California Surveyors Forums

thanks peter. I have to submit the post, then delete with the pencil and edit tab.

learned something new. I will put this to good use.

A tip of my cap to all of the great posts and insights on both sides of the original question and most of the discussions on tangential issues.

Just a few quick comments that may or may not be of interest, but here goes:
1.) If everything in Land Surveying was tab A, slot B (or the analogy I used to use is of the toy "pinball" machine that I had as a kid where you pulled the spring and the ball went up and then down and ended up in some slot) then we wouldn't need professionals. The very nature of being a professional, IMO, is having a reasoned opinion based on evidence, the law, written documents on the subject from whatever source, and your experiences. Other professionals may have a different opinion based on the same set of criteria. I also, think that being a fellow professional requires a civil, respectful discourse when there is a difference of opinion.
2.) I have found over the years that when there is a heated discussion over some topic that the differences of opinions can often times be traced to a different definition of an important term. Once the opposing parties agree to a defintiion of that term all differences of opinion go away - in most circumstances. On this thread those words would be Establish, Reestablish, Permanent Monument, Facile, Sufficient, etc. I'm sure I have missed some.
3.) At one point I advocating having these terms clearly defined to remove ambiguity. Apparently that was a stupid idea.
4.) As those who know me know, I think 8771 should be completely rewritten and portions of that section placed in other codes. Specifically the parts related to requirements of a government agency and a contractor. The PLSA is for us not them.
5.) Overly simplifying, I think 8771 should read, "All monuments should be tied out before potentially being destroyed and, if destroyed, replaced."
6.) All permits issued should have a clause referring to the PLSA and the potential destruction of monuments.
7.) The same (similar) discussion on temporary offsets to a PL for fence purposes could be applied to staking easements. This isn't even addressing the subject of if you consider easements a property line or not.
8.) Having worked for Caltrans for years (now retired) I realized on one of the first "big" projects I worked on that the Right of Way and construction staking were two different animals all together. That was the $1.4 Billion Cypress reconstruction project after the Loma Prieta earthquake. The RoW didn't fit from one end of the project to the other by several feet. What we did know was that the construction never came within that error, and, well, we can do anything we want within our Row. I.e. the ending roadway and bridges were not anything close to a good monument for the Row.
9.) When I was on the LSTAC for BPELS (No G at the time) the word "establish" was discussed at length with no resolution. At the time I was of the opinion that if you staked a permanent structure right at a setback or some other known controlling relationship to the PL that the new structure was a pretty good "monument" - even more durable, and permanent than most anything else. However, I will say that being a professional (I hope) I am willing to be persuaded to an alternate point of view.

Hope this isn't off base to much.

P.S. I am of the opinion that discussing pending Board cases on this forum is not a good idea.

"Now if we could just find an efficient manner in which to pass this on to the land surveyors that don't frequent this forum. Makes you wonder what viewpoints we would all benefit from if more chimed in with thoughts we haven't brought up." Mr. Ric Moore (I didn't use the quote button because I didn't want to post Ric's whole post just this section. Is there a way to copy with the quote button a partial post?)

I think Ric has an excellent idea. So, I will offer a potential solution.

John W. is always looking for good content for the "California Surveyor". Maybe John could have a recurring section that publishes these types of forum discussions for all to see. Of course, he would have to do some editing and possibly "change the names to protect the innocent" of posters, as well as remove stuff that is not appropriate or pertinent. Almost like a Point/Counter point with many participants. The "article" could have an unbiased preamble by John or a guest contributor and at the end a solicitation of comments.

Just a thought.

TTaylor wrote:(I didn't use the quote button because I didn't want to post Ric's whole post just this section. Is there a way to copy with the quote button a partial post?)

It's easy. After hitting the quotes icon, just highlight the parts you want to exclude and delete them. But be sure to leave the beginning and ending parts in brackets.