Sufficient Monumentation???

[PLS7393]

Under PLS Act Sect. 8765(d), and Board Rules 464(e) it states "where sufficient monumentation is found to establish the precise location of of property corners thereon". Can someone please define "Sufficient Monumentation", or is this open to interpretation of a County Surveyor?

I did a search on this here forum, and there is no discussion, or clear identification to what this means?

Ready GO!!!

[Mike Mueller]

This is one of the phrases that I think has a large spectrum of beliefs :)

The two biggest question about this topic to me are : who is the finder and what tools do they have? Depending on who is the finder, and what tools they have, the determination of what is easy should be relatively straightforward in my opinion.

Is the finder:
1) a licensed surveyor who is finding the physical monuments and has access to GPS and a CAD program to easily calculate positions that are lacking a physical monument and then stake them out?

2) a LSIT?

3) the homeowner?

I personally believe it is a LS. However I have heard from some folks at BPELSG (including at the most recent conference at the Board Panel) that the HOMEOWNER is the person that should be used for this "easy enough" test. I was always told that a landowner is legally able to survey their own property and have assumed that is why the homeowner is the Boards standard as the homeowner represents the lowest possible skill set that needs to be able to get over the bar. I am not sure where in the laws that allowance is made since I do not find it in 8730 exemptions from license.

Even if if the landowner can legally survey their own property, I would assert that the "survey" envisioned by that provision is for topographical maps and other types of maps of their land that only have consequences for themselves. Since boundaries generally have more than one interest, it should not be legal under the PLSA for someone to set a boundary corner "on their own land" since that corner is also someone else's land too.

Facile: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/facile
(1): easily accomplished or attained

No determination of "facile" is possible without knowing the tools available to the finder. Moving 4 tons of sand with a bucket is simple, but time consuming. Moving that sand with a D10 is pretty fast and easy, once you get the D10 on site. Determining the 100th digit of pi is simple and fast with a good program or access to the internet, but I bet there are few folks who could do it on paper without looking it up first.

I would assert that the tools available to most field crews in their trucks/rigs should be the standard. This would include the record maps they are attempting to retrace, as well as their data collector with calcs points/GPS/total stations/detectors/compass/rag tapes/machetes etc. To me this is the most commonsense standard, and I am always hesitant to use a convoluted scenario to set the standard.

BTW the new law 8771.6 faces the same issue. It is why the proposed 8771.6 guide establishes a licensed surveyor with maps and a detector and shovel ( but no digital staking capability) as the person to be used in the "easy to find at all times in the future" test. The reason why the 8771.6 proposed guide does not include the stakeout abilities is that there is a physical monument present that needs to be found whereas 8771(a) is just about perpetuation and reestablishment.

Perhaps we could get a Board Rule added that defined the finder and their tools to clarify this? It is my understanding that a Board Rule update would be safer and easier to accomplish?

Mikey Mueller, PLS 9076
Sonoma County

[Ric7308]

Respectively, I believe Keith and Mikey have expressed thoughts that are crossing into multiple sections of the Act and Board Rules so I thought I would add a few additional notes:

First 8765(d) is all about property corners (as expressed in the language). In this case, "...sufficient monumentation is found to establish the precise location of property corners thereon..." in which case "thereon" means as shown on the submitted Corner Record (as an exemption to filing an RS). This basically means that the submitting surveyor needed to have based the location of the set monument(s) on the presence of a sufficient number of found and accepted monuments which are in close enough proximity to assure that the determined set position is precise enough to enable this action to be accomplished within an acceptable tolerance which would not trigger the filing of an RS. Hence the exemption. I'm not telling any of you what that tolerance is because that is a responsibility of the surveyor performing the survey and submitting the CR. However, that surveyor better be able to support the action. While it is a good idea to discuss this with the County Surveyor (if desired to do so), it is still on the practicing surveyor to support that compliance. Since 8773.2 gives the CS the authority to review a CR for compliance with 8765(d), the CS has the authority to question it under the authority of that section.

Board Rule 464(e) - I fail to see how this reference applies to Keith's question.

8771.6 (and really 8771(a)) - Mikey and I did briefly discuss this Sunday (by briefly, I mean while walking in the hallway for less than 5 minutes after the Board panel discussion) and I wanted to offer a couple additional thoughts to what Mikey said above. The Board generally looks at monuments as primarily intended to assist landowners in understanding where the limits of their ownership or title rights are located on the ground; and secondary as control for retracement surveyors to use in understanding "where the footsteps are" for the property lines/corners being retraced are located, either as primary calls or controlling calls in title documents. Regardless of how us as land surveyors look at the importance of monuments intended to mark title rights and ownership, the fact remains that the original idea behind such physical objects is to mark those rights on the ground for non-surveyors to know where those "paper" rights exist in the world.

