Do This Before Building Your Project! Feat. Brandon Montero

A Big-Time GS With Paint on His Shoes

On a $360 million project, a general superintendent could have been anywhere else that morning. Instead, he was out with the survey crew, string and spray paint in hand, laying out the entire foundation himself: every pier, the full building perimeter, major mat footings, elevator pits, all of it, with paint on his boots to prove it.

Asked why a leader at that level was doing layout work personally, his answer was simple: he wanted to know how the building actually related to everything around it, and whether anything was in the way. That instinct paid off directly. Comparing his caisson locations against the blue stake marks on the ground, he spotted a duct bank running straight through one of them, something the drawings never showed.

The Real Pain: Assuming the Pad Is Ready

The real pain shows up when a team simply trusts that a site is clear and ready because the drawings say so. Existing conditions, utilities, easements, even roads that look permanent, do not always make it fully onto the design documents, and that gap can sit invisible until construction is already underway.

On one project involving a road widening, the existing road in front of the site looked so finished and permanent that nobody questioned whether it was staying put. It turned out that road itself was part of what needed to change, and nobody had accurately confirmed the property line or how the future building would actually relate to the street until the team physically laid the project out on the ground.

The Failure Pattern: Trusting the Drawings Over the Ground

The failure pattern is treating the design set as a complete, guaranteed picture of reality rather than a starting point that still needs field verification. Drawings reflect what was known and captured at the time they were made, not necessarily everything that actually exists on site.

This becomes especially risky with utilities. A gas line, a water line, an electrical duct bank, a telecommunications cable, any of these can sit exactly where new construction needs to go, and if nobody physically checks for that conflict before excavation begins, the discovery happens at the worst possible time.

A few signs tend to show up when a project is trusting paper over verified ground conditions, and they are worth checking honestly:

• Existing utilities and site conditions are assumed to be fully captured by the design drawings without any independent field verification.
• Survey marks and layout points are used directly for excavation planning without ever being physically cross-checked.
• A site feature, like a road, fence line, or utility pole, is assumed to be permanent and unrelated to the project simply because it looks established.

This Isn’t Paranoia, It’s the Standard Surveyor Practice

None of this is about distrust of designers, other surveyors, or utility companies. Double-checking a civil engineer’s elevations, an architect’s grid dimensions, or another surveyor’s layout marks is not an insult to their work, it is simply standard, professional practice.

Data received from someone else cannot be treated as verified until it has actually been checked. That applies to survey marks just as much as it applies to drawings, specifications, or as-built information from an owner.

The Duct Bank, the Water Line, and the 100-Pair Cable

Here is what catching these conflicts early actually looks like. On one healthcare project, a hundred-pair telecommunications cable providing internet service to an adjacent lot sat directly in the path of planned construction, completely absent from any drawing. Locating that cable meant contacting the utility provider directly and racing to get it relocated just before construction was set to begin.

On another project, a water line near a planned stairwell turned out to be both closer and deeper than the plans indicated, putting it directly in the path of the excavation. Because the team had physically laid out the building and compared it against real utility locations ahead of time, there was enough lead time to bring in shoring and protect the line without ever delaying the schedule. Neither outcome was luck. Both came from refusing to assume the pad was simply ready.

Why It Matters: Utility Conflicts Are Some of the Biggest Roadblocks

This matters because relocating a major utility is not a quick fix. Rerouting something like a major electrical duct bank can take five to six months once a utility company gets involved, timeline that has nothing to do with how fast a construction crew can move and everything to do with a utility provider’s own process.

Catching a conflict during layout, before a single shovel hits the ground, turns a potential months-long delay into a manageable adjustment. Catching it after excavation has already begun turns it into a real crisis.

Teach the Framework: Layout as a Verification System

The right process starts well before boots hit the site. Gather every available as-built and existing conditions record from the civil engineer, the owner, and the city. Get BlueStake completed for public utilities, and bring in a private utility locator or potholing company specifically for anything inside the private property line, since BlueStake typically only covers up to the building connection point.

From there, physically lay the building out on the ground, string, spray paint, or lath at property corners and along property lines, so the actual footprint and its relationship to everything nearby becomes visible rather than theoretical. Then double-check that layout independently: pull a tape from the property line to the street centerline, and from the property line to the building’s grid lines, as a genuine secondary confirmation rather than assuming the initial survey marks are automatically correct.

A few practical steps make this verification process real rather than symbolic:

• Request existing conditions and utility as-built data directly from the civil engineer and owner before any layout begins.
• Bring in a private utility locator or potholing company for anything inside the property line that public utility locating services do not typically cover.
• Independently verify layout with an actual tape measurement, rather than trusting survey stakes or another party’s marks without confirmation.

Turning This Into Daily Practice

None of this has lasting value if it only exists as string, paint, and memory. BlueStake marks fade, potholes get filled back in, and layout strings eventually come down, so capturing everything found in the field, in CAD or AutoCAD, turns a temporary discovery into a permanent, reusable record.

That documented overlay means the same visualization can be recreated anytime it is needed later in the project, rather than depending on a handful of people remembering exactly where a conflict was found months earlier.

Connecting It Back to Building People, Not Just Projects

None of this happens without leaders willing to physically verify conditions themselves rather than assuming the paperwork already covers it. That habit, built early and consistently, is exactly what prevents a hidden utility conflict from turning into a project-defining crisis.

If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow, including the pre-construction verification habits that catch conflicts before they become roadblocks.

The Challenge

So here is the challenge worth carrying onto your next project: before you trust that the pad is ready, physically lay out your building and compare it against verified existing conditions, not just the drawings. As one general superintendent put it plainly, “I always lay out my own buildings. I want to know how it relates to the rest of the structures.” On we go.

FAQ

Why would an experienced general superintendent personally do building layout instead of leaving it entirely to surveyors?

Physically laying out the building reveals exactly how it relates to everything around it, including conflicts that may not appear on the drawings at all. It is a direct way to verify reality rather than relying entirely on documents and secondhand information.

What is the difference between BlueStake and a private utility locator?

BlueStake typically covers public utilities up to the building connection point, but it often does not address utilities or conditions located on the private portion of a property. A private utility locator or potholing company fills that gap by identifying what actually exists inside the property line itself.

Why does catching a utility conflict during layout matter so much?

Relocating a major utility, like an electrical duct bank, can take five to six months once a utility company is involved, regardless of construction schedule pressure. Finding that conflict during layout, before excavation starts, turns a potential months-long delay into a manageable adjustment instead of a project crisis.

Why shouldn’t survey marks from another professional be trusted without double-checking?

Data from any source, whether a drawing, an as-built, or another surveyor’s layout marks, cannot be considered verified until it has actually been independently checked. This is standard professional practice, not a sign of distrust toward the person who provided it.

What should happen to temporary field discoveries like BlueStake marks or potholing results?

They should be captured and merged into CAD or AutoCAD as a permanent record, since paint fades, potholes get filled, and physical layout strings eventually come down. Documenting these findings ensures the information can be recreated and referenced again later in the project, rather than depending on memory.