So, the contractor’s about ready to pour concrete for mom’s cottage in our back yard, and I went out with a tape today to find that it’s 8′ from where it should be. The drawings clearly show 5′ setbacks from the fence, and it’s 13′ away on one side.
Damn, that’s 8′ of my back yard I’ll never see again.
This is partly my fault. I did the initial site measurements when we bought the place a couple years ago. Somewhere I dropped those 8′. The architect is a friend of mine and he trusted those measurements without verifying them.
I’ve (very politely, including my own responsibility in the mistake) pointed this out to the contractor and he gave me the finger, saying (a) the distance from the house is correct (it is), and (b) he’s not responsible for “surveying.” I still think he should have noticed an extra 8′ and at least made a phone call.
I’m not interested in suing anyone; we can find a use for the space. I do want to make sure something like this doesn’t happen again. In case of ambiguity between the architect’s plans the the physical world, who should notice that? *Should* the GC have called me? Or should I be out there with a tape measure every night, making sure?
All my work is interiors, fixtures, and furniture for my own house, so I’ve not dealt with this before. I don’t want to kill the guy’s profit and make him lose motivation for the job, but damnit, I hate being in the middle of an architect and contractor pointing fingers at each other.
Replies
I'd have to see the plans and site to know how ambiguous it is, and whether I would have caught it or read it differently. My contract specifically disclaims responsibility for verifying information provided by the architect or anyone else. I can't be the backstop for mistakes someone else might make. Why didn't you check the excavation and the forms earlier?
Anyone, maybe your contractor is a bonehead, maybe not, we'll never know unless you can give a much better description.
The part about him giving you the finger... that's... interesting.
"The part about him giving you the finger... that's... interesting."I'm guessing he meant a figurative finger
Barry E-Remodeler
What language do you use to disclaim responsibility.
Personally I love the dichotomy between most architects and builders. We (builders) claim we are not responsible mistakes made by the architects but the architects love to use that little stamp that says "Subject to field verification"
"Subject to field verification"we have the same stamp, it just mean SH%^ HAPPENS.two ways to screw up concrete 1) concrete driver 2) concrete finisher
I do not think the GC is responsible. I do think he would have been wise
to inform everyone of the discrepancy before doing the form work. Nothing like the job going south before the concrete is poured.John
Ypur description of the problem is ambiguous. Was the site plan drawn wromg? Did the plan show 5 ft and the gc layed it out at 13 ft? 8 ft is a lot to be off.
"Put your creed in your deed." Emerson
"When asked if you can do something, tell'em "Why certainly I can", then get busy and find a way to do it." T. Roosevelt
So what do want to do? Move it over? Are you ready to pay for that move? It's clearly not the contractors fault.
I don't mean to be harsh but from what you said you gave the architect the wrong info and he drew it up wrong. It's not ambiguous. The GC had the wrong info that stated from you.
That's what it comes down to. Doesn't it?
Whenever there is a dimension that is critical that dimension rules. The 5 foot setback is what should have been drawn in. Because you want to maximize the area on the other side of the building. It wasn't drawn that way.
Edited 2/17/2008 12:14 am ET by popawheelie
Friend or not, your architect knows better than to work without verified site dimensions.
The simple answer, for many of life's potential ambiguities, is; don't assume. I'm still working on that one myself.
In this case, no one is more able to protect your interests than you. Therefore you should've done your own staked layout. And you should've been there when the contractor arrived to verify that your layout complied with the setback ordinance and worked OK on the site.
The contractor may have had many valuable suggestions to offer but...if you're not there...he's just going to follow the basic rules; place the footings according to the dimensions to the existing structure, given on the site plan, while maintaining legal minimum setbacks. That fulfills his responsibility.
Edited 2/17/2008 12:41 pm by Hudson Valley Carpenter
Is there a zoning violation? Sounds like not.
