Despite what some equipment manufacturers claim, quick and easy geospatial surveys are not always the answer. Some projects call for best-practice survey principles and accurate, controlled data. What are the risks of an inadequate survey, and how can they be avoided?
In today’s fast-paced world of technology and software innovation, companies procuring geospatial surveys can easily lose track of the correct survey methods, appropriate costs and the additional value of survey data, especially when faced with a wide range of quotes. Economic pressures have further driven the emphasis on selecting the cheapest survey option, often without considering the future consequences.
Quotations at the high end of the cost scale may reflect a carefully considered approach using best practices, advanced equipment and a comprehensive survey control network. In 2024, these surveys often focus on appropriate data delivery and usage for all project stakeholders, offering additional valuable options such as colour 3D data and visualization. In contrast, lower-cost quotations may use the fastest methods with single-use techniques like SLAM, GNSS or photogrammetry, lacking survey controls and possibly involving subcontracted drawing services overseas. To the untrained eye, quotations appear as either ‘expensive’ or ‘cheap’. Without consulting geospatial survey experts, people can assume that cheaper quotes offer the same comprehensive survey level as the more expensive ones. The true cost only becomes apparent later in the project timeline.
Geospatial surveys are quick and easy
For years, survey equipment manufacturers have promoted ‘quick and easy’ solutions without disclaimers about using proper survey principles and controls. This strategy aims to boost sales to non-geospatial companies and investors. Surveyors often accept manufacturers’ claims instead of promoting objectivity and thought leadership. Social media adds to the confusion with exaggerated claims of quick, inaccurate surveys. These factors have diluted the importance of best-practice survey principles and accurate, controlled data. The geospatial survey community must unite to provide leadership, education and clear direction, rather than relying on manufacturers.
Generalized scope and cheap price
Development and investment projects often procure geospatial surveys with a ‘quick fix’ mentality, neglecting the strategic timing and cost of essential data and the resulting drawings and models. Quantity surveyors focused solely on the bottom line fail to account for the cost overruns caused by design and geospatial errors. Geospatial survey experts are rarely consulted at project inception, leading to poorly scoped, under-budgeted surveys and a tendency to accept the cheapest quote, often resulting in inaccurate or unfit surveys.
Who provides these inadequate surveys? The lack of understanding of geospatial survey value, combined with economic pressures in the UK, drives some survey companies to cut corners, using rapid methods without best practices, compromising survey integrity and client benefits. Additionally, ‘one-stop shop’ companies with varying in-house geospatial competence and architects using 3D laser scanners without proper expertise frequently deliver poor surveys. These inadequate surveys can lead to significant problems and additional costs down the line.
How does a poor or inaccurate survey impact on a project?
Inadequate or inaccurate survey data can have a huge negative impact on construction and development projects. Why? How? I explain this in every talk and CPD presentation I give: “A best-practice geospatial survey is possibly the single most essential, cost-effective and budget-saving part of any retrofit, development, assessment or construction project, as it provides the accurate 3D spatial information that everything relates to and is constrained by”.
Inaccurate or incomplete 3D information can lead to significant, costly problems that are often only identified later in the project timeline. The survey might have been conducted years before the project starts or overlooked as a crucial starting point. Project teams and quantity surveyors may not recognize that an inadequate survey is the source of expensive issues. This reflects an ingrained habit of poor geospatial survey procurement, with little reflection on past mistakes. During a 2023 discussion among survey sector peers, someone remarked: “This is the construction sector’s dirty little secret; there is rarely understanding or admission of neglect in geospatial survey procurement.”
Clients generally lack understanding of accuracy and precision in geospatial surveys, an issue worsened by the availability of detailed, colour 3D data. With the variety of equipment and software available, clients often don’t know which methods ensure appropriate accuracy and consistency. If specific advice is needed, consulting an expert is essential. Yet, despite the many problems caused by inaccurate or inappropriate surveys, geospatial experts are seldom consulted.
Which sectors are affected by inadequate surveys?
The problem of inaccurate or inappropriate surveys applies across the range of sectors and types of geospatial survey: construction, highways, rail, minerals extraction, energy, retail and leisure. But the worst and most common of all? Building retrofit and heritage projects!
Around 10-15% of Terra Measurement’s turnover every year is related to reporting upon or rescuing projects from poor geospatial survey information. Some examples of the types of projects and encountered problems include:
- Housing development (topographical and underground utilities surveys): Gross errors, inaccurate survey control or no survey control at all, incorrect features, missing boundaries, differing coordinate systems, misaligned previous surveys
- Mineral extraction (topographical surveys for minerals sectors): Gross errors on volumes, misaligned previous surveys, inaccurate setting out, features and details not updated
- Large buildings for retrofit: Gross inaccuracies and alignments within 3D point cloud data, inaccurate survey control, drawings and Revit models not correlating with the 3D survey data, missing features, incorrect levels, inadequate laser scan methods and resulting data accuracy and fidelity
- Cultural heritage buildings: Inappropriate methods not adhering to Historic England’s ‘Geospatial Survey Specifications for Cultural Heritage’, no survey control, inadequate and unusable 3D point cloud data
- Construction: Inadequate or missing survey control when it comes to setting out of structure or fit out
- Retail: Grossly inaccurate GIA and NIA figures from poor survey plans.
