Issues with contractor rebuilding our deck
Hi everyone! New to the forum, and trying to find some advice.
We hired a contractor to rebuild our big two-story deck back in August, and finally after permits with the city cleared up and other delays, the work started last month.
The original deck was torn down and we have some temporary framing holding the overhang roof covering it. New footings with column base brackets have been added for the new posts, among them: 3 posts that will hold the roof in place in the new design (30′, 24′ and 24′ in length)
Last week we received delivery of the materials for the new framing, and we noticed a discrepancy with the type and grade compared to what the contract and engineering plans call for:
– The contract and plans call for Douglas Fir in all framing, and we received Hem Fir for all framing materials (the big posts received were barn stock poles treated with CCA).
– Contract states that all work should follow engineering specs. The engineering drawings state that the grade for posts, beams, stringers… should be minimum #1, and we received #2
Contractor states that Douglas Fir is the same as Hem Fir, and doesn’t admit the discrepancy in what’s needed and what we got delivered.
Engineer confirmed that what we received is not up to spec.
Contractor has not been very responsive or cooperative, we’ve tried to find out if it’s possible to find the right materials from the supplier he used or others. The same company gives us an estimate of 16 weeks to get them, while other companies give us an estimate of 4 to 8 weeks (mostly because of the 3 big posts.)
In the meantime, we found out the contractor is on vacation and he will only be back in 2 weeks. Workers on site came yesterday and confirmed that the materials were not good, so they left because they couldn’t do anything.
Any advice on how to proceed?
(I’ve attached the engineering specs for framing lumber)
Replies
Hem fir is a long way from Douglas Fir. What have you paid so far?
One-third of the total cost
Your engineer is the designer of record and gets to make the call about materials, and you say your contract specifies this as well, yet it seems that the contractor either ignored the specs or ordered without regard for the specs. Likely, they bid this on the basis of the cheaper materials and probably won't be thrilled with returning and buying DF and #1. Stick to your guns...and the contract.
The design loads are certainly different in those two species, and so chances are your spans are wrong, especially if it’s engineered. You might be able to get engineer to recalc for reduced spans and just buy a bit more of what you have already, ie 12” vs 16” joist spacing. Might be worth it on some, maybe not on girders.
There's 2 approaches to this perceived problem:
1. That's what was spec'd and that's what is expected to be used. I would hold to the cost to me that was quoted, and I'll have to live with the time to obtain the correct lumber. If there a time penalty in your contract with the contractor, he/she will have to live with that.
2. The pragmatic approach. You state that "The engineering drawings state that the grade for posts, beams, stringers… should be minimum #1, and we received #2." Do you understand what this means in the lumber grading arena? What are the sizes of the lumber you received? 2" thick lumber (nominal, actually 1-1/2") meaning anything from 2x2s to 2x12s (or larger). These are covered by the first line in the spec - Structural joists and planks - #2. This also covers lumber sizes 4x4 to 4x12 (or larger).
Now, as to the specie - yes, Doug Fir was spec'd. Under WWPA grading rules, Hem-Fir #2 is:
- equivalent in bending strength
- DF #2 is about 20% stronger than Hem-Fir in shear
- DF #2 could be about 23% stiffer (when considering deflection) than Hem-Fir IF it's classified as Douglas Fir-Larch.
All of that said, you could simply ask your engineer to reevaluate the specified member size(s) or spacing(s) to determine if they will be acceptable. He/she may want to get paid for the effort. It may very well be adequate and worth it. Only you know for sure.
The 2nd & 3rd lines under spec #2 are covered by a different section of the grading rules. Those are for members that measure 5" x 5" or larger. There the allowable stresses are significantly different between Doug-Fir and Hem-Fir. Again, your engineer may find Hem-Fir to be adequate.
[CT licensed professional engineer]
It's definitely not cool when they don't stick to the plans and then try to brush it off like it's no big deal. Since the engineer confirmed the materials are off-spec, it might be worth getting a second opinion from another pro to back you up. In the meantime, keep pressing the contractor to fix it ASAP, especially since the workers can't do much without the right stuff.
My question is simple - does the specifier understand exactly how what was specified applies to the material received? Not all engineers are well-versed in structural wood design.
If the issue concerns posts of a size greater than 5x5, then there's a valid concern.
If the concern involves lumber that is 2" or 4" in nominal thickness, then there may be adequate strength the in Hem-Fir lumber received.
The issue was apparent when we saw 8x6 posts stamped as Hem Fir and #2&BTR when engineering and contract asked otherwise, plus being available from other suppliers in the area. If contract specifies DF and it is available in the area, don't bring me different... and don't lie to me by saying it's the same
Don't know where you live, but if it is California I would talk to the State License Board and file a complaint. Really makes a Contractor sit up and take notice.
It's super frustrating when the materials don't match what you agreed on in the contract. Since the contractor is on vacation, you might need to wait until they're back to sort things out. In the meantime, keep pushing for the right materials and maybe get some other quotes from different suppliers. It sucks that the workers couldn't do anything, but hopefully, you can get this sorted soon and finally enjoy your new deck stress-free!