<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>

<rss version="2.0"
 xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
 xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 >
<channel>
<title>Ahlers &amp; Cressman Lawyers</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blogs.php?topic=15</link>
<description>Construction News and Notes</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 21:10:42 GMT</pubDate>
<item>
<title>Call For Boost to Infrastructure Investment</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=193</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p><st1:state><st1:place>Pennsylvania</st1:place></st1:state> governor Ed Rendell is championing rebuilding of the <st1:city><st1:place>U.S.</st1:place></st1:city> aging infrastructure. It is easy, especially in tough economic times, for legislators to push aside infrastructure initiatives, including basic maintenance and repair, in favor of issues that seem more pressing or more appealing. Such neglect misses the point that infrastructure spending is a thoughtful and wise investment, a crucial investment in the nation's future  and it is an excellent source of high-value jobs. Governor Rendell is quoted as follows:</p><p>"When I took over as governor, I was told that <st1:state><st1:place>Pennsylvania</st1:place></st1:state> lead the nation in the number of structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges. We had more than 5,600 of them, so I put a ton of money into bridge repair. We more than tripled the amount of capital budget from $200 million a year to $700 million per year. I got a special appropriation from the Legislature to do $200 million a year extra for the next four years. Well, the good news is that we repaired a lot of bridges. The bad news is that by the end of my 6<sup>th</sup> term [as governor], the end of 2008, the number of deficient or structurally obsolete bridges had gone from 5,600 to more than 6,000. The reason is that we [<st1:state><st1:place>Pennsylvania</st1:place></st1:state>] led the nation in bridges 75 years or older, and the recommended life span for a bridge is 40 years. So, every time we fixed two, three would bump on to the list."</p><p>Similar investment must be made in the state of <st1:state><st1:place>Washington</st1:place></st1:state> to update and rebuild this State's aging infrastructure.</p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/opinion/16herbert.html">here</a></p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p><st1:state><st1:place>Pennsylvania</st1:place></st1:state> governor Ed Rendell is championing rebuilding of the <st1:city><st1:place>U.S.</st1:place></st1:city> aging infrastructure. It is easy, especially in tough economic times, for legislators to push aside infrastructure initiatives, including basic maintenance and repair, in favor of issues that seem more pressing or more appealing. Such neglect misses the point that infrastructure spending is a thoughtful and wise investment, a crucial investment in the nation's future  and it is an excellent source of high-value jobs. Governor Rendell is quoted as follows:</p><p>"When I took over as governor, I was told that <st1:state><st1:place>Pennsylvania</st1:place></st1:state> lead the nation in the number of structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges. We had more than 5,600 of them, so I put a ton of money into bridge repair. We more than tripled the amount of capital budget from $200 million a year to $700 million per year. I got a special appropriation from the Legislature to do $200 million a year extra for the next four years. Well, the good news is that we repaired a lot of bridges. The bad news is that by the end of my 6<sup>th</sup> term [as governor], the end of 2008, the number of deficient or structurally obsolete bridges had gone from 5,600 to more than 6,000. The reason is that we [<st1:state><st1:place>Pennsylvania</st1:place></st1:state>] led the nation in bridges 75 years or older, and the recommended life span for a bridge is 40 years. So, every time we fixed two, three would bump on to the list."</p><p>Similar investment must be made in the state of <st1:state><st1:place>Washington</st1:place></st1:state> to update and rebuild this State's aging infrastructure.</p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/opinion/16herbert.html">here</a></p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=193</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Safeco Field Overpass Nears Completion</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=192</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>By mid-June the Safeco overpass, a new bridge between the baseball stadium on <st1:street><st1:address>South Royal Brougham Way</st1:address></st1:street> will carry traffic and pedestrians over the BNSF railroad tracks.  The west end of the bridge was open on <st1:date month="2" day="17" year="2010" ls="trans">February 17, 2010</st1:date>.  The <st1:street><st1:address>Royal Brougham Way</st1:address></st1:street> bridge will open to vehicles only and bicycles by <st1:date month="4" day="12" year="2010" ls="trans">April 12, 2010</st1:date>.  The bridge's sidewalks, stairs and elevators will be open only for stadium events by <st1:date month="4" day="12" year="2010" ls="trans">April 12, 2010</st1:date> at the earliest and by the end of April at the latest.  By mid-June, the bridge will be open at all times to vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians.  The I-90/I-5 off-ramp to the <st1:street><st1:address>South Atlantic Street</st1:address></st1:street> overpass will open by <st1:date month="5" day="12" year="2010" ls="trans">May 12, 2010</st1:date>.</p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:48:53 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>By mid-June the Safeco overpass, a new bridge between the baseball stadium on <st1:street><st1:address>South Royal Brougham Way</st1:address></st1:street> will carry traffic and pedestrians over the BNSF railroad tracks.  The west end of the bridge was open on <st1:date month="2" day="17" year="2010" ls="trans">February 17, 2010</st1:date>.  The <st1:street><st1:address>Royal Brougham Way</st1:address></st1:street> bridge will open to vehicles only and bicycles by <st1:date month="4" day="12" year="2010" ls="trans">April 12, 2010</st1:date>.  The bridge's sidewalks, stairs and elevators will be open only for stadium events by <st1:date month="4" day="12" year="2010" ls="trans">April 12, 2010</st1:date> at the earliest and by the end of April at the latest.  