Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Strictly Surveying › As-built surveys
Tagged: jasa laser scanner, jasa pengukuran tanah, jasa survey hidrografi, jasa survey lidar, jasa survey pemetaan, jasa survey topografi, modelling cad 3d
As-built surveys
JSP replied 8 months, 1 week ago 22 Members · 56 Replies
I’m concerned that the discussion is drifting away from the original question. I’m not asking if as-builts are required in your area, I’m asking if they need to be based on a certified survey of the as-constructed works, and not just on markups by the contractor and/or inspectors.
A resounding “yes”, as-builts must be certified by either a PLS or PE. It would be unwise to trust a contractor to certify their own work. Especially when much of that work is buried underground. Too much temptation to skimp on the work.
It used to be just storm and sanitary sewer as-builts. In some municipalities, you might as well just to do a complete post-construction topo of the subdivision. Problem is that the builder has tons of cash tied up in escrow so they want you out there as soon as something is completed so you can get it located and turned into the inspector. If it passes, they get some money back.
It feels like extortion to allow someone to feel powerful. I would like it better if that person was just getting a bribe, at least then it would not be wasted wealth squandered into the ether of someone’s ego.
The municipalities and creditors learned from the 2008 housing debacle when many subdivisions were in mid-construction and the developers went under and walked away leaving infrastructure unfinished.
A resounding “yes”, as-builts must be certified by either a PLS or PE.
Both. PE signs the set, the PLS has their certification added to each page that they have information on.
It would be unwise to trust a contractor to certify their own work.
Don’t we have inspectors?
You can see how much weight they place on the inspectors, I guess.
BTW, around here, they video each and every pipe and get a third party cert for materials, etc.-All thoughts my own, except my typos and when I am wrong.The municipalities and creditors learned from the 2008 housing debacle when many subdivisions were in mid-construction and the developers went under and walked away leaving infrastructure unfinished.
This would not stop that at all.
-All thoughts my own, except my typos and when I am wrong.I’m concerned that the discussion is drifting away from the original question. I’m not asking if as-builts are required in your area, I’m asking if they need to be based on a certified survey of the as-constructed works, and not just on markups by the contractor and/or inspectors.
What is the final need?
Generally, it is that a system work. That should be signed off by an engineer.
Also, useful as-built information is needed for records to facilitate additions to the system, maintenance, fill in various GIS data points, etc.
Off the top of my head, and given what I know you are being asked to do…(and I reserve the right to be wrong and change my mind) 😉
How would I do it (AKA THE ONLY CORRECT WAY):
- AS-BUILT Data
- Drafted into a “Record Drawing” with certifications from both the PE of record and the PLS. I would want CAD to go with it to make transfer to my GIS easy.
- Having done this in multiple ways, if I was reviewing, my preference would be in the form of “redlines”.
- In the world of color pdf’s and printers, I would ask to see meaningful changes from design shown with a red cross-out of the old and the change shown in red. Would remind me of how we used to do it.
- If not color, I would want it simply moved, and the changed items in some sort of bold or such.
- Certifications:
- PE: This is as designed (with approved revisions) with the minor changes here, which it all still works. This should be the statement in any case, as major changes should have been subject to review as revisions.
- PLS: The information shown hereon is correct subject to the following: (This portion is shown according to contractor redlines, this portion is supplied data from asbuilts by the purveyor, inspector notes, etc)
- Metadata
- I would make my GIS people add in the metadata (meaning where the data came from) as described in the PLS Certification.
- Metadata is the real multiplier in a GIS. If you do not know the data about the data…the data is just information with alternative facts available around the corner.
- Publish a standards such as:
- Manholes that are more than 0.5′ from original location must be noted or drafted or whatever as such.
- Locations noted with coordinates/stations/whatever (should follow the original specs for the permit).
- Source of data must be clearly shown on drawing and be addressed in PLS Cert.
- Ties to physical monuments and the city/county/national datum.
- Etc.
- WORK HARD WITH A GOOD FIRM AT THE BEGINNING, CREATE AN EXEMPLAR SET, PUBLISH TO WHOEVER HAS TO SUBMIT TO YOU.
