ᐅ Foundation incorrectly positioned – what is the recommended course of action?
Created on: 19 Apr 2022 19:47
L
lars909
Hello everyone,
Unfortunately, during our new build today, we discovered that the foundation was positioned incorrectly on the plot. The concrete slab has not been poured yet. Because an incorrect boundary marker was assumed, the foundation formwork is located 3 meters (10 feet) too far back on the property. We briefly considered accepting this and submitting a new building permit/planning permission, but ultimately decided against it due to the lack of a garden.
The site manager immediately admitted the mistake. The plan now is to move the foundation forward by 3 meters (10 feet). From what I understand, a section will be added at the front and connected to the rest. At the back, another new section will also be added and connected—the 3 meters (10 feet) of overlapping “remainder” can stay, according to the site manager, as a terrace at the level of the sliding door is planned there anyway. The wastewater pipes and other utilities will, of course, also be relocated.
I am a layperson and honestly relieved that the concrete slab hasn’t been poured yet. However, I am wondering if this is the correct approach. Or should everything actually be removed and redone? I don’t want to cause unnecessary work and am satisfied with a reasonable solution. What is structurally sound and acceptable in such a situation? How is something like this typically handled in practice?
Good luck
Unfortunately, during our new build today, we discovered that the foundation was positioned incorrectly on the plot. The concrete slab has not been poured yet. Because an incorrect boundary marker was assumed, the foundation formwork is located 3 meters (10 feet) too far back on the property. We briefly considered accepting this and submitting a new building permit/planning permission, but ultimately decided against it due to the lack of a garden.
The site manager immediately admitted the mistake. The plan now is to move the foundation forward by 3 meters (10 feet). From what I understand, a section will be added at the front and connected to the rest. At the back, another new section will also be added and connected—the 3 meters (10 feet) of overlapping “remainder” can stay, according to the site manager, as a terrace at the level of the sliding door is planned there anyway. The wastewater pipes and other utilities will, of course, also be relocated.
I am a layperson and honestly relieved that the concrete slab hasn’t been poured yet. However, I am wondering if this is the correct approach. Or should everything actually be removed and redone? I don’t want to cause unnecessary work and am satisfied with a reasonable solution. What is structurally sound and acceptable in such a situation? How is something like this typically handled in practice?
Good luck
lars909 schrieb:
Since there still seem to be some misunderstandings:No 🙂ypg schrieb:
I would get an expert/appraiser to see what they say about it. You don’t have one, right?This also applies to the foundation!
lars909 schrieb:
Since there still seem to be some misunderstandings: The slab has not been poured yet. [...] This is "only" about the strip footings beneath the slab or the formwork blocks. [...] What would the approximate cost be to demolish these? So, by the "slab not yet poured," you mean the flat part of the slab, but the strips are already in place?
Apart from the fact that they are probably positioned incorrectly by now (I don’t assume your house plan is based on a 3m (10 ft) structural grid), I find the idea, to put it mildly, unusual—to build the thickened strip footings and the flat slab part in separate construction phases. I still don’t understand what formwork blocks are supposed to be doing in this whole scenario. Maybe you should provide some pictures of this situation first before we continue discussing this mess 🙂
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
11ant schrieb:
I find the idea, to put it mildly, "unusual" to create the ribbed thickened sections and the flat part of the slab in separate construction phases. No, I guess it can be done if it’s a base plate that isn’t designed as a structural element. It was like that for me, too. According to other expert reports (not the Meiningen ones), this is considered a cheap construction method and generally shouldn’t be used anymore, but it is technically acceptable.
Tolentino schrieb:
No, you can probably do that, if it’s a building permit / planning permission that does not involve a structural framework. It was the same in my case. According to other expert opinions (besides Meiningen), it’s considered a cheap construction method and ideally shouldn’t be used anymore, but technically it’s acceptable. Ouch. In terms of quality, I would fully agree with calling it "cheap," but I don’t expect much cost savings from it. And from that condition, it unfortunately follows that the strip footings must be located strictly under the loads. Even more ouch ;-)
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
As I always like to say, the language of the engineer is the plan. Where are the plans for the planned house, where are the plans for the current state, and where are the plans for the proposed changes along with the corresponding new reinforcement drawings and approved structural calculations? Until then, construction must be stopped. Of course, any homeowner can order a construction stop. In this case, it is more than justified.
Similar topics