Can you post a copy of the plot plan? If you can't scan it you can just take a pic of it with a digital camera and post the pic. Better still would be 2 pics. The plot plan the contractor used, and then a corrected plot plan showing reality and where the structure ended up.
Where the heck were you when the stakes got driven?
Consider your situation if he had gotten it wrong the other way and now the pad has to be busted out, carted off, and done over, because the town has a problem with your setback?
IMHO, a GC is not to be held accountable for getting a building where it belongs on the map. That is the job of your surveyor, who works for, and with, you.
View Image
"A stripe is just as real as a goddamn flower."
Gene Davis 1920-1985
>> Where the heck were you when the stakes got driven?I as at work, several miles away. Until yesterday I hadn't even considered that we needed to hire a surveyor.Thanks for the replies, everyone. I'm not trying to skate out of my own responsibility here. I manage software developers for a living, and I know that unless there is one point of responsibility, one person where the buck stops, things can and will go wrong.Until yesterday I assumed that person was the GC. Apparently I was wrong, either because I don't understand enough about construction or I don't know enough about this particular GC.I'm much less interested in hanging someone for this than making sure it doesn't happen again. Do I need to be out there every night with a tape making sure the GC hasn't screwed up during the day? Does the architect?
As an engineering manager for a large public agency and having a great deal of experience in dealing with construction contracts, contractors and contract disputes -- the rule of thumb is: the party preparing the plans is responsible for the ambiguities and errors. I think in this case the contractor is off the hook.
I'm much less interested in hanging someone for this than making sure it doesn't happen again. Do I need to be out there every night with a tape making sure the GC hasn't screwed up during the day? Does the architect?
Here's one big ambiguity for you...your own statements. First you say that you don't want to hang anyone then you say that the contractor screwed up.
Let's get this straight: The contractor's responsibilits were: A. lay out the excavation and footing according to dimensions given from an existing building. B. Check that lay out to be sure that it complies with minimum setbacks.
He did exactly that.
I've been in the same position many times. It's very doubtful that I would've called anyone when I saw that there was more setback than required by law.
Only if the homeowner had been there with me, showing an interest in the position of the new structure, would I have brought this to his attention. Otherwise I would justifiably assumed that everyone involved was correctly informed as to the actual dimensions of the site.
>> Here's one big ambiguity for you...your own statements. First you say that you don't want to hang anyone then you say that the contractor screwed up. Ok, I don't want to get into a semantic argument. Replace "the GC hasn't screwed up" with "something hasn't gotten screwed up."I've walked the site with this guy, gone over the plans multiple times, explained what we want. We talk on the phone every few days, and email nearly every day. Are you saying (and I mean this as a serious question, not any sort of attack) that I really need, every day, to be measuring things, checking work against the plans? Or is that someone else's job?What I'm trying to get to here is: how do we prevent another ambiguity from damaging the project?
>> What I'm trying to get to here is: how do we prevent another ambiguity from damaging the project? <<
I think that if that is your concern you have to repeatedly tell the guy that if any questions come up to please call you immediately and you will address the issue immediately. I'm guessing what happened is that he probably saw the error somewhere around the first hour that he was on site but didn't want to blow the whistle, get you out there, get the architect involved, have to get a new plot plan drawn, etc, etc and loose a day, week or whatever of work. That may sound kinda harsh and inconsiderate, but the flip side might be would you be willing to pay extra for him and is crew to stand around for a day or a week while the problem got resolved? Construction work is not like salaried jobs where everyone gets paid regardless if anything gets accomplished. OK - there are a few salaried employees but it's still costing the employer (contractor) every minute nothing is getting done. If you are paying the guy strictly time and materials it's a different story.
I hire and work with subcontractors every day and I can pretty much depend on that if there is a problem unless I'm there they will resolve issues to the best of their ability so that they can continue to work. I too often wonder why they don't pick up the phone very often. That is why I try to be there as much as possible and actually do a fair amount of paper work, etc while sitting in my truck at the job site. I'm not saying that you need to be there all the time but I am trying to help you understand the nature of the work. It's totally different than most office environments.
