Do these comments just indicate laziness?

[ultramods]

Again more just a rant........

 

We received first set of comments back from the council this week regarding the building warrant. Whilst none of them are serious it appears to me that most of them are due to shear laziness on the part of the architect. It looks like he just copies as pastes generic notes onto the drawings of every project he works on. Surely he must get similar comments for every building warrant he submits so why not just update his generic template? 

 

For example the comment about the gas "3.17.6 A gas boiler should be installed by a Gas Safe registered installer not Corgi. Amend accordingly." - I'm assuming this hasn't changed recently.

 

It reminds me of being a CHILD in school writing an essay, I knew that I should proof read it at least once, but I couldn't be bothered, so would just submit it, no doubt with many basic mistakes.

 

Section 1- Structure

1.1.1 In order to demonstrate compliance with this clause, a Certificate of Design from an approved Certifier of Design is required to accompany this Building Warrant application.

 

1.1.1 Provide any engineers details to support the aforementioned certificate.

 

1.1.1 The engineering sketches provided for the wall, floor etc do not correspond with the architect drawings. Ensure all details correspond.

 

Section 2 - Fire

2.2.4 A self-closing door with short fire resistance duration should be provided between the dwelling and garage. Clearly indicate.

 

2.2.6 Provide a specification for the separating wall between the garage and the dwelling. Also confirm that all services will be surface mounted. 2.6.1 Clearly show distance to boundary on the North West.

 

2.11.7 Provide smoke detection within the hallway outside the door to the master bedroom.

 

2.11.7 Smoke detection should be provided to the family room area.

 

Section 3- Environment

3.5.4 Several contradicting spot notes refer to existing drainage. One stating it is to be re-routed. Another refers to 'no existing drains' etc, another states exact location of existing drains to be determined. Irrelevant information should be removed.

 

3.7.1 The spot notes refer to a report by SA MacGregor. This was not received. Provide a copy to enable an assessment to be carried out.

3.7.1 The drainage notes and what is indicated on the site plan do not correspond. The notes state that a treatment plant and soakaway is to be provided, the site plan indicates connection to mains drains. All details should correspond. Amend accordingly.

3.7.1 SVP's should be provided with hand access 1m above each floor level. Also indicate the svp on the elevation.

 

3.7.1 The specification also refers to an AAV. Clearly indicate its location.

 

3.7.3 Ensure that the BS EN numbers stated are the current versions. Amend accordingly.

3.7.4 If the drainage is to terminate to public sewers, disconnection chambers should be provided immediately inside the curtilage.

3.10.5 Provide an annotated detail of the garage wall. The cross section just shows the timber frame.

3.11.6 Indicate the indoor drying space.

3.12.3 The walls to the accessible shower room should have robust construction as per this guidance, 9mm plywood would be insufficient. Amend accordingly.

3.14.2 A carbon dioxide detector should be provided within the main bedroom. Clearly indicate and provide a specification.

3.14.3 Clearly indicate mechanical extractors on the floor plans. Also indicate extract termination points on the elevations.

3.14.3 The utility room should be provided with inlet ventilation. Please note this should not be to a moisture producing area.

3.14.11 It is noted that the infiltration rate for this dwelling is designed at 3m3/hr/m2 @ 50 Pa, and it is noted that a MVHR system is to be installed. Provide full details including manufacturers literature etc.

3.17.1 The spot notes refer to a Stovax Riva 2 fire insert. Provide full manufacturers literature and installation instructions to enable an assessment to be carried out.

3.19.5 The stove referred to appears to be an inset stove however hearth details have been provided and a clearance diagram provided. If a hearth is to be installed clearly indicate which type is to be provided and remove all irrelevant information.

3.19.8 Where a hearth abuts a wall a solid non-combustible shield must be provided as per this guidance. Metal studs and supalux would not comply. Provide full details on what is being provided to enable an assessment.

3.19.9 If a fireplace recess is to be provided it should be in accordance with this guidance. Provide details.

3.17.6 A gas boiler should be installed by a Gas Safe registered installer not Corgi. Amend accordingly.

3.20.19 Indicate the flue outlet for the boiler on the elevations.

3.20.20 The plan shows a carbon dioxide (co2) monitor within the family room for the stove. A carbon monoxide detector should be provided. Amend accordingly.

