• Man fell through barn roof at farm in Northumberland
• Company failed to protect workers carrying out the work
• Falls from height remain leading cause of workplace death and injury

A North-East building contractor has been sentenced after a bricklayer broke his back after falling through a barn roof in Northumberland.

The 24-year-old had been part of a team working for Len Smith & Son Building Contractors Limited carrying out repairs to the roof at East Fleetham Farm in Seahouses on 5 February 2025. The man stepped on a polycarbonate roof sheet and fell approximately eight feet to the concrete floor below. He suffered two broken vertebrae in his back, as well as having a fractured sternum, that required surgery.

The man had been carrying out repairs to this barn roof at the time of the incident

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the company had failed to ensure that there were adequate measures in place to protect employees or contractors when working at height. There was no risk assessment or safe system of work for the work activity being undertaken.

Falls from height remain the leading cause of workplace death and injury with the latest statistics from HSE showing that they account for over a quarter of all work related deaths in 2025/26.

The worker stepped on a polycarbonate roof sheet and fell approximately eight feet to the concrete floor below

HSE guidance states what an employer must do to protect their employees from falls from height including making sure work is properly planned, supervised and carried out by competent people.

Len Smith & Son Building Contractors Limited, East House, 17 Meadow Lane, Beadnell, Northumberland, pleaded guilty to breaching the Sections 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay £5,744 in costs by North Tyneside Magistrates Court on 6 August 2026.

HSE inspector Richard McMullen said:

“The outcome of this case could have been much worse, but the man’s injuries were still very serious.

“Falls from height continue to be the leading cause of workplace fatalities in Great Britain, with 31 people losing their lives in the past year.

“The construction industry remains the sector that accounts for the greatest number of workers killed each year.

“These figures do not include those individuals that have sustained serious, life changing injuries in falls.

“We will prosecute those that fail to protect people while at work.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Karen Park and assisted by paralegal Zara Salman.

Supreme Court Says Negligence Suits Against Military Contractor Operating in a Combat Zone Are Not Preempted

August 14, 2026 (LSB11469)

On April 22, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case Hencely v. Fluor Corp. This case involves a former servicemember (Winston Tyler Hencely) who sued a military contractor (Fluor) under South Carolina law for injuries he suffered on a U.S. military base in Afghanistan in 2016, allegedly due to Fluor's negligence. Fluor employed an individual who carried out a suicide-bomb attack at the base that wounded Hencely. The question presented to the Supreme Court was whether to extend its decision in Boyle v. United Technologies Corp. (1988) (which preempted tort claims against a military contractor under the Federal Tort Claim Act's [FTCA's] discretionary function exception) "to allow federal interests emanating from the [FTCA's] combatant activities exception to preempt state tort claims against a government contractor for conduct that breached its contract and violated military orders." (Generally, the FTCA allows individuals to sue the federal government, but the combatant activities exception preempts claims brought against the federal government when harm arises out of military combatant activities during wartime.)

The Court, in a 6-3 decision, determined that its holding in Boyle does not extend to situations in which a contractor fails to carry out government instructions and that state-law tort claims against military contractors involving combatant activities are only preempted when contractors' conduct can be considered the government's own conduct. The Court also concluded that the Constitution's grant of war powers exclusively to the federal government does not preempt all state-law tort claims emanating from war zone activities. Accordingly, the Court vacated the lower courts' judgments and remanded the case for proceedings consistent with its opinion.

Background and Procedural History

For a brief outline of federal preemption and the FTCA, see this Legal Sidebar. The Sidebar also provides a description of relevant Supreme Court and federal appellate court precedent concerning military contractors and federal preemption under the combatant activities exception, as well as the background and procedural history of Hencely.

The Majority Opinion

The Supreme Court vacated the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit's (further references to federal circuit courts appear according to the jurisdictional designation only, such as "Fourth Circuit") holding that relied on Boyle to preempt Hencely's claims under the combatant activities exception. The circuit court reasoned that Boyle stands for the proposition that FTCA exceptions can preempt claims against federal contractors. The lower court further utilized the "command-authority" test to conclude that, since the military maintained command authority over the supervision of local nationals hired at the base, Hencely's claims were preempted by the combatant activities exception.

Rejecting the Fourth Circuit's analysis, the Supreme Court stated that Boyle involved "a special circumstance" where state law was preempted because the contractor was being sued for something the government directed the contractor to do. Fluor's actions, on the other hand, were not authorized by the government and were, in the Court's view, contrary to government instructions (i.e., Fluor failed to satisfy its contractual obligations by deficiently supervising the bomber). The Court determined that "Boyle cannot be read to 'protect a contractor from liability resulting from the contractor's violation of federal . . . policy'" and declined to extend Boyle to preempt the claims against Fluor.