Maybe make a habit of "popping by" there several times during the week during lunch for 5 minutes just to see if any Qs have come up, or maybe check in via phone. So not necessarily checking everything, but making yourself very accessible.
BTW - when you use the term "setback" are you talking about an actual zoning requirement or just a dimension that was drawn on the plot plan?
When you walked the site with him, did you not notice the discrepancy in setback between where he had staked and your desired location? Did you actually discuss with him the requirement to minimize the setback?
The GC is only as good as the plans. That's all he has to go by. I'd sit down with him and maybe the architect to go over the plans. Get a sense of what he considers typical details in a structure just to re-assure yourself that you are on the same page.
As you go over the plans make sure any ambiguous areas that he sees or you see are covered. Otherwise he will do typical construction details and follow the plans.
That's what they are for. So the architect and the owner don't have to be out there every night. But you might just want to communicate more with him on an onging basis until you are assured he is building what you think he should be building.
By the way. I just built a large storage shed between our house and the 5' setback. Maybe you can do something with that space? Does it face the sun? Just trying to make lemon aide out of lemons.
Edited 2/17/2008 4:02 pm ET by popawheelie
"Do I ned to be out there with a tape everynight making sure the GC hasn't screwed up?"
Yes. You should be there every day. Morning's probably are better since most construction guys start early and you can meet them at say, 7AM and then get to your own job by 8:30 or 9AM.
Runnerguy
I'm not a contractor, but going through the process of having a house built right now.
Yes... you need to be there often to confirm that the work is going according to what you wanted. The simple reality is that nobody will care about achieving that as much as you. This is all the more important during milestones like locating the building.
Archy is a friend of yours-- so probably trying to save you a few dollars by not getting a survey crew out there to confirm your measurements. That was probably a mistake, but did you in some way contribute to that particular decision through your instructions to him? Do you want to get into blaming your friend for this?
I would have to agree with others that GC is the least at blame here given that the measurements from the house to the cottage are correct. There was perhaps an opportunity for him to notice the screw up from others (you and archy) but it goes too far to lay blame on him to any significant degree.
I feel your pain..but this is not the GC at fault, and yes you need to confirm (frustrating but true) everything that matters to you.
>> Yes... you need to be there often to confirm that the work is going according to what you wanted. The simple reality is that nobody will care about achieving that as much as you. <<
Plus, the people building the house don't have ESP.
did he use batter boards? Is they a plot plan that shows building location? If there is, it his nickel, if not yours. Are you the GC, if so your nickel.
.
two ways to screw up concrete 1) concrete driver 2) concrete finisher
randall stated that there is a conflict ( thus the ambiguity) in the dimensions
one says the garage had to be no less than 13' from the fence
the other says 8' from the house
but only ONE dimension could be correct..
by missing the one dimension , the contractor is caught in the middle
the architect relied on randall's information in drawing the plot plan
rather than field measurements
so.. there was no "survey" yet the formal construction drawing (plot plan )
made it appear that someone in authority knew what was going on... but really ... no one knew
i certainly wouldn't want to be any one of the three parties in this fiasco
we built a house once, with stakes set by a surveyor, drilled the well, built the house,
owner moved in.... later had to buy the land the well was on from the abutter.... the surveyor got wrong
Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
If somebody gives me a set of plans thats what i go by , I could see if the building was in a setback red flags going off, What if he changed it on a verbal word hes still wrong unless all partys sign off.
here's from the original post:
<<<The drawings clearly show 5' setbacks from the fence, and it's 13' away on one side.
I did the initial site measurements when we bought the place a couple years ago. Somewhere I dropped those 8'. The architect is a friend of mine and he trusted those measurements without verifying them.
