Torn out by Construction

[JMS8070]

The city has asked me a question and I thought I would share my opinion and see if anyone agrees.

Take a look at the attached PDF. At the southwest corner you will find monument 6. We were unable to find a reference for the monument and no reason why it was 9.94' from the CL. It did happen to fall on the south line of the northerly 198' of the Lot 3 (deed call), which made me feel good about my line, but, again, no reason for the offset from CL.

After construction, we go out and set all of the monuments and notice that monument 6 has been torn out by construction. I tell the crew not to replace it since it does not appear to control anything directly and I have tied it to our centerline monument on the map.

Am I correct in that opinion?

Section 8771(b) states that monuments that are torn out must be reset "or permanent witness monuments set to perpetuate their location" which is what I feel we did.

Thoughts?

[Peter Ehlert]

does the Homeowner need it? Nope
does the Surveyor need it? Nope
can I find the same position on the ground from the map data? Yep

Was that the question?

Sorry, I don't intend to sound like a wise guy but we have better things to do than set meaningless iron in the ground. And, Yes, you have complied with the act.

[bruce hall]

over ties, one 10 foot away and the other about 35 feet or so. I would think that I could put the puppy back in. 8771 doesn't say how many ties or witnesses are required, but I gotta believe that there has to be at least two, (and preferably more), which is what you have.

You do not have to reset another monument at the position shown. It wuld be nice,(I replace all my found monuments after construction, which I think is the best scenario) but not required.

I see your point and think that you are okay.

[goodgps]

No Need to replace that.
your subsequent survey is sufficient to retrace the boundary.

Good question . . . from a "respect" point of view.

[JMS8070]

Mr. Ehlert, Mr. Hall, Mr. GPS - thanks to all of you for the responses. I'm sure the city will appreciate the additional opinions. They are in a state of flux right now regarding their survey personal and they were hoping for another opinion from someone who did not have a stake in the answer.

Thanks again.

[pls7809]

The only thing I would do different is add under Note 6 that it was destroyed in (month) 2009 during construction.

[E_Page]

I agree with all the above. Since it does not appear to directly control any corner, replacing it could cause someone some confusion later on. Conversely, if someone later on does find some record of what it was supposed to represent, they can reestablish the point from your ties.