaries, are you taking responsibility for that actual corner, or are you taking responsibility only for making sure a monument marks the same spot an old monument marked?
I would say that the responsibility for the tied out and replaced monument would be limited just to that task and nothing more.
>What if the surveyor referencing the monument disagrees with it being the actual corner that the monument reports to represent ...
First off, I believe that any crew sent out to preserve a monuments location, pincushion or not, with ties prior to construction would have a job description regarding the work to be done. I really do not think that any city would write such a description that would include each monument to be analyzed regarding it's apparent position.
>Do you have a right to take out a private surveyor's mark and puting the same mark back in the ground with that surveyor's number on it?
Yes as long as a Corner Record is filed on the before and after construction. How else can monuments be preserved if not removed and replaced with ties? California Corner Records have five options available.
1. Left as found
2. Found and tagged
3. Established
4. Re Established
5. Rebuilt
I think that Rebuilt would be the most applicable box to be checked for the subject of this thread.
>What about the retracing surveyor? Do they use a monument as gospel that has been replaced? Do they have to do the same amount of surveying to confirm that monument's location as they would if the monument were never replaced?
I think that is off topic so I am passing on an opinion.
> You can quote all the laws you want to about destruction of monumentation, but who is going to go after a government engineer who does not allow for the replacement of monuments?
This is the responsibility of the state board.
>Who is going to go after a construction company that merely does what its contract allows?
I think that any contractor who abides by the contract guidelines would be held harmless.
> Finally, how are you going to confirm that all the monuments were found and properly replaced?
If the work is done under the supervision of a licensed individual the assumption would be that what was represented in a Corner Record is what was done until proved otherwise.
Paul, good answers. It sounds like California has good laws to cover these issues.
> I would say that the responsibility for the tied out and replaced monument would be limited just to that task and nothing more.
>
I agree absolutely. My concern is or would be if the monument were replaced by a new monument with the new surveyor's number on it. It sounds like, in CA, you may pull another person's monument and put it back in the ground. I am not sure that is clearly spelled out in CO.
> Yes as long as a Corner Record is filed on the before and after construction. How else can monuments be preserved if not removed and replaced with ties? California Corner Records have five options available.
>
> 1. Left as found
> 2. Found and tagged
> 3. Established
> 4. Re Established
> 5. Rebuilt
>
> I think that Rebuilt would be the most applicable box to be checked for the subject of this thread.
>
That rebuilt option sounds like a good idea.
> > You can quote all the laws you want to about destruction of monumentation, but who is going to go after a government engineer who does not allow for the replacement of monuments?
>
> This is the responsibility of the state board.
>
I sort of agree....but I am concerned that no one will go after an engineer, at least around here, that designs a new roadway and does not allow for "rebuilding of monuments work" to be done.
> > Finally, how are you going to confirm that all the monuments were found and properly replaced?
>
> If the work is done under the supervision of a licensed individual the assumption would be that what was represented in a Corner Record is what was done until proved otherwise.
I agree.
>... It sounds like, in CA, you may pull another person's monument and put it back in the ground.
Yes we can. As long as the appropriate record is filed it does nothing but help all concerned.
