Attention, Architecture students! We know how hard you’re working toward your dream career, and we also know the cost of your education is high. Have you applied for the David W. Lakamp AIA Scholarship?

The David W. Lakamp AIA Scholarship was established in 1990 by a/e ProNet, a group of insurance professionals providing risk management services to architects and engineers. It was renamed in 1999 for David W. Lakamp, one of our founding members, and a widely-trusted advisor to the design industry. Mr. Lakamp left behind a legacy of professionalism and integrity that set new standards in the field of insurance services.

Today, the scholarship provides two $2,500 awards each year, and these are bestowed upon the two students who best demonstrate strong interest in practice management.

The scholarship is open to fourth-year undergraduates and graduate students of architecture enrolled in an NAAB-accredited professional degree program. Submissions are reviewed by a jury panel consisting of members of the AIA Practice Management Knowledge Community (PMKC) and the a/e ProNet organization. Candidates must submit a copy of their transcripts, two letters of recommendation, and an essay on how they would resolve a project management dilemma.

The current application deadline is November 19, 2012.

Visit the education section of the AIA website for more information, as well as to download a PDF of the 2012 a/e ProNet David W. Lakamp AIA Scholarship application.

In 2011, two recipients were awarded the a/e ProNet David W. Lakamp Scholarship. To read their case study topic responses, please click here.

Questions? Please send inquiries to: scholarships@aia.org

On September 7, AIA Colorado North presented the 2012 Design and Honor Awards to several architecture firms at the Dairy Center for the Arts in Boulder. We’re proud to announce that a/e ProNet client Arch11 came away from the night with quite an impressive haul, winning 5 total awards.

Honor Award for Residential: Large (Project: 2290)

Honor Award for Residential: Large (Project: Dihedral House)

Citation Award for Interiors (Project: Ignite!)

Citation Award for Residential: Large (Project: Lake House)

Citation Award for Single Architectural Detail (Project: Syncline House Sink)

 

Founded in 1993 by James Trewitt and E.J. Meade,  Arch11 gained regional recognition for projects ranging from exceptional residences to institutional planning, mixed use development and product design. They are skilled at developing projects with ‘impossible’ sites, budgets and structural parameters, while meeting the goals of diverse clients. The firm works on projects around the country from offices in Boulder and Denver, Colorado. Read more at the firm’s website.

Congratulations, Arch11!

Lovers of architecture (and the city by the bay) will have a special treat this weekend during the 2012 SF AIA Tour. This is the 10th annual San Francisco Living: Home Tours weekend, offered by the AIA “to promote a wide variety of architectural styles, neighborhoods, and residences—all from the architect’s point of view.” Tour participants will visit “some of the city’s latest residential projects from the inside out, meet design teams, explore housing trends, and discover design solutions that inspire unique San Francisco living.”

And we’re excited to announce that a/e ProNet client John Lum Architecture has a house featured on the tour for the second year in a row!

The St. Germain Residence, originally constructed in 1959, is a standout on Saturday’s list. John Lum Architecture kept the “original spirit of the Bay Area modernist aesthetic, while updating and reworking the interior to create an elegant but warm space.”

San Francisco-based John Lum Architecture, founded in 1994, has completed over 500 projects. Recent projects include a vegan shoe store in Berkeley. We love how creative our clients are!

Visit the AIA website for complete tour info and ticket information.

Photo by Sharon Risedorph Photography.

The differentiation between employees and independent contractors is an issue which comes up regularly for Architects and Engineers, especially with regard to Workers’ Compensation insurance, where the two categories are rated differently, therefore impacting a company’s premium.

So what is the difference between an Employee and an Independent Contractor?

Generally, a person is considered an employee if the employer retains the right to control the manner and means of the work they perform (i.e., provides the work space and tools, controls working hours). An employer only controls an independent contractor with regard to the result of his work and not with regard to the means by which the result is accomplished. It is important to remember, however, that this definition is often left vague in state insurance statutes, and open to the interpretation of the courts. Contact your insurance broker if you need help making this determination about one of your workers. Continue reading “Employee or Independent Contractor?”

