--- title: "Building near river bank; stop construction?" subject: "Engineering Professional Practice" chapter: 7 key: "semester_8/engineering_professional_practice:building-on-river-bank-flood" source: https://www.bctengineer.com/q/semester_8/engineering_professional_practice/building-on-river-bank-flood site: BCT Engineering --- # Building near river bank; stop construction? Engineering Professional Practice · Chapter 7: Case Studies based on Engineering Practices - Asked in: 2067 - Answer checked by Claude Opus 5.5 (high effort) on 2026-10-14 - Page: https://www.bctengineer.com/q/semester_8/engineering_professional_practice/building-on-river-bank-flood - Whole chapter: https://www.bctengineer.com/md/semester_8/engineering_professional_practice/chapter-7 ## Question During quality control visit in a remote village, it has been found that a building is being constructed on the bank of river, and it will be damaged due to flood. Approximately 20% of the construction was completed. The survey was done by your friend with the consent of the local people. However, the quality of construction was as per specification. Your job is limited to control the quality of the building only. Discuss the case and recommend your views on whether to continue the construction or not. ## Short answer Although my role is quality control, public safety requires reporting the flood hazard. I recommend suspending construction immediately, informing the client and local government in writing, and seeking an independent hydrological assessment. Relocate or redesign with flood protection; otherwise, lives and resources are at risk. ## Answer #### The case During a quality control visit, I find a building, 20% complete, on a river bank where flooding is likely to damage it. The quality of the work is as per specification. My task is limited to quality control. The site survey was done by my friend with the consent of the local people. #### Issues - **Public safety:** a flood can destroy the building and may kill or injure its users. The engineer's paramount duty includes public safety and the welfare of the community, even beyond the narrow job scope. - **Scope of work versus responsibility:** a quality engineer is not responsible for site selection. But knowing of a serious hazard and keeping silent would be negligent and would break the Nepal Engineering Council code of conduct (public safety, honesty, and notifying the proper authority if safety is endangered). - **Waste of public money:** continuing to invest in a building that is likely to be washed away wastes resources. - **Conflict of interest:** the survey was done by my friend. I must not defend his work out of friendship; it needs an independent check. - **Local consent:** the consent of the people is important, but it is not technical proof of safety. They may not understand the flood risk, and their non-expert consent does not remove the engineer's duty. Building by-laws, river-bank setback rules and water resources regulations may also prohibit building in the flood zone. - **Sunk cost:** the 20% already spent is small compared with the loss if the finished building is destroyed. #### Options 1. Continue because my job is only quality control: this ignores the hazard. 2. Stop the work myself: I have no authority to do so, and it may harm working relationships. 3. Report the concern and recommend suspension until the risk is assessed, then continue, modify or relocate. #### Recommendation I recommend option 3. 1. Inform the client, my employer and the local government in writing, with photos, high flood level information from the local people, and river data. 2. Recommend suspending further construction until an independent site assessment (hydrology and flood level, bank erosion and a geotechnical study) is made by someone other than my friend. 3. Share the findings with the community in simple language so that their consent is informed. 4. Act on the study: if the risk is high, relocate to a safe site and reuse materials where possible; if it is moderate, redesign with a raised plinth, a deeper foundation and bank protection works such as gabion walls or an embankment, allowing for the extra cost. 5. Continue quality control with the same strictness whichever decision is made, and keep a record of my advice. The construction should not continue as it is. Since 80% of the cost is still to be spent and lives may be at risk, it is better to stop and reassess now. ## Check yourself The answer's key points as multiple-choice questions, with the correct option and why. 1. Although the engineer's job is limited to quality control, why must he act on the flood hazard? A. Public safety and welfare are paramount, and knowing of a serious hazard and staying silent would be negligent B. Quality engineers are responsible for site selection C. The building quality is poor D. His friend asked him Answer: A. The code puts public safety first, and notifying the proper authority applies even outside the narrow job scope. (Key point: Duty beyond scope) 2. What is the status of the local people's consent? A. It proves the site is technically safe B. It removes the engineer's duty C. It replaces the need for a survey D. It is important but not technical proof of safety; their consent should be made informed Answer: D. People may not understand flood risk, so consent does not remove the engineer's duty. (Key point: Local consent) 3. Which option does the answer recommend? A. Continue because quality is fine B. Stop the work by himself on his own authority C. Report in writing and recommend suspension until an independent assessment, then continue, modify or relocate D. Hide the issue to protect his friend Answer: C. He lacks authority to stop work himself, so he reports and recommends suspension pending independent study. (Key point: Recommended option) 4. Why should the site assessment not be done by the friend who made the survey, and why is the 20% already built not a reason to continue? A. The friend is too busy; the 20% is a legal obligation B. Friends are banned; the 20% is wasted anyway C. The friend is cheaper; the 20% must be finished D. Independence is needed to avoid conflict of interest; the 20% spent is small compared with the later loss if it is destroyed Answer: D. An independent check avoids defending a friend's work, and sunk cost should not drive continuing when 80% of the spending and lives remain at risk. (Key point: Conflict of interest and sunk cost) ## Related in Engineering Professional Practice - [Bheri river suspension bridge collapse](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Fengineering_professional_practice%3Abheri-suspension-bridge-collapse) — Engineering Professional Practice, chapter 7 - [RCC bridge failure probe team judgment](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Fengineering_professional_practice%3Abridge-failure-probe-team) — Engineering Professional Practice, chapter 7 - [Slippery floor injures consultant engineers](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Fengineering_professional_practice%3Aslippery-floor-injury-blame) — Engineering Professional Practice, chapter 7 ## Related in other subjects - [Contactor construction and remote control circuit](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_6%2Fswitchgear_and_protection%3Acontactor-remote-control) — Switchgear and Protection, chapter 4 - [Asphalt concrete construction and quality control](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_7%2Ftransportation_engineering_ii%3Aasphalt-concrete-construction) — Transportation Engineering II, chapter 3, asked 5× - [Is treatment necessary? Industry near river](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_6%2Fsanitary_engineering%3Atreatment-industry-river-1p72) — Sanitary Engineering, chapter 6 - [Quality control in urban road construction](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_7%2Fproject_engineering%3Aquality-control-urban-roads) — Project Engineering, chapter 4