BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking Anaheim California tract home Anaheim California parking structure Anaheim California custom home Anaheim California concrete tilt-up Anaheim California office building Anaheim California condominiums Anaheim California industrial building Anaheim California mid-rise construction Anaheim California housing Anaheim California custom homes Anaheim California institutional building Anaheim California hospital construction Anaheim California Medical building Anaheim California retail construction Anaheim California production housing Anaheim California structural steel construction Anaheim California condominium Anaheim California townhome construction Anaheim California high-rise construction Anaheim California multi family housing Anaheim California low-income housing Anaheim California
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Anaheim, California

    California Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB800 (codified as Civil Code §§895, et seq) is the most far-reaching, complex law regulating construction defect litigation, right to repair, warranty obligations and maintenance requirements transference in the country. In essence, to afford protection against frivolous lawsuits, builders shall do all the following:A homeowner is obligated to follow all reasonable maintenance obligations and schedules communicated in writing to the homeowner by the builder and product manufacturers, as well as commonly accepted maintenance practices. A failure by a homeowner to follow these obligations, schedules, and practices may subject the homeowner to the affirmative defenses.A builder, under the principles of comparative fault pertaining to affirmative defenses, may be excused, in whole or in part, from any obligation, damage, loss, or liability if the builder can demonstrate any of the following affirmative defenses in response to a claimed violation:


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association Southern California - Desert Chapter
    Local # 0532
    77570 Springfield Ln Ste E
    Palm Desert, CA 92211
    http://www.desertchapter.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501


    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biasc.org

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Orange County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    17744 Skypark Cir Ste 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biaoc.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Baldy View Chapter
    Local # 0532
    8711 Monroe Ct Ste B
    Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
    http://www.biabuild.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - LA/Ventura Chapter
    Local # 0532
    28460 Ave Stanford Ste 240
    Santa Clarita, CA 91355


    Building Industry Association Southern California - Building Industry Association of S Ca Antelope Valley
    Local # 0532
    44404 16th St W Suite 107
    Lancaster, CA 93535



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Anaheim California

    Defective Grout May Cause Trouble for Bridges

    West Coast Casualty Promises Exciting Line Up at the Nineteenth Annual Conference

    Ghost Employees Steal Jobs from Legit Construction Firms

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    After Breaching its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Indemnify

    Firm Sued For Construction Defects in Parking Garage

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Joinder vs. Misjoinder in Colorado Construction Claims: Roche Constructors v. One Beacon

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    Insurance for Defective Construction Now in Third Edition

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Construction Defect Destroys Home, Forty Years Later

    Changes to Arkansas Construction and Home Repair Laws

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Construction Defect Scam

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    California Supreme Court Finds Associations Bound by Member Arbitration Clauses

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Contractor’s Coverage For Additional Insured Established by Unilateral Contract

    Recent Case Brings Clarity and Questions to Statute of Repose Application

    Texas Construction Firm Files for Bankruptcy

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    After $15 Million Settlement, Association Gets $7.7 Million From Additional Subcontractor

    Harmon Towers Duty to Defend Question Must Wait, Says Court

    Construction Defect Claim Did Not Harm Homeowner, Court Rules

    Florida Law: Defects in Infrastructure Improvements Not Covered in Home Construction Warranties

    2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar – Recap

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Florida Chinese drywall, pollution exclusion, “your work” exclusion, and “sistership” exclusion.

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Hawaii State Senate Requires CGL Carriers to Submit Premium Information To State Legislature

    A Performance-Based Energy Code in Seattle: Will It Save Existing Buildings?

    Limiting Plaintiffs’ Claims to a Cause of Action for Violation of SB-800

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    Lockton Expands Construction and Design Team

    OSHA Extends Delay of Residential Construction Fall Protection Requirements

    New Jersey Court Rules on Statue of Repose Case

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    Seven Tips to Manage Construction Defect Risk

    New Construction Laws, New Forms in California

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    Florida Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Homeowners Unaware of Construction Defects and Lack of Permits

    Subcontractor Not Liable for Defending Contractor in Construction Defect Case

    Safety Officials Investigating Death From Fall

    JDi Data Introduces Mobile App for Litigation Cost Allocation

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

    Judge Concludes Drywall Manufacturer Sold in Florida

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    There Is No Non-Delegable Duty on the Part of Residential Builders in Colorado

    Developer’s Fraudulent Statements Are His Responsibility Alone in Construction Defect Case

    Largest Per Unit Settlement Ever in California Construction Defect Case?

