My next door neighbor has decided to build up the slope in his back yard to pour a concrete pad which he intends to build a shed on. That's all hunky dory but, while he's built a hefty rebar-reinforced concrete retaining wall for the downslope portion of his pad, he's using our 1/2" slat cedar fence for the side wall.
Seeing our fence bulging out from the weight of the gravel backfill he was using, we suggested that this was not such a great idea. I came home today to find that he'd dug out the gravel, laid cinder blocks against the fence and filled those with gravel. I'm still rather underwhelmed.
Does anyone here have the expertise to tell me whether I should be worrying about this? Everything I've read about cinder block retaining walls indicates that they should be on concrete footings, filled with concrete and reinforced with rebar. His are sitting on earth and filled with gravel.
He didn't seem very interested in talking about the matter. We intend to call the city tomorrow to see if there's anything they can do for us.
[ August 20, 2007, 11:33 PM: Message edited by: MattP ]
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Odds are high that he can't legally build a shed using the fence as part of the structure. Or build anything against the fence which affects its integrity. Also many localities have a minimum clearance distance between any buildings and the property line. Additionally, there often are public easements/rights-of-way to allow for electricity/telephone/etc companies' access through the property which forbid building anything permanent (other than a fence) within several feet / couple metres of the property line (or at least one of the sides).
Depending on the size, it may not be legal to build that shed without a permit. Especially if the shed is permanent (ie hasn't been specificly designed to be taken apart to be moved) or the pad is of such size and construction as to be considered permanent (ie one would have to destroy the pad to remove it).
In some localities, building a pad larger than a legally-given maximum-size in-and-of-itself may trigger the legal necessity of informing the relevant governmental body that the property needs a new appraisal for property tax revaluation.
[ August 21, 2007, 12:03 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
Can you provide some more info? How high is the fill placed against your fence? Why gravel and not sand? What kind of concrete retaining wall is he using on the downslope? Does the retaining wall allow drainage or is any water that builds up suppose to drain through your fence?
I'm an engineer by the way.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
It's about 4' above the base of the fence at the highest point. No idea why gravel, not sand. On the downslope, it's an 8" thick, 4' tall concrete wall with some rebar sticking out the top. I wasn't there when it was put up so I don't know what the rebar structure is like inside or if there is any sort of footing at the base, but there's one vertical piece of rebar coming out about every 5 feet. I didn't see any provision for drainage, so I assume the water will be coming my way.
We told them last night that we need a commitment from them to work with us to get a proper retaining wall built or we would need to have a city inspector come out to put our minds at ease that his current design was safe. After expressing their annoyance at receiving an ultimatum, they agreed to not go any further on this until we work something out.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I'd have a city inspector come out regardless. You don't want that kind of work done, when it could affect your property value, unless the guy has a permit to do it properly.
And if it doesn't get documented now by the city, and you are aware that it is happening, you may have less legal recourse later should something Very Bad happen.
It's one thing if they decide to do electrical work on their own and burn their own house down, but causing a possible landslide onto someone else's property is Not Cool.
(and the fact that his first design was so crappy means he doesn't know what he's doing.)
(I'm only a civil engineer by osmosis, as I've lived with one for my entire life, I'm really a chemical/mechanical engineer.)
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
I've got a fairly good sense of what constitutes an adequate retaining wall at this scale, so as long as he's willing to follow my advice, I'm willing to look the other way on permitting and inspection because at that point the perceived risk of collapse will have fallen below the risk of alienating our neighbors.
I may still pay a for private engineer to come out, but bringing a city inspector out may cause more grief for both our neighbors and ourselves than is necessary. We both have a few zoning and code violations in our yards, but not anything that compromises safety. For instance, we have chickens in our yard - not allowed in our city. He's got a concrete pad poured on designated wetlands.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
What aspectre and BannaOj said, especially these:
quote:Odds are high that he can't legally build a shed using the fence as part of the structure [but I'd add -- "without your permission"]. Or build anything against the fence which affects its integrity.
quote:I'd have a city inspector come out regardless. ... And if it doesn't get documented now by the city, and you are aware that it is happening, you may have less legal recourse later should something Very Bad happen.
