Why do owners hire architects to specify designs and styles, and then disregard their spec and listen to a contractor? Why not just have the contractor design the exterior package and save themselves the expense in the first place? And keep in mind, the vast majority of contractors are used to dealing with a few favorite roofers and if those roofers don’t have to have interest in or experience with the roof the architect wants, then all of a sudden there are a thousand reasons why it’s too much money, or too this, or too that.
I just went through an experience in which what the client wanted for their new home and what the contractor wanted them to want could not be reconciled without a fuss. The client had signed a contract to rebuild the home where they planned to live for the indefinite future. They intended it to be an energy efficient, earth-friendly building that would be beautiful to view and have low energy usage. They contacted me because they decided after they began working on the project that they wanted a metal roof for its energy efficiency and permanence.
As soon as I understood that they were already working with a general contractor I asked if I could contact the contractor so as to introduce myself and offer information and specifications for the metal roof options being considered by their client. You would have thought I was threatening them with an OSHA inspection. The phone line went cold. The client assured me that I wasn’t wasting my time by measuring, specifying, and preparing a selection of colors and samples, so despite the inhospitable reception from his contractor I carried on with my work. The client was adamant that they wanted a roof product that was environmentally responsible, would reflect a high percentage of solar heat to off set cooling costs, and would last as long as they planned to be in the home, which In this case was the rest of their natural lives. Too bad the contractor had different priorities.
After all of that preamble, including picking colors and reflective liners for beneath the visible metal, and specifying accessories and details, the client ended up with an asphalt roof. An ASPHALT ROOF! The LEAST environmentally friendly, the SHORTEST lifespan, the LEAST able to resist solar heat! Quite an about-face.
It turned out that even though they wanted the qualities of a metal roof, loved the appearance, and were more than able to afford the additional investment, the deciding factor was the contractor’s preference. The contractor convinced the client that switching from the originally specified asphalt roof would compromise the progress of the project. Nonsense. It would have done no such thing, but it would have introduced an element that the contractor was not willing to deal with, and he didn’t want his predictable profit center messed with by sitting still for a new-fangled “green” upgrade. The client listed the objections of the contractor, and it was all I could do to refrain from laughing (“…it would need new engineering…” NOT true – the metal roof was ½ the weight of the asphalt roof! “…it would change the ventilation…” NOT true – the metal roof installs on the same solid, vented deck as the composition roof. “…it might hold up the job…” NOT true – there are more qualified, available metal roof installers now than there have ever been, and the material is as readily available as any asphalt shingle….etc. etc.).
It just shows once more that whoever is on the site, holding the hammer and standing in the midst of an incomplete project – with the meter running! – is the one really calling the shots. Eco-friendly roofing? Another time, maybe!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment