Beginning with the Little Leagues, everyone knows about “home field advantage”, where friendly fans abound, the field is familiar, and grueling travel is absent. While certainly no guarantee of victory, these are intangible factors leading to the best opportunity to win.
Our blog is your one-stop-shop for the latest insights, information and legal developments affecting the construction industry.
Do you hear that buzzing or is it just me? How use of drones is changing construction management forever.
The efficiency objectives of construction management may not be changing, but the tools it utilizes just might be. Driven by use on construction projects, the FAA has recently prosed new rules for the operation of drones (e.g. “Unmanned Aerial Vehicles”) that would permit operation on construction sites so long as visual line of sight is maintained by the pilot. Prior to this proposed rule change, the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 required a pilot licensure, approval and certification, making use on construction projects expensive and impractical. If the proposed rule is passed, contractors will be able to legally utilize drones on construction projects to perform such tasks as surveying, site layout, design, BIM, project management, and project completion analysis.
It has long been established law in Missouri that subcontractors, under certain circumstances, may enforce mechanics’ liens against the owner’s interest in a shopping center (or other real estate leased to tenants) even where the prime contract is between the tenant and a general contractor, not the owner of the real estate. However, this well established body of law was temporarily upset when a St. Louis County Court ruled that two subcontractors who worked for the general contractor on the build-out of an Allen Edmonds Shoe Store (tenant) at Plaza Frontenac did not have mechanic’s lien rights. The two subcontractors, Crafton Contracting Co. (demo, framework, drywall and carpentry for $67,000) and Vogel Sheet Metal & Heating (HVAC for $16,000) filed liens because the general contractor, Swenson Construction, did not pay them, even though Swenson was paid by Allen Edmonds. (Failing to pay its subcontractors, was not enough to prevent Swenson from going out of business.)