By mid-June, the bridge will be open at all times to vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians.  The I-90/I-5 off-ramp to the <st1:street><st1:address>South Atlantic Street</st1:address></st1:street> overpass will open by <st1:date month="5" day="12" year="2010" ls="trans">May 12, 2010</st1:date>.</p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=192</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Construction Of Giant Wind Farm In Oregon Presents Opportunities For Contractors</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=180</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>Shepherd's Flat project in <st1:state><st1:place>Oregon</st1:place></st1:state>, is the largest wind farm completed to date.  The construction will take place between 2011 and 2012 and approximately 400 workers will be needed.  The wind farm will power 235,000 <st1:state><st1:place>California</st1:place></st1:state> homes and will supply 10% of Southern California Edison's renewable energy. </p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&amp;amp;sid=ayHwf4d1AtSs">here</a></p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:33:19 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Shepherd's Flat project in <st1:state><st1:place>Oregon</st1:place></st1:state>, is the largest wind farm completed to date.  The construction will take place between 2011 and 2012 and approximately 400 workers will be needed.  The wind farm will power 235,000 <st1:state><st1:place>California</st1:place></st1:state> homes and will supply 10% of Southern California Edison's renewable energy. </p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&amp;amp;sid=ayHwf4d1AtSs">here</a></p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=180</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Corps of Engineers Reduces The Chance of Green River Flooding from 33% to 4%</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=176</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reports that repairs to the Howard Hanson Dam have dramatically reduced the chance of flooding in the <st1:place><st1:placename>Green River</st1:placename> <st1:placetype>Valley</st1:placetype></st1:place> this winter.  The installation of a grout curtain in the dam is slowing the seepage through a damaged abutment.  The Corps of Engineers' officials indicated that if heavy rains raised the water levels in the dam, the Corps of Engineers may have to release water so that the dam does not collapse.  The <st1:place><st1:placename>Green River</st1:placename> <st1:placetype>Valley</st1:placetype></st1:place> is the West Coast's second largest manufacturing and distribution center located southeast of <st1:city><st1:place>Seattle</st1:place></st1:city>.</p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://seattle.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2009/11/02/daily42.html">here</a></p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:06:02 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reports that repairs to the Howard Hanson Dam have dramatically reduced the chance of flooding in the <st1:place><st1:placename>Green River</st1:placename> <st1:placetype>Valley</st1:placetype></st1:place> this winter.  The installation of a grout curtain in the dam is slowing the seepage through a damaged abutment.  The Corps of Engineers' officials indicated that if heavy rains raised the water levels in the dam, the Corps of Engineers may have to release water so that the dam does not collapse.  The <st1:place><st1:placename>Green River</st1:placename> <st1:placetype>Valley</st1:placetype></st1:place> is the West Coast's second largest manufacturing and distribution center located southeast of <st1:city><st1:place>Seattle</st1:place></st1:city>.</p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://seattle.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2009/11/02/daily42.html">here</a></p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=176</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>OREGON COURT OF APPEALS RULES THAT BUILDERS IN OREGON CAN BE SUED FOR "NEGLIGENT CONSTRUCTION" IF A BUILDING CODE VIOLATION IS INVOLVED</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=174</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>A recent decision by the Oregon Appeals Court allows property owners to file negligence lawsuits against contractors for building-code violations. In a construction defect case brought eight (8) years after the construction was substantially complete, the Court ruled that the breach of contract action against the contractor was barred by the six (6) year statute of limitation, however, allowed the homeowners to sue the contractor on a negligence cause of action which has a two (2) year statute of limitation with a "discovery" proviso (the cause of action must be commenced within two (2) years of discovery). Though the discovery of the alleged construction defect occurred well after the contract statute of limitations had run, the lawsuit was brought within two (2) years of the date of the discovery of the alleged defect. The Court reasoned that because the water leakage, which was at the heart of the allegation, involved possible violations of the Oregon building-code, the homeowners were allowed to bring a negligence cause of action against the contractor.</p><p>This case has far reaching implications for commercial contractors (and their insurers), involved in construction defect disputes. Since most "construction defects" involve some violation of some provision of the building code, an owner now has two (2) years from the date of discovery of the defect (irrespective whether the contract statute of limitations has expired) to bring a cause of action against builders and their insurance companies.