« Construction Administration...or is it? | Main | ConsensusDOCS and the Architect’s Role During Contract Administration »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Liz O'Sullivan

Yes, I think the A/E has the right to request additional services for handling claims that are caused by owner-provided Division 1 sections that are deficient.

However, before we end up in that situation, we should implement some preventative measures.

When the architect is in the process of negotiating the contract terms with the owner, I think that the architect should include in the fee some time for reviewing Division 1 and discussing potential problems with the owner. The specifier should take the lead on reviewing Division 1. If the specifier is an outside specifications consultant (like I am), this should be spelled out in the specifier's proposal to give the architect a heads up that there could be issues that they'll need to work out with the owner. The specifier would have to review the owner's Division 1 and try to identify those issues as early as possible, but definitely before the documents go out to bid!

In the additional services portion of the owner-architect agreement, the possibility of deficient owner-provided documents should probably be addressed, too.

Ron Geren

I agree. If more architects make an issue of it up front, the more likley the owner will take notice and either drop the practice of providing Division 01 sections, or allowing the A/E to edit where they see deficiencies.

Regarding the latter, if the A/E is permitted to edit the sections, then they should probably have sufficient fee included, since it will probably take longer to edit that their own sections.

I have experience with an owner--a very well-liked one--that had their own Division 01 at one time, but later dropped it. Now, they just provide input of what they want to see in Division 01 to cover their specific issues. That approach is very reasonable and places the risk back on the A/E (why would an owner want to assume that risk, anyway?).

Alan Itzkowitz

I have some experience in dealing with Owner provided Division 0 and 1 documents/sections. As both Liz and Ron stated, the specifier has to take the lead and review the provided documents and make sure there are no conflicts between them and the technical sections. We all have master sections that reference to Div 0 and 1 and all of those have to be reviewed to be certain that they are correct.

Ron Korzecke

We have a few clients that insist on using their front-end for all projects and I am not a proponent of this practice. It can be problematic in correlating certain facets of the working sections with the general requirements.

Another issue with this method is how well the client's general requirements mesh with the contract between the owner and contractor, no matter what format that document may be.

Additionally, some work involves HUD or other government entities that demand the inclusion of douments that are in conflict with our specifications and create a need for more time on my part to prepare the specifications.

Currently, with the economic climate in Michigan suffering greatly, it can be diffcult to convince a client to add extra services for these items. Perhaps when things are flush, this could be negotiated but right now, I think we have to keep our proposals competitive.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Copyright 2011,2012 - RLGA Technical Services LLC

Check out my other blogs at:

The Code Corner – Articles relating to building codes

Keynotes – Articles relating to construction documents

Blog powered by Typepad