How does a best-practice geospatial survey generate value for money and other benefits?
A best-practice geospatial survey strategy for land, buildings or heritage projects provides lasting value. Starting with accurate survey control and a single coordinate system ensures consistency and accuracy across all project elements (drawings, models, designs, etc.), creating a single source of truth for all stakeholders. This approach minimizes problems and additional survey costs due to complete parity.
Having reliable data offers peace of mind. After witnessing numerous issues from cheap surveys, I am baffled why anyone would skimp on such crucial information. While challenges may still arise, a project team with accurate data, expert consultants and detailed 3D survey data will face fewer issues. For example, a £28,000 (€32,750) survey was undercut by a £18,000 (€21,000) quote. Terra Measurement was later called to fix the resulting problems, costing nearly £40,000 (€46,750). The initial survey errors ultimately cost the project almost £1 million (€1.17 million), all because of assuming the same survey quality for £10,000 (€11,750) less.
What could be done to emphasize the importance of accurate geospatial surveys?
The regulation of geospatial companies has been a longstanding topic of debate in the UK. Due to ineffective regulation and the lack of implementation, there is little emphasis on the significance and necessity of accurate surveys. The geospatial survey profession does not receive the same recognition as civil engineers, structural engineers, quantity surveyors and suchlike, and there are no quality standards. Consequently, some geospatial surveyors and users of geospatial equipment produce substandard work.
The geospatial profession is also grappling with a skills shortage. Compounding the issue, academic pathways to a career in geospatial surveying are diminishing, exemplified by Newcastle University discontinuing its geospatial survey BEng programme. To address this challenge, new geospatial apprenticeship pathways and relevant college courses are being developed. The Survey Association (TSA) runs the commendable Survey School, offering candidates a vocational course that complements their day jobs.
RICS, TSA, and the Chartered Institution of Civil Engineering Surveyors all play a crucial role in promoting best practices in geospatial surveys. Through training and influencing educational institutions and businesses, these organizations can enhance the understanding of geospatial survey data usage and distribution. Their collaboration will lead to improved practices, better cooperation and, ultimately, more successful projects.
Appropriate time and place
As mentioned above, today’s fast-paced world of technology – combined with the ‘smoke and mirrors’ of social media – can give the illusion that quick and easy is always the answer. In reality, there is an appropriate time and place for most methods and deliverables, and it is important to understand when they are appropriate (and when not). To spell it out: quick, cheap and easy is not suitable for the beginning of a construction or retrofit project, and not a good starting point for responsible long-term care and management of an estate, property portfolio or a listed or scheduled monument building. If in doubt, just reflect on the words above and just how many non-geospatial survey professionals (architects, structural engineers, conservation consultants, etc.) can tell you of the woes, stress and additional costs they have witnessed due to poor and inaccurate geospatial survey information.
How do inadequate surveys impact on clients?
“In the realm of heritage conservation, the accuracy of surveys is paramount, yet there appears to be a concerning trend towards complacency in their execution. Often, surveys – crucial for providing a faithful representation of historical structures – seem to prioritize convenience over precision. We have encountered situations where erroneous survey data led to incorrect material quantities, which can significantly impact project costs and timelines.” – Christian Montez (RIBA), architect, heritage consultant and design engineer
“My experience is that the value of a good survey is not appreciated and the cheapest is preferred. This is understandable to a point within the quarrying industry as the tolerances are greater; a lot of the time, things don’t need to be to the nearest centimetre. It’s difficult to convince a client to change the survey provider. Something I’ve been completely ineffective in is influencing clients/colleagues to choose a more expensive option. The problem is that it’s not easy to spot a poor survey, it’s only when something significant happens that the importance of a good survey can be understood.” – Anon, principal engineering geologist
“We frequently suffer from poor-quality measured surveys provided by landlords to our clients, which result in setting out problems and design coordination clashes. A high-quality survey providing accurate dimensional information and capturing all the details of the space enables us to design, coordinate, procure and fabricate with confidence well ahead of our start on site, so we can maximize efficient working on site, reduce programme duration, minimize waste, and save money for our clients.” – Bryony Levermore, construction technical & compliance director, design manager
“When a geospatial survey done is well and aligns with the briefing requirements, it makes a huge difference with the success of a project. If sufficient data is captured and accurately drawn, it saves an enormous amount of time on site visits, on-site measures, checking, etc. A well-produced set of measured survey drawings are a joy to work on as you have confidence in them, and thus have confidence in new design and detailing. Building recording is increasingly important for posterity, condition surveys, futureproofing against climate change, structural assessment, weathering… the list goes on. Best practice is crucial.” – Andrew Coles (RIBA SCA), conservation architect.
