PLSA Sect. 8771 - Time Limit?

[PLS7393]

As I read Sect. 8771 of the PLS Act, it only states under sub section (c): "A permanent monument shall be reset in the surface of the new construction or . . . , and a corner record or record of survey shall be filed with the county surveyor prior to the recording of a certificate of completion for the project."

Background:
1) Existing street monuments existed when I performed a survey and filed a corner record four years ago.
2) City ties out and perpetuates monuments with distance ties.
3) Corner records are somewhere in the county review process (past 20 days).

Fast forward to 2022:
Neighbors want me to monument opposite side of property from previous work. Seems pretty straight forward and simple, right? Upon arrival to the site, fresh AC has been laid and I find City nail & tags to perpetuate monuments. I contact the city to inquire if they have a time schedule to reset monuments per Sect. 8771. Was told no time schedule at this time, as they need to coordinate the replacing of monuments. Mind you the paving has been completed many months (as evidence of wear and tear). City tells me they have satisfied Sect. 8771 of the PLS Act since the monuments are perpetuated, and I can have field notes. Does me a lot of good as I"m standing in the field planning to perform work.

So Sect. 8771(c) does state: " and a corner record or record of survey shall be filed with the county surveyor prior to the recording of a certificate of completion for the project."

Is this CR for the initial monument tie, to perpetuate the monument in case it gets destroyed, or a second CR for the replacement of original monument?

Why does the PLS Act not clearly identify a timeline for any monument(s) to be reset, if the original monument is destroyed during the project?
Should there be a timeline for resetting any destroyed monument, and does CLSA Legislation Committee have any interest to initiate anything on this matter?

I typically try to work with various agencies, on timelines (avoiding to file multiple complaints), but in some jurisdictions they simply are tying out more monuments than they are resetting destroyed monuments. This is very frustrating when you have to explain to your client that you can not complete or even begin their work, due of this matter. Then spend additional time getting field notes and make an additional trip to the field.

Who's on First, once again. Thank goodness for a nine inning game, lol.

Now back to our regularly scheduled work program ! ! !

[BrianSpore]

Keith, this is my personal opinion but the time limit would be for the preconstruction CR to be filed. one should be able to reestablish the original location with the references provided on that. Also my personal thought is the monument replacement should have been a part of the pavement project and therefore a Certificate of Completion should net be filed until they are set. I have referenced out, submitted the preconstruction for review and had the new monuments set during the project. I did hold back on punching the new disks until the preconstruction CR was filed, then punched and submitted the post construction CR. Once again that is my opinion.

[PLS7393]

Brian, Yes I would think the resetting of monuments would be part of the whole project, but evidently it is not with this city. Thus my concerns with a time limit to reset, instead of relying on getting ties and having to do the City's work, lol. No I am not setting a nail at my established point, for the city to use, lol.

[David Kendall]

I would be happy to have the field notes...

CalTrans D4 blew out 4.5 miles of streets and sidewalk ramps for an overlay and improvement project here last winter and filed nothing. They won't share any information like notes either so the public just gets burnt on this one.

Monument conservation is done on the honor system at the end of the day. I find the local agencies to be more responsible and responsive in that regard, you ought to send them a thank you card!

[PLS7393]

Monument conservation is done on the honor system at the end of the day. I find the local agencies to be more responsible and responsive in that regard, you ought to send them a thank you card!

David, this is where I suggest CLSA Legislative step up and revise Sect. 8771 to clearly identify a time line when the monument(s) shall be reset.
Then we have a little more support and stance to file a complaint with the Board. As it is now, it is a little vague, and the Board currently simply says to file a complaint. There's your thank you card, lol.

Here is another good idea for the Legislative Committee to look into, but . . . will anything get done?

[Edward M Reading]

I would be happy to have the field notes...

CalTrans D4 blew out 4.5 miles of streets and sidewalk ramps for an overlay and improvement project here last winter and filed nothing. They won't share any information like notes either so the public just gets burnt on this one.

Monument conservation is done on the honor system at the end of the day. I find the local agencies to be more responsible and responsive in that regard, you ought to send them a thank you card!

File a complaint with the Board.

[David Kendall]

File a complaint with the Board.

I did that in November 2021. Apparently our esteemed DOT is well versed and adept at the fine art of Board enforcement and compliance delay tactics (presumably due to generations of practice at rule scoffing). They don't bother to respond to my CPRA request either so no luck there.

I fully expect that in a few years the licensing board will levy a $1000 fine which the state of California will pay to itself on behalf of the project engineer.

How is this supposed to help me complete a boundary survey in the meantime?

We're getting off topic though, I am contemplating a Cal Surveyor article to recount the experience, as it has been surreal. I don't believe it is like this everywhere in the state (at least that is my hope).

The point is that we should be appreciative of our cities and counties that respect the law and are proactive in protecting their survey monuments and responding to queries for information. While it is the law as well as a public service, they don't really have to do these things.

[mpallamary]

The City of San Diego has destroyed thousands of monuments. Indeed they have a database of the ones they know about.

They have not replaced them and there is no indication they ever will.

Nothing has been done and filing complaints is worthless.

[btaylor]

I am contemplating a Cal Surveyor article to recount the experience, as it has been surreal. I don't believe it is like this everywhere in the state (at least that is my hope).

This would make for a good read, so hopefully you can find the time to write it up.

[CBarrett]

I just had to re-establish a Caltrans ROW line based on two old city monuments which are of tertiary generation if you follow the monument pedigree, because there is no field evidence of where Caltrans boundary is, except for the freeway construction itself (which happened in early 2000's).
I did ask for Caltrans construction control, which they provided, to check this against my field work, which was incidentally on the same coordinate system and epoch.
I am filing a record of survey on a few weeks showing exactly that in my boundary narrative, including a detailed description of searched for, not found field positions and lack or records tied to field locations. I have several possible boundary solutions which float as much as 0.5', and a zero lot line building to the south of us (downtown construction density). Part of my evidence is basically, per Caltrans control calculations and provided coordinates this is where they say their right of way sits. Not very strong evidence, when I have to backtrack from that to reconstructing where the old rancho line sits, than back to current times.
The only saving grace for this piece of property is that possible overlapping and gapping slivers all belong to government agencies, so a property line dispute is unlikely. Private property owners may not take as kindly (or inattentively) to 5' to 7' uncertainty about where their PL's sit.

[PLS7393]

The point is that we should be appreciative of our cities and counties that respect the law and are proactive in protecting their survey monuments and responding to queries for information. While it is the law as well as a public service, they don't really have to do these things.

Exactly David!!! As I have always said, if I have to follow the laws, so do others.
Why don't they (government agencies) get held to the same standards?

[CBarrett]

State CLSA had a board meeting just today. If there is something you want to be taken up by the legislative committee, send them a letter. There's a form to fill out to submit a proposal, I need to dig it out off the website here, it is in the membership section.
It doesn't have to be very detailed, idea or problem level is sufficient to get the more formal discussion started.
Just today we voted yes to send all proposed legislative changes to the legislative committee for consideration and refinement (which would generally speaking be the next step).
The form I was looking at just this morning is a single page, so not much longer than writing a forum post.