I have no engineering background whatsoever, but I'm officially Appalled at the Moxie. What a nasty thing for you to have to deal with.
It's so embarrassing to have to work to get across to someone that he or she is, y'know, being a rotten, inconsiderate, appalling jerk.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP: I may still pay a for private engineer to come out, but bringing a city inspector out may cause more grief for both our neighbors and ourselves than is necessary. We both have a few zoning and code violations in our yards, but not anything that compromises safety.
Sure, I can see your point. I would draw the line at safety, too.
I wonder, though, what will happen to your property value if the washoff creates a serious problem in your yard. Once the matter is done, it would be awfully hard to get it fixed. That's why I think (in my uneducated, knee-jerk opinion ) that at least a private formal inspection would be worth it. I think he should pay for it, or at a very minimum, split the cost with you.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Make sure that the private engineer isn't legally bound to notify the city in the case of structural code violations.
The concrete pad poured on designated wetlands will give him major problems if he tries to sell the property, that's for sure. (You aren't in Illinois are you? I know about wetland headaches in detail in this state)
I guess it depends on your location, obviously you are rural enough to be able to get away with chickens in your yard to begin with. Chickens, however, are easilly removable items, concrete structures are less so. And if he's encroaching on city property easements you could have problems when selling your own house.
AJ
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:It's so embarrassing to have to work to get across to someone that he or she is, y'know, being a rotten, inconsiderate, appalling jerk.
Especially when this neighbor has been so great until now. When we got in a tiff with another neighbor recently (and tiffs are not a problem for us, that was the only tiff in 10 years living here), he organized a cul-de-sac barbecue to help us get over it. The other party to that tiff didn't show up, but it was a very nice gesture.
Unfortunately, this neighbor tends to react kind of emotionally to adversity and has trouble separating his frustration with the situation from those who bring the situation to his attention.
He also doesn't have a lot of money, which has been a sore spot for him recently as he wants his wife to be able to quit her job and take care of their new baby at home, but they cannot afford for her to do so.
So now, he sees us as unreasonable bad guys who are making him dig deeper into his empty pockets to resolve something that he doesn't view as being a problem in the first place.
I can completely understand his position, but that doesn't make it any easier to get through to him.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Ahhh. Well, I will send you all the good, patient, bottomless-well-of-fortitude vibes I can. Good on you for walking the hard path: addressing the issue, but still maintaining perspective and respect for his dignity.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
We're in Utah. We've observed a few home sales along the wetlands in this neighborhood, and have been party to one other than our own. Most people seem to be unaware of the wetlands restrictions and I don't believe that any inspections of wetland compliance have been required prior to sale. My sense is that someone would have to complain to trigger regulatory action.
We are pretty rural, at least our backyard is. Everything to our south/west is pasture and wetland until you get to the lake about a mile away. I am reasonably confident that there are no city easements long the sides or rear of the property.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
*sigh* That is tough. *schemes*
Ok, get the private engineer to come in, and the drainage situation is really bad then have him report it city instead of you. That way you are the good guy because you paid for the opinion out of your own pocket, and then the city and the engineer become the bad guys, and you can commiserate with him over how stupid the city laws are.
Gives you just enough distance that hopefully he won't blame you directly quite as much. AJ
Posted by ludosti (Member # 1772) on :
While I am not a civil engineer nor a landscaper, all of my experiences with retaining walls (actually walls of any kind) is that they need concrete footings (at a minimum).
The most worrisome thing to me is the drainage situation. Any type of modification to the base topography of a yard needs to account for (or preserve pre-existing) drainage away from structures (including the footings of walls).
It sounds like having the city come take a look at it is probably your best option, since this guy seems to be inexperienced and uninformed.
[edit:] Do you happen to know anyone who is a landscaper or civil engineer that could perhaps offer advice to you and your neighbor?
[ August 21, 2007, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: ludosti ]
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:While I am not a civil engineer nor a landscaper, all of my experiences with retaining walls (actually walls of any kind) is that they need concrete footings (at a minimum).
