Project Delivery

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Project Delivery and Committee on Design .
-------------------------------------------
Under the AIA B101-2007, in the Schematic Design Phase Services section (para. 3.2.3), the architect is contractually obligated to "...discuss with the Owner alternative approaches to design and construction of the Project, including the feasibility of incorporating environmentally responsible design approaches."

Paragraph 3.2.5.1 does go further in the description: "The Architect shall consider environmentally responsible design alternatives, such as material choices and building orientation, together with other considerations based on program and aesthetics, in developing a design that is consistent with the Owner's program, schedule and budget for the Cost of the Work."

Does this language imply that:

1. Under our normal standard design services, we architects are creating environmentally irresponsible designs?
2. Building orientation and material choices are normally selected at random, unless you opt for the environmentally responsible design alternatives?

My next questions would be;

1. How does the AIA define "environmentally responsible design" as separate and above standard good practice?
2. What additional fees are justified with these "alternative approaches"?

I think this muddy language is all precursor to "sustainable" design issues being considered for future AIA contracts.

Steven Cox AIA
President
Cox Architecture
Mccomb MS
-------------------------------------------

I will be anxiously awaiting the reply/answers to Mr. Cox's very pertinent questions
. While it may be (or is) a moral responsibility to design "environmentaly responsibly", is it prudent to make it a legal responsibility ?
-------------------------------------------
Fred Underwood AIA
Underwood Associates Architects
Decatur AL
-------------------------------------------

You have touched on a subject near and dear....

A few years ago at Buid Boston I had a spirited discussion with one of the authors, and a staunch proponent, of the sustainabliity clauses you cite in the 2007 agreements, in particular 3.2.3 in B101 and it's close relatives in other owner architect agreements.

My foremost objection is that the Owner Architect Agreement is a poor choice as a vehicle to advance the AIA's public policy agenda!

In my own practice, which includes consulting to other design professionals and attorneys on design professional risk management issues, is to delete the following from 3.2.3, "including the feasibility of incorporating environmentally responsible design approaches"; also delete from 3.2.5.1 "environmentally responsible design" in line 1 and "other", after 'obtain' in the last sentence.

These deletions do not mean you can't have the discussions with your client. You should have them to know what to do when you get to Article 4. However, two ot three years later, you won't be sued for failing to have the chat in the likely event that you had it but didn't memorialize it in writing!

And while where talking about Article 4, beware the word 'Certification' in the table at 4.1.24 and change it to read "LEED Certificate Application"; also at 4.3.1.2 delete 'certification' and insert "certificate application and documentation related thereto;"

None of these changes make you a bad person for not advocating for sustainability in your contratrcs. They do reduce your risk from malfeasance and negligence claims! I don't know about you, but the latter is more important to me than being a lap dog for the AIA's public policy agenda.

-------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Zimmerman, FAIA
Architect/Consultant
Z2 Architecture, PLLC
Canandaigua NY
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 04-24-2012 10:42
From: Fred Underwood
Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches

I will be anxiously awaiting the reply/answers to Mr. Cox's very pertinent questions
. While it may be (or is) a moral responsibility to design "environmentaly responsibly", is it prudent to make it a legal responsibility ?
-------------------------------------------
Fred Underwood AIA
Underwood Associates Architects
Decatur AL
-------------------------------------------

To me this is no different than reaching into my shower and setting the temperature for me.  I'd say it is out of place for AIA to include language like this, confusing as stated and bound to create hard to define performance duties for the architect which will lead to hard to bear liabilities.  All in all a good reason not to use the AIA Owner Architect form.

All the best,
Donald

-------------------------------------------
Donald Wardlaw AIA
More Than Construction, Inc.
Oakland CA
-------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------
Patrick Roy AIA
Principal
Patrick Anthony Roy, Architect & Planner
Englishtown NJ
-------------------------------------------
NO, due to the implication of the Haves and the Have Not.







Original Message:
Sent: 04-24-2012 11:12
From: Donald Wardlaw
Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches

To me this is no different than reaching into my shower and setting the temperature for me.  I'd say it is out of place for AIA to include language like this, confusing as stated and bound to create hard to define performance duties for the architect which will lead to hard to bear liabilities.  All in all a good reason not to use the AIA Owner Architect form.

