Managing risk on mass timber projects can be more complicated than traditional construction and requires early detailed co-ordination and planning among all parties.
Identifying potential risks and allocating that risk to the appropriate parties “with no risk gaps” while ensuring each party understands their responsibilities is vital.
“Not having that is going to certainly result in disputes and maybe litigation or arbitration,” Catherine DiMarco, a partner and certified construction law specialist at Blaney McMurtry, told a Sustainable Buildings Canada (SBC) webinar.
The time of year for onsite construction is a key consideration in mass timber project planning.
Ensuring the product is protected from water, meets fire code and acoustical requirements is as critical as the design of the foundation and slab-on-grade is to ensure accurate placement of anchors and fasteners, she said.
“With the relative newness of mass timber there is a higher risk of gaps in responsibilities and/or a party assuming risk that it doesn’t realize it is assuming,” said DiMarco.
A widely used contract model in Ontario is the CCDC 2, a stipulated‑price contract between the owner and the general contractor. Under this model, the GC enters into contracts with subcontractors, who may in turn engage sub‑subcontractors or suppliers.
A separate professional services agreement between the owner and the consultant (usually an architect or engineer) is also consistent with CCDC 2 stipulations, she added.
Another traditional contract (CCDC 5B – defined as construction manager at risk) has the construction manager often providing pre-construction services such as costing, scheduling and constructability prior to wearing the general contractor hat during construction.
On mass timber projects the caveat is that these contracts are structured for traditional building projects where everything is done onsite.
In mass timber projects, off site is a significant part of the work.
DiMarco said determining contractor responsibilities for the storage and proper care of mass timber in a warehouse after completion by the manufacturer can be complicated.
Who pays for the warehouse, monitors the moisture content and just-in-time material deliveries are among a number of duties they face.
The risks have to be “baked into the contract” through supplementary conditions, she pointed out, adding that possibly a future CCDC contract will be “uniquely tailored” for mass timber projects.
Integrated project delivery (IPD) contracts (CCDC 30) consist of a multi-party agreement structured around collaboration and a no-fault approach among all parties. Remedies for mistakes by one party are generally covered by all parties, said Amelia Phillips Robbins, senior associate in the construction law group of Blaney McMurtry.
Often BIM is used by the integrated team working to a common set of goals, said Phillips Robbins, who also presented at the SBC webinar on mass timber risks.
Being that manufacturers and suppliers are part of the IPD team their involvement can be at an early planning stage, she said, adding the CCDC 30 also allows for additional parties under a schedule C later in the project.
She told the webinar IPDs include a validation stage containing a comprehensive report used by the owner and team to decide whether to continue or terminate the contract.
“Pre-planning the project to an extraordinary degree” is paramount to being on time and within budget.
Phillips Robbins added to create the report involves early site assessments and government approvals through a realistic budget based on the design.
DiMarco told the webinar CCDC contracts in mass timber can be “a bit of a square peg, round hole” for consultants.
Consultants are responsible for regular visits to the jobsite (not the manufacturing facility) to assess progress as well as receive and review applications for payment from the contractor and subs.
Duties include checking the price of the services and materials supplied to the place of work.
The question that remains is: Who bills for what and when and what is the consultant supposed to do as manufacturing is conducted off site?
Amending the place of work to be both onsite and in a manufacturing plant can potentially lead to “unintended consequences.”
A possible solution is supplementary conditions that revise place-of-work language so the consultant can certify the value and the applications for payment for the manufacturing, DiMarco added.