No Common Law Indemnification Duty Owed by General Contractor to Project Owner for Subcontractor Employee Injuries Where GC Did Not Control and Supervise the Subcontractor’s Work

In a case whose principles apply to design professionals as well as general contractors, a GC was performing a build-out for a store tenant (not the project owner) and retained the services of a subcontractor for certain work. An employee of the subcontractor was injured by falling from a ladder, and the project owner sued the contractor for common law indemnification and contractual indemnification for damages for which the Owner had been found vicariously liable under the state’s statutory law.

Although the general contractor had not itself been found to be directly liable or vicariously liable for the subcontractor employee injuries, the property owners argued they were entitled to common law indemnification. They asserted the general contractor contractually assumed sole responsibility and control of the entire project, and had the contractual authority to (1) direct, supervise and control the means and methods of plaintiff’s work, and (2) institute safety precautions to protect the workers.

The Owner asked the Court to adopt a general rule that a party may be liable for common-law indemnification upon a showing that the party (i.e., the proposed indemnitor) either was actually negligent or had the authority to direct, control or supervise the injury-producing work, even if it did not exercise that authority. What the Owner asked to court to do was equate a party that merely has authority to direct, control or supervise the work with a party who is actively at fault in bringing about the injury suffered by the plaintiff.

The appellate court held that in the absence of proof of any negligence or actual supervision of a general contractor, the mere authority the general contractor has to supervise the work and implement safety procedures is not a sufficient basis to require common law indemnification of the project owner. McCarthy v. Turner Construction, Inc., 953 N.E. 2d 794, (New York, 2011).

Although the GC interacted with the subcontractor and the sub-subcontractor firm whose employee was injured, the GC had no supervisory authority over the sub-subcontractor’s work and it provided no tools or ladders to subcontractors that worked at the site.

No Contractual Indemnification

Citing case law that stands for the proposition that through a contractual indemnification clause, an owner who is only vicariously liable by statute may seek full indemnification from the party that is wholly responsible for the accident, the court found in this case that there was no direct contractual relationship between the project owner and the general contractor. The contract was in fact between the contractor and a store tenant of the project owner. In addition, the owner had no third party beneficiary rights under the contract between the contractor and the store tenant. For these reasons, the contractual indemnification claim was dismissed on summary judgment by the trial court, and that dismissal was affirmed on appeal.

This has been an excerpt of the June 2012 edition of ProNetwork News. Download the full PDF version of this newsletter to read more about Common Law Indemnification and the implications for design professionals.

About the Author: J. Kent Holland is a construction lawyer with the risk management consulting firm Construction Risk Counsel, PLLC, in Tysons Corner – Vienna, Virginia. The firm provides consulting services including: Contract Risk Management and Insurability Review; Change Order and Claim Preparation and Analysis; Insurance Risk Management; Insurance policy and endorsement review and drafting; and Risk Management Training. Mr. Holland is admitted to practice law in Virginia and Maryland and concentrates on construction and environmental law, insurance and risk management. For more information, call 703-623-1932 or e-mail Kent@ConstructionRisk.com. This article is adapted from one originally published in ConstructionRisk.com Report, Vol. 14, No. 5 (May 2012). and is used here with permission.

Blog Love: Schinnerer’s RM Blog

Time to return some Blog Love!

We are big fans of Victor O. Schinnerer’s Risk Management Blog. Several times a month, this long-standing professional liability insurance provider posts brief, timely, helpful articles that are relevant to the design industry. The emphasis is on risk management for design firms, and posts often include links back to pertinent studies and claims scenarios.

