Practical Talks with Home-builders 
THE GREAT PROBLEM OF EXTRAS AND HOW TO AVOID THEM—PROVIDING FOR SCREENS, STORM 
SASH, HARDWARE, LIGHTING FIXTURES, SHELVING AND SUCH THINGS IN THE SPECIFICATIONS 
by Alexander Buel Trowbridge 
[This is the fifth of a series of intimate helpful talks with those who are about to build. The aim is to offer untechnical suggestions to prospective 
home-makers in the hope that many of the common mistakes and difficulties may be avoided through foreknowledge. The talks are written for those of 
moderate means rather than for those to whom economy is no object .] 
ANY a home-builder, entering upon a 
building project for the first time, is not 
fully alive to the need of good business 
methods and habits in his dealings with 
architect and contractor. There are 
many occasions when misunderstandings 
arise which may be avoided through 
very simple means. The most frequent 
cause of trouble is due to the fact that 
instructions are given verbally by the 
owner to the architect, over the tele¬ 
phone or in office conversations. If 
instructions could always be in writing 
and the owner could retain a copy, the 
chance of trouble would be reduced to a minimum. For women, 
this requirement would be not only irksome but often impos¬ 
sible of fulfilment. The best way to proceed, in case the owner 
finds it impossible to keep a record of his instructions, is to 
always request the architect to confirm a telephone message, a 
conversation or even a written communication, by letter as soon 
as possible after the receipt of instructions. This increases the 
work for the architect but he would generally prefer to add to 
his labors if by so doing he can feel in perfect accord with his 
client and place himself on record regarding his understanding 
of his client’s wishes. Sometimes a client is disappointed because 
a certc.n finish or a color is not what he expected. There is 
one good way to guard against this difficulty and that is for the 
owner to request samples and to sign his name on those which he 
wishes to have followed. If the finished result is not like 
the sample, the contractor will be obliged to do the work over 
again. 
The question of extras is of great importance and, rightly 
handled, may present little or no difficulty. When the time comes 
to sign plans and specifications, it would be well if the owner would 
ask the architect to give him a list of the items that have not 
been included in the contract, but which are usually a necessary 
part of the equipment of a comfortable home, such as: blinds, 
storm sash, screen doors, screens for windows, awnings, flower 
boxes, hanging shelves in cellar, hardware, lighting fixtures, 
kitchen range, laundry stove, water heater, mantels, tinting, 
wall-papering, etc. These are the principal items that are quite 
frequently omitted from the specifications. It is perfectly legiti¬ 
mate to leave them out, provided the owner has taken them all 
into account and knows approximately what they will cost. 
The writer believes the better way is to include them in the 
specifications and obtain estimates covering every necessary item. 
If, then, the estimates are high, omissions can be made to reduce 
the cost. It is well known that loosely drawn specifications will 
secure low bids. The estimators see at a glance that there will 
be a large bill of extras and they plan to make their main profit 
in that way. They do not feel responsible for the loose specifica¬ 
tions and they do not feel called upon to advise the owner to the 
disparagement of the architect. Specifications are much more 
important than owners generally realize. Drawings occupy his 
chief attention and when the bulky sheets of typewriting are put 
up to him for approval he very naturally is inclined to feel that 
here is a technical side of the subject of which he knows nothing 
and which he is entirely willing to leave to his architect. It is not 
necessary for the owner to read the specifications with the inten¬ 
tion of criticising the phraseology or the technical points. If 
he is a lawyer he will possibly run over the pages to test their 
legal strength. If he is an engineer or a builder he will possibly 
wish to see whether his architect has followed the prevailing cus¬ 
toms regarding methods of construction. But the chief reason 
why an owner should study the specifications is to ascertain what 
omissions, if any, have been made. Although the specifications 
may have been written with great care, extras may easily arise 
through the wish of the owner to change the building more or less 
radically, during construction. Such changes should be ordered 
by the owner in writing and he should keep a copy of his 
order. 
In the case of hardware and lighting fixtures it is not feasible 
to list them in specifications in such a way as to secure a final 
estimate of the cost upon which a contract may be signed. A 
very common practice is to insert an allowance in the specifica¬ 
tions. For example, the architect can estimate approximately 
the cost of hardware and state in the specifications, “Contractor 
shall allow the sum of-dollars for hardware.” The speci¬ 
fications usually list all common building hardware and state that 
the above sum is for finishing hardware only. The owner and 
architect visit the hardware show rooms and either have a compe¬ 
tition among several companies or make a selection outright from 
one company, adjusting the cost with the contractor in case the 
allowance mentioned is more or less than the final cost. 
In the case of lighting fixtures a good way to proceed is to 
decide upon a sum, for example $400, to cover the cost and 
installation of fixtures. Then invite several companies to take 
from the plans a list of the light outlets and to propose or exhibit 
to you the best selection they can offer for $400. This places 
the competition on a basis of quality rather than price. If the 
cost is all important the owner will not feel like following the above 
method but will prefer to invite several companies to compete 
on price. It is sometimes difficult to obtain good results through 
competition in price. The writer has known of instances where 
an over-zealous salesman has submitted a bid that was too low, 
leaving to his factory associates the problem of making a selection 
which would avoid a loss to the company. These factory officials 
may perhaps have believed, from the low estimate, that the owner 
had agreed to accept “seconds”— i. e., goods that are strong and 
serviceable but having slight flaws in appearance. In this way 
much trouble occurs because the architect is obliged to refuse to 
accept the seconds, they must be crated and sent back to the 
factory and, after a long delay, the owner receives what he con¬ 
tracted for. All this can happen without the general contractor 
being in any way to blame. The selection of goods that are 
furnished by a sub-contractor is usually made by the architect 
and owner dealing directly with the manufacturer or his agents. 
The moral of all this is that the lowest bid is not always the safest 
to accept. Trouble may be largely avoided by limiting the bid¬ 
ding to only first-class contractors and by requiring the successful 
general contractor to submit the names of his sub-contractors 
to the architect for approval. 