Some types do not. The "gravity wall" type which uses blocks which have a lip at the back can be built on compacted gravel, but they work on a different principal than concrete or masonry walls which must be physically coupled to a concrete footing.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
A 4-ft wall is not that big, but the way he has it now isn't going to hold. Even the concrete block wall on the back isn't going to last that long if he only has rebar placed every 5 feet. You're right in knowing that you're fence isn't going to do the trick. BTW, a wall footing is there to support the weight of the wall itself and prevent setting. It doesn't really keep it from overturning. For a concrete block wall, I would recommend it, but I put in a wall using retaining wall blocks and didn't bother
It's hard to say anything about possible drainage problems. If the natural ground is pretty sandy, any water might just infiltrate right into the soil below the fill and never affect you.
If you have an engineer come out, will your neighbor listen to any suggestions he might have? I would recommend that you look for a geotechnical engineer.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:If you have an engineer come out, will your neighbor listen to any suggestions he might have?
We won't let him go forward until we feel it is safe. If an engineer tells us it's unsafe, we will tell the neighbor to fix it. Our only real leverage, beyond appealing to his good nature, is the threat of bringing the city out. So far that seems to be effective.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
Zgator, just wanted to let you know I started my first GeoTech class yesterday.
Hobbes Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Another suggestion... if you have a digital camera, take lots of pictures. You can use those as evidence later should you need to. But try to do it without the touchy neighbor observing, if possible.
AJ
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
I did a careful reading of the city zoning code and found that no accessory buildings are permitted within three feet of a property line. With that, I can shut him down completely on this project if I need to as his ultimate goal is to build a shed on this pad. Also, there has to be 6 feet between buildings and he already has a shed just adjacent to the pad.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
In theory, even if one is not notifying the city, one should attempt to follow the code, otherwise he will almost certainly have to pay a penalty to the city should he try to sell his house.
(The freestanding garage of the house we purchased was too close to a property line and the seller had to pay a pretty hefty fee to the city as a result.)
AJ
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
Good idea on the photos.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP: My next door neighbor has decided to build up the slope in his back yard to pour a concrete pad which he intends to build a shed on...(H)e's using our 1/2" slat cedar fence for the side wall.
Let him build the shed. Then, remove that section of the fence. Pretend that someone built a tiny little branch of Home Depot just for you.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
He's using the fence for the side wall of the retaining wall, not of the shed itself. The shed will be rising well above the fence. It'll look aweful, but that's a separate issue.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: In theory, even if one is not notifying the city, one should attempt to follow the code, otherwise he will almost certainly have to pay a penalty to the city should he try to sell his house.
I agree. It could even be worse. They have the authority to require that he remove the shed. That could be much more expensive than a potential fine.
Anything that I build that is going to be of substance will definitely be built to code, even if I'm not going to bother with permitting. I'm a big fan of fixing problems when they are cheap, and it's usually cheaper to do things right at the beginning.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: Another suggestion... if you have a digital camera, take lots of pictures. You can use those as evidence later should you need to. But try to do it without the touchy neighbor observing, if possible.
AJ
Excellent suggestion, as MattP noted. And this will brand me as a paranoid crackpot (unclean! unclean!), but if the timing is at all an issue, put the front page of a current newspaper in the photos.
However (ah, the trials of paranoia), this can make you seem a dingbat and be used against you as evidence you knew sumpin' was fishy about that shed. Casual "oh hey, my kid happens to be standing in front of that shed the neighbor is building!" photos might be better for all sorts of reasons. Can you get your kids to play in the sprinkler in that side of the yard?
*tips tinfoil hat
quote:Originally posted by MattP: Anything that I build that is going to be of substance will definitely be built to code, even if I'm not going to bother with permitting. I'm a big fan of fixing problems when they are cheap, and it's usually cheaper to do things right at the beginning.
I like the cut of your jib, sir.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Oh heck, I am a nutcase. *sigh
-----------
Edited to add:
quote:He also doesn't have a lot of money, which has been a sore spot for him recently as he wants his wife to be able to quit her job and take care of their new baby at home, but they cannot afford for her to do so.
