State laws
> > Doesn't your state have laws that require civil engineers to design grading & site plans in 3D that actually allow the water to run down hill?
> >
> > Do any states have such requirements in their codes?
>
> [sarcasm]So, Idaho has solved they're #$%^&*! Engineer problems by codifying natural law? Brilliant![/sarcasm]
LOL!!! No, we are in the same boat as most of the rest of the U.S. (if not worse off). I asked the question somewhat sarcastically to make a point. Check the laws of most states and you will find detailed coverage of nearly everything a surveyor does (or is supposed to do), from requiring traverses and parcels to close, to what is required to be stamped on a cap. But, you will probably not find any such nanny-state baby-sitting of the #$^%$#@ engineers. Why do you suppose that is? The obvious answer is that engineers can be trusted to have enough professional judgment to perform the work they do and surveyors obviously cannot. Now the big $$$ questions ..... why do you suppose that is, and how do we change it?????
> > rail contractor finally said just stake the new alignment, eyeball over to the old track and use that elevation for the new one.
>
> :excruciating:
> Did you get him to sign off on that?
Yeah. That'll sound good in court. "Aye just eyeballed it, Your Honor."
State laws
> > > Doesn't your state have laws that require civil engineers to design grading & site plans in 3D that actually allow the water to run down hill?
> > >
> > > Do any states have such requirements in their codes?
> >
> > [sarcasm]So, Idaho has solved they're #$%^&*! Engineer problems by codifying natural law? Brilliant![/sarcasm]
>
> LOL!!! No, we are in the same boat as most of the rest of the U.S. (if not worse off). I asked the question somewhat sarcastically to make a point. Check the laws of most states and you will find detailed coverage of nearly everything a surveyor does (or is supposed to do), from requiring traverses and parcels to close, to what is required to be stamped on a cap. But, you will probably not find any such nanny-state baby-sitting of the #$^%$#@ engineers. Why do you suppose that is? The obvious answer is that engineers can be trusted to have enough professional judgment to perform the work they do and surveyors obviously cannot. Now the big $$$ questions ..... why do you suppose that is, and how do we change it?????
EDUCATION, EDUCATION, EDUCATION.
Ridding our ranks of the anti-degree requirement faction would go a long, long way. The tired, yet still common, self defeating argument against education places us right next to hairdressers and plumbers.
Check out a civil engineering blog or try to sit in one of your State's Physician Licensing Board meetings. We're still way off the "professional" reservation.
Yeah he signed off on it, he's the prime contractor foreman and was waiting on the grades so he could take out the existing track.
There is an engineer I worked for/with some 35 years ago whom you all would like to work with. Every time it rained moderately to heavy all of us who worked on subdivision/site design would go out to the site/subdivision and see how it worked in REAL TIME. Needless to say it really improved our work. His name is Larry Graham for those folks in MA.;-)
Thad, I feel your pain..... around here I keep hearing them called "bid documents".
Sure enough, just enough information to bid the job.... NOT build it.
