Here’s the deal: Our homeowners Association is having our poolhouse rebuilt. The contractor had access to inspect everything before he bid. Original bid was $42,500 based on the scope of work that we developed together. We did not hide or conceal anything from him. He knew (or should have known) what he was getting into. He had ample opportunity.
After the GC submitted for building permits, our Village required a site plan, with several changes to accommodate handicap accessibility. The GC hired an architect to draw up a site plan, and the revised quote came to $47,750 based on all the changes in the site plan. We signed a contract at that point for $47,750. ($5,250 increase)
The contract was signed before the building permits were issued, since our Village took their sweet time getting around to it.
The GC just hit me with a change order for an ADDITIONAL $8,300 saying that additional changes are required to satisfy the Village requirements that they came up with after reviewing the site plan.
Please note that we, the homeowners association, have not changed anything regarding our requirements.
The contract specifies 2 things that apply here: 1) work will be according to the scope that we developed together, and anything over and above that will be charged extra, and 2) all work will be done to code.
I can see both sides of the fence here. The GC is doing work that is not in the scope, but on the other hand, isn’t that what we (the GC paid, but included part in the final bid) paid the architect (and the difference between $42,500 and $47,750) to settle on the contract terms? Should the Homeowners Association be responsible for the extra charges, since we didn’t change anything, or would this come under the heading of the GC not doing enough homework, and he and the architect should suck it up?
On the one hand I know that the Village has been “difficult” to deal with, and in some cases not entirely reasonable, and that the requirements are legitimate (i.e. the GC is not making any of this up to try to screw us.) But on the other hand, I feel that “all work done to code” means that the GC did all his homework, and unless WE have any changes, the contract price should stand.
I realize that the contract wording could have been more precise (and we did spend a lot of time on the contract, and even had it reviewed by an attorney), and that likely we will have to work out some compromise. I was just wanting some feedback from people here, since there is a lot of knowledge and experience in this group.
The GC is a stand up guy, and not a fly-by-nighter, I I don’t want to screw him, but should we have to pay for his oversight?
Thanks for any and all input.
Pete Duffy, Handyman
Replies
pete... sounds like you know the answer to your question...
i'll give you another.. who benefits?.... the people who get the use and enjoyment of the work.. if there was a change in scope required from the plans... due to nothing on the part of the contractor ( ie: the addditional requirements of your jurisdiction )...
then a Change Order is called for..
if he treats you fairly with the CO, then your association should sign off adn move forward
but hey, whadda i no ?
Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
>> ... should we have to pay for his oversight?
What did he overlook?
The way you describe it, it sounds to me like your trying to blame the GC for not having certain information at the time he signed the contract. But the only way he could get that information was by shepherding the permit application through the negotiations with the village. And it would have been entirely unreasonable to expect him to go through that process - on your behalf - without a signed contract.
What you and the GC have learned is that no job in your village can be fully defined until the permit is approved. If you have a beef with anybody, it's the village. Don't take it out on the GC.
You know, it's hard for a bunch of strangers to comment on a contract that they cannot see and give any kind of objective answer. The lawyer can give a more accurate answer, since he has the contract.
That said, it sounds like both you and he are good guys and can work this out.
"Done according to code" has not necessarily to do with requirements of a local village. Building codes involve structural and safety issues. I have ssen local entities add on plenty more.
On the other hand, there are contractors known as "Lowball bidders" who specialize in writing contracts so that they are change orders required to allow them to mark up the job, but it sounds like this was a negotiated deal and not a bid going in.
So the only thing left would be to know how to substantiate what the extra charges are for. Are they documented as to scope and actaul costs aor is there simply a total fee bill?
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!
Thanks for the input, folks. Just needed to vent a little.
You're right about having the beef with the village, but, they ARE in charge, so that won't do much good. Kinda like giving some lip to a small town sherriff, probably not a good idea. The contractor isn't the low baller type, and I know he's honest, and we'll both be reasonable working this out.
