Posts Tagged ‘insurance’

BY ANDREW LAVALLEE, FASLA

Warranties on plantings often seem reasonable. Until they aren’t.

FROM THE FEBRUARY 2019 ISSUE OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE MAGAZINE.

 

Most landscape architects are familiar with specifications about plant warranties. We often apply them without much thought because many consider it to be an industry standard practice. A typical plant warranty, usually lasting one or two years, requires the contractor to replace plantings that have died or appear to show unsatisfactory growth. Standard specification language often seems reasonable and enforceable. Until it isn’t—especially a few months after you thought the job was complete, or worse, after the end of the stated warranty period when the client calls upset that some of the plants are looking bad or are outright dead. Now comes the hard part. Whose responsibility is it if plants don’t succeed? Aren’t the dead or dying plants supposed to be covered by the warranty? If not, what was the warranty actually supposed to cover? These are all good questions that are symptomatic of a larger problem in the landscape industry. (more…)

Read Full Post »

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

It’s the first of February, which means the latest issue of LAM is here! You’ll find these stories inside:

FOREGROUND

Changes Ferguson Can See (Planning)
In Ferguson, Missouri, the Great Streets plan for West Florissant Avenue is revived,
this time with more community participation.

Life Insurance for Plants (Materials)
Who’s responsible when a plant fails?

FEATURES

ICEd Out
The U.S. government does not classify landscape architecture as a STEM topic. That is bad news for foreign students seeking visas to study here—and for the profession.

Live and Learn
Artificial intelligence may well revolutionize landscape architecture. At least
that’s what the robots tell us.

The Huntress
Hunting her meat, growing her vegetables, and designing for meaning: Christie Green, ASLA, has chosen the wild life.

All this plus the regular Now and Goods columns. The full table of contents for February can be found here.

As always, you can buy this issue of Landscape Architecture Magazine at more than 700 bookstores, including many university stores and independents, as well as at Barnes & Noble. You can also buy single digital issues for only $5.25 at Zinio or order single copies of the print issue from ASLA. Annual subscriptions for LAM are a thrifty $59 for print and $44.25 for digital. Our subscription page has more information on subscription options.

Keep an eye out here on the blog, on the LAM Facebook page, and on our Twitter feed (@landarchmag), as we’ll be posting February articles as the month rolls out.

Credits: “The Huntress,” Gabriella Marks; “Live and Learn,” XL Lab/SWA Group; “Changes Ferguson Can See,” SWT Design; “Life Insurance for Plants,” Cristina Cordero, ASLA, SiteWorks.

Read Full Post »

BY ZACH MORTICE

Aerial photo of damaged homes along the New Jersey shore after Hurricane Sandy. Photo credit: Greg Thompson/USFWS, Wikimedia Commons.

The Union of Concerned Scientists’ recent report on the economic damage and displacement that sea-level rise flooding will unleash called for investments “in a range of coastal adaptive measures,” such as “the protection of wetlands, and barrier islands, and other natural flood risk reduction methods” and other “natural infrastructure.” That puts the onus of surviving sea-level rise very clearly on landscape architects.

The report, Underwater: Rising Seas, Chronic Floods, and the Implications for US Coastal Real Estate, which the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) compiled with help from the real estate website Zillow, shows the consequences of sea-level rise in the short and long term, down to the state, city, and zip code levels of granularity. Released in June, it estimates lost houses, lost home value, lost tax base, and lost population by the years 2035 and 2100. (more…)

Read Full Post »

BY BRADFORD MCKEE

FROM THE FEBRUARY 2018 ISSUE OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE MAGAZINE.

Image by Jocelyn Augustino [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons.

In November, Moody’s Investors Service, the bond rating agency, released a cautionary report on climate change. Looking ahead, the report said, the effects of what it describes as climate trends and climate shocks are sure to become a “growing negative credit factor” for states, localities, or utilities that don’t appear to be responding to potential climate change effects through mitigation or adaptation. Cities and others issue bonds to borrow money for building things such as infrastructure or schools. They need investors to know they’re a good risk. Moody’s came out to say that it has begun deciding, based on climate resilience among a matrix of other factors, whether a given risk is good or bad. “If you’re exposed,” one Moody’s analyst told Bloomberg, “we know that.”

The other of the two biggest rating agencies, Standard & Poor’s, is also keenly onto climate (it and Moody’s together run 80 percent of the bond rating business). It released a report in October to explain how municipal bond issuers will be affected by climate impacts. Like Moody’s, S&P specified two theaters of risk: the sudden extreme event, such as a hurricane, and “more gradual changes to the environment affecting land use, employment, and economic activity that support credit quality.”

This may all seem very back-office in the design world, and for now it is. It is also, critically, moving to the fore as the federal stance on climate change and its many hazards is not only in retreat but in vicious denial. Trump administration appointees, who are like drones for industry, are ordering the removal of references to climate change in agency communications. The administration is also purging our government of good-faith, (more…)

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: