In high-end residential remodeling, few phrases create more confusion than “by others.” It looks harmless. It sounds administrative. But in practice, it is one of the fastest ways for a clean design-build budget to become a messy series of surprise costs, delayed decisions, and awkward change-order conversations.
That matters even more in California. The Contractors State License Board says home improvement contracts over $500 must be in writing, should describe the work in detail, must state who is obtaining permits, and any scope or price changes must be handled through a written change order signed before the changed work begins. In other words: if responsibility is vague on paper, the problem is not small. It is structural.
For homeowners in Pacifica and across the San Francisco Peninsula, this issue is not theoretical. Local projects often involve utility coordination, sewer obligations, tree protection rules, right-of-way permits, and outside consultants. Those costs do not disappear just because a proposal says “by others.” They simply wait until someone has to pay them.
What “by others” actually means
In plain English, “by others” means the contractor is signaling that a particular item is not included in their contracted scope and is expected to be provided, performed, purchased, coordinated, or paid for by someone else.
Sometimes that is perfectly reasonable. Maybe the homeowner is directly purchasing decorative lighting, AV, or specialty appliances. Maybe PG&E is handling part of a service connection while the applicant handles trenching. Maybe an arborist, surveyor, or sewer contractor must be hired separately. The phrase itself is not the problem.
The problem is that many contracts stop there.
If the agreement does not identify who the “others” are, who pays, who coordinates, who carries schedule risk, and who restores anything disturbed, then “by others” is not a clear allocation of risk. It is a placeholder for an argument.
So who pays when the contract does not assign responsibility?
Usually, the first honest answer is: the contract is defective on that point.
The second answer is more practical: the cost often lands on the owner unless the contractor clearly included that item in the base scope or is otherwise responsible under the contract documents. Why? Because the work still has to happen for the project to move forward, and if it was excluded, omitted, or left unassigned, the owner is often the party forced to authorize and fund the fix so the job can continue.
That does not mean every ambiguous item automatically becomes owner-paid. If a contractor promised a complete kitchen remodel, represented that the project was turnkey, or accepted plans that reasonably implied certain required work, then an omitted item may become a dispute about whether it was already included. California’s contract rules reinforce the importance of getting that sorted in writing, because scope and price changes are supposed to be documented through signed change orders before the work proceeds.
The expensive truth is this: when responsibility is unclear, the owner usually pays first in one of three ways. Either you pay directly to a third party, you approve a change order so the builder can proceed, or you absorb delay while everyone argues over whose number should carry the cost.
Why this gets especially expensive in Pacifica and on the Peninsula
Pacifica is a strong example of why smart homeowners should treat “by others” as a red-flag phrase that demands detail.
Start with sewer laterals. The City of Pacifica states that the homeowner is responsible for maintenance and repair of the sewer lateral from the structure to the city’s main sewer. Pacifica also says a building permit is needed to repair or replace a building sewer, and if work extends into the public right-of-way, an encroachment permit is also required. On top of that, Pacifica requires sewer lateral television and/or repair compliance in situations including property transfer, remodels or additions costing $50,000 or more, added plumbing fixtures, or certain water service changes. If your contract says sewer work is “by others,” that is not a footnote. That can become a real line item with permitting, inspection, excavation, and restoration consequences.
Then there is utility work. PG&E’s residential underground service requirements state that the applicant must provide the trench, conduit, and backfill, while PG&E furnishes and installs the service cables and makes the final connection. PG&E also instructs applicants to arrange trenching, call 811 before trenching, coordinate inspections, and have the owner or contractor on site during installation. If your remodel needs a panel relocation, service upgrade, or underground utility work, “by others” can quietly mean trenching, conduit, compaction, inspections, and site coordination that were never carried in the builder’s base number.
Pacifica also adds another local cost trigger: protected trees. The city states that construction activity within 50 feet of a protected or heritage tree requires special consideration, and a Tree Encroachment, Protection, and Preservation Plan prepared by a qualified professional must be submitted with the building permit application. If the plans show work near trees but the contract never assigns arborist work, protection fencing, root-zone rules, or redesign costs, those expenses do not evaporate. They simply show up later.