All the best,
Donald

-------------------------------------------
Donald Wardlaw AIA
More Than Construction, Inc.
Oakland CA
-------------------------------------------

My complete surprise at the nature of the responses of Mr Underwood and Mr Wardlaw to Mr Cox's inquiry led me to a rereading of Mr Cox's original questions.  I had previously responded directly to Mr Cox that his questions seemed misguided as a result of not appreciating that the  paragraphs he cited were basic services and not "separate and above  good practice". But my  rereading of the  language  of  the paragraphs  cited does make me  understand better where  Mr Cox is  coming from.  The  language in the  paragraphs does seem to imply that environmentally responsible design is an alternative to be considered and possibly incorporated, not a given of standard  practice.
That said,  the concerns from Mr Underwood and Mr Wardlaw about liability implications and legal implications  of these contract provisions are part of the mindset that has gotten our profession to where  it is today, borderline  irrelevant.  We've allowed lawyers and insurance companies to define  the parameters of architectural practice to the point where we don't take responsibility for anything anymore.  We've ceded the high ground of 'Master Builder' terrain to contractors, construction managers, and some design build entities willing to take risks and willing to convince owners to pay for that risk taking.  My vision of the  future of conventional architecture practice is grim, I don't see it existing very far into the  future. I hope that there are braver, more optimistic people out there to prove me wrong.  Those people will need to come to grips with this unhealthy focus on liability and figure out a way to move forward with a vision of what architecture CAN do and not on what  it shouldn't do.

-------------------------------------------
Eugene Ely AIA, LEED AP
Sr Project Architect
San Jose, CA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 04-24-2012 11:12
From: Donald Wardlaw
Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches

To me this is no different than reaching into my shower and setting the temperature for me.  I'd say it is out of place for AIA to include language like this, confusing as stated and bound to create hard to define performance duties for the architect which will lead to hard to bear liabilities.  All in all a good reason not to use the AIA Owner Architect form.

All the best,
Donald

-------------------------------------------
Donald Wardlaw AIA
More Than Construction, Inc.
Oakland CA
-------------------------------------------

There will always be a strong need for the architectural profession as long as architects are known as people who think clearly. Poorly worded contract language makes one neither environmentally sensitive nor environmentally insensitive.  Clients, in my experience, need and expect us to be careful.  One can be careful and useful and imaginative, and knowledgeable, and even bold.  

I also do not think this is a matter of tying ourselves in knots over the legal implications of practice.  It is simply a recognition that our services begin with a clear statement of what we are going to do.  Words like "responsible" lie at the other end of the teeter totter.

A focus on what we can and cannot do as individual architects seems like a good foundation for building a relevant future for the profession.  I'm not a pessimist.

All the best,
Donald


-------------------------------------------
Donald Wardlaw AIA
More Than Construction, Inc.
Oakland CA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 04-25-2012 11:50
From: Eugene Ely
Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches

My complete surprise at the nature of the responses of Mr Underwood and Mr Wardlaw to Mr Cox's inquiry led me to a rereading of Mr Cox's original questions.  I had previously responded directly to Mr Cox that his questions seemed misguided as a result of not appreciating that the  paragraphs he cited were basic services and not "separate and above  good practice". But my  rereading of the  language  of  the paragraphs  cited does make me  understand better where  Mr Cox is  coming from.  The  language in the  paragraphs does seem to imply that environmentally responsible design is an alternative to be considered and possibly incorporated, not a given of standard  practice.
That said,  the concerns from Mr Underwood and Mr Wardlaw about liability implications and legal implications  of these contract provisions are part of the mindset that has gotten our profession to where  it is today, borderline  irrelevant.  We've allowed lawyers and insurance companies to define  the parameters of architectural practice to the point where we don't take responsibility for anything anymore.  We've ceded the high ground of 'Master Builder' terrain to contractors, construction managers, and some design build entities willing to take risks and willing to convince owners to pay for that risk taking.  My vision of the  future of conventional architecture practice is grim, I don't see it existing very far into the  future. I hope that there are braver, more optimistic people out there to prove me wrong.  Those people will need to come to grips with this unhealthy focus on liability and figure out a way to move forward with a vision of what architecture CAN do and not on what  it shouldn't do.

-------------------------------------------
Eugene Ely AIA, LEED AP
Sr Project Architect
San Jose, CA
-------------------------------------------

The AIA Contract Documents team provided a resource document to assist members in understanding why these provisions were included in B101-2007 and some subsequent developments in the documents in the area of sustainable design.    

The document is located here in the Project Delivery Resource Library. 

-------------------------------------------
Susan Parrish
Manager, Knowledge Communities
The American Institute of Architects
Washington DC
-------------------------------------------

I agree with the muddy language part. Seems the AIA legal crew got a little wordy with the 2007 revisions throught out the doucment edition. It also took the AIA a really long time to even provide us with LEED guide documents which we haven't found that helpful.

We strike the paragraphs you mentioned as well as a few others in the B101-2007 and do not use them in our agreements.

-------------------------------------------
Joel McCreary AIA
Principal Architect
McCreary Snow Architects, P.A.
Columbia SC
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 05-02-2012 12:17
From: Susan Parrish
Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches

The AIA Contract Documents team provided a resource document to assist members in understanding why these provisions were included in B101-2007 and some subsequent developments in the documents in the area of sustainable design.    

