Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So my wife is now freaking out that the neighborhoods we have been searching in have homes built on expansive soils. Somehow someone put into her mind that the only way to solve this problem is to build a new home since builders now take steps to solve this issue and offer a 10 year structural warranty. I would think a home that has been sitting for 4-5+ years would show if there are any structural issues.
I know Superior has had major issues with soil expansion. Any other areas to avoid? There are new homes in Thornton (Fallbrook Farms) that we are looking to purchase.
There are many areas throughout the front range of Colorado with expansive (bentonite) soils.
Depending upon the original site prep and mitigation measures, a house may be standing for quite some time before this becomes an issue. In some subdivisions, the issues became apparent within the first year from construction.
It's important to note how the original sites in the area were platted and graded to control surface and sub-surface moisture flows, and be observant of changes in the area due to later construction, modifications to the sites, etc., which can drastically alter sub-surface flows.
For example, I bought a house in SW Denver area that had no sign of bentonite problems, although the surrounding houses had significant issues. Part of the CCR's issued by the original developer specified that the sites were not to be regraded from their original configuration. The problem with this was that the original grading made for some very chopped up yards, so the 1/5 acre sites had a lot of essentially unusable terrain. In time, later homebuyers came in and regraded the sites to a level area for their landscaping and lawns. What they didn't know .... or care to observe from the CCR's ... was that they altered the run-off and sub-surface flows so that homes downstream from them which previously had no bentonite problems developed them within a year with the new flows by their foundations.
Similarly, I have seen adjacent retail areas re-developed which affected homes 1/2-1 mile away from the new parking lots and buildings, or where well-intentioned landscapers/homeowners installed sprinkler systems which affected the moisture at their own and downstream structures. It's not just homeowners who have this problem, I've seen multi-million dollar commercial properties make this mistake and then wonder why their interior floors are heaving and having delamination problems with floor coverings (if not also mold issues under tile, carpet, or wood floors).
It is prudent to review the engineering reports, site sample reports, and any other documentation about how the builder in a given area mitigated the potential damage from expansive soils in an area. Proper excavation, backfill, compaction, drainage, etc., are all critical to a successful build-out for a structure. Be aware that many architects, engineers, site prep folk, and real estate agents/brokers either don't know about this stuff or are very cagey about minimizing the prospects; ie, I've seen soil test reports released that were taken when they knew that the soil would be dry and stable, yet they also knew that there was bentonite in the development and that sub-surface flows would affect the sites. In my experience over 50 years in the front range area, I've consistently found those with a vested interest in making a sale to be less than candid about the issue in many subdivisions.
FWIW, I've a relative who recently bought a new $1 mil house in one of core eastside Denver's established neighborhoods. It was one of a pair of tear-down sites that were scraped off and new homes built there. Neither the developer/builder/real estate firm selling the properties disclosed any concern about bentonite soils. Yet both houses developed serious problems with the foundation and interior structure within the first year of occupancy. My relative was advised after the fact that it would take over $300,000 to mitigate the problems and fashion appropriate drainage control around the foundation once an engineering firm and architect were brought in to assess the situation. The developer/builder/real estate firm all claimed ignorance and that they'd had no reason to suspect any problem with the sites. But it developed that the neighbor with the adjacent house had had significant issues with this in their first year of ownership while the adjacent house sat vacant, waiting for a buyer ... and all three parties knew about the problems with the 2 new houses there. Lawsuit time follows while they deal with the problems in the structure, far in excess of cosmetic issues such as floors heaving, walls shifting, doorways not closeable, plumbing out of kilter, etc.
As a homebuyer, absent seeing no evidence of bentonite problems in an area and confirmation that reasonable appropriate steps have been taken in the site prep and construction to mitigate the issue, your best defense is to seek out those developed areas that do not have a history of problems with this. In some areas, you will see appropriate site/foundation measures, and perhaps even sump pumps to protect the structure.
Personally, after having bought several homes in the area with some amount of bentonite damage, I'd not buy another without making an engineering inspection part of the home buying process. I'd make my offer contigent upon an engineer's report, to be paid for by the seller and reimbursed only upon a closing. I've done this several times and the seller got stuck with the engineer's report which found significant undisclosed structural problems; ie, do not ignore the "little crack" in the foundation wall or similar clues that there may be a hidden problem. I would insist upon such an independent engineering inspection even with a new construction house in the area, done by an engineer with experience in bentonite soils (not all of them do!).
Please note: a "homebuyer's inspection" by somebody who claims years of experience but whose credentials were issued by an outfit that advertised on a matchbook cover simply won't do. I've seen those types of inspection reports and waiver of inspector's liability terms associated with houses that got a clean bill of health yet I was able to spot tell-tale signs of structural issues with a house which justified bringing in an engineering firm to inspect .... and they verified that there were serious defects present that the unqualified inspection totally dismissed as cosmetic issues.
