Architect Creates LEGO Detroit

penobscot_detroit_lego

After all the bad press Detroit has received in the last few years, it’s nice to see that the city continues to inspire architects. For Jim Garrett of Redford, Michigan, it has motivated him to pull out his childhood LEGO sets and spend months faithfully recreating scale models of his favorite Detroit buildings.

“Twelve of those buildings are replicas of real Detroit structures, including the Detroit Institute of Arts, the Detroit Public Library in Midtown and the Fisher Building in New Center. Most of his downtown Detroit buildings are on view at The Henry Ford this month. Even the old red sandstone Union Depot, which stood at the corner of Fort and Third until it was demolished in 1974, is on display.”

The 51-year-old Garrett has been known to clear out LEGO sections in toy stores whenever they go on clearance, but these days it’s easier to find what he needs on the internet. For these kinds of detailed projects, he suggests the site bricklink.com, “sells specialized pieces like arched windows in bulk.”

When constructing Detroit’s tallest Art Deco skyscraper, The Penobscot building, Garrett was relieved to find “LEGO made some grooved bricks that perfectly matched the detail on the actual building.”

“I bought almost the entire world’s supply at the time,” he said.

“It took eight months to erect the Penobscot’s 47 stories. The model is 9.5 feet to the roof and 11 feet to the tip of the red ball at the pinnacle.”

Donna Terek penned the original article for the Detroit News, and it includes a video of the exhibit which is worth a watch.

As Garrett wholeheartedly admits, “It’s my hope that people who aren’t familiar with Detroit will realize there’s more to Detroit than crime stories and bankruptcy. I’d like to think it will help them get an appreciation of Detroit’s architecture.”

construction

Sometimes the grounds for termination are absolutely clear. And sometimes several legal options are available. But when preparing to terminate a subcontract, there’s one more question to ask: Is this the right business decision? We turn to Burns Logan’s Southeast Construction Law Blog for the answer.

The following is an excerpt from a September 2014 post on the blog titled Subcontract Termination: Not for the Faint of Heart:

After a few weeks of poor performance by the stucco subcontractor, my client and I sat down to determine all the possible avenues to resolve the issues. The first thing we did was pull out the subcontract which controlled the stucco subcontractor’s work. We wanted to be sure that the subcontract included all the necessary provisions to allow my general contractor client to remedy the situation. Some of the common default provisions in subcontracts include:

  • failure to prosecute the work promptly and with due diligence;
  • failure to prosecute the work in a workmanlike and safe manner;
  • failure to supply proper supervision;
  • failure to properly staff the job;
  • failure to supply materials and equipment of proper quality and quantity;
  • failure to promptly correct defective or deficient work;
  • failure to pay sub-subcontractors or suppliers;
  • failure to maintain the project schedule as directed by the contractor; and
  • failure to submit proper progress and completion schedules.

We found that this subcontractor had violated many of the standard default provisions in my client’s subcontract. Therefore, we felt we had the proper authority to issue notices of default.

Continue reading “Subcontract Termination: The right business decision?”

Sometimes it’s difficult to sort through all the resources available to design professionals on the internet. We recommend you check out this series of eleven free videos from aecKnowledge, each one an interview with a respected architect in California’s Bay Area.

aecKnowledge Insights video series

Jack McAllister, FAIA

Throughout his long career, Jack McAllister has placed value on understanding how materials were fabricated and buildings constructed, and the importance of working directly with clients, allied design professionals, and the craftspeople building his creations. Above all, Jack learned the value of mentorship, as he describes so poignantly in this in-depth interview curated by Tim Culvahouse, FAIA.

Chuck Davis, FAIA

At age 78, Chuck remains a partner in EHDD, a fabled Bay Area architecture firm with a distinguished international reputation. In this candid interview, Chuck shares his insights about his early years with pioneer Joe Esherick, working with David Packard on the design of the Monterey Aquarium, his post-partum blues, collaborating with clients, the “search and discovery” that makes great architecture, and passing the torch to a new generation of leaders.

Peter Dodge, FAIA

Peter is a founding member of EHDD–one of America’s most distinguished architectural practices. A Fellow of the American Institute of Architects, Peter is the 2008 AIA California Council’s Lifetime Achievement Award. In this interview, he describes his circuitous path to architecture and talked about his contributions to the profession.

Visit the aecKnowledge website to watch these interviews. The following is a list of the rest of the interviewees:

  • George Homsey, FAIA
  • Odile Decq
  • Thom Mayne, FAIA
  • Gwynne Pugh, FAIA, ASCE
  • Steven Ehrlich, FAIA

“A hundred years after we began building with tall buildings, we have yet to understand how the tall, high-rise building becomes a building block in making a city… in creating the public realm,” says legendary architect and teacher Moshe Safdie of Safdie Architects in Boston. This is the driving force behind his TED talk on How to Reinvent the Apartment Building.

