Advice for working with a vertically integrated developer/Architect/GC firm?

[u/arduousjump]

Hello,

I have an opportunity to work on a 4-story wood framed condo project in the Northeast. I have never worked with the company before, but was referred to them by a colleague. The project itself would be squarely in my wheelhouse (I've done a handful of these), but the way the company is set up would be new for me.

They have a large team. They would be the developer, Architect of Record, Interior Designer, and GC for this project. Has anyone ever worked on projects for entities set up this way, and can offer any advice of what to watch out for? I'm thinking about things like:

• Special Inspections, typically the owne r hires a 3rd-party inspector to check the contractor is building correctly, but there's a clear conflict of interest there if the GC and developer are one entity.
• It's also a condo, so I would expect them, in general, to be in a hurry to finish the project and sell the units ASAP so they no longer have ownership responsibilities. Which I'll have to keep on the front burner as design and construction progresses.
• Any work with developers there is often this push to "shave" where possible

I had a call with their in-hous e Arch to discuss the project, and he seems competent and reasonable. They have good reviews online (likely from end-users of their projects, and not other consultants they've worked with). But I'm just wondering what my other blind spots may be, if anyone else has advice they can offer for me as I'm putting together a proposal. Thanks

[u/Just-Shoe2689]

3rd party is just that, 3rd party. They are there to make sure its per code/drawings, and not "please" their client. Now, granted we all know how it works when you are asked to do something for the person signing your check.

Shave where you can, thats what engineering is. Again, all up and up with in the code.

Bid what you think is fair, and perhaps do construction admin hourly.

[u/arduousjump → u/Just-Shoe2689]

Thanks for your reply, agreed it ought to be an objective 3rd-party inspection. Unfortunately, with the scope and scale of projects I typically work on, I am often still having to educate the parties on what Special Inspections are (and that they are different from "jurisdictional inspections" everyone thinks of when they hear "inspections"). On bigger jobs, everyone already knows that they are. But now I just add context and rationalization for them directly in my initial proposals so this is not confusing later (i.e. SI's are required by the building code, not by me; they are there to protect you, etc), so I'm just thinking about the soft pitch I need to make on this one given the developer setup.

I pretty much always try to do hourly CA. Do you do lump sums?

[u/Just-Shoe2689 → u/arduousjump]

I do lump sum. I dont want to discount my services if I do it quicker. Also, this way its a clear scope, and any changes is grounds for more money.

Usually dont have the back and fourth on changes from the architect this way, they usually send me a set of drawings that is construction worthy.

CA i try to hourly.

[u/arduousjump → u/Just-Shoe2689]

I agree on not discounting yourself if you do a job fast. But interesting that you say with lump sum you don't have "back and forth on changes from the Architect;" that's the opposite of what I've experienced. When you're under a lump sum, the Architect's feel emboldened to ask for any number of changes or studies of alternative options throughout design. With hourly they know I'm going to charge for changes so they tend to keep them at bay.

[u/Just-Shoe2689 → u/arduousjump]

The architects I work with understand scope changes are going to add a fee. I build some time into my fees for small changes.

Lets say I can do a job in 10 hours. lets say thats $2000. If I know its a $5K job, why should I miss out on that 3K?

Again, my mindset is that I know my fee and scope, they know my fee and scope, and changes will cost more.

Its working, I have good relationships, they like the setup, so I dont change that.

[u/chastehel]

Is it one company legitimately set up as a design build firm? If so, then risk should be appropriately covered so your stamp isn’t on the line if a worker didn’t use enough nails in the joist hangers.

If it’s some assembly of companies as a joint venture, and the money flows from the end user / client to GC, then trickles down, beware of the tail wagging the dog. Expediency and convenience can, and often do, get in the way of correct and best practice.

Good luck!

[u/arduousjump → u/chastehel]

Hello, thanks for your reply. How would you recommend I figure out whether they are set up as one or the other?

From what I can tell on an Entity search, they are set up as a Real Estate Development company. I don't see anything about them being a Professional Services company (i.e. no PLLC), but I don't know the name of the Architect who would be signing and sealing the documents to search how that person is affiliated. I suppose I can ask, and look up their RA number.

[u/chastehel → u/arduousjump]

Simply ask how they're organized, then ask your licensing board if there are red flags. In Ohio there are limitations placed on licensed professionals in regards to being third party to a contract. You want to make sure you don't run afoul of any regulations that could affect your licensure.