And when work touches public frontage, Pacifica’s encroachment process matters too. The city says the property owner and/or contractor performing the work must submit the encroachment permit application and site plan, and permit issuance can require fees plus a performance bond tied to the value of the improvements. Again, a vague note like “street restoration by others” or “encroachment by others” can leave the homeowner holding costs they assumed were already somewhere in the contract.
But isn’t design-build supposed to prevent this?
Yes—if the contract is written the way design-build is supposed to work.
DBIA defines design-build as one entity entering into a single contract with the owner for both design and construction services, with a single point of responsibility. DBIA also emphasizes that owners are expected to stay actively engaged and make timely decisions throughout the process. That is the ideal. A good design-build agreement should reduce blame-shifting because the designer and builder are aligned under one contract.
But “single point of responsibility” is only as real as the scope exhibits, assumptions, exclusions, allowances, and owner obligations attached to the agreement. A design-build contract can still push meaningful risk back to the homeowner if it leaves out utility coordination, owner-furnished items, agency requirements, testing, surveys, specialty consultants, or restoration work. Design-build helps. Sloppy drafting cancels the benefit.
The five places “by others” most often hides
The first is utility scope: panel upgrades, trenching, conduit, service relocation, disconnects, and reconnections.
The second is civil and exterior restoration: sawcutting, sidewalk or driveway patching, drainage correction, fencing, retaining walls, and landscape repair after underground work.
The third is agency and compliance work: permits, encroachment fees, sewer certifications, consultant reports, arborist plans, and required testing.
The fourth is owner-furnished or separately purchased items: appliances, plumbing fixtures, decorative lighting, AV, security, shades, and sometimes even specialty stone or tile.
The fifth is coordination risk: even when another vendor is paying for their own scope, someone still has to coordinate dimensions, rough-ins, delivery timing, protection, punch-list issues, and warranty boundaries.
That last point is where affluent homeowners get burned most often. The dollars matter, but the larger cost is usually schedule damage and accountability gaps.
What a well-written contract should do instead
A strong preconstruction package does not merely list what is included. It assigns responsibility.
At minimum, your contract should identify:
- who obtains each permit and approval,
- who pays each fee,
- who handles PG&E or other utility applications and trenching-related work,
- who owns sewer lateral compliance obligations if triggered,
- who hires outside consultants like arborists, surveyors, engineers, or soils professionals,
- who restores disturbed finishes, paving, landscaping, and hardscape,
- and who coordinates owner-furnished items from approval through final installation.
California’s CSLB is explicit that contracts should describe the work in detail and state who gets permits, and that changes to scope or price must be documented in a signed written change order before the changed work starts. That is not bureaucracy. That is how you stop ambiguous scope from becoming expensive memory loss.
The hidden lien problem
There is another reason vague responsibility is dangerous: payment chains.
CSLB warns that subcontractors, suppliers, and workers who improve the property but are not paid may place a mechanics lien on the property. That means a homeowner can end up in the middle of a payment dispute even when they thought someone else was handling the item. Separate vendors, separate scopes, and fuzzy coordination lines make this risk worse, not better.
A word on owner-builder temptation
Sometimes homeowners respond to repeated “by others” exclusions by deciding to manage those pieces themselves. In California, that is not a casual choice.
CSLB states that when you sign a building permit application as an owner-builder, you assume full responsibility for all phases of the project and its integrity. San Mateo County also warns that owner-builders may become responsible for employer-law compliance, vendor payments, mechanics liens, and even personal liability for injury or property damage arising from the work. That is a steep price to pay just to save a markup on paper.
The smarter way to handle “by others” before you sign
Before you approve a design-build agreement, require a simple responsibility matrix. Every gray-area item should have four labels next to it:
Responsible party.
Paying party.
Coordinating party.
Schedule impact if delayed.
If a line item cannot survive that test, it is not ready for contract.
For Peninsula homeowners planning a major remodel, addition, or custom renovation, the cheapest place to solve this problem is before construction starts. Spend the time in preconstruction. Buy clarity. Force the paper to match reality.
Because once demolition begins, “by others” rarely stays quiet for long.
Informational only; not legal advice. For contract interpretation or dispute risk on a live California project, have qualified construction counsel review the agreement before signing.
Rich Lee
Written by Home Pride Construction