Housing and Community Development

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

proposal for multi-dwelling project

  • 1.  proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-09-2011 10:13 AM
    This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Practice Management Member Conversations and Residential Knowledge Community .
    -------------------------------------------

    I a

    I am currently putting together a proposal for a large multiple dwelling project. My intention is to charge a fixed fee for each unit type with a scaled multiplier for duplicate units and additional fees for extensive approval process, atypical foundation conditions, or major plan variations. Any feedback/suggestions based upon experience with this project type would be appreciated.

    Thanks

    -------------------------------------------
    Alexander Esposito AIA
    Alex Esposito Architects
    Southport CT
    -------------------------------------------
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 2.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-12-2011 08:56 AM
    All of our communications here in this forum are publicly visible.

    -------------------------------------------
    Rand Soellner AIA
    Architect/Owner/Principal
    Rand Soellner Architect
    Cashiers NC
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 3.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-12-2011 04:35 PM

    I have been invited to say a few words about the antitrust laws, and why e strictly control discussions that center on fees or other pricing matters.  I welcome this opportunity, since in the past the Institute and some of its members have been the subject of two antitrust actions by the U.S. Department of Justice and one lawsuit by a private individual.  The AIA did not prevail in any of those proceedings, and one of these cases resulted in the 1990 consent decree that many of you will remember.


    You'll want to keep the following in mind:

     

    1. Federal antitrust laws are designed to promote vigorous and fair competition, and to provide American consumers with the best combination of price and quality.  Most states and the District of Columbia have their own antitrust laws, which frequently (although not always) parallel the federal laws.
    2. Antitrust violations are felonies, punishable by imprisonment and fines.  The U.S. Department of Justice is authorized to prosecute Sherman Antitrust Act violators as criminal felons, who may be severely fined and, in the case of individuals, imprisoned for up to 10 years.  In addition, the Justice Department, state attorneys general and private parties may bring civil suits and recover three times (treble) their actual damages, court costs and (in private suits) their attorneys' fees from corporations and individuals who have violated the federal antitrust laws.  The Federal Trade Commission has its own statutory authority to enforce antitrust laws through civil and administrative proceedings.
    3. The most common antitrust violations of which you should be aware fall within Section 1 of the Sherman Act.  They result from agreements - typically with competitors, customers or suppliers - that unreasonably restrain competition.  Thus, the antitrust laws prohibit the AIA and its members from agreeing to do certain things that they could legally do if they acted independently.
    4. Any type of agreement, understanding or arrangement between competitors, whether written or oral, formal or informal, express or implied, that limits competition is subject to antitrust scrutiny.  Moreover, any attempt to reach such an agreement may be unlawful, even if it is unsuccessful.  Even discussions that are innocently intended (e.g., about pricing - see below) may be viewed as part of an illegal attempt or conspiracy under the antitrust laws.
    5. Any agreement between competitors on prices charged to others for products or services violates the antitrust laws.  Every direct price-fixing agreement is illegal, whether it is meant to raise, lower or just stabilize prices.  Agreements may be illegal as well even if they only indirectly affect prices because they involve such things as discounts, promotional allowances, standardization of customer or delivery services, or uniform credit terms and billing practices.  It is also illegal for competitors to agree on the prices they will pay for products or services sold by other persons, or to engage in collusive bidding practices (or "bid rigging").  As suggested above, in this context discussions about fees among architects - whether in person, by e-mail, in a discussion list serve, or otherwise - may be regarded as part of an attempt or conspiracy to fix prices in violation of the antitrust laws.

     

    There are other anticompetitive activities that go beyond the scope of this e-mail.  For more information, I encourage you to go to our Web site at http://www.aia.org/about/antitrust/If you have questions or would like to discuss further, I welcome your e-mails and telephone calls. 

     

    Jay A. Stephens

    Vice President and General Counsel

    The American Institute of Architects

    1735 New York Avenue, N.W.

    Washington, D.C. 20006

    (202) 626-7379

    jstephens@aia.org






    -------------------------------------------
    Jay Stephens Esq.
    VP and General Counsel
    The American Institute of Architects
    Washington DC
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 4.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-12-2011 06:49 PM


    -------------------------------------------
    Martha Andrews FAIA
    Andrews Architects, Inc.
    Portland OR
    -------------------------------------------
    My advice, based on a practice focused on multi-family, is to calculate a basic fee that will cover the most likely set of variables and best guess of final design configuration; and keep the add-ons and adjustments that the client sees to a minimum.  For our projects, we try not to get buried in a cascade of bookkeeping items that have to be tracked internally, documented to the client, and are a possible cause for dispute (and maybe not getting paid for).

    It may be that we will calculate our base fee as you suggest (ea. unit type X multiplier for duplication), but the client would not see this, just the total.  If we have done our homework enough to know upfront that there is an extensive planning or review process, we include this as an itemized line item as part of our fee proposal.  And as the project design moves forward we seek to get client approval(s) so that if there are major plan variations at the client's request, we CAN bill this as additional service.  The AIA standard contracts spell this out pretty well. 

    We don't recommend proposing to the client a low basic fee -- then doing a menu of add-ons -- because what the client will remember (and maybe only budget for) is the low base fee.  Then when there are add-ons, even if quite legitimate from the architect's standpoint, the client feels like they've been a victim of bait & switch.   This is a variation on the Owner's horror-story of getting eaten alive by Contractor's change orders.

    In summary, we recommend keeping your basic fees and optional add-ons (if any) as simple as possible.