The document is located here in the Project Delivery Resource Library. 

-------------------------------------------
Susan Parrish
Manager, Knowledge Communities
The American Institute of Architects
Washington DC
-------------------------------------------

Be careful about striring out paragraphs in a "standard agreement".  Check with your attorney before you do it.  From experience, some stste laws don't recognize it if your client takes it to court.

-------------------------------------------
Thomas Montero AIA, FCSI, CDT
Architect/Consultant
Sanford FL
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 05-03-2012 13:59
From: Joel McCreary
Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches

I agree with the muddy language part. Seems the AIA legal crew got a little wordy with the 2007 revisions throught out the doucment edition. It also took the AIA a really long time to even provide us with LEED guide documents which we haven't found that helpful.

We strike the paragraphs you mentioned as well as a few others in the B101-2007 and do not use them in our agreements.

-------------------------------------------
Joel McCreary AIA
Principal Architect
McCreary Snow Architects, P.A.
Columbia SC
-------------------------------------------

Be careful about striking through paragraphs/sentences in a "standard agreement", which the <st1:stockticker>AIA</st1:stockticker> documents are considered.  From experience, there are state courts that do not recognize "deletions / strike-throughs" of parts of a "standard agreement" even though both parties have initialed the document.  Check with your attorney before doing that. 

-------------------------------------------
Thomas Montero AIA, FCSI, CDT
Architect/Consultant
Sanford FL
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 05-03-2012 13:59
From: Joel McCreary
Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches

I agree with the muddy language part. Seems the AIA legal crew got a little wordy with the 2007 revisions throught out the doucment edition. It also took the AIA a really long time to even provide us with LEED guide documents which we haven't found that helpful.

We strike the paragraphs you mentioned as well as a few others in the B101-2007 and do not use them in our agreements.

-------------------------------------------
Joel McCreary AIA
Principal Architect
McCreary Snow Architects, P.A.
Columbia SC
-------------------------------------------

...proving that the AIA Board of Directors is out of touch with us and our clients.

-------------------------------------------
Sean Catherall, AIA
Herriman UT
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 05-02-2012 12:17
From: Susan Parrish
Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches

The AIA Contract Documents team provided a resource document to assist members in understanding why these provisions were included in B101-2007 and some subsequent developments in the documents in the area of sustainable design.    

The document is located here in the Project Delivery Resource Library. 

-------------------------------------------
Susan Parrish
Manager, Knowledge Communities
The American Institute of Architects
Washington DC
-------------------------------------------

Well said ! The AIA and NCARB have both been out of touch for a long time ! ------------------------------------------- Clifton Strickland III AIA Architect Strickland Architects and Associates PC Virginia Beach VA -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 05-07-2012 11:14 From: Sean Catherall Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches ...proving that the AIA Board of Directors is out of touch with us and our clients. ------------------------------------------- Sean Catherall, AIA Herriman UT -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 05-02-2012 12:17 From: Susan Parrish Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches The AIA Contract Documents team provided a resource document to assist members in understanding why these provisions were included in B101-2007 and some subsequent developments in the documents in the area of sustainable design. The document is located http://network.aia.org/AIA/ProjectDelivery/Go.aspx?c=ViewDocument&DocumentKey=eb664d3c-f295-4717-94bf-51e117e1dbc1 in the Project Delivery Resource Library. ------------------------------------------- Susan Parrish Manager, Knowledge Communities The American Institute of Architects Washington DC -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 04-23-2012 12:09 From: Steven Cox Subject: Environmentally Responsible Design Approaches This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Project Delivery and Committee on Design . ------------------------------------------- Under the AIA B101-2007, in the Schematic Design Phase Services section (para. 3.2.3), the architect is contractually obligated to "...discuss with the Owner alternative approaches to design and construction of the Project, including the feasibility of incorporating environmentally responsible design approaches." Paragraph 3.2.5.1 does go further in the description: "The Architect shall consider environmentally responsible design alternatives, such as material choices and building orientation, together with other considerations based on program and aesthetics, in developing a design that is consistent with the Owner's program, schedule and budget for the Cost of the Work." Does this language imply that: Under our normal standard design services, we architects are creating environmentally irresponsible designs? Building orientation and material choices are normally selected at random, unless you opt for the environmentally responsible design alternatives? My next questions would be; How does the AIA define "environmentally responsible design" as separate and above standard good practice? What additional fees are justified with these "alternative approaches"? I think this muddy language is all precursor to "sustainable" design issues being considered for future AIA contracts. Steven Cox AIA President Cox Architecture Mccomb MS -------------------------------------------