(a) the distance from the house is correct (it is),
>>>
clearly... the contractor was concentrating on getting the distance from the house to the garage to comply with the drawings
thus overlooking the setback
i'm thinking the order of guilt goes like this:
owner
architect
builder
but all three are in cahoots
Isn't it great when everyone blows it? Then you can't hang the contractor.... even during The Punishment of The Innocent.
Hopefully you did not hire the surveyor in the scenario you mentioned.
Now that I think about this a little bit, I'm thinking you're spot on, and the contractor interpretted the 5' as a minimum requirement. He set it the distance from the house that was spec'ed, it met the minimum requirement, and awaaaay we go.
I say HO eats this one.Remodeling Contractor just on the other side of the Glass City
Yeah, but why not ask the HO if he noticed the issue?
Well, That's what I was trying to figure out this morning when I read it.
Then it occured to me that the contractor could have read th 5' as a minimum requirement to be met, and not a major design priority, he understood the distance from the house to be of first concern and the setback was then greater than 5' - no issue.
Maybe.Remodeling Contractor just on the other side of the Glass City
I remember somebody here telling the story that they build a house on the lot next door to the correct one. nobody said anything till move in time..two ways to screw up concrete 1) concrete driver 2) concrete finisher
I remember that too i think.Remodeling Contractor just on the other side of the Glass City
There's a development south of town, long story short, the realtor who worked for the developer took money to be used for site surveys and didn't survey. They walked around with hunks of rebar and said "that looks about right".
It was almost a year after people moved in before it got noticed. Some guy is trying to lay out for a fence, a guy who used to work for a survey joint, and he says "something don't look right here". And there were houses on lot lines, across lines, etc. One guy I know down there, his house was on his lot, but his garage was on the neighbors, and his septic pool was on another neighbors.
FWIW, the contractor was the first one to get sued. Pretty much the same as what the above guy says - I had a plan given by the developer with stakes clearly marked. Subs came in and dug according to stakes. Court said, have a nice day. No foul on him. Real trucks dont have sparkplugs
happened in Alberta on a country lot. Owner of the land knew that the new house was build on his property but said nothing until move in day.
Then wanted the house for nothing. Claimed it was not his responsibility ."if they want to build a new house for me thats ok with me."
Court gave him an option: Either trade the land with the neighbor for equal size or pay for the house at fair market value.
I was called entrapment
I have a question on the term "setback"
Several years ago i had a garage built on a pretty tight urban lot.
the builder mentioned to me according to code there was a setback of(I believe) 3 feet off the side line and ( I believe) 5 feet off the back line.
i have always figured-- that term meant that you can't build within that area----but other than that it doesn't locate the position of the building
so--to me-the dimension given from the EXISTING house would locate the building---but the dimension given as a "setback"--would have next to nothing to do with actual positioning.
in our case---due to the size of the new garage, the size of the lot and the position of the house-the garage did end up right on the set back---but that was pure coincedence-----a larger lot-or the house positioned differently--the garage wouldn't have been with in several feet of the "setback"
so-am i wrong in this---or is it something like the common usage of the term "setback' is different than the actual meaning?
thanks,
stephen
Stephen,You are correct the setback defines an unbuildable area. not a building location necessarily. Given the use of the cottage (for the Mother In Law)the distance from the house would be a logical dominant dimension to me. It would be interesting to see the plans and what is dimensioned and how it is dimensioned. Could be such that the builder could of thought "Hmmm? Do they want it here or here?" Might have been worth a phone call but still falls on the OP for giving overall bad dimensions to Archy.TFB (Bill)
I can't imagine how someone builds using a setback for dimensions. Even if the lot line is well marked it's just not accurate enough. Lot sizes and setbacks may generate the dimensions that are put on drawings, but they aren't substitutes for them.
It is done all the time. In this town if you don't have the property line marked (preferably with a string line ) and your foundation set outside the setback you won't be pouring any mud.
You will however more than likely be moving your forms .
They can't get your Goat if you don't tell them where it is hidden.