So now, he sees us as unreasonable bad guys who are making him dig deeper into his empty pockets to resolve something that he doesn't view as being a problem in the first place.
If he is short on money, then why the heck is he building a shed? The materials aren't diamonds and saffron dust, but they aren't free, either.
Is he a hoarder that needs more room as he accumulates more stuff from sinking deeper into untreated depression that prevents him from making decisions about what to get rid of?
(That's my childhood encapsulated in a single sentence.)
---
Edited again to answer: Nope, don't answer that. The question amounts to idle gossip. So, a nutcase and a gossip -- my, my, am I not progressing magnificently? *rueful look
[ August 21, 2007, 08:20 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:If he is short on money, then why the heck is he building a shed? The materials aren't diamonds and saffron dust, but they aren't free, either.
I thought the same thing. His house is pretty small and had been owned by a single woman for several years. She got married to this guy and he moved in within the past two or three years and they had a baby together. The garage had already been converted into a living room, so they have no proper garage space for storing the misc. junk you usually put there.
I understand why he wants a shed, though I don't know how he's financially justifying it. I also want a shed and I make a lot more than he does, but I can't financially justify it at this point.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
I want a shed and I don't even have a yard right now. They're just darn useful things, and the smaller your means the more you can use one...to store the stuff that more successful people can put in their large basements or garages. Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I would love a shed. I am currently living in an ~360 square foot apartment (including the kitchen, bathroom, and closet). Heck, I'd be thrilled with anything. Give me another shelf on the wall, and I'd dance a jig.
But from my (crabby, misanthropic, surly, and crackpotly) perspective, a shed is the sort of thing that if you can't afford to build it safely and without endangering your neighbors or their property, then you just don't get one.
They are useful -- renting things is often more expensive than just buying them on sale or secondhand. But really, there is little we cannot do without, and much that (I think) we'd be happier without. And this guy apparently already has one shed ("his ultimate goal is to build a shed on this pad. Also, there has to be 6 feet between buildings and he already has a shed just adjacent to the pad."), which surely would suffice for the necessities (lawn mower, rake, basic car stuff). Ah, well, who am I to say. I'm just busy getting indignant on MattP's behalf. Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:I'm just busy getting indignant on MattP's behalf.
And I appreciate it. Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
*laughing aloud
Well, you have it in spades. And I admire your calm-headedness tremendously.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: And I admire your calm-headedness tremendously.
I'm a basketcase on the inside, but I'm dealing.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
Update...
I looked closely at the wall again today. It turns out that the cinder blocks that he's placed do not go all the way to the bottom of the fence. There's about 10" of gravel along the entire base of the fence, then cinder blocks the rest of the way up. The cinder blocks are not secured in any way, they are just stacked on each other and filled with gravel.
When we talked to him and his wife this evening, they rattled off a list of 6 people who they had described the wall to, with varying degrees of engineering experience, who had all, they said, signed off on it.
Given that the neighbors were unaware of the bare gravel under the blocks (they suggested we could go ahead and remove that fence panel - right), I doubt anyone that they spoke to understood exactly what was going on.
We insisted that an impartial engineer sign off in person. He's going to have his uncle (yeah, I know... just wait), who allegedly has been an engineer for 20+ years. Should he claim that it's safe, I will remove the fence panel in his presence. Simple physics says that 10" bottom layer of gravel will pour out, the blocks will drop, and a great deal more gravel will follow them out.
We also plan to call the city inspector in the morning to seek his advice.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
OK, so the blocks he placed not only don't go all the way to the bottom, they're only stacked up? Stacked blocks do not resist soil pressure. Blocks that are mortared don't do that great of a job at that height without some type of reinforcement.
<-- his wall would not even be able to withstand this
quote:When we talked to him and his wife this evening, they rattled off a list of 6 people who they had described the wall to, with varying degrees of engineering experience, who had all, they said, signed off on it.
Then have any one of them actually sign and seal, as a Professional Engineer, a letter detailing what the design is and that it will work. I have a feeling none would do that.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
We've got a geotechnical engineer coming out tomorrow morning. $125 an hour. (ouch)
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
That's beginning to be what I would consider going to far, considering that it would not cost you anything to call a city building inspector.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP: We've got a geotechnical engineer coming out tomorrow morning. $125 an hour. (ouch)
Hey Matt for $50 I'll "convince" your neighbor to take down his stupid wall. Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
The thing is that I'm not convinced that the city is going to do a rigorous evaluation. When the city builds retaining walls, they contract the work out to a large local engineering firm.
Because it's not technically a code violation to build a wall under 4' tall using whatever methods you feel like using, the city inspector can just say "if it fails and encroaches on your property, he has to pay for it." We already know that.
What we want to determine, and I think this requires someone with specialized knowledge, is what the failure mode will be. If it's going to be gradual encroachment, we can let it go and go after his homeowner's insurance when that happens. If it's going to be a catastrophic failure, we'll have to take more immediate action.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Hey Matt for $50 I'll "convince" your neighbor to take down his stupid wall.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Yeah, but since the point of building the wall is to put in a pad for a shed that is against the building code, the inspector telling him that would make the wall moot.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
The inspector can't do anything about a building that isn't there yet and I can point out the setback restriction to the neighbor if I want to go that route. An explicit threat to report future setback violations might motivate him to re-engineer his wall, but that could get really ugly. I'm keeping that card in my pocket for now.
I'm hoping that a proper inspection by a credentialed expert will convince him to do the right thing. I'm also willing to be reassured by that expert that there's nothing to worry about. Either case is worth a couple hundred dollars to me. Yes, I've got better things to spend the money on, but I've also spent much more money on much less useful endeavors in the past.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Fair enough.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I was wondering about the "why is he building a shed if he's broke" bit too. It seems counter intuitive, but I know that I am firmly in the "N" camp of Meyers-brigs and not the "S" camp at all.
The "wall" isn't really a wall, but a foundation component, to a larger structure and I think that needs to be emphasized with any and all city inspections. It has to be viewed in that light, not as a "wall" unto itself.
And most cities contract out the work to an engineering firm, so that isn't unusual, but there should be at least one engineer employed by the city itself, if it is a large enough city, to ride herd on the contractors.
AJ
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP: We insisted that an impartial engineer sign off in person. He's going to have his uncle (yeah, I know... just wait), who allegedly has been an engineer for 20+ years. Should he claim that it's safe, I will remove the fence panel in his presence. Simple physics says that 10" bottom layer of gravel will pour out, the blocks will drop, and a great deal more gravel will follow them out.
I'd suggest that if it (by some bizarre alignment of the planets) manages to hold up temporarily, then have that uncle sign off on hard copy of plans as zgator suggests ...
quote:Originally posted by zgator: Then have any one of them actually sign and seal, as a Professional Engineer, a letter detailing what the design is and that it will work. I have a feeling none would do that.
... and make sure he signs it with the correct job title (zgator, would the proper title be "Professional Engineer"?).
Minimally.
Get someone's sweet bum on the line in writing who has something to lose, either by falsifying credentials or by being later proven wrong by gravity. At least then there is something to take to small claims court (goodness forbid) should catastrophic damage or irreconcilable differences occur.
quote:Originally posted by MattP: We also plan to call the city inspector in the morning to seek his advice.
Great. That too. Even if he/she can't comment on a building not yet made, there might be some useful advice to get.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:... and make sure he signs it with the job title correct (zgator, would the proper title be "Professional Engineer"?)
Licensed professional engineers have seals that indicate the nature of their license. They are supposed to use these seals on any document which they take professional responsibility for.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Even if it isn't stamped with a seal, a signature of a professional engineer where he puts the letters "P.E." after his name, is generally legally binding in the engineering sense.
AJ
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"why is he building a shed if he's broke"
To clear what's currently being used as storage space inside the house to make room for the baby: babies grow past crib-sized. Besides, stacks of stuff become ever more dangerous as a child learns to crawl, then toddle, then climb.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
If you don't mind where it's being built, seems like it'd be as cheap or cheaper to buy the extra materials needed to build the shed in the manner that you would feel comfortable with than to hire an engineer.