    Florida Construction Defect Case Settled for $3 Million

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    Statute of Limitations Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    Lower Court “Eminently Reasonable” but Wrong in Construction Defect Case

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    After Katrina Came Homes that Could Withstand Isaac

    Exact Dates Not Needed for Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    David McLain to Speak at the CDLA 2012 Annual Conference

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    Insurance Firm Under No Duty to Defend in Hawaii Construction Defect Case

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Supreme Court of Oregon Affirms Decision in Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, et al.

    Association May Not Make Claim Against Builder in Vermont Construction Defect Case

    Damage During Roof Repairs Account for Three Occurrences

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    Demand for Urban Living Leads to Austin Building Boom

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Allowing the Use of a General Verdict Form in a Construction Defect Case Could Subject Your Client to Prejudgment Interest

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    Driver’s Death May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    Differing Rulings On Construction Defect Claims Leave Unanswered Questions For Builders, and Construction Practice Groups. Impact to CGL Carriers, General Contractors, Builders Remains Unclear

    Construction Defect Lawsuits? There’s an App for That
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California Construction Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.









    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Changes to Arkansas Construction and Home Repair Laws

    September 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    A new law, set to take effect in 2012, lowers the ceiling on when work must be done by a licensed contractor. Through the end of the year, projects costing $20,000 or more had to be done by an Arkansas licensed contractor. As of January 1, 2012, that new limit will be $2,000.

    This will apply to all single-family residences and according to Lovely County Citizen, covers “construction, alteration, renovation, repair, modification, improvement, removal, demotion, or addition to a pre-existing structure.” Residential building contractors will be required to have workers compensation insurance, as will home improvement contactors if they take jobs worth more than $20,000.

    Morris Dillow, a building inspector in Holiday Island, said, “It will get these scammers out of here who are ripping people off.” He cited the example of a contractor who after getting paid for roof repairs and painting, left the job unfinished.

    Read the full story…


    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    October 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The US District Court has ruled in the case of D.R. Horton Los Angeles Holding Co. Inc. v. American Safety Indemnity, Co. D.R. Horton was involved in a real estate development project. Its subcontractor, Ebensteiner Co., was insured by ASIC and named D.R. Horton as an additional insured and third-party beneficiary. D.R. Horton, in response to legal complaints and cross-complaints, filed for coverage from ASIC under the Ebensteiner policy. This was refused by ASIC. ASIC claimed that “there is no potential coverage for Ebensteiner as a Named Insurer and/or D.R. Horton as an Additional Insured.” They stated that “the requirements for coverage are not satisfied.”

    The case same to trial with the deadline for discovery set at March 1, 2011. ASIC stated they were seeking the developer’s “job file” for the Canyon Gate project. D.R. Horton claimed that ASIC’s discovery request was overbroad and that it would be “unduly burdensome for it to produce all documents responsive to the overbroad requests.”

    D.R. Horton did agree to produce several categories of documents, which included:

    “(1) final building inspection sign-offs for the homes that are the subject of the underlying litigation;(2) an updated homeowner matrix for the underlying actions; (3) the concrete subcontractor files; (4) the daily field logs for D.R. Horton’s on-site employee during Ebensteiner’s work; (5) documents relating to concrete work, including documents for concrete suppliers; (6) documents relating to compacting testing; (7) documents relating to grading; and (8) D.R. Horton’s request for proposal for grading”

    The court found that the requests from ASIC were overbroad, noting that the language of the ASIC Request for Production of Documents (RFP) 3-5 would include “subcontractor files for plumbing, electric, flooring, etc. - none of these being at issue in the case.” The court denied the ASIC’s motion to compel further documents.

    The court also found fault with ASIC’s RFPs 6 and 7. Here, D.R. Horton claimed the language was written so broadly it would require the production of sales information and, again, subcontractors not relevant to the case.