I DO think some of the beef should be with the architect, since we paid him for his professional services, and I feel that part of his "professional" services should include finding out what the local jurisdiction's (as well as the ADA and others) codes entail. Heck, I could have made the drawings myself. What we should have been paying for was his knowledge (and his stamp, of course.)
As far as who benefits from the changes, well, no one here, really. Here are some of the requirements we have to deal with:
Currently there are double doors at the entrance, two 30" doors for a 60" total opening. Now remember that this is a pool house, and when it is opened by the lifeguards, the doors remain open. Not like another commercial building where people open and close, open and close,...
We had to replace the doouble 30's with a single 36" for handicap accessibility. Go figure. (Would like to have a larger opening, like a 42", but then we would have to add crash bars and other hardware that would double the cost of the doors.
The showers used to be 3'x4'. We had to shrink the shower size to 3'x3' so there would be the 5' open space for wheelchair access in the locker room.
If that isn't enough, they are making us put in a permanent handicap bench in the showers, which is 18" of room. Add to that the shower head has to be maximum 5' high on a vertical sliding bar, and a standing person of average height will have trouble taking a shower. What is wrong with a portable bench stored nearby? Any wheelchair-bound person would still be accommodated (I haven't seen one there in the 8+ years I've been here.)
In a 16'x30' building (2 bathrooms, 2 showers, a hallway, small guard area, and equipment room) they want 3 exit light signs, 7 emergency lights, 7 audible and visual fire alarm indicators. If a fire alarm goes off with anyone in the building, it will pierce their eardrums.
They wanted RPZ (reduced pressure zone) valves on the water supply from the city, (which I can understand and don't have a beef with) but also on the pool water supply (which comes from the city supply and free-falls into the pool via a spout about a foot above the water level.) Someone PLEASE explain to me how, if the city supply loses pressure, that water from the pool will jump a 1 foot air gap and get sucked into the city water supply. If the water gets that high, we all better start building an Ark.
Thank heaven we don't have to put in a fire sprinkler system. Then we would have that cost, plus the cost for a heating system so it doesn't freeze in the winter. Plus the cost of enlarging the building because there isn't room for a heating system. Plus the hassles of getting variences since the building is already about on the setback line.
Remember, it's a poolhouse, open for 100 days between Memorial Day and Labor Day weekends, north of Chicago. 187 homes in the subdivision, probably half use the pool at all, and maybe 25% use it regurlarly.
I just found out we don't have to insulate the walls and ceiling. Yippie.
(BTW, a pool service drains all our systems after Labor Day as part of closing the pool, so freezing pipes has never been an issue.)
Thanks for putting up with my venting. Any of you around this summer can come swimming as our guest. The water is nice and warm, too!Pete Duffy, Handyman
Most of these items are related to the ADA act from the federal Govt.
Whether , when, and how to interpret and apply all of it is often a matter of local opinion. I suspect that if you have a problem, it is with the Village first, then with the archy. Both builder and archy probably assumed that things would be grandfathered, but since all of this is withiong the area of design, the archy is the most respoonsible person here, IMO.
I can remember times when i have briefed archies on out local codes and interpretations and had them totally ignore all that I said, leaving the HOs to need to pay them to redesign to meet compliance. I have also charged as much as a thousand dollars to consult archies and shepherd an application through all the ambiguities, having had several years of experience on the board that approves or disapproves permits.
BTW, I think the price you mentioned is a fantastic low figure for all the extras you have detailed here. I doin't think this contractor is pulling your pants down. Pay Him
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Like I said, folks, we'll work something out. We're all reasonable. I'm not trying to screw him, and he's not trying to screw us, (although there is probably SOME padding in the CO price to help make up for other stuff, which I can understand. I'd do it too. But he's not screwing us.)
I think one point that might not be getting through is this:
The question is, how much knowledge is a contractor supposed to have before signing a contract where he promises everything to code? If he is promising "work done to code" but doesn't know all the applicable codes for that project, is that the customer's fault?
