I cannot reconcile questions 3 & 4 from Part 4B.
The question is:
- What next steps should be taken by the architects considering the higher construction estimate?
One of the two correct answers from question 3 is as follows:
c. Propose an additional fee for working with the new CM.
Correct. Both parties agree to appropriately adjust the architect’s services, schedule or compensation due to changes. The owner may also adjust their budget or design and
construction milestones.
The source that supports this correct answer from the AIA contract B101-2017 is:
1.2 The Owner and Architect may rely on the Initial Information. Both parties, however, recognize that the Initial Information may materially change and, in that event, the Owner and the Architect shall appropriately adjust the Architect’s services, schedule for the Architect’s services and the Architect’s compensation. The Owner shall adjust the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work and the Owner’s anticipated design and construction milestones, as necessary, to accommodate material changes in the Initial Information.
Question 4 say:
- According to B101, would the architect be entitled to additional compensation due to changes caused by the Construction Manager’s cost estimate?
The answer is:
The answer is not clearly defined in the B101. It could be argued that the architect is required to make changes to the design without additional fee, when costs exceed the owner’s budget.
The cost and constructability guidance provided by Southwest Green-Build were simply recommendations, which do not remove the responsibility of the Architect under the B101.
However, it could also be argued that the architect was operating under the assumption that Southwest Green-Build was providing accurate pricing information and that they would be selected to complete the project, as evidenced by their correspondence with the owner.
In this specific scenario, reasons for the change in costs are due to circumstances the architect could have not otherwise predicted and thus are outside of the Architect’s control. The fact that Southwest Green-Build was operating on a ‘handshake’ agreement not only put themselves at risk, it also created exposure for the architect as well.
None of this makes any sense to me. If the answer to question 3 is c. and article 1.2 supports the answer, which it does, then how can the answer to question 4 be true?
-Michelle