California Surveyors Forums

In reviewing 8771(b), the below statement throws me for a little loop.

In the first part of the subsection, it states horizontal or vertical survey control, but then make the following statement;
"...prior to the time when any streets, highways, other rights-of-way, or easements are improved, constructed, reconstructed, maintained, resurfaced, or relocated,..."

The primary survey control for my agency is not set in any streets, highways, or other rights-of-way, so does that mean 8771 does not apply to my control. The reason I ask is, several of our PM's have no regard for protecting the survey control and if they do disturb any, they have a consultant set a nail and shiner. Our primary control are stainless steel rods driven to the point of refusal, not some cheap nail. I would like to think 8771 applies to my primary control and I can explain to the PM's that these monuments are protected, but the way I read it, they may not be.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

My interpretation is that if a monument has ever been used as horizontal or vertical control (which includes CORS/CGPS stations, not just passive monuments) or serves as control for the listed features (subdivisions, tracts, etc...), it falls into being protected under 8771(b). I think the subsequent language you cite are examples of the types of improvements which most often imperil existing control.They are not intended to define the locations where these control monuments must exist in order to qualify for protection/perpetuation, IMO. Hopefully Ric will see this and chime in, but I believe your primary control points would qualify under 8771(b).

The first part of 8771 (b) speaks to "When monuments exist that control the location of subdivisions, tracts, boundaries, roads, streets, or highways, or provide horizontal or vertical survey control, the monuments shall be located and referenced ...

8771 (c) then talks of "A permanent monument shall be reset ..." A nail and shiner isn't going to qualify.

I am of the belief that the language of 8771(b) has to be interpreted as a whole and that the deference to work performed in streets, highways, other rights-of-way, or easements is a qualifying clause. It is also my belief that the development and re-writes of 8771 were in large part due to destruction of monuments during work performed for public works projects and private development encroachment on said public streets and rights of way. As that was the targeted objective, that is the focused language.
My belief is that in particular, for horizontal and vertical control monuments on private lands, and on public and quasi-public lands not located in streets, highways, or other rights of way, 8771 does not impart responsibilities of protection on agencies, agency surveyors and agency engineers. Instead 8771(b) only imposes those responsibilities for those monuments subject to destruction due to work performed in streets, highways, other rights-of-way or easements.
For monuments located in an airport, I can only suggest articulating the importance of perpetuation of such durable monuments to a level higher than the PMs.

So, you think monuments that are included in the NSRS (in the NGS integrated database) that are not located in public streets or right-of-ways are NOT covered under 8771(b)? I strongly disagree with that interpretation, but that is just my opinion. As a professional land surveyor, if I am working on a project where a published horizontal and/or vertical control monument not located in a public street or right-of-way is going to get destroyed and I know it, I believe it is my professional obligation to employ the provisions of 8771 to perpetuate the location of that control monument. BPELSG doesn't take enforcement actions against agencies, They go after licensees who failed to comply with the law. I will be very interested to hear other opinions on this topic.

8771(b) only applies to monuments that "...control the location of subdivisions, tracts, boundaries, roads, streets, or highways, or provide horizontal or vertical survey control..." that could be impacted by improvement efforts associated with improving, constructing, reconstructing, maintaining, resurfacing, or relocating any street, highway, other right-of-way, or easement.

Ex. 1: Centerline monument and street is being resurfaced
Ex. 2: Right-of-way monument and improvements are being constructed to the extents of the right-of-way.
Ex. 3: Railroad improvements and NGS/USGS control monument is located on a headwall that is slated for removal.
Ex. 4: Monumented offsets to front lot corners and sidewalk is being reconstructed.
Ex. 5: Property corner set near rural transmission pole or tower and within or bordering an easement and the power company is performing construction or maintenance.
Etc.

Thank Ric, That was my understanding as well. I will just have to hope the monuments we have (60' +/- steel rods) that are not part of the NSRS miss all proposed development here.

Brad,

Not sure what jurisdiction you are with. Perhaps filing Corner Records on those points and including the control info (coordinate, datum, epoch, etc.) in the space on the form will give the private or public surveyors performing monument preservation the notice needed that they are in danger. If you're with a city or water district, many won't know if you have your own agency control unless it's published out there in the County Records like a corner record would be.

Just a suggestion.

Ryan.

Brad L wrote:Thank Ric, That was my understanding as well. I will just have to hope the monuments we have (60' +/- steel rods) that are not part of the NSRS miss all proposed development here.

Am curious Brad. What if the monuments impacted by proposed development are part of the NSRS?

Ric7308 wrote:8771(b) only applies to monuments that "...control the location of subdivisions, tracts, boundaries, roads, streets, or highways, or provide horizontal or vertical survey control..." that could be impacted by improvement efforts associated with improving, constructing, reconstructing, maintaining, resurfacing, or relocating any street, highway, other right-of-way, or easement.

