Is the window installation correct? Is it wind-driven rainproof?

For me it is self-evident that a house is built according to an (execution) plan – it is rather sad if such a thing does not exist, as the house then can hardly be proper.

I do not want to bet whether nowadays more than 5% of single-family houses are built with an execution plan. Thanks to low construction interest rates, realizing the dream of having your own house is also affordable for those who see an architect’s fee as an obstacle to sufficient financing and follow the siren calls of the general contractor (GC) devils, settling for inclusive permit plans. A pretty typical GC runs a construction business, believes his masons should not be paid to read, and therefore only has foundation and ceiling plans on the construction site. The plumbers are subs; after all, they’d have to improvise with a Hilti tool in existing buildings anyway and are supposed to manage entirely on their own. On the shell construction, plans are generally considered feminine stuff for sit-down urinators. Without a client-biased (i.e., by no means employed by the GC) construction manager, who should have a good dose of Instructor Schmidt in him, execution plans are simply not read. “America First” in the typical GC interpretation means “rational” (= piecework) work by the trades operating with their own people – accordingly, at the expense of the subcontractor trades, to which the improvisation burden shifts. If execution plans are not explicitly included in the construction service specifications or listed in the offer, you can assume with an inclusive permit planner that they do not exist. “With plans” costs extra more than “without rubber.” Everything that sounds nicer is romance.

Shall I tell you a secret?











Life is also wonderful in such houses