any guesses?

Walk the site, multiple times. Front to back, both sides, and the adjoining property.

Get a feel. Plan it. Do it. You will spend more time thinking about it, than DOING it.

N

I remember the engineer getting a topo for us, he said 80 tree, HA there was over 300.

After you are done they will clear the site.

i've walked it a couple times. not particularly scared of it- just don't look forward to tagging and shooting all those trees.

i don't know to what extent this'll get cleared. first, i don't know that the city will even let this proceed past the due diligence phase, the slopes are in great excess of what's usually allowed for development. and cutting trees down around here is an expensive endeavor- which isn't to say he wouldn't pay it, but maximum retention will be the goal.

i budgeted it based upon a day for boundary and 4 days for topo/tree. i'll have a greenhorn for a helper, probably have him tag trees straight out of the gate while i run a traverse in- take care of the drudgery while i get something productive done.

Sounds reasonable

[sarcasm]Why no GPS, I lose jobs to surveyors that GPS sites like that all the time.[/sarcasm]

😉

The usual $499 ought to do it

😉 😉 😉 😉 😉 😉 😉 😉 😉 😉

10-foot contours should be adequate.One shot on each side of the tract should be enough. No need to get fancy. Heavy equipment will change it all anyway.
How far can you go astray on a 90-foot wide tract?
I want to see vehicle traffic in February on any driveways installed.
At least the sewer lines might drain. Way too fast, of course, but, they'll drain.
20-foot building setback on each side only leaves 50 feet for any structures.
Runoff control should be entertaining to design and install...and maintain indefinitely

The usual $499 ought to do it

It's not funny. Lowballers here would do that. lol:-O

“can't imagine the city will give anyone the variance this guy wants to put some condos on it.”

Lot’s of good advice above (yea! Beerleggers) however, only You can determine if this job would be worthwhile.

If you do proceed I would really like to see the site plan (engineering too!) of the proposed project.

B-)

The usual $499 ought to do it

> At least the sewer lines might drain. Way too fast, of course, but, they'll drain.

Was at a site like that, the general joked that any steeper and effluent would blow the side of the pipe out :-O

Nate..

somebody taught you good. You're hired if you ever come to Norman!

Nate..

Mr Cash, that is a mighty fine compliment... Thanks!

My current health issues are getting a little better. I take B vitamins, and when I STAY on them, 2x or more a day, I get better. IF I mess up for a day, then I PAY heavily. The Tick Fever thing messes with your nerves, and the B vit's help the nerves.

If we ever get out that way, we would love to stop by for coffee, or tea.

Nate

> I remember the engineer getting a topo for us, he said 80 tree, HA there was over 300.
>
> After you are done they will clear the site.

😀 :good: :good:

> i budgeted it based upon a day for boundary and 4 days for topo/tree. i'll have a greenhorn for a helper, probably have him tag trees straight out of the gate while i run a traverse in- take care of the drudgery while i get something productive done.

I'm sorry, but it sounds to me as if you've completely missed what it will take to do that project, even for 2 ft. contours and a boundary survey that merely meets minimum technical standards. If you've committed yourself to do the work on a fixed fee, the way to proceed to do the work right and keep accurate track of your time so that in the future you'll get an "Optimism Factor" to multiply all future estimates by. It will cost something for the education in the short term, but in the long run you'll get a much more realistic idea of what it takes to turn out quality work.

You're looking at getting about 500 ground shots minimum to generate an accurate topo at 2-foot vertical interval. That doesn't include trees. The limitation on sight lines means you'll either be making lots and lots of set ups or cutting lots and lots of line.

The minimum technical standards mean that you have to locate the boundaries of all of the adjacent tracts, including the road upon which the lot fronts. In an area with topography that steep, I'd be surprised if road construction didn't destroy a significant amount of original evidence upon which to base the boundary survey and the tract below the bluff line may present a logistical challenge of the first order to locate and connect to.

kent,

i'm anticipating somewhere on the order of double that number of shots. there are actually two decent lines of site, two trails (one on the low side, one on the high side) are worn in, i'm assuming to traverse back and forth between the aformentioned camp sites. walked the bndy and the vast majority of the tract itself (and a good number of adjoiners) still have faded flagging evident from at least the last survey of record (holt did it in '06). and a good bit of the adjoiners have at least visual clues...

it fronts spicewood (the wall between 360 and the top of the hill). i don't think there's been any major road work done on that section in... a while- i don't recall any in the last 15 years anyways. fingers are crossed, though, definitely.

if it were somewhere nearer to flat i'd be much more confident in the estimate- i added a day just for the site condition, but it may not be enough. in any event, i'm confident we won't lose any money- just may not make any. the plan of attack is in place- we'll just have to see how it works out.

here's a picture of it from an old engineering report:

> i'm anticipating somewhere on the order of double that number of shots.

Well, for 2-foot contours, you'd need a shot at 4-foot intervals vertically to get an accurate interpolation on terrain of the sort seen in the photos. So, with about 27 ft. fall transversely, and 220 ft. longitudinally, that's 8 x 56 = about 450 for the ground surface. If you need to deliver accurate 1-foot contours, then that would be 15 x 111 = about 1665. That doesn't take into account detailing the pavement and earthwork in the right-of-way of course.

If you're signed up for 1-foot contours, you have my sympathy.

Generally, I'd expect that the method of calculating an Optimism Factor would work over time, i.e. generating an estimate and then multiplying it by the Optimism Factor and, after the project is completed computing a new Optimism Factor to use in future work until the factor approaches 1.0.

Five foot contours would be overkill

Except for perhaps the very top and the very bottom. That's plenty to let them know how silly they are in the first place.

Can you say "RETAINING WALLS"

A week field time, plus office sounds completely reasonable. Seriously.

I don't understand K's explanation much. Who cares how much fall between shots, as long as it is a straight pull on the ground. I usually take about twice as many shots as necessary.

I was just reviewing an exhibit with 2' contours. A fellow here had spent an hour detailing a swale, and not one contour showed. It wasn't wasted, since the electronic files will allow the engineers to determine the flow line, but for a 2' contour exhibit, they were useless.

> I don't understand K's explanation much. Who cares how much fall between shots, as long as it is a straight pull on the ground.

You will seldom find planar surfaces on natural ground. If you're trying to meet an accuracy specification on the interpolated contours, the vertical spacing of the ground shots from which the contours will be interpolated is fairly important and depends upon the topography. A vertical spacing of twice the contour interval on a site like that is what I use and avoid surprises when construction is actually laid out on the surveyed topography. The point of the exercise is to get accurate estimates (70% within 0.25 x contour interval; 95% within 0.5 x contour interval) of what the actual elevation of the surface of the ground is at all point within the area mapped, not just a generalized idea of which way surface drainage flows.