Very interesting. In particular I thought that first case example they cited was an eye-opener, where the contract was “for a farmhouse renovation, when the stated objective of the architectural contract was to ‘create a sustainable green modern single family home.'” The question to me wasn’t who was responsible to obtain certification, as the article suggests, but rather should it have been obtained at all. Has LEED marketing and self-promotion done too well a job? Something can’t be sustainable and green unless it’s LEED certified, and the client base out there expects such when that language is used even if not explicitly stated? Sounds like one more thing to add to the boiler-plate contract template under exclusions/not included unless specifically stated.
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
If this is your first time on the new site, please click "Forgot your password?". Follow the steps to reset your password. It may be the same as your old one.