He did A LOT of homework on this project beforehand, speaking to the Village, county, and the archy and I just figured he had ALL (or at least most) of the answers to code questions when we signed the revised contract, since the price did increase by 12% from the first proposal. Now it's going up an additional 17%. I just think it's a bit much.
Thanks again for all the feedback.Pete Duffy, Handyman
I can't speak for the rest of the country, but as a GC I'm the one held responsible for knowing and following the codes. And keeping up with the changes as they would apply to the jobs I do. It's a tough nut when there are so many conflicts between what is actually written and what the inspectors or plans examiners interpretations are.
Almost all plans I've seen from engineers and architects have standard boilerplate wording that specifically says that the contractor is responsible for following code, as well as determining if something can be built the way it is designed and a bunch of other things as well.
Here is one line item in my contracts that may or may not insulate me from unreasonable demands and hopefully cover my financial butt if or when somebody in charge has a hair up.
"Any modifications, upgrades, testings, filings or code compliance issues required by the city or any agency in order to obtain the building permit(s) for the job are the responsibility of the owner."
So on one hand I'm saying the contractor is responsible for knowing everything there is to know about everything that could impact the job, but in reality, when it takes droves of bureaucrats, several code writing entities that take different views on whose codes are best or correct, scores of lawyers kept in fish and chips or caviar to interpret what was meant when a code is written and a bunch more politicians to spin it to their hearts content, I'm saying that the customer will be the one to foot the bill to cover all eventualities.
One more thing: It IS the contractors responsibility to convey this eventuality to the customer in terms that the customer understands so that when it does happen, the customer is not blindsided with a cost that blows his budget and expectations out of the water.
Another thing to keep in mind about contracts is that there must have been an original meeting of the minds, at least according to a Montana Supreme Court decision I read recently. If it turns out that the two parties weren't talking about the same thing in some material respect, there is no contract, even if all the other formalities have been observed.
If the association believed the contract obligated the GC to bear the costs of meeting any village requirements that his already diligent search had failed to uncover, and the GC believed otherwise, that sounds like there was no meeting of minds. I think the GC could plausibly argue that he did not believe he was assuming such an open ended obligation, because if he had believed it, he would have priced the job differently.
I think you're going to end up paying for it, but...I'd get in the archys face for missing the wheelchair space in the locker room...ADA has been around too long to miss that. The permanent bench I can see...just cuz there's been no use up to now is not a good answer...maybe there's a HC person who hasn't used the shower because the bench wasn't there.
What about a pair of 32" doors?
Try to negotiate with the FD on the audible alarms. Tell them you'll install what your designer sayss is adequate, and then they can test before the CO is issued, and if the alarm is not hearable (is that a word) in the entire building then you'll add more.
Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell'em "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it. T. Roosevelt
>> ... hearable (is that a word) ...
It's probably in the dictionary, but audible is more common.
Brain lock. Gets more common with grey hairs.
Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell'em "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it. T. Roosevelt
What about a pair of 32" doors?
Would not fit in the 60" RO.
Plus, 36" minimum is needed for HC access.
Pete Duffy, Handyman
A 36" and a 24"? Who says that utility doors have to be symetrical?
SamT
what about a handicaped bench that flips up out of the way like this?
View Image
http://www.cdsparling.com/shower.htm
Fold up bench is an option that we will probably pursue.
I have no beef at all with wheelchair-bound persons, and I do feel like reasonable accomodations should be made. But there's that word left open to interpretation, "reasonable."
I think a portable bench is reasonable, then a fold up bench after that. A permanent bench that takes up half of the shower space is not reasonable IMO.Pete Duffy, Handyman
187 units, and you've never seen a handicapped person try to use the facilities? I don't want to sound too harsh, but I often find a lot of resistance to the ADA, and I have to defend it. The ADA has made a huge impact on the life of people with disabilities, not only where they live/work now, but where they can in the future. The requirement for renovations means that even if it wasn't accesible when built (maybe why you don't have anyone in the 187, if true) your community will now an option for the disabled. You may not know anyone with a disability there now, but bodies break down over time, you and I might both need that accesible shower some day.
you and I might both need that accesible shower some day. Not at the same time, I hope. And certainly not with Luka around.Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell'em "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it. T. Roosevelt
Wait, who is Luka? Is she someone I'd like to shower with? (not that there's anything wrong with PeteDuffy, mind you, though that was not exactly my point)
Wait, who is Luka? Is she someone I'd like to shower with? Go the the thread in the Tavern about your best pirate face. I'd pay big bucks to see you in the shower with Luka...Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell'em "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it. T. Roosevelt
oh boy, u guys are sicker than I thought
Be afraid Rick.
Be very afraid.
And don't ever drop your soap in the shower.
For the rest of the time that you're given Why walk when you can fly
quittintime
I'd pay to NOT see that!
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Now we're talking. I'd take money not to do that, too.
How much are you willing to pay ?
For the rest of the time that you're given Why walk when you can fly
quittintime
I am so getting out of this thread
I said I would take money not to do it.
No amount of money could get me to do it. But I will allow Piffin to pay me not to do it.
: )
So, how much are you willing to pay to get out of this thread ?
LOL
For the rest of the time that you're given Why walk when you can fly
quittintime
Well, the great thing about the net is I can just pretend that this never happened and ignore the posts.
Why did I start this breaktime thing anyway? I don't want to be a pirate!
Just put it on my account and let go of him
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
You are a sick, sick man...
For the rest of the time that you're given Why walk when you can fly
quittintime
Not at the same time, I hope. And certainly not with Luka around.
If they are going to be sharing that shower, it damn well better be, not with me around. I'd have to start shooting people.
Of course, I'd have to claw my eyes out first, then I'd start shooting, and who knows who'd get hit then...
For the rest of the time that you're given Why walk when you can fly
quittintime
Yep, seriously I can say I have never seen a WC-bound person try to go to the pool.
Out of 187 homes, I know more than half of the neighborhood, and I know of only ONE person in a wheelchair, an elderly lady who is homebound.
I've got no beef with the ADA or people with special needs. My wife used to teach phys ed to special needs kids. I don't mind taking the pains to accomodate them, as long as everything is reasonable. My beef is that I feel that many of these issues should have been known beforehand by the archy and the GC who hired him, and should have been included in the initial cost of the project. Getting a CO for 17% of the project cost is a bit alarming, when this information should be readily available.
Ditto with the village cra_. The things they are making us add are not all bad things. I just feel that the professionals that we paid for, well, we're not paying them just to make prints or pound nails. We're paying partly for their knowledge and expertise. And we're paying plenty. The archy wanted $400 per site visit. $20 for a fax. BS like that.
Well, life goes on. We'll work it out.Pete Duffy, Handyman
I think your beef should be with the archy. The gc bid what was on the plans, knowing that he had to do certain things within code, and was obligated to point out non-code items to the owner/archy when he found them, rather than simply continue with construction. The archy should have caught a lot of the items, like the door sizes. And maybe the schedule was too tight, otherwise the archy would have sent the drawings to the village for a preliminary plan check, which mighjt have caught a few more issues. Nope, I side with the gc here.
Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell'em "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it. T. Roosevelt
You know Ed, even though the archy is the one who would normally know and check into things like this, I am remembering that the contrractor is the one whoi hired the archy ion the first place, for this project. That particular item, if true, makes the contractor the dominant player and partly responsible for the archy and his performance, no?
Again, we are only exposed to one side of this multi-faceted story, so we can't be entirely sure, but the speculatioon is educational.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I missed that part...I thought it was a traditional project where the archy was hired first. Assuming you're right (again!) then the gc would bear more of the responsibility since he is the lead entity. I'll go back and read it again.
