Engineering Design and Compliance

descol

Hi - has anyone got any views on the pros and cons concerning a requirement set out in a tender invitation for a Contractor (small scale domestic project) whereby the Contractor is required to engage the services of a qualified structural Engineer to design and certify structural for the works. ?
Any comments appreciated - thanks

sinnerboy

Will be an irrelevant query come next March. See here

descol

Sinnerboy - thanks for the link - I did not know the discussion was going on here

DOCARCH

descol wrote: »

Hi - has anyone got any views on the pros and cons concerning a requirement set out in a tender invitation for a Contractor (small scale domestic project) whereby the Contractor is required to engage the services of a qualified structural Engineer to design and certify structural for the works. ?
Any comments appreciated - thanks

I would suggest there is nothing wrong with this approach (for now at least) for a small project...but...it would have to be very clearly set out in any tender documents and confirmed, in writing, with any selected contractor.

Rather than just being 'qualified' the structural engineer should, in addition, be 'chartered' and carry PI insurance.

If I was going to take your suggested approach, prior to appointment of the contrcator, I would be asking the contractor to nominate the engineer, provide confirmation of the engineers appointment and confirmation of PI insurance. I would also link/make a condition that any final payment to the
contractor would be subject to having sign off/an opinion on compliance from the engineer with regard to structure.

If the agreement is casual, I would suggest you may never see any paperwork!

sinnerboy wrote: »

Will be an irrelevant query come next March. See here

Not so sure about that? Domestic extensions under 40m.sq. will be still under the old 'system'/as it is now. I use the word 'system' very loosely!

descol

DOCARCH
Thanks for the advice

sinnerboy

DOCARCH wrote: »

Not so sure about that? Domestic extensions under 40m.sq. will be still under the old 'system'/as it is now. I use the word 'system' very loosely!

Legally technically , yes I agree. However I do believe the real "policemen" of building control for the future will be the lending institutions. They will refuse to lend on properties with undocumented interventions. So even if works are not bound by the +40m2 rule I would think long and hard about not adhering to the new building control regulation procedures.

And for the benefit of those who may not know "the old system" requires all works to be carried out in compliance with building regulations. ALL works. No matter how "small" . Eg - replacement boiler must be of min % efficiency. Replace just one bedroom window and it must comply with min dims for means of escape.

A standard consideration a lender will make is "has the property been altered since it was first built" and then " where are the certs?"
During the boom the answer was often "there are no certs" and the lenders (almost) always said " ok so , carry on" .

They won't anymore.

DOCARCH

sinnerboy wrote: »

So even if works are not bound by the +40m2 rule I would think long and hard about not adhering to the new building control regulation procedures.

Agreed.

I suppose where I was coming from was, in reply to the OP, was that I was assuming there will be an architects opinion on complaince with regard to building regulations and an architects opinion on complaince with regard to planning permission and/or exemption.

In addition to these documents/opinions, if structual works/alterations are carried out there should also be an opinion on compliance with regard to structure/Part A of the building regulations (from a chartered engineer).

Finally, as standard practice for the last 10 years or so, I have alwsy requested e letter of confimation from the contractor stating/confirming they have built the works in accordance with building regulations. I include to requirement for this in the tender documnets.

For even the smallest extension, I would expect a client (of mine) to have those 4 documents at the end of their project.

Ohhh...and...don't forget documnet no. 5...the safety file (for projects where design has commenced after August 1st)!

Bubbling

DOCARCH,

Thanks for the post. Very good summary. Can I just ask, do you always involve a structural engineer on every project, no matter how small, to cover the design of any beams and foundations and to give their opinion of compliance for the structure?

And for say a small extension, typically how does the engineer structure his fee? (pardon the pun! :-)) Percentage, lump sum, etc.?

I am just starting an architectural practice on my own and have been advising clients of the need for an architect and engineer for their projects / extensions, but the general reaction form clients is that that seem over the top. And they also don't like the idea of paying on the double for fees. I guess I just need to educate them properly as to the scope of services of an architect and how they are different from an engineer.

BryanF

Bubbling wrote: »

And they also don't like the idea of paying on the double for fees. I guess I just need to educate them properly as to the scope of services of an architect and how they are different from an engineer.

there's nothing to stop you including a structural fee in your price and paying a Eng directly for say designing a beam/foundation for a smaller project. otherwise your expecting the client to pay for a way oversized structure to ensure your/their builder's rule of thumb structural calc wont come back to haunt your PI insurance..

DOCARCH

As BryanF alludes to, you simply have to explain to clients that your PI insurance, as an architect, will not cover anything in relation to structural design/calculations/certification.

The bigger/more complex the project, the bigger the input of the engineer.

I don't want to be speaking on behalf of engineers, but, for domestic projects, normally the engineer will work on a fixed fee.

For very small domestic projects, where structural work/intervention is limited, I am usually happy to propose the structural works required up to tender stage. Then when job goes on site (or just prior to going on site) I have an engineer review what I have proposed, tweak specification as necessary, inspect structural works and certify at the end.

For more complex domestic projects, the engineer is brought in at the end of the design stage and would prepare a set of structural design drawings for tender (along with the architectural tender drawings and documentation).

In all cases, the clients are made well aware that an engineer will be required at some stage during the porject...and, even though I use the same engineer most of the time, I always have clients appoint engineer seperately.

Gangu

Would anyone have or know where I might get a template invitation to tender for contractors needed for a refurb and extension?

Gangu

Gangu wrote: »

Would anyone have or know where I might get a template invitation to tender for contractors needed for a refurb and extension?

Sorry meant to start a new thread