Reflecting on the journey of building my on-site home versus years of off-site manufacturing, several insights have surfaced. While many may hesitate to do it again, I remain optimistic. Why the enthusiasm? Because every challenge I faced was met with a manufacturing mindset honed by the systematic approach I learned in off-site manufacturing. Though another home build may not be in my future, this project indulged my OCD manufacturing-guy nature.
A recurring issue that plagued most of my problems stemmed from placing too much trust in subcontractors’ assurances regarding on-site standard practices. Particularly concerning was the floor framing, where I saw a potential for undersized floor framing members. Despite the subcontractor’s confident assurances of design compliance, I failed to seek outside validation—an oversight, in hindsight. This resulted in the incessant rattling of china cabinet dishes as we passed, remedied only by makeshift bracing. Looking back, more diligence in the floor design, perhaps through consultations with other design managers, could have been beneficial.
Similarly, clashes arose with the framing project manager over my demand for proper house-wrap sealing practices, such as the application of seal tape on house-wrap seams and roof flashings. Leaks during downpours before the siding application underscored the importance of adhering to manufacturer installation requirements, which mandated all seams and flashings be taped. He relented after persistent nagging and reference to contractual documentation that guaranteed materials would be installed per manufacturers’ requirements. This episode showed the necessity of persistence when you know you’re right.
While the majority of framing impressed me, had this project been built off site, electrical input on fixture placement and allowances in framing would have occurred in pre-production meetings. Most fixture placements were satisfactory, but some were awkwardly positioned due to excessive framing. In the plant, the wall department would have electrical drawings to refer to and would accommodate for fixtures. It wasn’t until after drywall installation that I noticed a few that could have been better placed. While understandable, these oversights could have been mitigated with better coordination.
The septic tank placement was the most budget-busting issue, directly obstructing our side garage’s path. Despite my protests, the installer insisted it was fine and there was plenty of room, citing health department approval. When installed in the problematic location, we accidentally drove over the outlet line in the too-tight turn-around, causing drainage issues and a backup. While the original contractor fixed the backup, he refused to acknowledge the location issue. Ultimately, a new contractor identified a suitable location, and the health department agreed. My lack of on-site experience in this area was an expensive lesson learned.
Overall, this journey serves as a reminder of the need for consistent quality control and proactive oversight as the on-site General Contractor. What I didn’t know proved to be my biggest obstacle, and I should have conducted more thorough research and relied less on contractor assurances. Nevertheless, we are pleased with the outcome and overall cost.
While off-site construction has challenges too, on-site practices could benefit from some of the off-site processes and controls to make each project more efficient and cost effective. This was one home built in a rural area with limited subcontractor availability. Most were owner-operators with little business experience beyond working for themselves, so I can’t be too hard on them. If there is a next time though, I will be better prepared to manage the process and the trades. Building, whether off site or on site, remains a labor of love.