Impact of apparent ROW cost on survey time

Google apparent ROW cost.

I searched both Google and DuckDuckGo for that term, as I found it a bit confusing. "apparent ROW cost" comes back as the cost for acquiring a right-of-way, presumably for a road or utility installation. It doesn't really address the survey companies' expected hours required for the work, or why they would differ so much.

It might help if you describe the project a little. Is it right-of-way acquisition, topographic survey, or a construction staking type of project?

This seems like something the prime should clarify for you. My take on this is that there could be an ROW that is vague in detail and/or location. If that is the case, the significant time split differential could be explained by the research and field time that would be needed to lay down the actual location on the ground.

I tend to avoid involving myself in projects where there more than one survey firm will be involved. Not my cup of tea and I don't want to get involved in finger pointing if something goes south and having to prove that I didn't create any problem that might arise.

Why should their hours be equal? Perhaps one firm has 75% of the survey work and the other 25%. I have never come across the term "apparent ROW cost"

I did that, but there wasn't any beneficial info.

Thanks for your reply

The prime is saying that due to the higher ROW acquisition cost, the surveyor needs more time/crew to do their work, which I can't comprehend why!

It's an infrastructure project and we have pre-identified ROW lines from many previous projects. There will some ROW acquisitions but not a significant amount.

Thank you for your reply.

The split is close to 50-50. That was one of my main concerns.

Thank you for your reply

Good point, I will check on that. We have maps/CAD files of the existing ROW lines.

Thanks for your reply

Not all survey firms are created equal. Some have higher hourly rates than others because of overhead costs and/or the education and experience levels of their staff. All are bound to have different ideas about what the appropriate level of effort is for any given job. You are procuring a professional service and not a commodity that will be identical regardless of source. It may well be that the firm with less experienced staff is going to need to put in more hours to complete the assigned tasks.

"The prime is saying that due to the higher ROW acquisition cost, the surveyor needs more time/crew to do their work, which I can’t comprehend why!

Well, I would suggest asking them, but also consider you may still not comprehend why. I am sure you are intelligent enough to understand, but expertise requires more than intelligence. If you don't trust your expert, find a new one. I have spent a couple of hours on an ROW acquisition, and also spend dozens of hours over many years on others.

It’s an infrastructure project and we have pre-identified ROW lines from<i style="background-color: var(--bb-content-background-color); font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; color: var(--bb-body-text-color);"> many previous projects. There will some ROW acquisitions but not a significant amount.

It appears that based on the your comparison of the two estimates you have lessened your estimation of the value of the entire project. The question is simply one of value. It should be noted that different firms approach bidding differently. Some have vast experience and can look at a project and know the cost to within 5%. Others assume best case and intend to use change orders when that isn't (predictably) the case. Also, firms simply need the work and undercut the real cost.

Either way, it comes down to value, not cost. If you want to understand, contact the subs, it might help.

I tend to avoid involving myself in projects where there more than one survey firm will be involved. Not my cup of tea and I don’t want to get involved in finger pointing if something goes south and having to prove that I didn’t create any problem that might arise.

And, if I WAS to get involved, I might have a very large fee associated with it to make it worth my time.

😉

One of the biggest FAFO costs of a construction project is putting concrete, pipelines, ect on the wrong property. Having the correct location for ROW lines on a road is job #1. The last couple of years I've done a 1-1/2 mile of interstate ROW for 3k, a 1-1/2 mile of more complicated ROW for 90k. It all depends. Having ROW "lines" in CAD from GIS can be the most expensive item when concrete is torn out, catch basins, manholes (and the pipes going to them) removed for being in the wrong place based on GIS ROW "lines".

Hence the term apparent.

Pay whatever it takes to get it right.

Having spent a number of years evaluating proposals the difference in them is not a surprise to me. There were many times when it was helpful to ask for a more detailed break down of tasks and hours involved in each task. Saying the split is 50 - 50 has no real meaning for me. Is it 50 - 50 in boundary lines that will need located or the project length for example? Also firms estimate proposals with different strategies. One is to make conservative estimates and ask for more if needed. The other is to estimate worse case and come in below. Plus some go anywhere in between. In my experience many times the actual hours, etc. are closer together in the final analysis then the proposals were. I had the expertise to estimate hours needed to complete the tasks and I was usually surprisingly close to what was proposed. I was usually more concerned with a low proposal because you usually get what you pay for. A poor product.

Money isn't everything, sure, I can make more money on one big job and get involved in defending or disputing who did what or when or I can devote my time to my existing work volume, with good profit margins, and make more in the end with much less aggravation and wasted time on proving what I did and didn't do.

Having been in this career for 42 years, I'll never say that I've seen it all, but I will factually say that I have seen way more than enough to assess the risks. I have taken on a ton of large commercial and industrial ALTA surveys and, without doubt, significantly increase my prices because I am well aware of how much time I will spend talking to or emailing paralegals who have no clue, lawyers with no idea and title clerks who I have to harass to get a complete title report. To that end, I am the only expert surveyor involved in the transaction and am aware that time will be wasted on my end, and my proposals are elevated in pricing by being able to gage the staff time to pour through title reports that often exceed 100 pages.

Knowingly involving myself in one project with two surveyors involved in it raises red flags, especially if I don't know the other surveyor or what level of collaboration and information sharing between us there will be. In a situation like this, all the GC is concerned with is the lowest price so that their profit is maximized. If you've ever worked for a GC on a large Federal project, you would see exactly where I am coming from.