Foundation Choice Responsibility

[B16A2]

If you (a SE) design a driven pile foundation system that is near a neighboring residence, and the pile installation causes cracks in the residence, who is responsible? Engineer? GC? Owner of new foundation?

Would choosing auger cast piles in lieu of driven piles absolve the engineer of any liability?

 

[BAretired]

I think the responsible party is likely the piling contractor, but the fact is, all parties will be named. It is best to avoid such situations if possible. Otherwise, it is prudent to take plenty of photographs showing damage to existing buildings prior to installing any piles.

BA

 

[cvg]

with pile driving there is a reasonable expectation that the construction will create significant noise and vibrations and that pile driving has been known to cause damage to nearby structures and annoyance to nearby residents. Owner, contractor and engineer should have all been aware of this and the liability can be split any way the jury / judge wants...

 

[Ron]

Agree with the other comments and add:

When an engineer selects a construction method (in this case a deep foundation system), he bears some responsibility for warning of the repercussions of that selection. In this case, the engineer has a duty to warn that vibrations can cause damage to adjacent property AND that a pre-construction survey, monitoring, and a post-construction survey be done to quantify and characterize any damage.

Augered concrete piles inherently produce lower levels of vibration than pile driving; however, you much look at both frequency and intensity of vibration when assessing damage or damage potential. You also must be aware of strata that can transmit vibrations to adjacent structures.

In short WARN, WARN, WARN then specify MONITORING/Surveying.

 

[ron9876]

And put it in writing.