Dang...right there in the second para of the original post. Well now I'm thinking the 'owner' is at fault for not having a set of plans first. He says the gc provided a bid based on the scope of work they worked out. Surely he didn't think they could build a shower facility, with plumbing and electrical, without a set of plans. It says that after they submitted for the permit, they discovered that a site plan was needed. Wouldn't you do that first so you could get the building properly located on the property? How did they plan to tie into the sewer system without knowing the relationshipo to the building? And sidewalks. And a lot of other stuff. Sounds like someone was in a hurry to get started.
Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell'em "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it. T. Roosevelt
Edited 4/8/2004 8:39 am ET by Ed Hilton
Edited 4/8/2004 8:43 am ET by Ed Hilton
from first post
"Here's the deal: Our homeowners Association is having our poolhouse rebuilt. The contractor had access to inspect everything before he bid. Original bid was $42,500 "
believe this is a renovation of an existing building, assumption that u can't demo and build new for $42K in WI. or $47K. but it is an asumption
just an observation as an HO. some of the things mentioned as village required changes sound like things either (or both) the archy and GC should have known. wonder if either are familiar with working in this village.bobl Volo, non valeo
The GC hired the archy. It is an existing structure, so no work outside the building (except siding, roofing and handicap ramps) is being done. Sewers, electrical service are all untouched.
The GC & I worked up drawings showing where the interior walls, plumbing, electrical and such would be located. The village did not accept them, since we didn't have an archy stamp.
The first quote was $42,500. After we got the archy involved, the additional concrete work (wing walls for ramps not in original plan) plus the archy fees and other incidentals raised the cost to $47,750, with no beef from us.
The archy's plans DID include exit lights, emergency lights, different doors, more outlets, shower reconfiguration, and spec'd some things (like ceramic tile in the equipment room, which we don't want or need.) The GC, I feel, did not scrutinize the plans thoroughly enough before submitting final bid, or he would have included those items then instead of now with a CO.
We're working it out. I went through all the costs and came up with something I feel is reasonable, and will present it to the GC soon.
Life is full of lessons, huh?
You guys are right, this was probably pushed through a little faster than should have been. The project has to be done May 1 in order to open the pool on time. Permit apps were submitted late December. The Village told us "about 2 weeks" to get permits. Then they wanted the site plan, which the GC got to them within a week or 2. Then they sat on it for a long while, then gave the GC the review notes. Back to the archy for less than a week, then back to the Village, where they sat on it again. Clock is ticking all the while. Finally got permits mid-March. Contract signed in January, after the first set of plans came back from the archy, but before the Village plan review.
The GC kept saying 8 weeks, which I interpret as 10 for cushion. We've got 4 weeks (less) left. Still need ramps, siding, drywall, tiling, and all the finishing work. He keeps saying it'll be done on time, and I've been doing my best not to bug him.
Let's hope the weather cooperates!Pete Duffy, Handyman
I need get my eyes checked. You're right, it did say existing building. Sorry.
Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell'em "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it. T. Roosevelt
Again, the GC did not add anything to the plan. It is not the GC's responsibility to 1. know each and every code. And 2. more importantly it is impossible for the GC to read the minds of the Village code enforcement staff and their interpretation of the codes. In this case not even the supposed code expert, the architect, could make a determination of the code interpretation.
The bid was made on a plan (print) prior to interpretation by code enforcement, that's the instant of time and scope or work the bid was based upon, what came after, if not added by the GC is not the GC's responsibility. Unless his name is Creskin.Never serious, but always right.
Then he never should have included in the contract "All work will be done to code."Pete Duffy, Handyman
I assume any reasonable interpretation of "to code" would be to the plans and specifications at the time of his signing the agreement. How could he be expected to include what might be added by some 3rd party in the future?
That's another reason to always have the owner and yourself as GC to initial every page of 2 sets of drawings, 1 for each of you, at the time of contract signature and include those documents as part of the contract. The usual problem you avoid with this protection is the architect/owner adding something to the print and forgetting to note it or redate the documents making you responsible, either innocently or purposefully, for added or unknown to you additions to the scope of work.
Never serious, but always right.
