Ring - Ring

yes, to pick up the shots, you just scoop them up into your hand...

That's bad. Whoever the poor sucker that tried to stake the place out would not be real happy with the architect or the surveyor that used a few shots to base the plan on, would they?

Tell the Architect to cut his fees by cutting out all of those extraneous details like dimensions, door & window schedules and maybe have the structural engineer just design the foundation in a few limited spots.

Yes architect, I thought you could just sketch up a few plans while you're in the office. You're in there anyway, so just sketch up some free plans.

So shoot a few grade shots and send them to the Architect when you send him the rest of the information...just don't tell him where you took the shots 😉

Chuck

provide a list of random elevations, with no X,Y locations.

Plot "+ Spot Elevation" on your plans, but turn off the elevation layer. When he asks the elevation, tell him that will cost him $XXX extra... or $XX per point. Make sure you take just enough to tease him.

yeah can you guess where the liability falls back on if Arch's design funnels water places it shoudn't go? not worth the potential headache IMO; unless the Arch is willing to go on the hook by instructing you exactly where to take & how many grade shots he thinks he needs. Then a note to that effect on the map. Even still I'd tell him to pound sand.

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

on an average lot say its a subd, you don't need a wad of shots to place a house or insure drainage and sewer hookup--out here in the communist country of colorado surveyors stake a house and grade it per the driveway side and percentage of slope to the garage entrance then set the grade 8" higher for top of wall, we usually have a plot plan of the lot showing a workable drainage scheme across lots, we and the builder make it work but they spot the house on paper using a plan interpolation the same as we do in the field using real world shots on curb or flow line---you should have asked the archy what shots he wanted the 6-8 shots for say 50 bucks would have made him happy and the 100 bucks to stake the house out would have been gravy---out here we stake out houses requiring any where from 12-30 stakes with maybe 50 different models, with a regular gun and a hand tape it was normal to do 15-30 houses a day with grades !! tdd

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

In that case, you do it, Ted. Because asking someone to do work for free is unprofessional.

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

> ...asking someone to do work for free is unprofessional.

I agree with Tedd. The architect is not asking for something for free. He is asking for a reduced scope of services for a reduced fee.

Assuming the architect is signing the site plan and the elevations provided are correct why is the surveyor on the hook for anything?

Peter Lazio

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

No, he wants you to drop the topo and just throw a few shots on there while there. He did not ask to have it scope reduced to a few topographic shots, he wanted 6th to give them to him free. That is why he added the while you are out there.

They design to your shots and then move the dirt and the plans do not work, do you really think they will say "the surveyors shots must have been good and we just screwed up", no. They will try to pass the buck to 6th pm to say he gave the wrong info and they designed on that and so he is responsible. Don't ever fall for that. They want to design to your stuff, you have to work that stuff to the point that you feel it is accurate enough to design to. And that will cost 6th some dough. So the client should pay.

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

I've danced to this tune before - many times

The archt calls you after the fact and says; oh did you get the back of walk 10 feet from the south PL, or how about that tree near the garage, we would like to save it, or Why didn't you get the top/bottom of the retaining wall, or what's the slope of the alley, or the neighbors house is a little close, what's the grade at the corners, or I need more grade shots to calculate the bulk plane.

-- Sure I could appease the client and only conduct the boundary survey with a few miscellaneous spot elevations, but that's not what he needs.

I just thought how strange the request was.
It basically was cut my fee in half,
but to provide him with everything he needs for design.

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

> No, he wants you to drop the topo and just throw a few shots on there while there. He did not ask to have it scope reduced to a few topographic shots, he wanted 6th to give them to him free. That is why he added the while you are out there.

That is what he asked for. You don't have to do what he asks for. 6th can price the job to include minimal topography which will be less than the original proposal. Call it what you want. The scope of work is less and the fee is less.

> They design to your shots and then move the dirt and the plans do not work, do you really think they will say "the surveyors shots must have been good and we just screwed up", no. They will try to pass the buck to 6th pm to say he gave the wrong info and they designed on that and so he is responsible. Don't ever fall for that. They want to design to your stuff, you have to work that stuff to the point that you feel it is accurate enough to design to. And that will cost 6th some dough. So the client should pay.

If 6th has a written contract stating the scope of work and then performs his work professionally to that scope of work what is the architect going to say? I am not saying do poor quality work but rather to do less work. If the elevations are correct and to the contract specifications I say there is no additional liability.

Keep in mind the architect is also a licensed professional and he is specifying what he needs to design the site. You provide the data he asked for. If it is not enough then he poorly spec'd the job. Any liability will be mitigated by the fact that a license design professional provided the specifications for the project. If the reduced scope of work is not adequate to design the site plan then the architect is on the hook for the bad design and for poorly specifying the scope of survey services needed for the design. I think the architect is assuming more liability going this route.

Peter Lazio

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

I've got an old engineer that does that to me on every job. He's a nice old guy, he just thinks he can do plans like he did in the 60's. He'll do the "just get me a few shots in here" and I ask him "aren't you going to need some offsite shots and this and that?" and he says "no, just a few shots will be OK". Then after a while, the County gets tired of redlining his plans and signs them off and they don't work. We call him up from the site when we're staking it and suggest what would work and he says OK and we do it. It's never been messed up beyond repair yet and the jobs have been real small and simple so far. I don't think he'd really know what to do with a full-blown topo if we gave it to him.

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

> The archt calls you after the fact and says; oh did you get the back of walk 10 feet from the south PL, or how about that tree near the garage, we would like to save it, or Why didn't you get the top/bottom of the retaining wall, or what's the slope of the alley, or the neighbors house is a little close, what's the grade at the corners, or I need more grade shots to calculate the bulk plane.

Your very reasonable response is, "Sure we can do that but, that is out of the original scope. The additional fee will be $###.## Present him with an addendum to the contract and once it is signed proceed to do the work for the additional fee.

> -- Sure I could appease the client and only conduct the boundary survey with a few miscellaneous spot elevations, but that's not what he needs.

If I understand correctly your client is an architect, a licensed design professional. He is willing to design the site with a minimal number of spot elevations. He is the one assuming additional liability.

> I just thought how strange the request was.
> It basically was cut my fee in half,
> but to provide him with everything he needs for design.

Not to provide everything he needs but everything he asked for in writing.

Peter Lazio

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

Paying for a "few shots" (let's say 10) won't be 1/10th the cost for 100 shots. He has to be made aware that you first put in your control, put elevations on it, and then set up over it. He is a lot better off having you do more than a few shots after you get out there; than having you go back for more.

You also need to make sure he signs to the fact that he doesn't want all the improvements or all of the elevations shot on the project.

Some people might not be admitting that they have gotten screwed by engineers that say they don't need all that much only to have them come back and ask why you didn't show more. It happens a lot in my opinion.

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

Peter, if you just get shots where he wants to place the house, how are you going to prove your work was right when it got knocked out. You have no evidence.

Ring - Ring panties in a wad ??? he's reasonable says me !!

Oh, I've had that happen too. The engineer meets you at the site and points out what he needs, you do that and they come back with a bunch of other stuff that they "need" now, sometimes with an attitude like they could have done better. After a couple of jobs for those types, I say let them get their own dang topo. Whatever you give them is never enough.