</p><p><a target="_blank" href="http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A136228.htm"><i>Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, Inc.,</i> Or. App. __, WL 2766868 (2009)</a></p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>A recent decision by the Oregon Appeals Court allows property owners to file negligence lawsuits against contractors for building-code violations. In a construction defect case brought eight (8) years after the construction was substantially complete, the Court ruled that the breach of contract action against the contractor was barred by the six (6) year statute of limitation, however, allowed the homeowners to sue the contractor on a negligence cause of action which has a two (2) year statute of limitation with a "discovery" proviso (the cause of action must be commenced within two (2) years of discovery). Though the discovery of the alleged construction defect occurred well after the contract statute of limitations had run, the lawsuit was brought within two (2) years of the date of the discovery of the alleged defect. The Court reasoned that because the water leakage, which was at the heart of the allegation, involved possible violations of the Oregon building-code, the homeowners were allowed to bring a negligence cause of action against the contractor.</p><p>This case has far reaching implications for commercial contractors (and their insurers), involved in construction defect disputes. Since most "construction defects" involve some violation of some provision of the building code, an owner now has two (2) years from the date of discovery of the defect (irrespective whether the contract statute of limitations has expired) to bring a cause of action against builders and their insurance companies.</p><p><a target="_blank" href="http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A136228.htm"><i>Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, Inc.,</i> Or. App. __, WL 2766868 (2009)</a></p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=174</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Former Mayoral Candidate Files Lawsuit To Halt Seattle Tunnel</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=171</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>Seattle Citizens Against the Tunnel filed a lawsuit to prevent the WSDOT from proceeding with a plan to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a tunnel.  The lawsuit seeks to halt work on the tunnel until an Environmental Impact Study is completed in 2011. </p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://blog.seattlepi.com/transportation/archives/181329.asp">here</a></p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:39:19 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Seattle Citizens Against the Tunnel filed a lawsuit to prevent the WSDOT from proceeding with a plan to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a tunnel.  The lawsuit seeks to halt work on the tunnel until an Environmental Impact Study is completed in 2011. </p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://blog.seattlepi.com/transportation/archives/181329.asp">here</a></p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=171</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>City of Seattle Takes Another Step Toward Construction of the Alaska Way Viaduct Replacement Project</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=170</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>On October 19<sup>th</sup> the City Counsel will vote on an agreement to take on nearly a billion dollars of responsibility for streets, a new seawall, parking, a waterfront promenade and perhaps a street car.  These costs are over and above the $3.1 billion State highway project.  This month's paperwork does not lock in the "big bore" but, is one step further in committing the City to the tunnel project. </p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2010001454_tunnelagreement05m.html">here</a></p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:29:26 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>On October 19<sup>th</sup> the City Counsel will vote on an agreement to take on nearly a billion dollars of responsibility for streets, a new seawall, parking, a waterfront promenade and perhaps a street car.  These costs are over and above the $3.1 billion State highway project.  This month's paperwork does not lock in the "big bore" but, is one step further in committing the City to the tunnel project. </p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2010001454_tunnelagreement05m.html">here</a></p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=170</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Committee On Advancing The Competitiveness And Productivity Of U.S. Construction Industry (National Research Council) Publishes Its Findings</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=169</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>In 2008 the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) requested that the National Research Council (NRC) appoint an ad hoc committee of experts to provide advice for "advancing the competitiveness and productivity of the U.S. construction industry."  NRC defined efficiency improvements as ways to cut waste in time, costs, materials, energy, skills and labor.  The Committee believes that improving efficiency will improve overall productivity and help individual construction firms produce more environmentally sustainable projects and become more competitive.  The Committee identified 5 "opportunities for breakthrough improvements."  There were (1) widespread deployment and use of inter-operable technology applications, also called Building Information Modeling ("BIM"); (2) improve job-site efficiency through more effective interfacing of people, processes, materials, equipment and information; (3) greater use of pre-fabrication, pre-assembly, modernization and offsite fabrication techniques and processes; (4) innovative, widespread use of demonstration installation; and (5) effective performance measurement to drive efficiency and support innovation.  The Committee discusses its findings in this report that can be obtained by accessing the following website:  <a href="http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12717.html">http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12717.html</a><sub></sub></p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:52:00 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>In 2008 the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) requested that the National Research Council (NRC) appoint an ad hoc committee of experts to provide advice for "advancing the competitiveness and productivity of the U.S. construction industry."  NRC defined efficiency improvements as ways to cut waste in time, costs, materials, energy, skills and labor.  The Committee believes that improving efficiency will improve overall productivity and help individual construction firms produce more environmentally sustainable projects and become more competitive.  The Committee identified 5 "opportunities for breakthrough improvements."  