3.20.20 Carbon monoxide detection should be provided for the boiler.

3.21.2 Clearly indicate the vent for air for combustion.

3.24.4 A storage container for solid woody biomass fuel is required.

 

Section 4- Safety

4.1.4 Confirm the surface of the accessible route.

4.1.7 The ground floor plan appears to indicate a step at the accessible entrance and a specification for external steps is provided. A suitably sized plat should be provided. Clarification is required.

4.3.2 Provide full details and specification for the cantilevered stair including the tapered section at the bottom

4.3.14/4.3.15/ 4.4.2 Provide full details and specification for the handrails, barriers etc.

4.4.2 Confirm that no opening to the stair will allow the passage of a 100mm sphere.

4.4.2 Confirm that the glazing to bedroom 2 is capable of withstanding the loads specified within this guidance.

4.6.4 A minimum of 6 sockets should be provided to the kitchen area in addition to any for floor standing white goods or built in appliances. Only two are indicated. Amend accordingly.

4.8.5 The sockets within the family area are indicated too close to the corners. Amend accordingly.

4.9.3 Indicate the unvented hwc discharge point on the drawings.

4.13.2 Confirm that all windows and doors will be secured by design as per this guidance.

4.14.1 Provide details to show compliance with this guidance.

 

Section 5- Noise

5.2.3 The intermediate floor detail indicate on the plan is as per the example construction from the BSD website. However, this is not what is actually shown or specified. Clarification is required. Section

 

6- Energy

6.1.1 Full energy information, SAP, TER, DER and supporting u value calculations will require to be provided to enable an assessment.

6.1.1 The specification for insulation to the ceiling level states 140mm between trusses and 2 further layers across. This would take the insulation above the truss line. The boiler, cylinder, comms cupboard and mhvr system are all specified as being located within the loft space. If a floored section is to be provided this would affect the insulation level. Provide full details.

 

6.2.5 It is noted that air tightness testing will be carried out.

6.5.1 The specification states that a minimum 100% of fixed lighting will be low energy then goes on to refer to 50%. Irrelevant information should be removed. A minimum of 75% of the fixed light fittings and lamps installed should meet the guidance to this standard. Amend accordingly

6.9 An EPC should be provided.

 

Section 7- Sustainability

7.1.1 A sustainability label will be required at completion stage. Additional Information Amendments and revisions should be highlighted and linked to the above technical observation points. Clearly indicate how access to the attic space is achieved and confirm if there is to be a floored section. The drawings make reference to demolition works. Provide suitable drawings indicating any existing building and clearly indicate any buildings to be demolished. The spot note at the garage section refers to cavity wall being backfilled to ground level. This does not correspond with what is indicated for the garage. Clarification is required. Provide a method statement for any demolition works. Spot notes which are irrelevant to a new build should be removed i.e. exposed pipework to be insulated. Provide a full height annotated section through the chimney. Provide full details of the mvhr system referred to including manufacturers literature. Provide manufacturers literature for the stove and flue. Provide a specification for the timber clad sections. The central heating system notes refers to BS 5256. Provide details of this British Standard as it does not appear to be related to gas boilers.

[LA3222]

Wow, I gave up reading halfway through, looks like an extremely piss poor effort by the architect.

 

I feel your pain, spending good money on a 'professional' and you get this to deal with.  Seems like self building is a perpetual minefield of fighting to get value for the money we are spending on achieving 'the dream'.

 

 

[PeterW]

I’d want that lot fixed by the architect and without a bill for the work ... it’s laziness and smacks of a standard set of annotations that are used regardless of what has been drawn. 

[ultramods]

1 minute ago, PeterW said:

I’d want that lot fixed by the architect and without a bill for the work ... it’s laziness and smacks of a standard set of annotations that are used regardless of what has been drawn. 

 

He won't be charging to fix the issues. However I am left thinking that right now we could have had an approved building warrant if he hand't been so lazy when submitting it.

[newhome]

Dear oh dear! That’s a very long list and not in keeping with the amount you paid I’m sure . I imagine that BC will always find something but that list looks way in excess of what you’d expect from a quality job. I hope that none of it means any material changes to your preferred design. 

 

Ultimately there are always so called professionals that do a crappy job no matter what their trade or fee. I recall a very well known management consultancy preparing a very expensive report (nearly 6 figures) for my division and they hadn’t even bothered to change the company name from clearly the last time they wheeled out the same sub standard report. 

 

On a positive note at least you didn’t go down the route of engaging him for the project management as he may have continued with the shoddy job throughout the project. 

