Are Specifications a requirement foe ...

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 720 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Tuesday, April 20, 2010 - 06:44 pm:    Should contract documents include specifications for LEED Certification? A client questions if specifications are necessary for a Hotel project seeking LEED gold certification. Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 325 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Tuesday, April 20, 2010 - 06:57 pm:    Where does the client expect all the Division 01 and Divisions 02 and up requirements to reside? Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 431 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Tuesday, April 20, 2010 - 09:17 pm:    If the client has such faith in the performance of the contractor that they don't feel specifications are necessary in order to achieve their design intent, consider obtaining a waiver of claims from the owner, leave the client and contractor to have a good time, and go design the next project. Most architects don't make money on CA phase services anyway, so why do them? Don't do more than your state licensing statute requires. Of course, you'll never work for that client again after the disaster they are about to set sail on. But sometimes you can't save a client from themselves. Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 721 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 01:30 am:    Phil, unfortunately new work remains rare in our backyard these days, this project is a large one and one that the architect is not willing to walk away from. The Developer needs to understand the importance of the specifications for the project, the architect know this, but wants to please the developer, leaving us out of the team and thus no specifications...I am trying to develop an argument for the value of specifications... To date we have been prepared specifications on 7 LEED projects, all which had specifications, so my question remains, are specifications necessary (or even advantageous)for inclusion in the contract documents to obtain LEED Certification? C. R. Mudgeon Senior Member Username: c_r_mudgeon Post Number: 63 Registered: 08-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 09:43 am:    Specifications are no more and no less necessary for a LEED project than any other. Isn't it interesting that, in a few short years, the entire industry has been taken by the need for LEED, but there remains a lack of appreciation for the documents that actually get the work done? Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEEDŽ AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 1032 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 11:02 am:    At the very least, there are countless submittals for LEED certification and the requirements for these are listed in each technical section and, overall, in a Division 01 section. For Gold certification, I'd assume that there will be requirements for waste management - another Division 01 Section - or two. There would also be a LEED checklist to enumerate the LEED credits for the project; I'd suspect that should reside in a Division 01 Section, too (maybe Sustainable Design Requirements?). And what about the Commissioning requirements - I doubt Gold is attainable without commissioning; and there's another Division 01 Section. The specifications, Division 01 through Division 49, serve to organize project information in a way that allows consistency and coordination. I can't imagine trying to keep track of all the LEED requirements without a good Project Manual. Dave Metzger Senior Member Username: davemetzger Post Number: 353 Registered: 07-2001 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 11:13 am:    Jerome: Didn't you go through something like this a few years ago, where the owner's rep wanted all industry references removed from the specifications? What are owners and developers in Florida smoking? Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 722 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 11:22 am:    yes Dave, apparently I won that battle, but now Contractors are aggressively pursuing elimination of specifications from all private sector projects, not just condominiums for the prime purpose of reducing quality and increasing their pocketbooks, while telling the developer how much better their job would run without specifications and the developers are buying it, meanwhile the architects are so desperate for work, they are forgetting how valuable specifications are to protect them. Could be why so many spec writers have left South Florida, they are getting burned out, frustrating and literally dying off. Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI, CDT Senior Member Username: rliebing Post Number: 1177 Registered: 02-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 11:54 am:    In the 2007 Florida version of the IBC, "Construction Documents, required for review for permit, are defined [in Chapter 2] as, "Written, graphic.......' Seems to me that it is difficult to meet that requirment[!] without specs, much less totaly circumvent it. Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 326 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 12:08 pm:    That may be a compelling answer for a project manual and LEED requirements. They are required by code unless waived by the AHJ. Lynn said better what I feebly attempted to say in my brief sentence. Perhaps you could turn this around, turn it into a make work campagne and manage the LEED processes to the USGBC. Sounds like the potential to make beaucoup $. Ronald L. Geren, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 853 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 12:26 pm:    Playing devil's advocate: The IBC definition could be defended by some building officials or plans examiners that the "written" portion of the definition is also in reference to the notes on the drawings and not necessarily just specifications. Thus, specifications are not specifically required. The UBC did not have an official definition of construction documents, but the UBC did identify specifications as a submittal document. I'm not sure what the SBC used to define construction documents. Ron Geren, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP www.specsandcodes.com Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEEDŽ AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 1033 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 12:31 pm:    In Wisconsin (admittedly a state that goes its own way), the submittal requirements to obtain a commercial building permit include 4 sets of drawings and 1 "set" of specifications. While the building permit is "conditional", I don't think you'd get even that without submitting the specifications. "Commercial" encompasses anything more complex than a 2 family dwelling. Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI, CDT Senior Member Username: rliebing Post Number: 1178 Registered: 02-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 12:58 pm:    Wanna have some fun? Let's submit a code change to IBC to add "specifications" to the definition of construction documents, and we take a collection to send Ron and Jerome to the hearings, wherever, to defend the change!!!! Nah, that would be cruel and unusal punishment-- sending them into the "hostile" camp. But wait, isn't this REALLY A VIABLE SPECIFICATIONS issue that needs a remedy? Especailly in light of what Lynn has noted neeeds doing for LEED and ever increasing "stuff" being required on projects. And the AHJs really shouldn't complain since "if there are regulations, enforcment and verification are required"! George A. Everding, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: geverding Post Number: 520 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - 01:01 pm:    I have noticed that LEED specifications are getting tighter, more "requirement-y" and less "suggestion-y" than a few years ago. Earlier, there was a lot of "Goal for recyled materials...", and "Owner desires to achieve..." If the owner expects a LEED Gold building, and expects the A/E to make it happen, then how else does it happen without requiring it in the specifications? I suppose as Phil suggests the owner could write into the agreement (supplementary conditions?) that the contractor shall provide a LEED Gold project, and leave the A/E out of it entirely. Performance specifying to the extreme: tell the end result and let the contractor figure out how to achieve it? If LEED (or anything else work result related) is in fact a contract requirement, it needs to be specified. Specifications = requirements. Anything less is mere suggestion. Construction Suggestion Institute, indeed! George A. Everding AIA CSI CCS CCCA Cannon Design - St. Louis, MO John Regener, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: john_regener Post Number: 460 Registered: 04-2002 Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 09:36 am:    Maybe we should form a national organization that includes architects, engineers and building product manufacturers (and maybe even including building officials and facility owners/managers) that promotes the value of well-prepared construction specifications. What would be an appropriate name for such an organization? D. Marshall Fryer, CSI, Assoc. AIA Senior Member Username: dmfryer Post Number: 74 Registered: 09-2003 Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 09:43 am:    How about the construction sarcasm initiative? Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 327 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 10:55 am:    The SOMETIMES, GENERALLY, ALWAYS, AS A RULE, CONSTRUCTION SUGGESTION INSTITUTE or The PAY ME NOW OR PAY ME LATER INSTITUTE Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 947 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 02:13 pm:    I'm surprised, actually, that the lending institution isn't requiring a project manual. some years ago, I had a lot of developer clients come to me because the bank required a set of specs. oh... that was before the recent banking reforms.. well... another tactic might be to appeal to the Architect's liability insurance -- how would his carrier feel about having no project manual on the project? does his liability increase if the documents aren't complete? Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 432 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 05:10 pm:    Back to Jerome's kind reply to my flippant comment: Perhaps the fee argument is a good one to make. Any single claim or dispute due to misunderstanding or conflicting information will cost at least 3 times as much to unravel as it would take to hire a specifier to put together a step by step guide on how to build the building (and obtain LEED certification in the process.) A good set of specifications holds the building team's hand during construction. All you have to do is do what it says, and you'll come out with your multi-million dollar project intact. Paul Gerber Senior Member Username: paulgerber Post Number: 7 Registered: 04-2010 Posted on Friday, April 23, 2010 - 03:32 pm:    LOL...personally I like Wayne's suggestion..."The PAY ME NOW OR PAY ME LATER INSTITUTE" although it could perhaps use a little tweak... The PAY ME LESS NOW OR PAY ME MUCH MORE LATER INSTITUTE Ride it like you stole it!!! Randy Cox Senior Member Username: randy_cox Post Number: 69 Registered: 04-2004 Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - 09:14 am:    I agree with Anne's comment about the lender and architect's insurance. Unless there is a huge difference between Boston and Florida (other than the warm winters), those should be major issues for your project. On all of our projects with construction financing, the bank has someone look over the proposed contract documents and send us comments. I would imagine that not having a specification would be a loan killer for anything bigger than a two family house. Our insurance has two stops that would kill a non spec project. Our rate is dependent on our use of a master specification. Our insurer also has us send a copy of each proposed Owner Architect Agreement with riders to them for review. No specs would raise red flags. In addition: from the contractor's perspective, they should want specifications too. Most GCs use them as part of their negotiations with subs to insure that they are buying what the contract requires. Having clear concise and complete information up front allows them to buy out and build faster...lowering their admin costs. Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 723 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - 09:33 am:    Randy, you bring up some good points, however it sounds like your firm is not familiar with private sector work in South Florida during a recession - work remains sparse, fees are down significantly as is staffing, and contractors will do anything to beat the estimate - reducing quality by eliminating specs is the game, and there are many architectural firms willing to play. I agree that on this project I am at a loss to think that the architect would risk so much to appease the Developer, however they need to keep their staff busy and there ain't too much work out there right now. Mark Gilligan SE, CSI Senior Member Username: mark_gilligan Post Number: 273 Registered: 10-2007 Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - 01:25 pm:    Projects that you accept at an inadequate fee to keep busy inevitably have a way of causing you problems when the market rebounds and you need to spend all of your attention on the excess of work you then have. Been there done that. (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, April 29, 2010 - 09:50 am:    Waive prudent business practices (something one typically did not do during "good times"?)...just for the sake of keeping staff busy (or paying the rent, and keeping the lights on)? Sounds like a recipe for...(you fill-in the blank).