"Facile" as used in 8771(a) must be read with the context used in that paragraph which is "...the perpetuation or facile reestablishment of any point or line of the survey." Please recognize that 8771(a) mentions "any point or line of the survey" and does not limit itself to a "property corner" as used in 8765(d). Obviously, when used in conjunction with "reestablishment", one naturally gravitates to a surveyor performing a retracement survey and implies that the surveyor performing the survey is responsible to "ensure" that "any point or line of their survey" is "easily" retraceable by subsequent surveyors...on ANY survey, not just surveys being documented on a CR or RS. The Board would also consider that by use of the term "perpetuation" in 8771(a), and also taking into account the Board's paramount mandate for protecting the public (see previous paragraph), that once the surveyor has ensured compliance with 8771(a), the property owner(s) should be able to rely on, and use, those physical markers for whatever they need to, including such things as constructing improvements, demonstrate to permitting authorities where their property corners are located, facilitate discussions with their neighbors, etc. In another way, the property owner(s) have the responsibility to ensure the perpetuation of those monuments also, in addition to surveyors.

8771.6 - and following along with the use of "perpetuation" in 8771(a), the Board believes that practicing professionals should already be participating in, or otherwise ensuring, the perpetuation (or preservation) of monument evidence as a standard of care despite the inclusion of this new language. When evaluating the proposal last year, the Board believed that by "reminding" the practicing surveyor of this responsibility, this would ultimately benefit the public by ensuring that more monuments remained in existence...out there in the wild...free from worry that they might disappear off the face of this earth without any lasting physical legacy........I digress.

[Mike Mueller]

Opps, I saw the question by Keith and my mind just leapt to 8771(a). I wasn't really writing in response to the corner record threshold language. Sorry for the off topic post.

Mikey Mueller, 9076
Sonoma County

[PLS7393]

Board Rule 464(e) - I fail to see how this reference applies to Keith's question.

Ric, My bad as I see the latest PLS Act removed that wording under Sect. 464(e).
It use to be there, as I grabbed an older Act. So my initial concern was relating to a CR, and since the verbiage was removed, maybe this is a a mood question when dealing with a CR?

Thanks for your input and guidance.

[Jim Roepel]

Hi Keith, first if your County has a County Surveyor and not a contractor you are lucky. They don't hand those out to just anyone unless they are contracting plan checks. These people have their hands in maps all day and every day and have usually earned the respect of the local surveyors of the County for their "smarts" and knowledge gathered over time. So don't sell them short. We see the minimalist to the maximiser in survey practitioners work products. Be truthful and honest and make sure your Mom would be proud to put you last lot survey you did on the fridge. So when you look for a definition of "Sufficient Monumentation" in these posts you need it. When you practice ethically, daily, you know what a good job is, and you know what you should do. You will know the definition of "Sufficient Monumentation." You will also know the difference between a journeyman and a Master.

[PLS7393]

Be truthful and honest and make sure your Mom would be proud to put you last lot survey you did on the fridge. So when you look for a definition of "Sufficient Monumentation" in these posts you need it. When you practice ethically, daily, you know what a good job is, and you know what you should do. You will know the definition of "Sufficient Monumentation." You will also know the difference between a journeyman and a Master.

That's all fine and dandy Jim, and I think I have the resume to understand the difference, but there are no standards for one to satisfy. How can anyone dictate what is and what is not "sufficient monumentation" without standards? Just another situation open to one's interpretation, and the position of ones voice. How can the surveyor and County Surveyor agree sufficient monumentation has been satisfied, only to have someone else step in and say five (5) found original subdivision street monuments is not sufficient monumentation to retrace a lot in a cul-de-sac? The one with the biggest stick wins!

I won't even begin to identify Boundary Control and Legal Principles for Simultaneously Created Boundaries into this topic, even though I use referenced principles all the time when found original monuments are found and held, per documented principles. But there are still some who don't accept published principles, hmmm interesting.

Maybe I should listen to others and simply delete myself from this forum, like many other surveyors. Cheers and have fun as enough time has been wasted!!!

[hellsangle]

Keith,

"Crazy" needs company!