A few recent posts:

Building Reuse Provides Environmental Value — 27 August

“Earlier this year the National Trust for Historic Preservation released a report by its Preservation Green Lab that provides the most comprehensive analysis yet of the potential environmental benefits of retrofitting the existing building stock. The study, The Greenest Building: Quantifying the Environmental Value of Building Reuse is available from the organization’s PreservationNation.org/Sustainability website.

“The report concludes that when comparing buildings of equivalent size and function, building reuse almost always offers environmental savings over demotion and new construction. The report states that it can take between 10 and 80 years for a new energy-efficient building to overcome, through efficient operations, the climate change impacts created by its constriction. For the majority of building types in different climates, the study points to 20 to 30 years of use to offset the initial carbon impacts from construction. The study recognizes that the environmental benefits of reuse are maximized when a minimum of new materials are used; renovation projects that require many new materials can reduce or even negate the benefits of reuse.” Continue reading… Continue reading “Blog Love: Schinnerer’s RM Blog”

School is back in session for Engineering students across the country. So, let’s talk about the future of Engineering. It is one of the oldest fields of study. It is also an industry integral to the everyday workings of our infrastructure. What can we expect of and for our engineers in the next two decades?

Recently, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers released a study on the future of the Mechanical Engineering profession, specifically. The survey included results from 1,200 engineers with a minimum of two years of experience in mechanical engineering-related positions. According to an article in Virtual-Strategy Magazine, “The study also revealed that early career engineers and students will play a major role in meeting global challenges over the next 10-20 years, especially in the areas of sustainability or renewable energy, bioengineering and biomedical fields, nanotechnology, green building technology, energy storage, smart grids and greenhouse gas mitigation.”

Other positive results from the survey showed that over the next 20 years:

  • The prestige of working as an engineer will increase
  • The financial rewards of working as an engineer will be greater
  • The number of engineers working in less-developed countries will be greater
  • The need for engineers to increase their ability to communicate more effectively, increase language skills and manage global teams will increase
  • Skills in motion simulation, animation and virtual prototype creation are needed

This is all great news, both for Engineering students still looking forward to beginning their careers, as well as for those who graduated in recent recession-hobbled years and may have struggled to enter the Engineering workforce.

But there is another trend in the Engineering industry that doesn’t quite jive with this expected uptick in demand, prestige, and reward. Even a cursory review of the enrollment figures for Top Engineering Schools indicates the presence of the problem. Continue reading “Conflicting Trends in the Engineering Industry”

Last month, the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) announced the winners of its 2012 awards.

a/e ProNet client PWP Landscape Architecture of Berkeley, California received The Firm Award, and the firm’s principal, Peter Walker, FASLA snagged the ASLA Design Medal in recognition of exceptional design work over a sustained period of at least ten years.

Selected by ASLA’s Board of Trustees, the Honors represent the highest awards ASLA presents each year. The awards ceremony will take place at the 2012 ASLA Annual Meeting & EXPO, September 28–October 1 in Phoenix. See the full press release here.

With more project owners demanding the use of Building Information Modeling (BIM), project delivery is necessarily carried out through greater contributions of design input by the general contractor and the major trade subcontractors. The design professionals are no longer the sole authors of the project design. This collaborative project delivery method has been called integrated project delivery (IPD). The contribution of design input from each of the various project players using IPD is a significant break from the traditional division of responsibility recognized in the standard design-bid-build project delivery method. Players who never participated in the project design now face potential risk of professional liability. Additionally, the new, cutting-edge technologies being used for BIM expand the types of risks born by the design professional if there are errors and omissions within the computer modeling system or the improper management of the computerized data.

What is BIM?

BIM involves computerized design software tools that help create a model that reflects all of the building components’ geometric and functional qualities. The general contractor and trade subcontractors provide product-specific information for building components and that data is inputted into the model, including performance specifications, connection details and cost data. However, the model is more than a mere representation of the design in a three-dimensional computer graphic. Embedded within the design programs are rules that define each of the components’ relation to the other components. Continue reading “Integrated Project Delivery: Changing the Insurance Landscape”