Showing Survey under Proposed work on Grading Plan?

[brandoncdg]

I am curious what everyone shows on their grading plans. I have always placed the full survey screened back on the plans. An architect the other day asked if I could clip out the survey under the proposed area, grading limits, to make the plans easier to read. Does anyone do this?

For some reason the survey I am working with is super messy.

Civil Development Group, LLC
Los Angeles Civil Engineering specializing in Hillside Grading

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com/blog

 

[beej67]

We typically take the digital survey data and construct our own base cad file. On it, we move any data that's going to no longer be relevant after demolitions phase into 'demo' layers, which we can thaw for the existing conditions plan and demo plan, but freeze for other plans, as necessary. This can make things a lot easier to read, and we also transfer all the survey's labels and whatnot to our cad standards to make the plans more cohesive.

I would NOT recommend turning off your existing contours beneath a building pad on your grading plan, because more people than just the architect need to see those. One obvious example, the grading contractor needs to see existing contours for the whole site so they can do their quantity takeoff. Reviewers usually want to see existing contours across the whole site as well, so they can identify cut and fill areas easily.

Definitely refuse any request to freeze out existing utilities, unless there's a specific plan showing them being moved. You can get into quite a bit of trouble that way. If there's a gas main under your building and you're not showing it because an architect asked you to freeze out your survey, then Bad Things(tm) ensue.


Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East -

http://www.campbellcivil.com

 

[brandoncdg]

You are right about putting the survey into our standards. That would easily make the plans easier to read. I was holding my ground on not clipping out the survey. The architect made it sound like most people they work with will clip this out and it made no sense. Yes the obvious, the contractor can't tell what the earthwork will be as soon as they look at the plans is enough of an issue to me.

I never thought of moving objects to demo layers, that will help a lot on our projects that have demo plans in the set. Thanks!

Civil Development Group, LLC
Los Angeles Civil Engineering specializing in Hillside Grading

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com/blog

 

[GoldDredger]

Oh gee, an architect is telling you how to do your civil plans. That's got to be a first (sarcastic).

Just remember that when problems arise during construction, the architect will be the FIRST to point out that civil plans are your responsibility. At least that has been my experience.

Back on topic, I agree with the posts above. I have a good relationship with the surveyor we use (not inhouse) and have them set up the layers so we can easily turn them on or off depending on the background info needed.

Surveys do become cumbersome when you have text of multiple points overlaping into a big blob, so they should be separated out to be legible. If not the surveyor might be being a little lazy. I always always always have existing contours on, greyscaled, in the grading plans.

 

[brandoncdg]

It's more that this architect mentioned that other Civils do their plans this way. I guess it's just by chance that this survey is a huge mess, I wish we were working with our normal surveyor.

Civil Development Group, LLC
Los Angeles Civil Engineering specializing in Hillside Grading

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com/blog

 

[gbam]

I have seen plans that keep the topo screened for the review process and then clip it out for the final submittal.

 

[beej67]

gbam: What area of the country are you in? Just curious. There's a tremendous variation between Georgia and Florida plans, for instance, even though they're adjacent states. I've never ran into a reviewer who wanted you to change your layering mid-approval.

brandon: Sounds to me like the major problem is a messy survey, not TMI. Just get a digital file, and make your own base file where you clean the survey up. Assuming you're using autocad, learn the refedit command, it's a life saver. Also, fwiw, include a copy of the original survey in your plan set and carpet bomb it with notes about the contractor verifying all existing info, and reference where you got your data from, and all that typical mess.



Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East -

http://www.campbellcivil.com

 

[civilman72]

Not sure if anyone else deals with this, but gaining agency review approval seems to go smoother when I present plans that are easy on the eyes the first time around. I've seen technically sound drawings that lacked curb appeal get run through numerous review iterations, while other plans that looked great but contained numerous errors get approval with minimal comments. Frustrating... I just wished I figured this game out quicker.

One of the first steps we take before jumping into a design is to extract all "other" data and place it in our CAD layering system. The "other" data usually includes survey info (property and topo) and architectural info (building footprints, proposed road and lot layouts). There's so much extraneous information (especially in arch drawings) that having control over their display is imperative in creating clean drawings. This usually takes a good CAD person only 2-4 hours to complete, and we always build this time into our proposal. Contracts also require that our client provide us with these "other" CAD files before commencing design.

One other thought... I always ask the surveyor to provide me with their point file (ascii, or txt). Providing existing spot elevations along with existing contours is the best way to display the background for a detailed grading plan. Trying to manipulate an existing surveyor's points in a CAD file can be very cumbersome. When you start with the original point file it is much easier to manipulate how the existing points are displayed in the drawing.

 

[brandoncdg]

The one file I hate messing around with are Survey files, as my first job was at a mainly surveying company. You can't bill these extra hours manipulating these files because everyone else out here is low balling beyond belief on projects. We just happen to be getting a good reputation to not be the lowest bidders, but still have to bid pretty low on work. Maybe this is starting to filter into the surveys we have to deal with.

This is our first job we have had issues with regarding too much info and nonsense on the survey.

My best example of the serious lowballing is that I could make more money working at McDonalds compared to what others are bidding on jobs. Not sure how this benefits anyone.

Civil Development Group, LLC
Los Angeles Civil Engineering specializing in Hillside Grading

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com/blog

 

[gbam]

beej67;
I am in the SW. Let me clarify that there is typically a seperate existing condition survey/topo plan sheet in with the submittal. Also, I have seen reviewers request the clipping and some do not. I have seen it both ways.

 

[brandoncdg]

I don't generally include the survey as a separate sheet as the Architect is generally submitting the survey sheet in their package. We try to submit as a package with the architect as often as possible.

BTW one of the main messy items with this survey were spot elevations all over the place, showing up with the contours. Along with hatching that might have been a bit overkill.

Like I said this is why I like working with our normal surveyor as they do a very good clean job.

beej67: I learned the hard way that it's never good to use the in-place xref editor. Somehow that always brought garbage into the main drawings every single time I had used it. Even though I put writing on the plan saying verify, it still doesn't help anything. Another example is I had a great detail of a dispersion wall only for the contractor to build it completely wrong.

BTW thanks for everyone's input. As I basically used bits and pieces of what you guys were mentioning. The plan is getting close to legible.

Civil Development Group, LLC
Los Angeles Civil Engineering specializing in Hillside Grading

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com/blog

 

[beej67]

Hrmm. I've never had a problem with refedit. I don't use it a whole lot, but it's invaluable for rearranging survey labeling so it doesn't interfere with your design labeling.

gbam: Thanks. It's interesting stuff.

Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East -

http://www.campbellcivil.com

 

[dik]

I've generally used the digital survey contours made a copy of it and modified the copy to reflect new, changed conditions. The existing grades are screened and shown as a lighter background than the final grades.

Dik

 

[darthsoilsguy2]

Grading plans:
existing contours print in light gray with proposed contours in dark lines.

Existing Conditions Plans:
existing contours print in dark lines

Utility plans would not typically have existing contours, but all information would be called out.

We'd keep survey info on a points layer that was typically frozen.

We would handle all the architectural stuff on a "Site Layout" plan which would have no contours or spot elevations of any kind. It would have road stationing, radii, and typical dimensions.

With the right scale on a good layout, there should be no problem giving visually pleasing plans.

 

[brandoncdg]

The final answer to my problem was that the survey was just overkill and I had to spend a few hours adjusting out the useless information.

Civil Development Group, LLC
Los Angeles Civil Engineering specializing in Hillside Grading

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com

http://www.civildevelopmentgroup.com/blog