The expansive soils are everywhere. If a neighborhood has a problem it is due to the builder. I would not buy a house even if it was fine if the builder had problems with other homes in the neighborhood. However if a neighborhood had multiple builders and the ones by the builder I was considering were fine then they likely did a good job, especially if the homes are older (at least 5 or 10 yrs old). I remember when they built Flat Irons Mall. Had to tear down the one section and the restaurants in it due to the expansive soils. Restructuring is in store at FlatIron mall - The Denver Post
But as posted above good inspections are important. We had two for our house. One specialist for the structure and one normal home inspector. Our neighborhood is all custom homes so all by different builders and was built in the early 1990s. No one has had a problem but the new neighborhood going in behind us did extensive mitigation. I know we have a large underground water collection pit behind the house where the drainage system goes and a sump pump that goes there but I don't think it has ever gone off.
In my last neighborhood in Centennial I asked a number of neighbors how they felt about the construction quality and checked out the reputation of the builder before buying the house. The house had a sump pump that went off all the time and drained water into the driveway to drain away from the house. Never had a problem there and neither did the neighbors. The construction company was well known for quality homes in the south Denver area. The home was built in 1973.
When I was looking at a house in the southwest (Ken Caryl) area, I knew that there were expansive soils there by looking at the sunken roadways. I got a copy of the engineering report and talked with the person who actually did the study of that house. While there were other houses in the area that were on bentonite, that house wasn't. So you never know until you do your research.
I wanted to share some information that I have related to one of the builders in Solterra.
I had entered into a purchase agreement with Cardel Homes to build their Ranch model (bellini) with a finished walk out basement Communities | Cardel Homes
The lot soils report was not yet available. When it bacame available, I noticed that the lot report made the recommendation to obtain and review the subdivision soils report.
It was not easily obtained, but access was eventually provided by Cardel Homes at their corporate offices location.
I noticed some language that seemed at odds with what the builder was proposing. I requested to speak to whom-ever was responsible at Cardel for determining what the soils report stated to be necessary for the long term satisfactory performance of the structure to be built.
At first, Cardel claimed that they had no one on staff who could review the soild report language with me; that they relied on the engineering firm they had engaged to perform the evaluations, CTL Thompson to tell them what needed to be done.
When I refused to relent, and continued to request meeting with either their legal counsel or engineers to discuss the soils report recommendations language -- (all of a sudden) I was offered a meeting with a their general manager, named Pat Hamm, who would be able to review the soils report information.
Well, I show up to the meeting, and Cardel Home's representative, Pat Hamm, did not even bring the soils report with him to the meeting.
I went through my understanding of the language contained in CTL Thompson's report -- which indicated that a "structurally supported floor" should be utilized for "all finished living areas."
Mr. Hamm denied the meaning of the words contained in the report. I continued to discuss the normal and ordinary meaning of the words in their contract and the engineer's soils reports, trying to explain to him the impact of such language to our particular situation and purchase agreement.
We went back and forth for a bit, and getting no where fast, I requested again to either meet with their engineers to review the report with them in person, or to have Cardel obtain a letter from CTL Thompson to ensure that they were of the same opinion as the builder with respect as to what the needed inclusions were for sytuctural design of the home.
Well, Mr. Pat Hamm of Cardel Homes then went off on me, saying that Cardel Homes was clearly not the builder for my wife and I -- due to the fact that I was so focused on the "technical language" contained within their purchase agreement and the CTL Thompson Engineering soils reports. The language that Mr. Hamm used was that CTL Thompson's Soils report contained "CYA language" with respect to the structural needs of the home to be built, and that they knew what was "really required."
They went on to say that I was the first customer to request the full report, and that to date -- over 75% of the homes they had built had finished basements, and of those only one had structurally supported living areas in the basement -- ie Cardel had supplied all but one of the homes they had built to that point in time with a slab-on-grade foundation; to the contrary of the requirements dictated in the CTL Thompson engineering reports for the subdivision development.
Mr. Hamm of Cardel Homes Colorado and Solterra development operations wanted to refund my earnest on the spot. I replied that this was not a decision to be made by me alone, that I would need to talk to my wife...
long story short, I talked to several professional enngineers and attornies, and although I had grounds to enforce specific performance due to language in the Cardel Homes purchase agreement -- It was best to take Cardel Home's offer to breach the purchase agreement and return our earnest.
They refunded 100% of our earnest monies, and sent us on our way.
Here are some links to the soils reports referenced.
I suggest to anyone buying a new home to be constructed in Colorado read everything that
you can when you enter into these transactions...
good luck!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Someone know his stuff