    Further, the court found that RFPs 8, 10, 11, and 13 were also overbroad. RFP 8 covered all subcontractors. D.R. Horton replied that they had earlier complied with the documents covered in RFPs 10 and 11. The court concurred. RFP 13 was denied as it went beyond the scope of admissible evidence, even including attorney-client communication.

    The court denied all of ASIC’s attempts to compel further discovery.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Oregon agreement to procure insurance, anti-indemnity statute, and self-insured retention

    March 5, 2011 — By CDCoverage.com, March 5, 2011

    In Continental Casualty Ins. Co. v. Zurich American Ins. Co., No. 09-35484 (9th Cir. Oct. 28, 2010), general contractor TCR was sued by an employee of subcontractor Safeway for bodily injuries suffered while working on the project. In the subcontract, Safeway agreed to procure primary insurance providing coverage for TCR for liability arising out of Safeway’s negligence. Safeway’s CGL policy included a self-insured retention that had to be satisfied before the insurer had a duty to defend. TCR filed suit against Safeway alleging that

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    January 6, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The US District Court of Nevada issued a summary judgment in the case of R&O Construction Company V. Rox Pro International Group, Ltd. on December 19, 2011. The case involved the installation of stone veneer at a Home Depot location (Home Depot was not involved in the case). R&O’s subcontractor, New Creation Masonry, purchased the stone veneer from Arizona Stone. Judge Larry Hicks noted that “the stone veneer failed and R&O was forced to make substantial structural repairs to the Home Depot store.”

    Rox Pro asked the court for a summary judgment, which the court granted only in part. The court looked at two issues in the case, whether the installation instructions constituted a breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and whether there was a breach of an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

    Judge Hicks found that there was a breach of implied warranty of merchantability. The instructions drafted by Real Stone and distributed by Arizona Stone were not sufficient for affixing the supplied stones, according to R&O’s expert, a claim the plaintiffs dispute. “Because there is an issue of material fact concerning the installation guidelines, the court shall deny Arizona Stone’s motion for a summary judgment on this issue.”

    On the other hand, the judge did not find that the instructions had any bearing as to whether R&O bought the stone, since the stone was selected by the shopping center developer. This issue was, in the view of the judge, appropriately dismissed.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Fourteen More Guilty Pleas in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The ongoing case over claims that a group fixed homeowner board elections in order to supply the conspirators with a stream of construction defect cases and repairs has lead to fourteen guilty pleas. The judge recently issued charges against fifteen of the accused; one defendant did not join in the group as he was recovering from pneumonia. The prosecutors have asked the judge to delay sentencing, as the investigation is continuing. Prosecutors note that another dozen people may be indicted.

    Along with an earlier group who plead guilty, this brings the total number of guilty pleas in the case to twenty-five. All have promised to cooperate with authorities.

    The case has also involved four deaths, although authorities have not suspected foul play in the deaths. Nancy Quon, one of the four, was the construction defect attorney suspected to be at the center of the conspiracy.

    Read the full story…


    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    January 6, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    In their fourth quarter earnings call, executives of Hovnanian Enterprises made some projections for investors, covering the company’s plans for 2012. During the call, Ara K. Hovnanian, the firm’s CEO, discussed their reserves to meet construction defect claims. The firm does an annual actuarial study of their construction defect reserves.

    Mr. Hovnanian noted that there have been no changes for the past several years, but this year they are increasing their reserves by about $6.3 million. Additionally, the firm has added $2.5 million to their legal reserves. Mr. Hovnanian stated “we do not anticipate that changes of this magnitude will be recurring as we look forward to 2012.”

    Read the full story…


    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    August 11, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Patriot-Ledger reports that insurers could pay out as much as $200 million to cover homes damaged or destroyed in the tornadoes that hit central and southern Massachusetts in June, 2011. Joseph Murphy, Commissioner of the State Division of Insurance didn?t foresee problems with insurers covering these claims. “At this point, there doesn’t seem to be any one company overexposed in that area,” he told the Patriot-Ledger.

