The first photograph shows the remains of a Worcester County Highway concrete bound from a recent project. The crumbling concrete is maybe due to harsh elements. It is near a lake.
The reinforcing bars that remain are also weathering. It appears that flat bars are used where the front face would have been and #4 bars are at the rear. The arrow points to the remains of the rear bars that are now less than the diameter of a pencil.
Assuming the bars are symmetrical?ÿ we observed the center with good results. The concrete at the ground level appears solid, but you can see the crumbling concrete pieces in the photograph to the right of this position.
The second photographs was taken at another project for an example of how the bound would look in good condition.
?ÿ
You should see what a heavy duty rotary mower (Bush Hog- style) can do to that. It's not for the squeamish.
Thread hi-jack warning. I just saw the coolest hydro axe. It was a remote-control tracked unit about half the size of a bobcat. It went through everything, and I mean everything. 3" saplings were gone, black berries trembled in fear. The operator said it was about 100k with all the various cutter heads and trailer. A couple of days later when I was struggling through a will thicket and then spent hours cutting line through some horrible brier patch I was whishing I had one.
I would have been thankful for that situation. If there's some concrete left there.
These are some honestly are difficult
at what point does the statutes or whatever authority to govern these control monuments require rehabilitation or replacement for the perpetuation of the evidence?
this inquiring mind wants to know
I don't know that I have ever seen them being replaced. Many of them were set by the highway construction contractors and may not be anywhere near where the highway plans show them.
I don't know that I have ever seen them being replaced. Many of them were set by the highway construction contractors and may not be anywhere near where the highway plans show them.
One monument in particular that we found while surveying near the installation of a new utility pole was reported to the City Engineering Department. It was a cut stone with a drill hole dating to circa 1890 that had been tossed up the bank.
We asked the same question of them, and their answer was that they would be suing the utility company for the cost of replacement.
That may be true where you practice, but not so in my jurisdiction. While the contractor may dig the hole and place the bound there, it was always with four perpendicular offsets. After that process the surveyor returns to set the point. At least that is my experience from working with the DOT.
We set stones, and they were very heavy, so I appreciated the work of the contractor. Besides that, with perpendicular offsets, the contractor could use a string to determine where to dig the holes, and we all know how much they love the string. I don't think anything would ever get built without string.
@not-my-real-name @jitterboogie
It's a great idea; nobody wants to pay for...
@not-my-real-name @jitterboogie
It's a great idea; nobody wants to pay for...
Yes
But isn't the requirement for the process in PLSSia, that if you're digging and find nothing else and the ties are gone, and everything is done for showing this should be a section corner that was previously here and recorded with the BLM and the state board process, that now you're responsible for rehabilitation and the replacement of the section corner? All because you had the ambition to use that corner and discovered that oh no it's not there.
Or in Denver, development is required to set the Denver range points by law and a similar way that the BLM is mandated. Of course I'm just trying to remember what it is I'm likely to have forgotten about it and need to sit down and start the study grinad again so I'm ready for the next test which will have more boundary stuff for the scoring I have read.
I'm just learning and will always be learning.
That doesn't answer the question: Who's going to pay for it?
The contractor/owner tore it out with zero intent of putting it back. No references were set; the best evidence is the survey and site plan used to improve his property. He just did what ever he wanted; the section corner is gone; he encroached on his neighbor (my client) and the city permitted it. When i brought this to the city's attention, their response was "We didn't know we needed to preserve these monuments"
My guess; the contractor/owner is a bully/a--hole and nobody wants to get anywhere near him...
The corner remains obliterated...
Send it up the chain to the BLM.
They'll have fun enforcing the rules.
It's their rules. Ignorance is no defense in the face of the law, and the city isn't immune from gross negligence because they 'didn't know'. If they have a surveyor there they know.
I guess we still need to keep trying to get the inertia shifted.
Because as long as people have no consideration or any kind of respect for the importance of the monuments and the value they income to their property, and think that surveyor pay is too high and not really even required we will keep being the necessary evil they'll be trying to eliminate and replace with robots or lawyers with cell phones and GIS.
eliminated and replaced with robots or lawyers with cell phones and GIS.
This topic didn't start out being about malicious destruction of survey monuments, but here in Massachusetts it's a crime, and the punishment is jail time.
