> Well, we got fired from a job because were weren't using the proper methods to stake out a building. We were staking the main corners and then setting the lines from those corners. According to the contractor, we should have just resected a new setup in the middle of the site, then radial sprayed all the corners in.
Did you pull up your control? Hopefully you made the seocnd guy establish his own control.
Breach of contract.
If Tommy is the professional it would unethical for the contractor to tell Tommy how to do the layout.
Well, we did the design survey and we set control for the design plans. The building is about 300 feet from one of the points.
> Well, we did the design survey and we set control for the design plans. The building is about 300 feet from one of the points.
I usually publish the benchmark elev but not the coordinates on the design survey unless absolutely forced which is rare, I do it just for this type of situation, then they will play hell getting another firm to meet my construction price because they will have to establish their own control.
I also keep most of my control points fairly low profile, off the beaten path, and out of the way.
So how can they make money?
I mean four hours of travel time? Gas at $3.60+ a gallon?
Throw this at them
You need them to cough up the payroll taxes, social security and medicare on your fees if they are in control of how you perform the work.
An excerpt from the IRS website (the bold is mine)
"You are not an independent contractor if you perform services that can be controlled by an employer (what will be done and how it will be done).
This applies even if you are given freedom of action. What matters is that the employer has the legal right to control the details of how the services are performed."
F 'em
Fuggettaboutem..
I don't believe in issuing surveys for design without control to go on the plans. I've had too much trouble in the past getting guys like you to give me some way to tie the design work down. In fact, I will say that it is a derelict of your professional duty to issue a survey for design without providing a way to tie into your survey.
> I will say that it is a derelict of your professional duty to issue a survey for design without providing a way to tie into your survey.
Rediculous, I only owe it if it is specified in the contract, otherwise call me back for the construction, I already have control out there and can do it cheaper than the next guy, it is called a strategic business advantage, hey I am not the one that got fired off the job, just trying to help you.
> ...some way to tie the design work down
You got that right Tommy. I was thinking the exact same thing. Plans these days just plain suck. Without the CAD file you have to get real creative to figure out where things go. I often wonder how in the world they ever get approved, but that's a whole different problem.
If you feel that strongly then leave some sort of tie that is difficult to recreate on the ground, but you don't owe it to some engineer to provide your strategically placed control so they can easily price shop the construction surveying or fire you?
Especially if they are dumb enough to not ask for it in the begining.
They have every right to fire you. How did you or your party chief handle the implication that you were ripping them off by using a method which was perceived to take longer, especially when you were working by the hour. He might be right, I have staked buildings using radial stakeout and had no problems, yes, checks were made. What I would have refused to do would be a resection unless there was a very good strength of figure, Does not take long to occupy a known, back sight a known and traverse to a new point which would be checked by using ties to known control. From his point of view this just might be the straw that broke the camels back, has he hinted about time taken before, my guess is that this is not the first time that method and time has been an issue. This type of thing will eventually have an effect on construction staking for all, probably will end up without a license being required for this work. We will not be in danger of being fired then, a win-win situation, should not be, but, for those paying the bills.
jud
> > ...some way to tie the design work down
>
> Without the CAD file you have to get real creative to figure out where things go. I often wonder how in the world they ever get approved, but that's a whole different problem.
Because this is modern times, nobody calcs plans on the hood of the truck anymore, 99.9% is calculated in CAD and radially staked.
> > ...some way to tie the design work down
>
> You got that right Tommy. I was thinking the exact same thing. Plans these days just plain suck. Without the CAD file you have to get real creative to figure out where things go. I often wonder how in the world they ever get approved, but that's a whole different problem.
That's exactly right
I'm working on one myself right this moment.
The builder sends me some plans for a pool, deck and spa
The "Pool Plans" are tied off the building - yet to be built
The builder wants to layout the pool area 1st
I call the builder this AM to inform him that the corner of the spa (as designed) is into the neighbors property 0.7'
He tells me -
Oh, we knew it was close
Umm - Just move it over so that it's clear.
I tell him
Ummm, what about the house?
Move it too?
He says
Ohh, I better call the architect
I say
You think?
> I'm working on one myself right this moment.
> The builder sends me some plans for a pool, deck and spa
> The "Pool Plans" are tied off the building - yet to be built
>
> The builder wants to layout the pool area 1st
>
> I call the builder this AM to inform him that the corner of the spa (as designed) is into the neighbors property 0.7'
>
> He tells me -
> Oh, we knew it was close
> Umm - Just move it over so that it's clear.
>
> I tell him
> Ummm, what about the house?
> Move it too?
>
> He says
> Ohh, I better call the architect
>
> I say
> You think?
The original surveyor would not have your problem, he has control already.
Not to say your methods are wrong, but we have found that when done properly we can get the same if not better results by performing a resection IF the main control was accurately established.
In our plant projects, most of the time it is impossible to have or keep ground control on site. We have had great success by mounting targets on very stable equipment or in one of our ongoing projects now, had screw piles installed and mounted tribrachs and targets surrounding the site.
What I'm really trying to get at is that I would never let a contractor tell me how to do my work, however he was not totally wrong in his way of thinking either.
> If you feel that strongly then leave some sort of tie that is difficult to recreate on the ground, but you don't owe it to some engineer to provide your strategically placed control so they can easily price shop the construction or fire you?
Don't the majority of engineers want your CAD file for your topo? Mine always want it. Besides, isn't the idea to provide a complete job so they can do their job. Nothing worse than being called to the carpet by the owner once he figures out he had to pay twice for the same thing. Then everybody looks bad.
Also, in the event I don't do the constuction staking (often), I certainly want the guy doing it to be on the same datum and use the same control I used for the survey. Then everybody looks good.
>......it is called a strategic business advantage,
No it's not.
It's blackmailing the client by issuing a deficient product and then using that information to secure future work.
You have to leave a way to recreate your data.
Liability
is an issue here. I will always believe if you're going to bear some liability as to whether a structure is staked in its proper place, no one but the liable party should be in control of how the work is performed.
IF you're taking longer than the contractor thinks; it's his perogative to send you down the road. He should buy a TS and do it himself.
Thats funny! 🙂
