Hello,
we now have the following "conflict" to resolve.
We are building a 14 x 14.5 m (46 x 48 ft) bungalow. The soil report indicates the following layers:
Layer 1: Topsoil 20 cm (8 inches)
Layer 2: Sand, highly silty, soft to stiff, gray-brown
Layer 3: Sand, highly silty, humus, soft to stiff, dark brown to black-brown
Layer 4: Sand, low silt content, partly silty, medium dense, ...
Recommendation: remove 1 to 1.1 m (3.3 to 3.6 ft) and refill with compacted gravel or a similar material.
Now, a groundworks contractor who has seen our plans pointed out that he was not informed about our planned fill. We actually need to build up an average of 1 m (3.3 ft).
He suggested that it would be sufficient to just strip off the topsoil (and possibly some centimeters of layer 2) to achieve a 1.4 m (4.6 ft) gravel layer underneath the foundation slab. If necessary, the foundation slab could be made a bit thicker and the reinforcement adjusted accordingly. This would save us money.
However, our structural engineer insists that everything must be removed as recommended in the soil report.
Now we are uncertain. Both are professionals.
We will consult other groundworks contractors to see their opinions.
However, this involves a significant amount of money. Has anyone here had experience with a similar case?
we now have the following "conflict" to resolve.
We are building a 14 x 14.5 m (46 x 48 ft) bungalow. The soil report indicates the following layers:
Layer 1: Topsoil 20 cm (8 inches)
Layer 2: Sand, highly silty, soft to stiff, gray-brown
Layer 3: Sand, highly silty, humus, soft to stiff, dark brown to black-brown
Layer 4: Sand, low silt content, partly silty, medium dense, ...
Recommendation: remove 1 to 1.1 m (3.3 to 3.6 ft) and refill with compacted gravel or a similar material.
Now, a groundworks contractor who has seen our plans pointed out that he was not informed about our planned fill. We actually need to build up an average of 1 m (3.3 ft).
He suggested that it would be sufficient to just strip off the topsoil (and possibly some centimeters of layer 2) to achieve a 1.4 m (4.6 ft) gravel layer underneath the foundation slab. If necessary, the foundation slab could be made a bit thicker and the reinforcement adjusted accordingly. This would save us money.
However, our structural engineer insists that everything must be removed as recommended in the soil report.
Now we are uncertain. Both are professionals.
We will consult other groundworks contractors to see their opinions.
However, this involves a significant amount of money. Has anyone here had experience with a similar case?
It is best to bring together a structural engineer, a geotechnical expert, and a civil engineer. They should provide you with a recommendation, then the excavation is carried out, and in the end, the geologist performs an inspection of the foundation pit. Only then is it ensured that they are truly liable for their recommendation. We did the same, but in our case, due to the slope, a laboratory soil stability analysis was also included.
B
Bauexperte19 Jul 2016 12:25Payday schrieb:
... of course, the structural engineer says this after the soil report, since this way they can elegantly shift liability to the geotechnical expert. And the geotechnical expert avoids liability because they include some clause in their terms and conditions that somehow passes the blame to the contractor.
That leaves the civil engineer, who in case of problems, of course, no longer remembers this recommendation. You are such a sweetheart – have I told you that before?
Neither the geologist nor the structural engineer can completely avoid responsibility in the worst-case scenario. A competent judge will always weigh the professional knowledge of both, basically reasoning: "Given their training and experience, they should have known..." Both are quickly found jointly liable.
Similarly, if the civil engineer deviates from the recommendations in the geotechnical report, they won’t enjoy the outcome of any future legal proceedings. It doesn’t help much that, as you describe, they don’t remember; in the end, they executed differently and, in my opinion, much to the relief of the geologist and structural engineer, hold the sole losing hand. Let’s hope an experienced expert will stop this madness if it ever happens!
Payday schrieb:
Conclusion: in the end, you have to decide how much replacement you want No. The original poster is well advised to follow the geologist’s advice, even if that means the foundation costs end up higher than expected. Repairing a settling single-family house will be significantly more expensive!
Regards, Bauexperte
Bauexperte schrieb:
You’re such a sweetheart – have I told you that before?
Neither the geologist nor the structural engineer can simply avoid responsibility in the worst-case scenario. A competent judge will always consider the expert knowledge of both; something like, “You should have known this based on your training and experience…” Both can quickly be held jointly liable.
Also, if the civil engineer deviates from the recommendations in the geological report, they won’t be happy about it during a later court case. It doesn’t help much that, as you described, they can’t remember; ultimately, they acted differently and thereby—in my opinion, much to the delight of the geologist and the structural engineer—end up with the sole losing hand. One can only hope that an experienced expert will put a stop to this madness if it ever occurs!All of that has to be proven first. The civil engineer first needs to be instructed by the structural engineer on how to proceed with the excavation. Does he receive such information? Can you prove that? And if the structural engineer shifts responsibility by saying he followed the recommendation of the geotechnical expert, who is the “specialist” for this, and the geotechnical expert says the boreholes are only point checks and the actual verification must be done on-site during excavation—and that he was not involved in execution but only issued a recommendation, etc…
These are just fairy tales that anyone on a construction project is ever truly held accountable in a serious way. Where has it ever happened that the client even breaks even? That has NEVER EVER happened. Simply because the client has to prove everything and pay for the experts… Meanwhile, the client often goes bankrupt because a new place to live is needed, but the financing keeps running. And in the end, the companies go insolvent or it ends in a settlement. In both cases, the client is left footing the bill.
There is a reason why many people are afraid of building, and that is exactly what this situation reflects…
No. The original poster is well advised to listen to the geologist; even if that means the foundation costs turn out higher than expected. Renovating a sunken single-family home will be considerably more expensive!
Regards, BauexperteThat’s exactly what I also advised: that the structural engineer’s solution seems to be the best. If something goes wrong, at least it is documented in writing. It will just be expensive for you now. Getting everyone together won’t help much because no one wants to take responsibility.
PS: My mother was a judge and worked in this field for several years. Not a single builder ever went home happy.
PPS: Even legal expenses insurance companies see it that way. Otherwise, they would offer legal protection insurance specifically for homeowners. Why don’t they? Because even they never see their money again, and it gets really expensive…
Similar topics