There is another approach: The owner, architect and contractor can work together to develop a specification that satisfies everyone.
Michael: It’ll never happen, because it makes too much sense. 
I have started to put product details into the guide specs I write when it helps to explain the products. So it works both ways.
Michael there is a very small percentage of contractors who will follow your suggestion, and the percentage grows smaller every day. For this boom cycle Florida contractors have no incentive to cooperate with the team, IMHO most contractors consider specs detrimental to their bottom line. On private sector performing per industry standards has become less important.
Ten years ago, I never heard a client (architect) say that the Developer would not agree to reimburse the architect for the specs, that work was always included in the architect’s fee. Not anymore. Did something change that I am not privy to or have I been too busy to notice. It seems when given the choice Developers are saying no to specs on every job for a variety of reasons: Lack of coordination, too much to read, not up to date, too expensive, too controlling, too restrictive.
Ron is right on the money, except I would use another spelling, a play on words if you will, “it makes too much cents.”
Its sad that today alone I received several inquiries from architects wanting to know how they can issue contract documents w/o specifications. Seriously, how did I become the authority for doing the opposite of what I preach? What kind of messed up world has it become?
For one of the inquiries I have responded because its from an existing client, but I am ignoring the others, I want no involvement in their crime. I will delete their email and avoid reaching out to them, I don’t want to be the source for how to not issue complete contract documents. I guess this forum is read by more architects than I thought, kudos to Colin, but this is really getting bizarre.
I will probably be winding down on my posting for the problems on my current condo project, if it goes to litigation I don’t want my posts helping the litigators. Someone had posted that perhaps this problem could be discussed at association meetings, that would be excellent. I sincerely hope this trend is only a Florida construction trend, I would like to hear from my colleagues in other states whether specifications are included in the contract documents or not.
This idea makes no sense so it’s worth posting. How about if the architect provide the owner with the spec and let the owner issue the documents any way they want. The entire CD package, drawings and specs, get sealed and delivered to the owner. After that, it’s out of the architects hands. Not a very smart way the put ones head in s noose, but an option.
I’m not sure what the concern is Jerome? Is it the “big picture” issue w/ the growing trend of deleting specs, or this specific project where they want to issue the documents sans specs? Isn’t that the Architect’s decision, if they want to go that route? If you don’t feel there is any alternatives, tell them that, based on your years of experience, the specs you produced are appropriate for the project.
Robin, I’ve stated my case to the Architect, this firm has never had a client that challenged them in this manner, and I will tell you this Architect is not an insignificant firm, in fact its a highly respected firm responsible for cutting edge architecture, I am proud to have been asked to be part of the team…well I was proud, if the Architect gives in to the whims of the Contractor and Owner, I will probably regret being part of the team, not because I will be thrown into litigation, but because I am very proud of the work I did on this project. If the specifications are deleted, the quality of construction will suffer, and the way the architect has chosen to detail the building, the quality has to be better than the typical Florida Condo construction. It could be a beautiful building, award winning architecture, when finished. Fingers are crossed, only time will tell.
Robin, the Architect doesn’t always have a choice or is even advised of the status of the specifications. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve issued specs to the architect only to find that the Developer chose not to issue them as part of the CD’s. Contractually, when that happens and I am not advised promptly, my agreement is terminated. Why should I be part of the team if my work is not used?
Ron Geren offered a suggestion that the Architect retain the specs as a guide in reviewing submittals, and to back up the intent of the drawings. I like that advice, I just doubt it will stand up in court.
Than again, what do I know? You are the only attorney on this board, its nice to hear your off the record opinions.
I may have to revise my future agreements to retain my role on the project if my specifications are deleted. I’ll be calling my attorney for his advice if I revise the agreements.
Many of the responses are about how to accommodate the client but there are times where the only rational thing to do is to fire the client. As I stated previously the refusal of the owner to issue the specifications should be grounds to terminate the contract.
These clients will not change unless they have too. The designers need to stop accommodating the client on these matters. Just say no.
The question that occurs to me is: If there are multiple developers, each doing this on multiple projects, and if this delivery system doesn’t work because it ends in costly litigation, poor quality, etc., why do they keep using it? Does it increase short-term profits at the expense of long-term? Or doesn’t it? Does it trade construction savings at the expense of legal expenses? Or doesn’t it? Is everyone stupid?
When something is crazy and doesn’t make sense, yet is common practice, I want to know why people, especially the profit-oriented, continue to do it.
Tony, to answer your question, with your own words, “Everyone is stupid!”
People have short memories, even those who’ve had their pockets emptied after the last round of massive litigation.
It takes several years for the results of poor construction quality to manifest into real problems, mold doesn’t develop overnight, at least not to the point where it becomes a real problem. The last boom period for construction in Florida for the private sector was 2000-2005, litigation didn’t start until 2008, it took a while for defects and failures to become real problems. I expect a similar scenario, by 2018 most condos currently under construction will be completed, a few years later the problems will start, stucco will start delaminating, mold will rear its ugly head, some new threat will appear from China that makes us all fear for our lives, litigation will start, lessons won’t be learned until the start of the next decade.
Why do they keep using it, the big boys on the block figure litigation into the equation, they are still making huge profits. Its all us pions that wind up suffering.
So, did those problems result from the absence of specs in those projects? ;-9
Tony, I am not privy to the litigation on those projects, so I can’t tell you who was to blame. I’ve never had my work blamed for a construction failure. The clients who still include specs in their contract docs tell me that is one of the reasons why they do. I wish I had more answers. It seems that its easier to blame specs on construction problems than the drawings.
That’s because most lawyers, judges, and juries can’t read drawings. It’s also why I tell people to write their specs so a 10-year old can understand them.
Ken, I agree and that is one of the reasons I prefer 16 division format. I have an ongoing job with an architect who agreed to use MF04 format. One of the spec sections numbers had several decimal points, he asked me if this was my attempt to simply the specs, I really had no answer for him.
Ken, one of my clients who I’ve worked with for 16 years is the firm that really surprised me this year by refusing to include specs in their contract documents. This is a local SFL Latin firm that is well respected and works on mega projects, condo especially. I know the principal and all the players well, having prepared many project manuals for them in the past. IN previous years the biggest problem with working with them was the Project Managers unwilling to read the specs. I guess this is their solution, no specs is better than having to read specs.
When I questioned several PM’s about why they were no longer including specs, the answer I got every time was the specs increased the firm’s liability. Yet none of them could provide a real example to back up their claims. In SFL specs are being used as a scapegoat for the ills of contract documentation and the laziness of architects. Its very sad indeed.
I recommend my peers steer away from SFL specwriting for a while. If you don’t have experience in the trenches of SFL construction, you should not be writing specs in SFL.
Well, I guess if you don’t read the specs for your projects, you might expect some liability issues to arise.
Jerome and anyone else. Funny that I just got this in an email from the AIA LinkedIn forum.
http://www.entrearchitect.com/2015/06/03/specifications-for-residential-architecture/
Feel free to weigh in the conversation.
Alan, thanks for the link, what’s really weird is that I went to college with Rand Soellner, he graduated before me because I took time off between degrees (money ran out had to go work for a few years). Rand was a brilliant architect, totally out of the box guy, very into behavioral architecture, I always wondered what happened to Rand, he stuck around Florida for a while, but eventually moved west to explore avant garde architecture, really cool find.
Jerome, Does Tampa/St. Petersburg count as South Florida? There might be hope for SFL architecture yet. This Florida architect earned his CDT! That’s a start, right?