[ultramods]

@newhome none of the issues will lead to changes to the design, just delays the building warrant being issued.

[Thedreamer]

These comments appear to be a mixture of a few areas left out of the plans/specification and building control stating the obvious. 

 

I used a local house designer and a structural engineer and the only differences between what was amended after going in, was for a space for a possible stair lift and the external drainage  to be haunch in concrete where it passed over parking.

[MikeSharp01]

If they are proper architects and you engaged them to create acceptable warrent drawings then these are clearly so full of holes you wonder what they were doing. Anyway just get them to fix it all at their expense.

[ToughButterCup]

6 hours ago, ultramods said:

[...] we could have had an approved building warrant if he hadn't been so lazy when submitting it.

 

I have come to expect laziness within the building sector as standard. The first thing that suffers as a result of laziness is attention to detail.

My ecologists lack of attention to detail resulted in a 6 month delay. I paid half his bill. That resulted in instant attention. When, as we agreed -in writing - , he resubmits an invoice for the balance, I'll pay it. 3  years later, no invoice. 

 

My ecologist will be aware of his character trait. And so will your architect. Withhold an appropriate amount: wait for the fuss to die down, and then don't pay it until you see a change in behaviour.

 

Why should unprofessional behaviour cost the same as the opposite?

[SteamyTea]

8 hours ago, ultramods said:

Again more just a rant........

 

It reminds me of being a CHILD in school writing an essay, I knew that I should proof read it at least once, but I couldn't be bothered, so would just submit it, no doubt with many basic mistakes.

 

 Provide details of this British Standard as it does not appear to be related to gas boilers.

" If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter. " Blaise Pascal 1657

[MikeSharp01]

2 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

" If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter. " Blaise Pascal 1657

Ah - the glory of the sub edit.

[ultramods]

4 hours ago, recoveringacademic said:

 

I have come to expect laziness within the building sector as standard. The first thing that suffers as a result of laziness is attention to detail.

My ecologists lack of attention to detail resulted in a 6 month delay. I paid half his bill. That resulted in instant attention. When, as we agreed -in writing - , he resubmits an invoice for the balance, I'll pay it. 3  years later, no invoice. 

 

My ecologist will be aware of his character trait. And so will your architect. Withhold an appropriate amount: wait for the fuss to die down, and then don't pay it until you see a change in behaviour.

 

Why should unprofessional behaviour cost the same as the opposite?

 

We have thought about withholding payment a few times now, however we know that with the architects personality he would probably deliberately drag things out even longer.

[ToughButterCup]

1 minute ago, ultramods said:

We have thought about withholding payment a few times now, however we know that with the architects personality he would probably deliberately drag things out even longer.

 

Time to several the ties? 

But it is time to pick your fight. And because most don't choose that , he gets away with it.

[ultramods]

@recoveringacademic once we get the building warrant we wont need anything else from him. And once we are into the build if we experience similar from any of the trades I will be getting rid of them immediately.

[newhome]

1 minute ago, ultramods said:

if we experience similar from any of the trades I will be getting rid of them immediately.

 

That’s a great sentiment but it can be easier said than done when you are halfway through a job, unhappy, but then struggle to get someone else to pick up a half job. And even when you think you’ve chosen wisely things can go wrong. Self building isn’t for wimps for sure. 

[ToughButterCup]

45 minutes ago, newhome said:

[...]

Self building isn’t for wimps for sure. 

 

Thats what makes it so worthwhile. 

[MikeSharp01]

Architects have professional bodies all of whom have complaints procedures. You could loil them up and see if making a formal complaint would have the desired effect. The PB will know what constitutes unprofessional behaviour - which this looks like it might be from the insights we have been given, and will take up your case if it looks like it to them. At the very least they will inform the architect which might have the required galvanic effect. 

[newhome]

8 minutes ago, recoveringacademic said:

 

Thats what makes it so worthwhile. 

 

Aye, for sure, but drives you demented at times lol. Sanity isn’t a prerequisite for self building, in fact many may consider us slightly insane . 

[Hecateh]

58 minutes ago, newhome said:

 

.... Self building isn’t for wimps for sure. 

 

12 minutes ago, recoveringacademic said:

 

Thats what makes it so worthwhile. 

 

That wasn't the word I would have chosen at various stages 

 

(cross posted with newhome - with similar sentiments  )

 

Edited June 17, 2018 by Hecateh