Surface area
The farm pond as first excavated had a surface area of about 11,000 square-feet or 1/4 acre.
The farm pond specified in the contract was supposed to have a surface area of 22,000 square-feet or 1/2 acre or TWICE as large in area as what was delivered.
Weed-free area
 |
| Curlyleaf Pondweed (Potamogeton crispus) |
As a rule-of-thumb, submerged vegetation does not break the surface when the bottom is 6' or more below the surface of the water.
 |
| It is not fun to swim when seaweed wraps around your legs. |
The area of the pond as first excavated where the bottom was 6' or more below the surface was essentially zero. For most pond owners, that means that the pond as first excavated would have no usable area after June 15 (in Michigan) for boating, swimming or fishing. It would also be subject to winter die-off due to excessive vegetation dying and decaying which would gobble up all of the oxygen dissolved in the water.
The area of the pond specified in the contract would have approximately 10,000 square-feet where the bottom was 6' or more below the surface. The "weeds" would only extend from the shoreline to 18' out. In fact, the area of usable pond that would be deeper than 6' would be almost as large as the entire pond as-built.
Volume of pond
The volume of the pond is a first-order approximation of the amount of fill that had to be moved and is directly related to the contractor's cost to dig the pond.
The pond as first excavated displaced about 940 cubic-yards.
The pond as specified in the contract would have displaced about 3200 cubic-yards.
In other words, the contractor's cost to dig and move the fill was understated by a factor of three relative to what an "honest" quote would have been based on.
The comparisons underestimate the costs because more fill that is removed must be carted farther away from the nominal water's edge.
Summary:
- Half the surface area the contract called for
- One third the volume (assuming a maximum depth of 12' and 1:3 slope)
- A million times less weed-free area and a similar disadvantage in terms of winter fish-kill
Yeah, my buddy had every right to go after them. What he paid for would have been an asset. What the contractor delivered was a liability.
Yes, get them!!!
ReplyDeleteOne might assume that there were bluegills, redears and bass that "would have" been another asset he was deprived of.
ReplyDeleteMilton
I wonder how many quotes your friend got for the project and if the others were ~3x the one from the contractor he selected.
ReplyDeleteThe rule I learned was "Get at least 5 quotes. Throw out the lowest and highest, then take the one closest to the average."
I don't have that information.
DeleteIt has to be pretty obvious that they didn't measure or drive any stakes to establish the perimeter. Nor did they ever measure the slope. They "eyeballed" it. Maybe once upon a time they were close but it may have drifted over time.
My perception is that there are not tons of people who will bid on the work. It may have been a matter of picking the firm that could get to it in 2025.
I've been in the construction business for about 50 years, starting as a laborer and working in the trades before graduating engineering school. I've worked on projects from minor repairs and additions to 500 million dollar high tech jobs. A couple notes:
DeleteThe award method noted above is known as the English award method in the construction business. Firm Fixed Price low bid is a common US method, especially for public projects, but there are other award/delivery methods. Regardless of method, any time I get a bid that is more than 10% from the average, either high or low, that sounds mental alarm bells. Best to understand why before inking the deal.
Once an award is made, an applicable adage is "You can only expect what you inspect." If the owner does not have the expertise or time to determine whether the work should be accepted, it is a good idea, and better long term value, to engage someone to check the work prior to completion. These costs should be included in the budget.
In this case, some simple tape measure work ahead of payment would have saved a great deal of trouble. 40 years ago, reputation was a lot more important, especially to site civil contractors, but with profit margins squeezing due to hungry newcomers, regulatory nonsense, incompetent/corrupt gooberment approvers/'inspectors', and rising fuel costs, among other factors, the pressure on excavation contractors to cut corners is immense. That does not excuse active dishonesty as evidenced here, but does require the Owner to be vigilant in protection of his interest.
Maybe I'm too distrusting - I have "way too distrusting" as a default setting - but the philosophies of "people's default settings is always to screw it up in the worst way possible so plan for that" and "help the provider help me" would make me measure and stake the perimeter myself. I don't know how to "demonstrate the proper grade I specified" or "the depth shall be Y" but including "X is the grade specified and here's how the final result will be measured and determined to be in or out of compliance" with the same for the depth spec would at least set a measurable performance standard.
ReplyDeleteThe cost of correction will be substantially more than the cost of fixing what was incorrectly done, on the part of both parties, and the property owner will probably never get what he actually wanted/specified . I suspect you may be right - this was what could be procured within the time frame desired.
I can't imagine how your friend was apparently blindsided by his finished pond.
ReplyDeleteI've got a couple of friends who had ponds built on their land and literally from the first dozer rolling on to their property to the final section of dock being installed, these guys had their nose in what was going on.
I think that that is pretty much the way I do it too.