CO prepared by whom

Comments

8 comments

  • Avatar
    Joel Edwards

    I noticed that too. I have received change orders from the GC in my office as well.

    My understanding is that this is ok as long as the Architect approves the CO documents submitted by the GC. The GC puts together all of the cost data anyways so allowing the GC to produce the CO helps expedite the process. In my experience, the GC usually knows about potential construction CO's before the Architect anyways.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Fernando Mingo Jozami

    AIA B101-2017. Refer to article 3.6.5.1

    AIA A201-2017. Refer to article 7.2.1

    A change order is an instrument prepared by an Architect and signed by the Owner, Contractor and Architect...

     

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    David Kaplan

    ^^Agree with above.  With respect to getting this question on the ARE as it relates to the AIA Contract documents, the architect is the one who prepares the Change Order.  This being said, I completely agree with you that in real life, and I've been doing this for almost 15 years, the GC nearly ALWAYS prepares this and we end up reviewing it with the Owner to make sure it seems legit.  However, for the purposes of passing this test, the answer is definitely the ARCHITECT prepares the Change Order. 

    This is one of those instances where real life and the contracts don't quite overlap.  Know that going into this exam and be sure you have a clear understanding of the Architect's responsibilities per the AIA Contracts.  Trust that information over what you do in real life and you'll be fine.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Nasheet Rumy

    Thank you!!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    William May

    Wha?

    "for the purposes of passing this test"  Well wtf?  "in real life" Are we really taking a test that "in real life" it's different than on the test?!  

    If in "Real Life" the GC is writing the Change Order and the Architect is reviewing and signing off on the CO, shouldn't that mean the contract as written should take this into account?  Or should the test take the "Real world" into account?  

    Ok, everyone, listen up, stop using "Real World" experience and start using ARE Test mode to practice architecture.  

    Is it any wonder why so many people fail these tests.

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    William May

    Is it possible to have a CO written by a GC, reviewed by the owner and architect then signed by architect AND owner?

    Ok so the GC goes to the architect and asks for a change; the architect then writes a change order, gives the CO back to the GC who makes a change to the CO, then gives it back to the Arch, who then goes over the CO with the Owner, BUT the owner makes a change to the CO, gives it to the Arch who then rewrites the CO and then gives it to the Cont.

    Who, is on first...STOP!

    Refer to the AIA Contracts to answer questions on the test, don't use the practice that you have used for the past 15 years successfully. 

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    William May

    Remember, you must always ask yourself, "How would the TEST want me to answer this question, not how the Real World functions".

    Just poking the bear mind you.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Kurt Fanderclai (Edited )

    Of course, anyone who has worked in an architecture office has seen change orders handled in numerous ways.

    My previous employer insisted on preparing the change orders, which, as Fernando has noted is practicing per the contract.  I agree that this not always happening in many practice circumstances, but this does not make it correct -- neither for the exams or for the "real world".

    There are a few other circumstances where the accepted practices fly in the face of the contract -- for example, how many times has anyone received a punch list from the contractor?  This should happen as part of Substantail Completion as described in A201 9.8.2, but this rarely occurs.  Again, does this mean that allowing the GC a pass on creating the punch list is correct?  It does not -- again, neither for the exams or for the "real world".  (Reviewing shop drawings is another example.)

    So, there are a few of these examples out there, but this is no reason to breathlessly conclude that the ARE is completely detached from the reality of architectural practice.    

    The ARE doesn't test on what random firms might do, but rather on the contracts, standard of care, etc.  Keep this in mind, and you'll be fine. 

     

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Powered by Zendesk