- Do this at shared expense, and make it so that you own the files, all of them, including dwgs, etc.
- The biggest problem with these processes is that they are all different. The major expense comes in the rework.
-All thoughts my own, except my typos and when I am wrong.- AS-BUILT Data
How would I do it (AKA THE ONLY CORRECT WAY):
I hope people still have a sense of humor.
-All thoughts my own, except my typos and when I am wrong.I’m concerned that the discussion is drifting away from the original question. I’m not asking if as-builts are required in your area, I’m asking if they need to be based on a certified survey of the as-constructed works, and not just on markups by the contractor and/or inspectors.
Not in the ID municipalities we work within. WA requires all topographic survey work to have an actual topographic survey drawing along with all the typical bells and whistles(this is a bad law in my opinion) With that said, you technically cannot have a PLS conduct actual as-builts in WA within creating a separate topo drawing meeting state requirements. So, in a nutshell, WA as-builts that require actual topo data would need to be certified.
Not here, although it was required some time ago. I gave the city mountains of data for their parcel line drawings, utility locations for new installations, ect.
They had the data imported into computer drawings and it was as close to perfect as is possible.
Then they got new GIS “experts” put in ‘official PLS” parcel lines, hired young techs to “locate” utilities with GIS receivers.
All that data is now degraded so I’m very, very ambivalent towards the as-built processes for GIS.
I’ve asked this from many, many GISers. Can you explain what the “official PLS parcel lines” are in GIS speak?
None have been able to tell me what that means.
Inigo Montoya: “I do not think it means what you think it means”
With that said, you technically cannot have a PLS conduct actual as-builts in WA within creating a separate topo drawing meeting state requirements.
That said, updating existing plans as “as-builts” is done all the time in WA, and in no case I am aware of have they been accused of creating a substandard topographic map. My assumption is that the set of drawings, with the certification, will fulfill the requirements of the WAC.
-All thoughts my own, except my typos and when I am wrong.My assumption is that the set of drawings, with the certification, will fulfill the requirements of the WAC.
I’ve never seen one that meets the requirements fully Code Here which is yet another reason why I think the law is poor. Very few I have spoken to are even aware of it.
What is the final need?
Generally, it is that a system work.
Not really, at least that isn’t the sole need. It will inevitably come to pass that some repairs or upgrades will be needed, and then it will be very important to know just what is buried there, and exactly where it is. Maybe in a big hurry, on an emergency basis.
The municipalities and creditors learned from the 2008 housing debacle when many subdivisions were in mid-construction and the developers went under and walked away leaving infrastructure unfinished.
This would not stop that at all.
Putting up hundreds of thousands, even in the millions of dollars of your own cash into escrow? Trust me, they are getting stuff done in order to get their money back.
Very few I have spoken to are even aware of it.
How could that be possible?
-All thoughts my own, except my typos and when I am wrong.The municipalities and creditors learned from the 2008 housing debacle when many subdivisions were in mid-construction and the developers went under and walked away leaving infrastructure unfinished.
This would not stop that at all.
Putting up hundreds of thousands, even in the millions of dollars of your own cash into escrow? Trust me, they are getting stuff done in order to get their money back.
Most of those types of subdivisions around here had bonds and all sorts of money tied up. The LLC’s went bankrupt and gone. We did a lot of work paid for by those bonds.
Just saying asbuilts have nothing to do with the walking away from unfinished infrastructure.
-All thoughts my own, except my typos and when I am wrong.Survey Work in Indonesia , the Topographic Surveyor Services certifies that the results of our land measurement can be accounted for, and it is stated and signed at the time of the first contract before carrying out the survey. By: Jasa Pengukuran tanah
jasasurveypemetaan.com
Jasa Pengukuran Tanah - Jasa Survey Pemetaan | Konsultan Pengukuran
Hubungi kami: 082249050011, Konsultan Jasa Pengukuran Tanah, Untuk mendapatkan Petas Situasi Memanjang - Melintang, Peta Kontur Aktual
Log in to reply.