ᐅ Removal of the crane from the sidewalk / pavement

Does the construction company already realize how lucky it is to be the only one required to sign the application? Just because you arrange this with the caseworker does not necessarily mean that the managing director agrees to it as well.

Bayernbors schrieb:

Why is it still my approval required, even though it was submitted and signed by the responsible company?
At least that’s how I understood it from the caseworkers. The person who submits and signs the application is the one legally responsible. This does not necessarily have to be the property owner.

Approval? – I was talking about an "agreement." If the construction company submits the application, they are naturally also the applicant. I hadn’t expected that. I assumed that the building authority had “lost interest” in your contractor and would agree to a new application if you submitted it. But if the office is on board with this, I won’t “stand in the way.”

Bayernbors schrieb:

Could you please clarify this point a bit? Should I hire someone to supervise the general contractor? What kind of job is that?
Is it a full-time position or just regular visits to ensure everything is in order? [ / ]
OK, so this is an expert who assesses the completed work and orders corrective measures if necessary, right?
Is it normal for the structural engineer to be well informed about all trades during house construction, or should there be a different person for the various phases?

HeimatBauer schrieb:

No, I can only agree with exactly what 11ant wrote; I have nothing to add to his phrase “Value added webcam.”

This is not a standardized, clearly defined role—main thing is that it is done well. I called it “Value Added Webcam” because your “avatar” is basically your extended eye and can give you expert input about when and how you should intervene. Their visits should be regular only in terms of safety obligations, and more on-demand regarding the construction work itself. For that, they need a construction schedule and execution drawings, as well as up-to-date knowledge of any changes. Ideally, this is a restless person who benefits from being needed. Whether you choose a structural engineer or a site manager for this role is secondary. Better not a metalworker, since construction deals with whole centimeters (or tenths of a meter), and a Latin teacher would likely not be taken seriously and wouldn’t have the relevant experience to compensate for your lack of expertise. I would recommend choosing a competent second-best person located within walking distance of the site rather than a top expert from a neighboring town.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

xMisterDx schrieb:

Just because you agree on this with the caseworker doesn’t necessarily mean the managing director will agree as well?

This is a mutual agreement between the three parties (general contractor, caseworker, and myself).

11ant schrieb:

I assumed that the building authority had “lost interest” in your contractor and would now approve a new application if you submitted it.

One of his concerns was that the general contractor didn’t feel responsible for compliance with the regulations. He wanted to hold them accountable so they would take the matter seriously.

11ant schrieb:

This is a non-standard “whatever-you-want” job – the main thing is that it’s done well. I called it a “Value Added Webcam” because your “avatar” is mainly your extended eye and can expertly advise you on when and how you should intervene. Its visits should only be regular regarding safety obligations and more event-driven concerning the work.

OK, that makes sense.
If I don’t personally know anyone qualified for this task, how and where could I find someone?

Pinkiponk schrieb:

In my opinion, you forgot the point that, from my perspective, competent and reliable people usually expect others to do their jobs competently and reliably as well.

One would think so. But what I have experienced over the 12 months since we started building is hard to believe, except by my neighbors who witnessed and partly saw some of it.

Pinkiponk schrieb:

My husband and/or I were regularly at the construction site too, but "really" just to restock drinks, food, etc.

We did the same at first, but after certain incidents (garbage stuffed into hollow bricks, half sandwiches thrown into the light well, etc.), we stopped. We still regularly hand out coffee, though.

Pinkiponk schrieb:

We were always available as contacts for all topics but avoided giving the impression that we were supervising.

Most decisions are made directly on site at the construction site. Of course, we didn’t do inspection rounds while the tradespeople were there unless something serious caught our attention. However, we addressed deviations from the state of the art objectively. For example, they initially started installing non-airtight electrical boxes in the exterior walls — but since the 2014 Energy Saving Ordinance, airtight boxes are mandatory. Conduits from the cold roof and through the building envelope were left unsealed, ventilation ducts were sloped away from the house instead of towards it (which affects condensate drainage), and many, many other such details that ultimately influence the quality, comfort, and efficiency of the house.

Pinkiponk schrieb:

However, it was also our first time ever working with tradespeople; maybe it’s different in that field.

I grew up in a family with a construction business ;-)

And yes, of course, it helps to live close to the construction site, but if that’s not the case, you need to bring someone onboard for that. I’ll say it again: this is the biggest and probably most important investment in life, and I have no tolerance for carelessness along the lines of, “It’ll be fine, they know what they’re doing.” WilderSueden put it perfectly: whoever can’t or won’t take over construction supervision (or delegate it externally) is probably better off buying an existing house. I fully agree with that.

Allthewayup schrieb:

WilderSueden put it very well: if you cannot or do not want to take on building supervision yourself (outsourcing it), buying an existing house might be a better option. I completely agree with that.

I definitely didn’t say that; I only pointed out that not everyone can be on the construction site all the time. An existing house isn’t necessarily the solution here either. For newer used homes in good condition, that can indeed be helpful. But with major renovation cases, you have the same problem. Building farther away from where you live is simply inconvenient, but for many, it is financially unavoidable.

Even an expert consultant helps only to a limited extent. They might come for about 10 visits at most. In my opinion, the only effective solution is to work from the start with individual subcontractors and your own site manager who is present daily on site. With a general contractor, this problem can’t be solved economically.

How did my building inspector put it after listing yet another issue from my long checklist? "Anyone who thinks the site manager actually manages the construction might as well believe that a lemon butterfly folds lemons."

How many times, after the inspector’s visit, have I brought a fresh pot of coffee and some cookies to the trade workers on site and asked whether insulation was supposed to be installed between the recently laid pipe and the bricks? The usual response was a very surprised "uhh yes, of course, we were just about to do that," followed by a rushed phone call to order the insulation. You don’t even notice something like this if you treat it like an Amazon delivery and only check everything for the first time during the final inspection.