Emphasizing the importance of light, permeability, and nature, Safdie demonstrates how breaking the mold of the standard residential skyscraper could transform the urban environment and the experience of those living in high-density housing.

chicagobean

Dozens of a/e ProNet members from across the country are gathering in Chicago this week for the annual fall meeting. They will be joined by representatives from several top tier professional liability insurance companies and a few major design industry organizations, including the AIA, NSPE, and ACEC.

Over the course of three days, members will receive presentations from the following insurance carriers: Beazley, Ironshore, HCC, Victor O. Schinnerer, Axis, Catlin, Hanover, RLI, All Risks, Liberty, Travelers, Navigators and Arch. These presentations will help inform the specialist brokers of a/e ProNet about industry trends, policy language changes, new coverage opportunities, and the like. It will also give our members a chance to ask questions and make suggestions pertinent to their own clients.

Along with insurer presentations, there will also be ample opportunity for the brokers to network with one another, alerting the group to trends around the country and problem solving in the collective.

To open the week, the Board of Directors will meet, and to close, Kent Holland of Construction Risk will present to the membership on the second edition of a/e ProNet’s Risk Management and Contract Guide for Design Professionals.

The Architect 50

We love seeing our members’ design clients on any premier list of architects. Scrolling through the brand new 2014 ARCHITECT 50 list from Architect Magazine, we’re excited to see several familiar names, including Brooks + Scarpa Architects and Mark Cavagnero Associates.

Each year, Architect Magazine strives “to compile a list that recognizes firms small and large, who are making their mark beyond just their ability to run a financially lucrative business. This year, [they] added a few new data points, capturing information on how firms are helping their interns gain licensure, both through financial incentives and culture. And [they] asked firms to submit a portfolio with an energy-efficient project that best exemplified their commitment to sustainability.” Read more about the methodology behind the annual selection of the Top 50 here.

More detailed lists of the Top 50 in Design, Top 50 in Business, and Top 50 in Sustainability are available on the Architect Magazine website, too. Congratulations to all the winners!

Graduation2

We’re proud to announce that the American Institute of Architects (AIA) panel–which includes a/e ProNet member Tom Coghlan of Design Insurance Agency, Inc.–has selected Kevin Fletcher and Nathan Blair to receive the 2014 a/e ProNet AIA David W. Lakamp Scholarship.

The scholarship program was initiated by a/e ProNet in 1990, and includes an annual award of $5,000 to two architecture students who demonstrate a particular interest in the principles of management in architecture practice.

You can read more about our scholarship and how to apply next year at our website. But here, let’s learn a little more about the next generation of leaders in the architecture community.

Kevin Fletcher

Kevin Fletcher grew up in Miami, FL and will be completing his Bachelors of Science in Architecture at Wentworth Institute of Technology in 2015 with plans of attending graduate school in the fall of 2015. During his time as an undergraduate student, Fletcher, a Dean’s List Scholar, has remained an active member of the American Institute of Architecture Students (AIAS).

In the summers throughout his college education, Fletcher has gained experience working as an Intern at BC Architects AIA, Inc. Prior to graduation, he has applied his talents in areas of marketing presentations, conceptual design, design development, and construction documents. All of which have contributed to his understanding of building systems, codes, and construction methods. Following graduate school, Fletcher plans on pursuing his NCARB registration along with his LEED accreditation.

Apart from his academic and professional involvement within the field of architecture, Fletcher has spent time developing skills in other areas of graphic design, photography, and videography. All the while, maintaining an active lifestyle along with a passion for travel.

Nathan Blair

Mr. Blair graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Architecture from the University of Utah in 2014. He will be returning to the U of U in the fall to complete work on a Masters of Architecture with an expected graduation in 2016. Mr. Blair is currently employed with Epic Engineering located in Heber City, UT. He has immensely enjoyed his time there helping to grow a newly established architecture department. Upon completion of the Master’s degree program, it is Mr. Blair’s intention to seek fulfillment of IDP credit hours with Epic Engineering.

Mr. Blair’s design interests center around identifying and isolating the spirit of our time with an affinity for communicating these visions through contemporary materials and methods. Mr. Blair was recently able to implement these ideologies by competing in the CTBUH Student Tall Building Design Competition, receiving positive remarks. He is also looking forward to participating in the University of Utah’s DesignBuildBLUFF program.

During his free time, Mr. Blair will most likely be found fly fishing. He also enjoys playing tennis, golf, billiards, and getting sushi on the weekends. Mr. Blair is constantly striving to improve himself personally and professionally, and concludes in his own words, “My name is Nathan Blair. I’m a lifelong student, an aspiring architect, and I’m a Mormon.”

