Levels and datum conventions
Compare stated elevations at building entrances, pads, and shared interfaces. Confirm survey datum, finish-versus-structure conventions, units, and current revisions.
For civil engineers
Connect the site plan to the building set
Bring civil drawings, consultant plans, and project references into one document review. Focus your instructions on the levels, utility connections, drainage information, and scope boundaries that need to agree across the package.
Where to focus
What to bring into the review
Utility handoffs
Trace connection points and labeled requirements between site utilities and building systems. Review the scope boundaries and references each team relies on.
Drainage information
Review the consistency of the drainage requirements stated in plans, schedules, details, and supplied reports. Have the responsible engineer assess calculations and design adequacy.
Details, notes, and revisions
Check that key callouts resolve to the intended detail and that issued consultant references match the current package. Flag unclear responsibility for information missing at an interface.
Inside Groundbook
Tell the review where to focus
Use the review instructions to identify the site/building interfaces, terminology, current issue, and supplied reference documents. The screenshot shows the general Groundbook setup workflow; the scope comes from your project.
A practical workflow
From the first pass to a decision
Define the document boundary
Include the civil package and the building drawings or reports needed for the selected interfaces. Identify survey backgrounds and superseded issues as references.
Verify location and meaning
For each potential conflict, confirm the same connection or physical point is being compared. Check datum conversions, units, and design assumptions before deciding it is an error.
Coordinate the decision
Bring the sources to the affected designers, record the agreed requirement, and check the revision at both sides of the interface.
From a published project review
Structural and mechanical floor elevations differ
Related coordination example from a building review—not a civil-project result.
Structural and mechanical plans showed different elevations for the same floor area, creating a cross-discipline coordination question.
Read the findingDefine the scope with your team
Use this workflow to review document consistency. It does not replace a survey, hydraulic or hydrologic analysis, utility investigation, engineering design, or the relevant agency’s approval.
Questions, answered
FAQs
Can Groundbook review civil PDFs with building drawings?
You can include civil PDFs and related consultant documents in a project review, then define the interfaces in the instructions. Assess each finding against the supplied information and the project’s engineering context.
Does this verify grading or drainage calculations?
This page describes document coordination. Checking whether a design performs adequately requires the applicable calculations, assumptions, site information, and review by the responsible engineer.
What should a civil coordination finding include?
The location or connection, the relevant source documents, the conflicting or missing information, and a clear question for the affected designers. Datum and unit conventions are especially important for elevation comparisons.
Keep exploring
Continue your review
Civil and infrastructure projects
Explore site and infrastructure review contexts.
ExploreCross-discipline coordination
Find potential conflicts across architectural, structural, and MEP drawings. Review levels, openings, equipment, and references with linked document evidence.
ExplorePrepare a set the reviewer can follow
Prepare a coherent drawing package for AI review: current revisions, readable PDFs, complete references, file roles, and clear project-specific instructions.
ExploreBring your next set into focus
Set up a review or talk through your project with our team.