    Insurance executives did not think the tornadoes would cause them to raise rates. Steve Chevalier, CEO of NLC Companies, said, “it’s a major event for those impacted by it, but it’s not close to a financial hit to us.”

    One insurer noted that the winter weather generated more claims; however the cumulative value of those claims was $15 million.

    Read the full story…


    Firm Sued For Construction Defects in Parking Garage

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Northhampton County, Pennsylvania is suing a contractor who resurfaced a parking garage in 2009. According to the Express-Times, three years later, the surface is cracked and the county is seeking $700,000 for repairs. Additionally, they have withheld $44,000 of the $2.2 million contract because of the problems. John Stoffa, Northampton County Executive, says that the garage is stable, but not up to safety standards.

    Read the full story…


    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    March 28, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Construction Law Hawaii

    Charles and Valerie Myers hired Perry Miller to build their home. Myers v. United Ohio Ins. Co., 2012 Ohio App. LEXIS 287 (Ohio Ct. App. Jan. 26, 2012). After completion of the home, Miller was again hired to construct an addition which included a full basement, staircases, bathroom, bedroom, hallway and garage.

    After the addition was completed, one of the basement walls began to crack and bow. Miller began to make repairs, but eventually stopped working on the project. Other contractors were hired to make repairs, but further problems developed. A second basement wall began to bow and crack, allowing water into the basement. The wall eventually had to be replaced. Subsequently, the roof over the addition began to leak in five or six places before the drywall could be painted. The leaks caused water stains on the drywall and caused it to separate and tear. It was discovered the roof needed to be replaced.

    The Myers sued Miller and his insurer, United Ohio Insurance Company. The trial court ruled that the policy did not provide coverage for faulty workmanship, but did provide coverage for consequential damages caused by repeated exposure to the elements. United Ohio conceded liability in the amount of $2,000 to repair water damage to the drywall. United Ohio was also found liable for $51,576, which included $31,000 to repair the roof and ceiling and $18,576 to replace the basement wall.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    May 27, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Lake-Flato Architects has disputed the arbitration panel’s conclusion that problems with the home of Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson were due to design flaws. The firm settled with the couple for $900,000, however the Idaho Mountain Express reports that David Lake said, “the settlement in the case in no way represents that Lake Flato was responsible for faulty design.” The Express reported that “the arbitrators found that problems at the home were attributable to design errors that did not take into account the cold winter climate of the Sun Valley area.”

    Read the full story…


    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Though the sagging roof is neither leaking nor a safety hazard, the town of Waynesville, North Carolina is suing the builder of its new fire station, as reported in the Smoky Mountain News. The engineers who examined the roof found a substantial number of loose bolts in the roof trusses. Additionally, the trusses themselves have become bent.

    Tom Galloway, Waynesville’s Town Manager said “it needs to be remedied and fixed.” He said that the builder, Construction Logic, “never indicated a willingness to fix the roof.” The town is seeking the cost of repair, which Galloway estimated could be $400,000, and an additional $30,000 in damages. The suit states that Construction Logic failed to follow the plan specifications for the roof.

    Read the full story…


    Louisiana Politicians Struggle on Construction Bills, Hospital Redevelopment

    June 16, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Louisiana politicians are still working on a compromise in the state’s construction budget, as reported in the Times-Picayune. Rob Marrianneax, the chair of the Senate Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Committee, removed a $45 million request from Governor Bobby Jindal and added $4 million for projects that Jindal vetoed last year.

    Two senators have formed competing plans to fund redevelopment construction for New Orleans’s Methodist Hospital. Mitch Landrieu, the mayor of New Orleans, hoped for $30 million dollars in state bonds. Senator Cynthia Willard-Lewis proposed an amendment that would supply $1.6 million, while Senator J.P. Morrell has an amendment that would supply $4 million.

    Read the full story…


    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    December 9, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Although the excess carrier was given inadequate notice of the underlying arbitration, the trial court determined it shared responsibility with the primary carrier for the arbitration award. Finding disputed issues of fact, the Washington Court of Appeals reversed in Am. States Ins. Co. v. Century Surety Co., 2011 Wash. App. LEXIS 2488 (Wash. Ct. App. Oct. 31, 2011).

