Sneak Peek: Tomorrow I have the honor of guest writing on Chris Hill’s Construction Law Musings blog. I previously wrote a post on Chris’ blog back in August 2010. I must not have have made too much of a mess over there, as he’s signed up for more.
My topic will be about contract essentials, so you won’t want to miss it. I’ll post a link to the article here once it goes live. Here’s the link.
————————————————————————
Photo: from Moon, Stars & Paper via Creative Commons license.
Are you familiar with the North Carolina Energy Efficiency Alliance (NCEEA)? The Alliance is a non-profit organization (funded by a federal grant through the NC State Energy Office) which “aims to educate all stakeholders in the home building industry about the benefits of ENERGY STAR homes.”
Among the resources on its website, the NCEEA offers a downloadable 59 page white paper entitled “Affordable Passive Solar Handbook for North Carolina“, which includes 12 different house plans that incorporate passive solar concepts. Some of the plans are converted from a variety of sources including Habitat for Humanity; others are original designs.
Solar Features include:
Affordable Features include:
According to the white paper, full sets of working drawings are available for free online at www.energync.net or www.ncenergystar.org. However, if you can find the applicable link at either of those sites, you are better than I am. I’m sure that if you contact the NCEEA they will point you in the right direction. (And if you do, please drop me a line as to where they can be found).
Have you reviewed the white paper? What do you think of their design concepts? Share in the comments below. And, if you are new here, be sure to sign up for regular email delivery of blog posts to your inbox so you never miss anything.
Photo: NCEEA Logo
Today we have a guest post by Tim Fausch (adapted from and reprinted with permission by BNP Media), publishing director of BNP Media’s Architecture, Engineering & Construction, Security and Mechanical Systems Groups, a collection of more than 20 trade magazines, Web sites and e-newsletters.
I’ve been thinking a lot about engineers lately and concluded they must be alien beings. For reasons I do not understand, God sent these advanced life forms to earth to keep people like me from mass chaos. There must be an engineering angel whose job is to keep us from self-destruction.
A recent development led me to this epiphany:
This summer, I started demolishing a retaining wall and deck my father built back in the 1960s. The cinderblock wall and cement deck functioned beautifully around our above ground swimming pool for most of my youth.
Then, in the 1970s, my dad transformed our pool into a garden, and it has been producing tomatoes and onions ever since. Unfortunately, my father passed away and the secrets of his cement structure were lost forever.
The structure was showing some wear and tear, so the “smart” thing to do was to knock it down and return it to its long-ago status as a grass-covered hill.
“This will be a piece of cake,” I told my family members. “Just a few hardy swings with a sledge hammer and we’d reduce the structure to rubble.”
Somehow, I severely underestimated its structural integrity. The cinderblock wall wasn’t so bad, but the cement deck apparently was built to the same specs as the Hoover Dam.
The pad was several inches thick and hid an encased a wire mesh. Nearly a half century later, it was still solid as a rock.
It took five adult men countless hours to slay the beast. We only missed our target demolition date by three weeks.
Did I mention that my father was an engineer? This is the same guy who reveled in assembling televisions from 500-part kits (Heath kits), so it was really brainless of me to think this structure would come down in less time than the fall of the Berlin Wall.
If I had been in charge of this project it would collapsed decades ago. It would have caved in the pool, creating a tidal wave that would have flooded our basement. The insurance adjuster would have concluded a tornado blew through our yard. I would have nodded in agreement.
I don’t know about you, but every time I drive over a bridge, ride an elevator, or fly in a plane, I am thrilled to know that somehow an engineer made these things work. Engineers – the aliens who make our lives better.
————————–
Photo by suttonhoo via Creative Commons License.
Make plans to attend a free webinar specifically for design professionals. Entitled “The Bright Gray Line: “Yes”, “Never”, and “Maybe” Contract Clauses for Design Professionals (and how to find the difference)”.
The presentation will highlight challenging contract clauses and approachs to evaluating, negotiating, and managing those clauses. Among the clauses which will be discussed are those relating to indemnity, the standard of care, code compliance, and document ownership.
The seminar is sponsored by Hall & Company and presented by attorney David Ericksen, President of Severson & Werson.
When: Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Time: 1:00 pm EDT
How: Click here to register
If you attend the webinar, let you know your thoughts afterwords. I’m planning to attend as well, so we can compare notes.
Everyone is probably familiar with the story the Emperor’s New Clothes. There, the Emperor is not wearing anything but his birthday suit, and yet everyone is afraid to tell him so. Today’s lesson is how to avoid being the clothesless fool by making sure you are covered with appropriate contracts with your subconsultants.
Previously we have talked about the need for a written contract on your construction projects. Usually, the focus is on the contract agreement with the Project Owner. Just as important, however, is the contract with your subconsultant.
A recent case brought to the attention of the E&O carrier Victor O. Schinnerer demonstrates what can happen when you have a signed contract with the Project Owner, but your subconsultant contract is not yet formalized.
The architect’s subconsultant agreement had been revised by the subconsultant to include the following language:
Subconsultant’s maximum aggregate liability under this Agreement shall not exceed $250,000.
Having been warned of the dangers of limiting the liability of a subconsultant without having a corresponding limitation in the prime agreement, the architect attempted to further negotiate with the subconsultant. The subconsultant agreed to increase their liability to $500,000 but said “I am told by our legal counsel that based on the work we are doing and the amount of our fee, $500,000 is our limit.
Work on the project had already started, but the subconsultant was withholding their design documents until they received a signed contract. At that point, the architect turned to his E&O carrier for advice.
His options were limited at that point, and the architect was left with weighing the risk of a claim in excess of $500,000 versus the risk of a delay claim from the Project Owner if he took time to seek out a new subconsultant. Essentially, the architect had no clothes.
Keep this lesson in mind the next time you are negotiating with subconsultants about a planned project. You should ensure that their contract has the same obligations that you have in your contract with the Owner.
Have you experienced a situation where you were contracted to perform, but your subconsultant refused to sign a contract with similar terms? How did you handle it?Drop me a line in the comment section.
—————————
Photo: (c) Mary Harrsch via Flickr/Creative Commons License.