Ex. 1: Centerline monument and street is being resurfaced
Ex. 2: Right-of-way monument and improvements are being constructed to the extents of the right-of-way.
Ex. 3: Railroad improvements and NGS/USGS control monument is located on a headwall that is slated for removal.
Ex. 4: Monumented offsets to front lot corners and sidewalk is being reconstructed.
Ex. 5: Property corner set near rural transmission pole or tower and within or bordering an easement and the power company is performing construction or maintenance.
Etc.

The thing is, you don't know if other surveyors used certain monuments as control for their surveys, so the safest bet is to assume that ALL monuments should be preserved.

dedkad wrote:

Ric7308 wrote:8771(b) only applies to monuments that "...control the location of subdivisions, tracts, boundaries, roads, streets, or highways, or provide horizontal or vertical survey control..." that could be impacted by improvement efforts associated with improving, constructing, reconstructing, maintaining, resurfacing, or relocating any street, highway, other right-of-way, or easement.

Ex. 1: Centerline monument and street is being resurfaced
Ex. 2: Right-of-way monument and improvements are being constructed to the extents of the right-of-way.
Ex. 3: Railroad improvements and NGS/USGS control monument is located on a headwall that is slated for removal.
Ex. 4: Monumented offsets to front lot corners and sidewalk is being reconstructed.
Ex. 5: Property corner set near rural transmission pole or tower and within or bordering an easement and the power company is performing construction or maintenance.
Etc.

The thing is, you don't know if other surveyors used certain monuments as control for their surveys, so the safest bet is to assume that ALL monuments should be preserved.

8771(b) is addressing ALL monuments...that meet those conditions as explained above, regardless of whether they have yet to be used as control or have been used many times. 8771(c) is only referring to those monuments that are determined to be impacted by the activities (I.e., location destroyed, disturbed, needing to be reset, etc.) Any monuments in the subject area that were acted upon in accordance with 8771(b) that were determined to have NOT been impacted do not require further action in accordance with 8771(c). Basically, (b) is "pre-construction" requirements and (c) is "post-construction" requirements.

Ryan,

I completed a Record of Survey of what I am calling the "Primary Control" for my agency, so that other can use this data. The primary control was established jointly, but processed separately, from our new PACS and SACS.

William,

If specific NSRS monuments (PACS/SACS) were disturbed I would have to re-establish them through the proper channels. If other NSRS monuments were disturbed, then they would be a loss for the surveying community as a corner record would not suffice for their perpetuation.

The survey monuments I have a question about are not tied to any boundaries. While it should be done and another RoS produced, I do not have the staff nor time to complete that task at this time.

IMO, (as stated many times before over the last 5 - 10 years) is that 8771 should be rewritten to be as clear as possible and to remove all of the corny, obfuscating language. Like devious surveys.

I think that 8771 should simply state that when ANY permanent monument is, or may be, disturbed or destroyed that it shall be tied out and subsequently replaced. Stating what appears to be an exhaustive list as to when to replace a monument is always going to be incomplete.

Also, having trained professionals standing around arguing about the intent of a section of law should be minimized by the clarity of the law NOT advanced by a poorly worded law.

Does the monument destroyed by civic improvements have to have been shown on a Record Map to qualify to be preserved?

I come across property markers all the time that are not on record maps or Corner Records.
They weren't required to be recorded when they were set.
I'm talking old, old, old LS numbers like 1706 and 2107, for example.
They're more worth being saved than some modern day GPS derived corner.

Dave Lindell wrote:I come across property markers all the time that are not on record maps or Corner Records.
They weren't required to be recorded when they were set.
I'm talking old, old, old LS numbers like 1706 and 2107, for example.
They're more worth being saved than some modern day GPS derived corner.

I beg to differ. California has been a recording state since 1891. I just reviewed the original 1891 statute and it is pretty clear on the issue.

The law wasn't enforced back then, but it was in the law.

And no the monument doesn't have to be shown in the public records to be preserved, but if you have control monuments that aren't in the public records it is less likely they will be known, rather than stumbling across them.

Check out Board Actions, Page Three of the CalSurveyor.

The reason most surveys are not recorded . . . was using common sense reasoning: (may not have been the letter-of-the-law) if ten surveyors come within a hat's ring - no need to file a R/S. And that was in the days of free to $100 checking fee.

(Although "off topic" . . . for those that have no idea why permit fees/checking fees/etc are what they are go to transparentcalifornia.com.) That's not to say they don't earn the wages . . . it's to say that most of private practice doesn't pay living wages and benefits. The race to the bottom has made us a commodity and another reason we can't attract people to the profession.

Phil - Sonoma

land butcher wrote:Does the monument destroyed by civic improvements have to have been shown on a Record Map to qualify to be preserved?

I think I need an OFFICIAL response to this.

Unofficially, I see 8771 (b) speaking to all monuments which control boundaries, etc. This would cover CORS and the like, even if they haven't (yet) been shown on a map of record.

Officially, I am speaking as a licensed land surveyor. And I now have a credit card - sized piece of plastic saying so. [see related thread]