    The primary insurer, American States, issued two liability policies to Professional Home Builders (PHB), a siding contractor. The policies were for successive years, 1998-1999 and 1999-2000. Each policy had annual limits of $1 million per occurrence. PHB also had a commercial excess liability policy for 1999-2000 with Century Surety Company.

    PHB was sued by Residential Investment Partners (RIP) for construction defects after moisture entered the building envelope, causing decay and damage. Century’s expert determined the decay started before the 1999-2000 policy period.

    RIP and PHB went to arbitration.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    October 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Lloyd Whann, an executive in M. M. Parrish Construction, a Gainesville, Florida firm, is going to trial over claims that he bribed a school district official with more than $50,000 in gifts. The trial has been pushed to March of 2012, in order for his defense to review documents.

    Bob Williams, the former school official, plead guilty to conspiracy to commit bribery. He agreed to testify against Whann and M.M. Parrish Construction.

    Read the full story...


    Policing Those Subcontractors: It Might Take Extra Effort To Be An Additional Insured

    June 14, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Council Blog

    I just came across a case that I think truly paints the insurance dilemma for contractors. Thanks to this recent Illinois case, I don’t have to make up any factual scenarios—so kudos to Attorney Robert Boylan for posting it.

    In reading over my RSS feeds this weekend, I noticed a great writeup on long-time blogger Josh Glazov’s Construction Law Today. Attorney Robert Boylan’s post describes a recent Illinois case where a general contractor was denied its additional insured status on a second-tier subcontractor’s insurance. The reason for the denial: the general contractor failed to procure an agreement in writing with the second-tier subcontractor, requiring it to be listed as an additional insured.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com


    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    December 9, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    Recently, I read an article on Engineering News-Record that outlines a remarkable movement by as many as four states, to mandate coverage of construction defects in contractor general liability insurance policies. Say what? Is this a reality? What will become of affordable insurance?

    Commercial General Liability insurance, or CGL, is your basic liability insurance. Every contractor doing business in the State of Washington, and most likely those abroad, has this insurance. Contractors buy this insurance to protect them from unforeseen liabilities arising from their negligence - and right now it’s reasonably affordable.

    Why is it so affordable in such a risk-heavy industry? Because CGL policies significantly limit the scope of their coverage. Coverage is generally afforded for damages resulting from negligence (The roofer put a hammer through the drywall contractor’s wall) or which resulted from your defective construction (the roof leaked and flooded the rest of the house). But, that coverage does not include replacement of your faulty construction (the contents of the home might be protected by your leaky roof - the leaky roof itself is not).

    The debate over coverage typically stems from the definition of “occurrence,” a term used to describe the event from which coverage arises, “resulting loss,” a term used to describe the type of loss covered.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com


    Demand for Urban Living Leads to Austin Building Boom

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The New York Times reports that Austin is undergoing a building boom as a high-tech firms, including Facebook and Google, have moved into the downtown area. With them, comes a need for more apartment buildings and more retail space. Mike Kennedy, the president and chief executive of an Austin real estate firm, told the Times “the office space was here, the housing came, and retail is arriving last to the scene.” Currently, two large projects that will add about 500 apartment units is underway, including a 222-unit, 18-story building, and another that will contain 277 units. Apartment occupancy in Austin is at ninety-seven percent.

    Developers also have hotels and more office space planned. The area has about 6,000 hotel rooms with an additional 2,000 planned, but events in Austin can bring in more people than the city’s 30,000 hotel rooms can accommodate. Office space is eighty-eight percent occupied, and a lack of office space could cause firms to look elsewhere.

    Read the full story…


    Homebuilding on the Rise in Nation’s Capitol

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Is the homebuilding crunch over in DC? The Washington Post has reported that while new home construction is up throughout the country, in the DC area, construction has reached levels last seen in 2006. From January to August 2012, there were more than 19,000 building permits issued in the area, nearly doubling the number issued by that point in 2011.

    While building is on a quicker pace, what’s being built has changed. As compared to 2006, there are more townhomes, condos, and smaller homes being built. The article notes that 11 percent of new construction is condos, while in 2006, it was only 5 percent.

    Read the full story…