Content area
Full Text
CONTRACTS
In May 2008, the American Institute of Architects issued two sets of con- tract documents to cover work using integrated project delivery. IPD, the new kid on the block, is increasingly adopted by firms that use building information modeling (BIM) and want to speed up the design and construction schedule, control the budget from the get-go, and increase all practitioners' productivity, com- munication, and decisionmaking. One set, called transitional because it's based on already-existing, time- tested AIA documents, includes IPD busi- ness terms for the owner-architect agree- ment (Bl 95-2008), the owner-contractor agree- ment (Al 95-2008), and a shared general conditions document that establishes the respective duties of the owner, architect, and contractor and describes in detail how the parties will work collaboratively during each phase of the project (A295-2008). The second document, a totally new contract, is a single- purpose entity (SPE) agree- ment whose purpose is to provide a comprehensive way to deliver an IPD con- struction project. (Three backup SPE subcontracts were released in the fall of 2008.)
Except the SPE doesn't deliver, said lawyer-architect G. William Quatman, vice president and general counsel of Burns & McDonnell A/E firm in Kansas City, Mo., during a seminar at the May 2009 AIA convention. Since then, Quatman's posi- tion that the SPE contract is badly "flawed" has created hurricane-size waves in A/E/C circles.
Criticism of SPE contract documents. "I applaud the AIA for breaking newground, but the SPE document wasn't thought through thoroughly enough," Quatman tells DFMAR. "The biggest issue for me is misleading representation. According to the SPE documents, the architect has no liability, the architect is indemnified by the LLC [limited liability company], and the only thing at risk for the...