Monument Replacement - How Not to Do It

If the contractor did not list a land surveyor as a subcontractor in the bid documents for that portion of the "incidental" work, then consider that contractor procurred land surveying work without being appropriately licensed to do so. And just as important, the agency had an obligation to oversee the contract to ensure that the tie-outs were made prior to destruction of the originals. Not unlike their obligation to test compaction on fill sections during each lift made. If the agency didn't, shame on them. This isn't something they can just pawn off on the contractor. At the very least, the agency should have made sure a land surveyor was on-board during the pre-construction conference.
I for one would be curious to see the contract documents as bid and to know which agency is in need of education on the matter.

The contractor did get a bid from another local surveyor prior to commencing work -- that's where the $100 per monument figure came from -- but apparently never followed through with him once they got the contract. As for the agency, I've been working on them for years now trying to get them to take §8771 seriously, but they never quite seem to get their act together. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. One time not too long ago they accepted brass tags epoxied to 6"x6" concrete sidewalk pavers as "durable monuments." It's been pretty frustrating.

Yes shame on them, in my area of work I don’t know a single agency that replaces monuments lost to construction work. Including the State of Alaska. I have confronted them for years and it has created a lot of trouble for me and lost job opportunities because government employees get offended when you start telling them that they are not doing something that they should be doing. Those same employees are the ones deciding who does the surveying projects. Most of the time the reply when confronted is – “why do you care, it just means more money and work for surveyors like you anyway”.

The well meaning handicap ramp program destroyed many city monuments in Pittsburgh. Typically there was a cast iron monument box at intersections, with a monument inside. Many were actually destroyed because no thought was given to protecting them. Worse yet, some were put back in the approximate location with no regard to where they were before. They were often 5' offset monuments originally.

The city at one time had 18,000 points, many of which were monuments inside boxes. The picture shows a typical box, although this one isn't in a sidewalk but rather buried a foot deep in a field. I don't think any one knows how many were destroyed or disturbed by construction of the ramps.

> If the contractor did not list a land surveyor as a subcontractor in the bid documents for that portion of the "incidental" work, then consider that contractor procurred land surveying work without being appropriately licensed to do so.

Contractors routinely bid on projects, where their work is contingent on professional services during construction, where the licensed professional is not listed on the initial sub-contractor list.

Construction contracts are full of requirements for plans and calculations to be provided by a licensed engineer or geological engineer prior to commencement of a particular stage of work. Many times, these professionals must make on-site inspections.

I an not aware of any cases where a bid has been rejected because the contractor didn't list an engineer.

However I could certainly imagine a bid protest being made with that assertion.

#1 The bid item "replace survey monument" should have been clearly defined in the Special Provisions. There should have been a reference to the state code.

#2 The agency administering the contract should have made sure a licensed surveyor was on board before they allowed the work to occur which destroyed the monuments.

> Contractors routinely bid on projects, where their work is contingent on professional services during construction, where the licensed professional is not listed on the initial sub-contractor list.
>
> Construction contracts are full of requirements for plans and calculations to be provided by a licensed engineer or geological engineer prior to commencement of a particular stage of work. Many times, these professionals must make on-site inspections. ..........

Imudigger,
I understand your comments well. The difference being is that in Jim's case, the item for monument preservation is a specific bid item and is something the contractor is bidding directly on, i.e. procurring land survey work directly through a specific bid item. In the instances you refer to, such as falsework, shoring, etc, that take PE, GE, or other licenses, these items are not directly bid on and are not therefor direct procurements of those services which fall under protected licenses. If you come across a contract which includes items for things such as "design falsework" or "obtain and analyse geotechnical investigations", then I would make the arguemet that contracts with those type of bid items should include the listing of subcontractors with the appropriate licenses for such.

Anyways, good discussion and one that I've heard taking place in several arenas of late. I've even heard of some who believe that the contractor should be subject to QBS requirements for such procuremnts of sub-contracted services.

Point taken. I have run into instances where a 2nd or 3rd low bidder successfully protests a bid based upon not listing a sub-contractor, where the work requires specific endorsements (painting), that the contractor does not possess.

I believe the claim is that the contractor is not a responsible bidder because they are not qualified to perform the work.

> Anyways, good discussion and one that I've heard taking place in several arenas of late. I've even heard of some who believe that the contractor should be subject to QBS requirements for such procuremnts of sub-contracted services.

I received a copy of some correspondence regarding the City of Visalia - Water Treatment Plant project, which brought up the QBS requirements. I requested clarification / additional information from the BOR in regards to engineering services and never got a reply back. I made the assumption that they were still trying to firm up their position. We will be looking into this further before we contract out any additional construction projects.

It's been about 10 days now, and this contractor is still knocking out monuments without engaging a surveyor to tie them out first. I happened to see his guys in action yesterday, standing amid the rubble of a street corner that they had just demo'd. I remembered a block line offset monument there that had been set by another local surveyor 5 or so years ago, so I walked over to look. I didn't see it, and asked the laborers if they had seen a nail and tag in the walk prior to starting work. The foreman said yes, and pointed out approximately where it had been. Wonderful.

During the initial phone call a week or so ago, the supervisor told me they had "put a stake" behind the walk at each site where a monument had been. He wanted me to use these to reset the lot corner offsets. This is an example of one that I happened upon today:

The estimate that I gave the contractor a day or so after he first called was $7,200.00 for 13 sites (in some cases there are multiple sites on the same block), which includes county fees for filing Records of Survey. He responded by saying they only had $100 per site in their budget, and simply couldn't afford to pay thousands of dollars to get this taken care of.

Earlier this afternoon I ran into a couple of Public Works guys who are aware of what's going on. I asked them how much of a retention they had on the contract, and they said "about $40k." I think the contractor's profit margin is going to get squeezed a little.