Notes on Topo Surveys RE: Monument Preservation PLSA 8771

[Robert Martin]

Would any of you be willing to share your notes you place (if any) on your Topo Surveys regarding Monument Preservation and PLSA 8771, and/or Streets & Highway Code 605?
Thanks,

[dmcdougall]

This might be slightly off topic since it's not for Topo Surveys, but being that I'm also a PE and prepare Improvement Plans (and that's where the monuments tend to get destroyed) I've been putting notes like this (taken from Long Beach and LA County). And I wish more cities required it.

Screenshot 2025-01-17 104158.png

Screenshot 2025-01-17 104227.png

Screenshot 2025-01-17 104054.png

I would be curious to see what notes would be applicable to a topo survey.

[Robert Martin]

Thanks Dane for your input.

In the case of the topo I'm working on right now I have no idea where the project improvements may be designed by the engineer (SS improvements in this case). The R-O-W is 80 feet wide; the paved roadway is 28 feet wide. The engineer may elect to run the SS improvements down the paved roadway, or the roadside ditch, or hug the R-O-W. My habit has been to show a symbol at the record locations of monuments, and a note in the legend next to the symbol, or somewhere conspicuous on the topo, stating:

"RECORD MONUMENT LOCATION. ALL EXISTING MONUMENTS SHALL BE PRESERVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 8771"

If anyone has any input on that note I would appreciate it. Most likely I will not be involved in the design, and nor I will not be involved in the construction staking on the project. I want to make an effort to accomplish two things with the note, (1) put the engineer on notice to preserve the monuments if they are to be disturbed by construction, and (2) cover myself from any violation of Section 8771.

Thanks,
Robert

[Robert Martin]

Hindsight being 20/20... I suppose the best time to address monument preservation would have been in my initial contract for the topo, in which I would either include it in the list of services to be provided and include an additional fee. Or, clearly state in the contract that I am NOT responsible for monument preservation, and it is the responsibility of the designer and/or land surveyor performing the construction staking to ensure monument preservation? Any thoughts or examples on that?
Thanks,
Robert

[LS9200]

Here is some language for assistance.

Also, I like the example Dane showed. I have tried implementing that when I can as well.

[steffan]

Hi Robert,

I suggest something along the lines of the following:

"NOTE:
Record survey monuments which fall within the limits of this survey are shown. The design engineer's attention is directed to Section 6730.2(c) of the Professional Engineer's Act which states: "The designated person in responsible charge of professional civil engineering work of any department or agency of the state, city, county, city and county, district, or special district pursuant to this section is responsible for compliance with subdivisions (b) and (c) of Section 8771."

Good to have a follow up call with the recipient designer of the topo to discuss that the intent of 6730.2(c) is to make sure engineers are tapping a surveyor to perform the corner records for monuments in the path of improvements. Sounds like you are already doing the lion's share of effort in this by identifying all monuments which are potentially going to be in the areas of work.

My feeling is the best path from project kickoff is to make sure the PE has a continuing dialogue with the project surveyor during the design process as to project footprint so that a cost-effective effort is made to identify and tie out those monuments truly in conflict. And to identify on the improvement plans those monuments which are close to the footprint and need to be noted as to be protected in place. Good practice is to have the surveyor get both the 60% and 90% sets of plans for review and for identification of the preservation effort.

[Robert Martin]

Thanks Jeff, referencing the PE Act is a good idea!