I mean spending money yourself to force another person to spend about an equal amount of extra money just seems wasteful.
Think in terms of building that wall facing your property as being the same as improving your own fence. It ain't exactly, but thinking of it that way makes it more pleasant to spend the cash. And spending a little cash to help out a neighbor is a LOT more pleasant than having friction with that neighbor.
[ August 22, 2007, 05:28 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
I've offered to help him get a proper wall built. He is not interested. This is and always has been a very personal thing for them. We are doing everything we can to not make that the case for us as well. For us, it's about the wall. For them, it's about us.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
*hugs* to MattP and family
I think that your sensitivity and understanding towards them during this situation is admirable. You really have tried to put yourself in their shoes, however it doesn't seem like they are capable of doing the same.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP: The inspector can't do anything about a building that isn't there yet and I can point out the setback restriction to the neighbor if I want to go that route. An explicit threat to report future setback violations might motivate him to re-engineer his wall, but that could get really ugly. I'm keeping that card in my pocket for now.
You haven't even pointed out the setback restriction? Why not? If done diplomatically (don't look to me for advice on that! I'd be all in his face) this could solve your problem by convincing him to change the site of the shed. I can see him having his heart set on a shed, but why does it have to be right on the property border, where it's prohibited by code?
This would also bypass the whole engineering issue: let him build his half-baked wall elsewhere, where it's collapse or drainage problems won't affect you.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
I'm not sure how I could do that diplomatically. Diplomacy doesn't seem to be effective with them.
Concrete has already been poured for the rest of the outline of the pad he wants to pour, so he can't just scooch everything over. If he's forced to obey the setback rules, he's probably going to have to make a smaller shed. That is going to be a really aweful conversation to have with him and I think I'd rather just let him build the shed against the fence, provided it's done safely.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
I'm all for people doing what they want on their property. But when they ignore setback codes that affects your property, a response is called for. You should at minimum tell him about the setback code before construction continues.
Posted by Zan (Member # 4888) on :
The picture I have in my head is that if things are done like your neighbor wants, you're going to have a shed looming over your fence. That's not a real neighborly thing to do.
Is the shed actually going to be on top of the wall or is the wall simply to provide a level platform for it?
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
It will definitely be looming. The fence still follows the old slope, and the shed will be built above the new wall, so it will rise 6-8' over the fence at the lowest point.
I am intensely annoyed by that, but that annoyance has taken a back seat to the structural concerns right now.
Posted by Zan (Member # 4888) on :
I'm not sure why this didn't occur to me before now, but removing the fence to see if his "wall" will hold won't really prove anything. Even if it does, which could happen although it's unlikely, that doesn't prove that it will hold up during a storm when you have water moving through the fill. Much less what will happen once the shed is built and filled. That will add a considerable lateral load to the "wall".
I'm sorry, but a "wall" made of blocks stacked on top of each other require that I use quotations. Otherwise, someone might get the idea that I consider it to be a wall in my professional judgement and I'll get sued, lose my house, my family, spiral into depression, etc.
Posted by Zan (Member # 4888) on :
I'm not sure why this didn't occur to me before now, but removing the fence to see if his "wall" will hold won't really prove anything. Even if it does, which could happen although it's unlikely, that doesn't prove that it will hold up during a storm when you have water moving through the fill. Much less what will happen once the shed is built and filled. That will add a considerable lateral load to the "wall".
I'm sorry, but a "wall" made of blocks stacked on top of each other require that I use quotations. Otherwise, someone might get the idea that I consider it to be a wall in my professional judgement and I'll get sued, lose my house, my family, spiral into depression, etc.
Count me as in as one who also admires your restraint. BTW, this is zgator signed in at home.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
The uncle never came by today. We'll see the geotech guy in the "late morning" tomorrow. I'm glad the real expert is coming by first so I'll know what questions to ask the supposed expert coming later.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Arrgh. I wish I could zap him with the patented Ray of Sensibility for you, but it's still in beta form.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: Arrgh. I wish I could zap him with the patented Ray of Sensibility for you, but it's still in beta form.