The moral question: The GC cannot be expected to know or have control of what the village added to your plan. He didn't add to the scope of the work nor did he benifit, you did, compliance with the village codes.
The practical legal question: without a signed change order, the court will not require you to pay the GC.
You can get by not paying the GC, but it doesn't make it right.
Pete,
My first question is this: why are you having to bring this building up to code? In VERY general terms, and your locale may be different, you only need to bring a building up to code if 1) you've been sued over the ADA or 2) you renovate the building and change it's use group (make a gas station into a nightclub, for example - so you have safe exits, etc).
Some places have regs that state "if you exceed some cost of the work versus the building's value" you must bring it up to code, too. I'm just curious.
If you don't renovate - what happens this summer? Is the building occupiable just like it was last year, or is there some reason it must be shut down? Before I spent that kind of money and tried to go back to all the homeowners looking like a scoundrel, I'd just table it until next year, so you can negotiate and decide what is important, etc.
The building is being "remodeled" because severe rot and nasty mold was found in the framing all over the place. One wall (exterior bearing wall) was so bad the sill plate was completely gone and you could push out on the wall and make it move about 3-4 inches!
30 years of neglect (it's a VOLUNTEER homeowners association, and many times those good enough to volunteer don't know what they're getting into, don't care, or don't have the knowledge necessary for that position. Or all of the above.)
Some previous improvements probably only made it worse. About 7 years ago, T111 siding was put over the drywall on the inside. So now all the water on the floor wicked up into it like a sponge, and had a happy meal on the drywall substrate. Water from the showers was soaking the T111 walls, which was then covered in some places with FRP panel. Bandaid after bandaid. Then I come along with a little knowledge. What have I gotten myself into?
It's shut down in September and forgotten about until the following May. It's a pool house with inadequate floor drains, so all the people coming in out of the pool to pee or take a shower (and we DO encourage that behavior!) drip water on the floor, it stands, or runs to the wall and rots the framing. 30 years takes its toll.
We did some minor improvements last spring, like replacing some doors and other sprucing up, and that's when we discovered all the problems.
Mostly neglect, and the nature of volunteering around here.
The cost of the remodel was compared to a knockdown/rebuild, and since the project is a certain size, many of the newer requirements are in effect. No choice really. It would have been worse had we knocked it down (new foundation, bigger footprint to accomodate more codes, and a bunch of other stuff.)
So we do what we can. It IS ridiculous, since the only things that are not being replaced are the ceiling joists, roof rafters, about 10' of one exterior wall, and most of the concrete slab. Everything else will be new. Just to deal with the codes, we had to do it that way.Pete Duffy, Handyman
Now that you've provided something closer to the whole story, it is pretty easy to see how project creep escalated into budget creep.
The original INTENT of the project was to deal with the structural repairs and mold issues, and not ADA code compliance. It is often a matter of local board interpretation when and how much of the ADA standards appply. Some operate in fear of litigation, Some are motivated by other emotions, Some focus on cost. others arre legalistic.
The problem you have, based on the info available without seeing the contract and how it was written, is with the board that required the extra changes. A contractor can read a code book, but cannot determine in advance how a board made up of multiple personalities will interpret it. Believe me, i know. i've sat on both sides of that table.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
The GC knew that the place would have to be handicap accessible, and included many things even in his 1st proposal. Bars in the showers and baths, special toilets, etc. So he did know what was involved, basically making the remodeled structure as compliant as possible within the restrictions of the footprint. This was by no means a surprise to him.
When I said "we" did some imporovements last spring, this GC was not even in the picture yet. He was contacted after we had decided that the place either needed to be torn down or remodeled to a great extent, and was asked to give input on both scenarios. So from the start he knew what he was getting into.
The board and the association haven't really had much to do with it, other than approving funds. Due to the nature of "volunteering" around here, most of the people around here would just as soon let somebody else (me) take care of everything, like interviewing a dozen contractors, reviewing contracts, specs, etc.