There were (1) widespread deployment and use of inter-operable technology applications, also called Building Information Modeling ("BIM"); (2) improve job-site efficiency through more effective interfacing of people, processes, materials, equipment and information; (3) greater use of pre-fabrication, pre-assembly, modernization and offsite fabrication techniques and processes; (4) innovative, widespread use of demonstration installation; and (5) effective performance measurement to drive efficiency and support innovation.  The Committee discusses its findings in this report that can be obtained by accessing the following website:  <a href="http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12717.html">http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12717.html</a><sub></sub></p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=169</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>The World Trade Center Collapse Still Being Debated By Engineers and Scientists</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=168</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>A summary of some the technical areas in dispute as to what caused the World Trade Center to collapse on <st1:date month="9" day="11" year="1999" ls="trans">September 11, 2001</st1:date> is set forth in this article. The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) and its building trade and scientific allies are one side of the debate and its equally credentialed science, profession and licensed critics (building and structural engineers, architects, physicists, chemists) on the other side, put forth their cases in these theories compiled from NIST's official report. In addition to complex engineer explanations, very convincing arguments are made that the collapse could only have occurred due to explosives having been "planted" in the building before the airplanes struck the towers. Incendiary "super thermite," evidence of explosives and the iron-rich microspheres that can only derive from high pressure, high temperature explosives have allegedly been discovered in the buildings rubble. This article provides an interesting recap of the raging debate: Whether the high-rise steel building collapsed in such a manner without the use of explosives? At issue seems to be NIST's competence and willingness to examine all the evidence.</p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://www.independent.com/news/2009/sep/17/elements-great-scientific-and-technical-dispute/">here</a></p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>A summary of some the technical areas in dispute as to what caused the World Trade Center to collapse on <st1:date month="9" day="11" year="1999" ls="trans">September 11, 2001</st1:date> is set forth in this article. The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) and its building trade and scientific allies are one side of the debate and its equally credentialed science, profession and licensed critics (building and structural engineers, architects, physicists, chemists) on the other side, put forth their cases in these theories compiled from NIST's official report. In addition to complex engineer explanations, very convincing arguments are made that the collapse could only have occurred due to explosives having been "planted" in the building before the airplanes struck the towers. Incendiary "super thermite," evidence of explosives and the iron-rich microspheres that can only derive from high pressure, high temperature explosives have allegedly been discovered in the buildings rubble. This article provides an interesting recap of the raging debate: Whether the high-rise steel building collapsed in such a manner without the use of explosives? At issue seems to be NIST's competence and willingness to examine all the evidence.</p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://www.independent.com/news/2009/sep/17/elements-great-scientific-and-technical-dispute/">here</a></p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=168</guid>
</item>
<item>
<title>Are Bidders Choosing to "Bomb" Project Pricing?</title>
<link>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=167</link>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>According to a recent <st1:stockticker>ENR</st1:stockticker> article, if all bidders have experienced estimators and costs of materials and efficiencies of bidders are the same, the variances in bids should be very small. Nevertheless, as of late, bid tabulations are showing significant variances, the explanation offered for these variances are mistakes in bids, missing amendments, takeoffs or subcontractors' quotes, or the company owners have decided to bid the work at or below cost to keep work coming in or generate cash flow. Qualified bidders are losing projects to bad business managers and poor bidders are ruining the markets for the competent bidders. "What the industry is facing today is complicated by having too many bidders either making mistakes in bides or poorly managing their businesses."</p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://enr.construction.com/opinions/viewpoint/2009/0916-WhenBiddersBomb.asp">here</a></p><p><a href="http://enr.construction.com/opinions/viewpoint/2009/0916-WhenBiddersBomb.asp"></a></p> 
]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>John P. Ahlers</dc:creator>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>According to a recent <st1:stockticker>ENR</st1:stockticker> article, if all bidders have experienced estimators and costs of materials and efficiencies of bidders are the same, the variances in bids should be very small. Nevertheless, as of late, bid tabulations are showing significant variances, the explanation offered for these variances are mistakes in bids, missing amendments, takeoffs or subcontractors' quotes, or the company owners have decided to bid the work at or below cost to keep work coming in or generate cash flow. Qualified bidders are losing projects to bad business managers and poor bidders are ruining the markets for the competent bidders. "What the industry is facing today is complicated by having too many bidders either making mistakes in bides or poorly managing their businesses."</p><p>To read the article click <a target="_blank" href="http://enr.construction.com/opinions/viewpoint/2009/0916-WhenBiddersBomb.asp">here</a></p> 
]]></content:encoded>
<guid>http://www.ac-lawyers.com/blog_article.php?article=167</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>