See whenever I use MY ray of sensibility it exacerbates the problem, or introduces a new problematic dynamic. Can I try recalibrating it to your specifications Claudia?
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
The geotechnical engineer just came by and completely vindicated me. He said that what was there was not a wall, that it would eventually fail, and that it should be built, as I described, on a footing with rebar and concrete reinforcement.
He also reassured us that when it does fail, it will do so gradually and is not likely to be dangerous to us, just expensive for the neighbors. Given that, I'm going to pass on the warning and let them move forward if they decide to.
Now, what to do about that 3' setback rule...
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
BlackBlade, we currently are having overcorrection problems: the subject goes directly from obtuseness straight through to hyperliterality. We think it's an accidental side effect of the reversed polarity on the neutron flow. Civilian use has been discontinued until further notice.
MattP, could you perhaps pass on that setback information when you pass on the warning, and just leave it all in your neighbor's lap? Any chance you could send it by email, so that you have a record of it (just in case you are blamed later for "knowing about it but not doing something," [either by the neighbor himself or the local government])?
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
That's sort of where I'm going right now. I'm writing a letter that gives the conclusions from the engineer (with promise of a copy of the official letter from the engineer). I'm going to include a paragraph about the setback.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:BlackBlade, we currently are having overcorrection problems: the subject goes directly from obtuseness straight through to hyperliterality. We think it's an accidental side effect of the reversed polarity on the neutron flow. Civilian use has been discontinued until further notice.
*Points own ray of sensibility at Claudia and fires*
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
And saving a copy of everything you send, I'm sure.
I doubt you actually need to send it certified mail, and that would likely be seen a provocative action (I am guessing here at how he would see it, in my inimitable Aspergery way, but that seems about right). At least this way he knows he was informed (and that you know, and that forgetting he was informed won't fly), and he can take the risks on his own head if he so chooses. Plus, you might just be providing him with useful information that he might have otherwise been misled about by people he trusted.
Well done.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:BlackBlade, we currently are having overcorrection problems: the subject goes directly from obtuseness straight through to hyperliterality. We think it's an accidental side effect of the reversed polarity on the neutron flow. Civilian use has been discontinued until further notice.
*Points own ray of sensibility at Claudia and fires*
Ah, my good man, I am perfectly shielded by my lack of social skills and determinedly curmudgeonly ways.
Sensible, sir? Nevah!
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:BlackBlade, we currently are having overcorrection problems: the subject goes directly from obtuseness straight through to hyperliterality. We think it's an accidental side effect of the reversed polarity on the neutron flow. Civilian use has been discontinued until further notice.
*Points own ray of sensibility at Claudia and fires*
Ah, my good man, I am perfectly shielded by my lack of social skills and determinedly curmudgeonly ways.
Sensible, sir? Nevah!
Impossible, everybody knows that girls being made of sugar, spice and everything nice are incapable of avoiding at the very least a sympathetic response to the ray of sensibility.
Now whether your response appears to be sensible is a result impossible to predict. But a response MUST occur! Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
So, I stuck that letter on their door (they weren't here at the time) and now, two hours later, there's a concrete truck pouring their pad. They would have had to have scheduled that before today so not only are they being unreasonable, but we can add dishonest to the list. They had agreed to an inspection prior to moving forward and their guy never showed up and they didn't know that ours would be by today.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Document, it MattP, just in case. Keep a written record somewhere as hard copy, with a note of when you put the note on the door, everything. Just in case, eh?
And then hope for the best. But don't lose that record!
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
Yep. We will do a certified mail of the engineer's letter. It may seem over the top, but I've learned now that I cannot trust these people.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Well, that does sound like a good idea to me. And I suppose you can continue to be as friendly as possible when you talk about other things as they arise naturally. ("Hey, hot enough for you?" )
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
) that at least a private formal inspection would be worth it. I think he should pay for it, or at a very minimum, split the cost with you.
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
<-- his wall would not even be able to withstand this ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)