Congratulations, Kevin & Nathan! We wish you both the best of luck in your academic and professional careers.

wooden gavel and books on wooden table,on brown background

The following is an excerpt from a recent Gordon & Rees LLP article entitled California Supreme Court Holds Principal Architects Owe Duty of Care to Future Homeowners:

On July 3, the Supreme Court of California published its decision in Beacon Residential Community Assn. v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. In short, the court concluded that prime architects designing residential buildings owe a duty of care to future homeowners even though they do not actually build the projects themselves or exercise ultimate control over their construction.

Of importance, Beacon involved a demurrer at the trial court level meaning that, on appeal, the Supreme Court was required to accept the facts pled in the plaintiff’s amended complaint as true. This included the allegation that the Beacon project’s designers provided their services “knowing that the finished construction would be sold as condominiums.” It also was claimed that the defendants played an active role throughout the construction process, including coordinating efforts of the design and construction teams, conducting weekly site visits and inspections, recommending design revisions as needed, and monitoring compliance with design plans. For their various services, the designers were reportedly paid $5 million. The plaintiff alleged that negligent design work resulted in several defects, including extensive water infiltration, inadequate fire separations, excessive solar heat gain, structural cracks, and other safety hazards…

Although not a total loss for the design community, Beacon will have the effect of expanding architects and engineers (A&E) liability to a broader spectrum of claimants and generally keep A&E defendants in lawsuits for longer periods of time.

For an explanation of the court’s decision, including a concise summary of the affects of the ruling on Architects and Engineers, visit the original Gordon & Rees post by attorney Dion N. Cominos.

Complex precedents like this are just one of the reasons why A&Es are best served by consulting specialist brokers about their Professional Liability insurance needs. Does your current professional liability insurance policy include pre-claims assistance? How about the latitude to choose your own council in the event of of a claim? Call your local a/e ProNet Broker and get answers to these questions today.

PNN_201403_Waiver of Subrogation A Valid Defense for Architects and EngineersAn attorney is asked to defend an architect in a claim for defective design of a geothermal HVAC system, which allegedly caused an explosion and several million dollars of property damage to an owner’s manufacturing facility. He reviews the file, making notes. The plaintiff is the owner’s casualty insurer, which has paid the claim and sued the general contractor in subrogation. It’s actually the general contractor who has named the architect as a third-party defendant, seeking contribution and indemnity. All sorts of interesting defenses present themselves: statute of repose (work was completed years ago), no common law indemnity claim, no negligence…but what about the contracts for the original project?

Contained within the AIA A201 General Conditions is a boiler plate “waiver of subrogation” clause. It appears to bar subrogation claims for damages covered by insurance on the property. The owner’s carrier picked up the tab, so how can it sue in subrogation now? Are these waivers of subrogation provisions enforceable?

Since the project is in North Carolina, our inquiry starts with a 1987 North Carolina Court of Appeals decision, St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company v. Freeman-White Associates, Inc. The case involves an architect who performed design services for a Charlotte, North Carolina hospital. During construction, a wing of the hospital collapsed, causing significant property damage. The hospital’s insurer paid the claim under an “all risk” policy and then sued the architect in subrogation. The agreements between the parties to the construction incorporated the AIA A201 General Conditions, including its standard waiver of subrogation clause, and the clause was applied by the trial court to dismiss the complaint against the architect under Rule 12(b)6. Unfortunately, on appeal, the court of appeals declined to enforce the waiver of subrogation provision and reversed the trial court’s dismissal.

The rationale? The appeals court held that because the contract required the architect to provide coverage for its own errors and omissions, the contract was susceptible to two interpretations: 1) the true intent of the contracting parties was that the owner would waive all claims for damages against which the owner had insured itself; or 2) the contracting parties intended for the architect to insure against its own negligence in order to negate the waiver as to losses caused by the architect’s negligence.

Not a great result for the client. However, St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company v. Freeman-White Associates, Inc. is a 1987 decision. Surely there has been some better law made since then…

Waiver of Subrogation in General in Construction Contracts

“Subrogation is the substitution of [one person or entity] to the position of another, an obligee, whose claim he has satisfied…” Thus, in the insurance context, the doctrine of subrogation allows an insurer who has indemnifed its insured to step into the shoes of its insured and sue any at-fault party which may have caused the damages. The right of subrogation may arise by equitable, common law principles, or by virtue of any express assignment in the insuring agreement. The policies underlying subrogation are appealing: 1) it feels “fair” that the ultimate liability for a loss should land on the wrongdoer, not an insured’s insurer; 2) in theory, subrogation should keep insurance premiums down; and 3) parties remain incentivized to avoid mistakes. In addition, fault-based claims in the midst of construction can cause delays and increased hostility during the project. Costly litigation would ensue, the avoidance of which was one of the purposes for which the property insurance was originally obtained. Continue reading “Waiver of Subrogation: A Valid Defense for Architects and Engineers?”