    Martha Peck Andrews, FAIA
    Andrews Architects, Inc.
    Portland, Oregon


    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 5.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-13-2011 09:35 AM
    As a sole practitioner, I really feel for Mr. Esposito.  How often is it that an architect is on their own knowing every possible situation he or she will have to face?  We should be free to rely not just on our own experience but on the experience and wisdom of others.  Upon reading Mr. Esposito's post, my initial thought was, in light of the harsh and unfair restrictions put upon architects' rights to discuss fees, that he did a good job being in the right.  He didn't ask how much would anyone charge, didn't volunteer how much he intends to charge, but simply asked what fee structures people found appropriate for the project type.  If this was a competition and all entrants had to use the same fee structure, would anyone complain that it was a conspiracy to limit competition? 

    Furthermore a quick look online would show that lawyers routinely post their hourly rates on their websites, something architects are prohibited from discussing publicly or privately.  Any lawyer can spend ten minutes surmising the competition on Google looking up "attorney fee schedules" in his or her area and "fix" their price accordingly.
    http://www.jdbar.com/current_rates.html
    http://www.attorneydavidgreen.com/fee-schedule/
    http://www.qdroassistance.com/5.html
    http://www.adcuncontesteddivorce.com/feeschedule.shtml
    http://www.czepigalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1480730.html
    http://www.fastlegal.org/Reduced_Fee_Schedule_MUPH.html
    http://www.cohnpatents.com/FeeSchedule.html
    http://www.ruthlaw.com/fees.htm
    It appears that we don't need more anti-trust laws, but better lawyers. 


    -------------------------------------------
    Andrew Mikhael AIA
    Andrew Mikhael Architect
    Englewood NJ
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 6.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-13-2011 10:34 AM
    Jay, thank you for the informative discussion we had on the phone this morning.  I can appreciate the target that AIA and other organizations have on them regarding antitrust suits.  Hopefully, we can create a safe and organized place where professionals can educate one another on methods of project delivery.  

    -------------------------------------------
    Andrew Mikhael AIA
    Andrew Mikhael Architect
    Englewood NJ
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 7.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-13-2011 05:25 PM
    I appreciate Andrew's point of view, and am glad we had the opportunity to talk this morning.  I welcome phone calls or e-mails from anyone else who may want to discuss this subject further.

    -------------------------------------------
    Jay Stephens Esq.
    VP and General Counsel
    The American Institute of Architects
    Washington DC
    (202) 626-7379
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 8.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-14-2011 04:35 AM
    Mr. Esposito.
    I am the co-author (w/Don Jacobs, FAIA & Alan Sclater, FAIA) of the AIA (B188): O-A Agreement for Housing Design Services, which we wrote in 1995+/- in response to the long-ignored lament of AIA/Orange County (CA) - then the center of production builder housing development.   Once we began to drill down deeper, looking at all the other AIA Standard Contract-bereft areas of housing project types, it became clear that we needed to accommodate a host of different types under the category 'HOUSING'.
    I think you'll find our final, published document to be a serviceable 'Swiss Army Knife' form of agreement....
    I invite you to review it to see if it will work for your needs.

    Good luck,

    Morton Frank, FAIA
    Morton Frank Architect
    Redwood City, CA







    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 9.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-15-2011 09:38 AM
    Good points Andrew.  When was the last time you heard someone discuss the "going rate" when it comes to legal services?


    -------------------------------------------
    Andrew Fethes AIA
    President
    Andrew Fethes Architects PA
    Oradell NJ
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 10.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-15-2011 06:33 PM

    Andrew,

    Ditto... antitrust scare, wow. Not to pick on attorneys since they get enough of that from the media and late night comedians. However, I am curious, upon whose suggestion did he write that "dribble", and under whose letterhead* was it posted...

    Moreover, it is certainly unfortunate the level of support, we have all come to expect, from our association with such notation of an apparent paid representative's demonstrated naiveté.

    With that, the questioned appeared to be in earnest, only asking a point; have any of you encountered such a need, and what vehicle or structure might you suggest, so that one could possibly secure such a commission?

    Instead, some would apparently digress into a spooky hinterland displaying an apparent level of (reading or rather comprehension) incompetence...

    As an example in support of these hypotheses, in the mid-90's, I tried to develop a corporate operating agreement, obtaining the services a highly respected corporate legal specialties group, to only be told (after delivering my $5k retainer), that I needed to "....answer (the) questions myself, since I was more familiar with my operating model (profession) than they were".

    Only a few of the 10's of $1000's thrown at such useless fees and apparently to our association (oh, Institute) over the past quarter of a century.


    Take care,

    ------------------------------------------
    "Steve" Dunakoskie, AIA
    Stephen Dunakoskie, Consulting
    Leesburg, VA

    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 11.  RE:proposal for multi-dwelling project

    Posted 09-16-2011 12:47 AM


    -------------------------------------------
    Sympathetic
    -------------------------------------------
    Doesn't answer your question, but be very careful to conform to the ADA, the Fair Housing Accessibility Act and the ANSI A117.1.  Not that any architect purposely wouldn't, but, there is your interpretation of the "guidelines" and the Feds interpretation.  In some areas, the DOJ is actively pursuing public housing projects with relatively small violations of the "guidelines".  Their method is to name the architects, engineers, developer, owner and contractor in the suit and pressure them to pay as a group, for the retrofits, penalities, aggrieved funds, etc.  Under the umbrella of a group, they push a quick settlement where each party pays an equal share, regardless of the actual violations credited to any single party.  This puts the professional in a box, since the legal costs to defend yourself may be greater than paying for more than you were responsible for.  (There is a term for that, "exto...  something or other.)  If the developer has completed multiple housing projects dating back to 1991, all of these may be brought into the suit by association.





    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13