Teardown Home in Rosemary Beach

[Teresa]

AAb - regardless of your history with the scootbug, why not just say you disagree and move on without all the angry stuff, or just state your own opinion without putting down another, or just ask her out for a date for chrissake.

 

[AAbsolute]

AAb - regardless of your history with the scootbug, why not just say you disagree and move on without all the angry stuff, or just state your own opinion without putting down another, or just ask her out for a date for chrissake.

I wish. Thanks

 

[AAbsolute]

The mold in this house was mostly from the fact that the windows (nice mahogany windows) had been improperly installed. The leaks below the window sills caused mold that was concealed inside the walls.

Wasn't that a Walt Chancey Architects job?

 

[AAbsolute]

Does the word "lawsuit" come to mind?

I know the house is over one year old and outside the general contractor's normal one year warranty period, but there is a term called "Latent Defect" that addresses items like this.

'course in this case, the buyer probably doesn't care about minor things like that. He apparently only wanted the lot (and got it!!!!)

The Builder of Record for that original construction is long out of business. Latent Defect wouldn't go anywhere. The Architect of Record administered that contract and designed and approved all of the window installation details. They were paid mega bucks to be the final word on construction detailing and waterproofing and how did that turn out? There are as many opinions about "correct" or "defective" window and door flashing details as there are pencil pushers to draw them.

 

[Chickpea]

An architect can draw away as much as he or she desires - but all the details are completely worthless if the Builder does not build it per the drawings.

 

[AAbsolute]

An architect can draw away as much as he or she desires - but all the details are completely worthless if the Builder does not build it per the drawings.

You sound like you say that with some level of experience. If an Architect is paid to administer a construction project and paid hourly for site inspections of their own details who is responsible for the execution of the work?

 

[AAbsolute]

You got the complaining part down to a science now let's work on an answer to the real life questions.

 

[Chickpea]

You sound like you say that with some level of experience. If an Architect is paid to administer a construction project and paid hourly for site inspections of their own details who is responsible for the execution of the work?

You are a builder and you know that an Architect on site tries to do the best they can to look after Owner's best interests and make sure drawings are being respected (but remember that a contract is between Builder and Owner - a competent architect will draw a complete set of drawings and details to fully convey not only design intent but also preferred construction techniques and they will hope that their client will select a Builder commited to building as designed. This does not mean that there cannot be healthy debate between Builder and Architect. Ultimately though, like I said, an architect can draw away to their hearts content - if a Builder is not faithful, it matters little.

And to answer your question: an architect cannot be on site all the time regardless of whatever contract they have negotiated with Owner - it is the responsibility of the Architect to detail things correctly and that of the Builder to execute properly.

 

[AAbsolute]

You are a builder and you know that an Architect on site tries to do the best they can to look after Owner's best interests and make sure drawings are being respected (but remember that a contract is between Builder and Owner - a competent architect will draw a complete set of drawings and details to fully convey not only design intent but also preferred construction techniques and they will hope that their client will select a Builder commited to building as designed. This does not mean that there cannot be healthy debate between Builder and Architect. Ultimately though, like I said, an architect can draw away to their hearts content - if a Builder is not faithful, it matters little.

And to answer your question: an architect cannot be on site all the time regardless of whatever contract they have negotiated with Owner - it is the responsibility of the Architect to detail things correctly and that of the Builder to execute properly.

That was very thoughtfully worded. I appreciate the effort.

In the case that you are talking about right now, in this Thread, that you added your 2 cents too, you are completely innaccurate.

This Architect drew elevations that did not match from one page to the other. The Architect submitted finish schedules that did not match the specification book that they prepared. The flashing details were not consistant with their own product specifications. Structural sections did not match floor plans or elevations. The Architect designed and specified the flashing details and inspected them with comments and corrections. The structural drawings did not match the Architectural drawings. Last, I should add, that the client hired the Architect and the Architect was the highest authority on the job from the permitting stand point.

Now again, If the Architect specifies flashing details and charges the client for inspections and administration who is responsible for the success of the condition?

 

[Chickpea]

That was very thoughtfully worded. I appreciate the effort.

In the case that you are talking about right now, in this Thread, that you added your 2 cents too, you are completely innaccurate.

This Architect drew elevations that did not match from one page to the other. The Architect submitted finish schedules that did not match the specification book that they prepared. The flashing details were not consistant with their own product specifications. Structural sections did not match floor plans or elevations. The Architect designed and specified the flashing details and inspected them with comments and corrections. The structural drawings did not match the Architectural drawings. Last, I should add, that the client hired the Architect and the Architect was the highest authority on the job from the permitting stand point.

Now again, If the Architect specifies flashing details and charges the client for inspections and administration who is responsible for the success of the condition?

I do not know if you are talking about the original Architect of record or the new one and I certainly know absolutely nothing about the drawings BUT from what you describe (and I have no idea if what you are saying is correct or not), there was not sufficient time allocated to coordination which is poor work on the part of the Architect - but this does not change the premise of my argument - a good client pays for good drawings - a good architect produces complete and accurate and well coordinated sections/elevations and details AND a good builder executes these per the drawings. In fact a competent Builder would easily spot the discrepancies in drawings and should bring it to Architect's attention way before Construction starts (this does not mean Architect has license to be sloppy).

An architect LEGALLY cannot tell a Builder and certainly cannot tell any of the GC's subs what to do on site or how to build something - they can bring discrepancies and deviations from the drawings to the Owner's attention and ask that Owner act accordingly and notifies Builder. An Architect is paid to observe (some call it administer) Construction BUT they have to trust that details are being executed properly (IF they have been correctly drawn).