I did form a steering committee from the neighborhood to help give input on decisions, and they've been good. Haven't done a lot of work, but gave input. THis was basically a preventive measure so when people come and b!tch about the project later, I can ask "Why weren't you involved? The opportunity was provided."
Like I said previously, how much is the GC, (and any people he hires, like subs, the archy, etc.) expected to know? I realize that they cannot possibly know all of the codes in all of the jurisdictions, but when he tells me it will be handicap accessable and will comply with all codes, and then hits me with a CO for 17% of the project cost, it just knocked me backwards. I can fully understand that changes are necessary, but someone dropped the ball. In my opinion, the archy he hired didn't earn his pay honestly, and the GC was somewhat at fault, only because of lack of diligence, not by any bad intentions.
Say he hires an electrician who puts 14ga wire in the lighting circuits. Then he finds out that 20 ga is required (commercial) and then wants to upcharge for that?
"Oh, you need studs every SIXTEEEN inches? I quoted 24 OC. Sorry, that'll cost ya! Didn't know ya had to build it like that 'round these hyer parts."
Extreme examples, yes, but the principle is the same.
I went through his change order and some parts catalogs, and came up with some reasonable proposals that I will give to him soon. I ain't gonna nickel and dime him, but will only pay for what is reasonable and fair, and I'm sure we'll work it out together. On most of the items I'm even erring on his side of the wallet, giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Thanks for the input. I'm all vented out now.Pete Duffy, Handyman
Hopefully we can all ignore your wire gauge analogy - I think that was a swing and a miss, and I understood what you were swinging for...
I think, if you haven't done so already, you should make an appt to sit down with the building official. Explain the situation in full. There may be some latitude, to let you do a little less - since it is technically something you are doing voluntarily... unless he can show you where the building code absolutely requires it. I'm not so sure, but I don't work in your area. What code?? IBC?
The contractor hired the architect, so IMHO the contractor is culpable for some of this - he gave a price before he understood the scope. As much as I always try to lean toward fairness, stupidity needs to be a little painful.
You're right, the next step is with the Village Building Department. Can you believe they want us to INSULATE the building, walls AND ceiling! For a pool house open from Memorial day through Labor Day, then purged of ALL water (even the water meter is taken out) for winter. There is no heating system. The place is vacant for 265 days a year. Why insulate? Does this guy's brother-in-law work for Owens Corning or what?
This place is used to shower and go to the bathroom and change into and out of swim gear. Most people just come in their suits anyway, since it's a neighborhood pool. They walk through the open front door and right through the open pooside doors 16 feet away. And we need an EXIT sign above both of those, plus one above the guard area door which is maybe 6 feet away from one of these.
The Village is just getting a bit ridiculous, and it's time to call them on it. Fist replacing a 60" door opening with a 36" because some book told them to. Now insulate? This one has put me over the edge.
The emergency lighting they are requiring must be rated for 90 minutes! It's a 16 x 30 foot building, fer cryin' out loud. If it takes you more than 90 seconds to get out, you deserve to be left in the dark!
I intentionally stayed out of the loop between Village and GC so as not to muddy up the waters, but it is now time to go for a little visit down to Village hall. The stupidity is what is really bothering me now. Forget the money!Pete Duffy, Handyman
Just ask them to show you the reg that requires all this upgrading on a renovation. Sanity should say you shouldn't have to double your costs just to repair some rot - the building ain't changing.
my suggestion: build some fenced shower enclosures like you'd find at a beach. build a block walled restroom only building, or buy one that's prefab.
or just knock it down and plant grass...
ALL RIGHT!
Now we've got that pent up anger headed in the right direction!
;)
Get in touch with those feelings, Then get in touch with the idiots who are interpreting the rules.
Go for it. Hang'm high on the exit sign
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I can hang THREE if I want, since that's how many exit signs we're required to have!
Or maybe hang the same guy 3 times? I'll have to check the code book first.Pete Duffy, Handyman
I'm glad to have helped you vent so you can be reasonable with him.
BTW the board I was refering to is the permitting agency, not the homeowner association
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!