Modeling and Elevation Points/Z-Coordinates

[C W]

Until now I've always set my first floor layer at Z=0 because it seemed the obvious/easiest way to approach the build. Recently however, having taken into account that the surveys I'm receiving have property lines/contour lines at actual Z coordinates (ie; 100 as the benchmark and +/-100 for all given coordinates) and issues I've had with objects not being placed at there true Z coordinate, I'm considering changing my modeling approach. My hopes are to make it easier to locate items (such as fences, pergolas, walls, etc) that differ several inches vertically due to grade change. Does this make sense or am I actually making things more complicated? I am very much trying to use VW for all its worth (Floor Plans, Elevations, Sections, Renderings, etc.) and feel preciseness is the key... but should this truly equal quicker, as well as more accurate, work flow? ...this is a tough sell to the SketchUp supporters in house. Thanks in advance.

[Guest Frank Brault]

It may be work to keep your current workflow with a 1st floor set to the conventional z=0' elevation, and then create a Design Layer Viewport(DLVP) and move it to the z offset elevation in the site plan.

hth,

[C W]

Hadn't thought about that. To be honest, I've had so many issues with WRs and DLVPs in 2008 I've been weeding them out of my files. I've discussed these issues with the board and the folks at NNA but with little resolution. And it's not just my station... all of our stations have issues with files that have more than a couple WRs or DLVPs.

And circular references are an outright nightmare!