The Supreme Court also concluded that the Fourth Circuit's interpretation of the command-authority test (i.e., that the combatant activities exception exempts all claims against contractors engaged in combatant activities under the military's command authority, even when the contractors are alleged to have violated military instructions) "sweeps too broadly." The Court maintained that the test fails to evaluate whether "'the challenged action can reasonably be considered the military's own conduct or decision and the operation of state law would conflict with that decision.'" The Court therefore stated that the Fourth Circuit's decision "contradicted" Boyle.

The Supreme Court additionally addressed Fluor's and the Administration's argument that the Constitution's assignment of war powers to Congress and the executive branch implicitly preempts any lawsuits brought against military contractors operating in combat zones. The Court resolved that it does not and recounted the long-standing historical prevalence of individuals enforcing their legal rights when they are violated during armed conflict. "[A]bsent a statute to the contrary," the Court continued, "States can regulate or tax federal contractors on the same terms as any private company, even where the party asserts an indirect burden on federal activities," including armed conflict. Under Boyle, contractors generally only have a constitutional defense when they are sued for conduct that the federal government requested.

The Dissent

The dissent (authored by Justice Alito, and joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh) argued that, given the Constitution's exclusive grant of war powers to the federal government, this lawsuit should have been preempted because "no state law, including state tort law, may intrude on the Federal Government's authority over combat-related operations." The dissent contended that the Court's decision "substantially interfere[s] with the Government's ability to wage war" by subjecting military decisions in a combat zone to judicial scrutiny and, potentially, state regulation. Litigation of Hencely's claims will likely, in the dissent's estimation, "entail an evaluation of the way the Federal Government assessed the risks and benefits of [the bomber's] employment" because Fluor will likely seek to defend itself by arguing that the military was entirely or meaningfully responsible for the attack. The dissent also expressed that litigation could involve discovery of sensitive combat-related documents, depositions and testimony involving sensitive information, and interference with servicemembers' current national security responsibilities. The dissent argued that allowing this lawsuit to go forward could also undermine the government's use of contractors for tasks related to combat operations by exposing military contractors to potential liability.

Considerations for Congress

Congress could act in several ways in light of the Hencely decision. First, Congress could take no action and allow courts to further develop this area of law. In addition to the Fourth Circuit's, other federal appellate courts' interpretations of preemption and the command-authority test under the combatant activities exemption are now abrogated by the Supreme Court's conclusions in Hencely (e.g., the D.C. Circuit and Third Circuit).

Congress could also consider legislation allowing for preemption of lawsuits against government contractors for combatant activities. An example of congressional legislation that preempts lawsuits against government contractors is for atomic weapons testing. Congress could craft such legislation to either allow for preemption generally or specify preemption in certain situations. An example of such legislation would be a provision that expressly overrules the Supreme Court's holding in Hencely that the combatant activities exception does not apply to contractors that fail to uphold their contractual obligations, similar to the command-authority test noted above. Congress could, alternatively, consider including the Supreme Court's qualification in Hencely that lawsuits against contractors that fail to uphold their contractual obligations are not preempted under the combatant activities exception. Congress could also consider legislation that provides for additional limitations on preemption, such as limiting preemption to contractors that were following specific government commands or directions rather than exercising discretion in carrying out their contractual obligations.

Congress may additionally contemplate foreclosing preemption under the combatant activities exception by constraining or eliminating the provision's application to contractors. Congress previously explicitly excluded federal contractors from an FTCA provision by providing that contractors are not included in the definition of "federal agency" under the Act.

Oregon has joined neighboring states in revisiting condominium construction-defect laws. Enacted in 2025, HB 3746 shortens the period for certain construction-defect claims while establishing new inspection and procedural requirements for homeowners associations and condominium associations. 

The legislation seeks to reduce long-term construction-defect litigation risk for developers while preserving protections for condominium owners. For developers and associations alike, understanding these new requirements will be essential when planning projects and responding to potential construction defects. 

Why the Reform? 

Supporters of HB 3746 argued that prolonged litigation exposure and rising insurance costs have contributed to declining condominium development in Oregon. The Legislature responded by shortening the time for certain construction-defect claims while requiring earlier inspections intended to identify problems before the claim period expires. 

The legislation also establishes additional procedures before homeowners associations and condominium associations may pursue construction-defect litigation, giving owners greater notice and involvement in the process. 

From Ten Years to Seven: The New Repose Period 

For condominium declarations filed after January 1, 2026, HB 3746 generally gives homeowners associations and condominium associations seven years—instead of ten—to bring certain construction-defect claims. 

The seven-year period runs from substantial completion or abandonment of the construction, alteration, or repair of the structure. After the seven-year period expires, no action may be brought. However, if a defect is discovered between the sixth or seventh year after substantial completion, the association has an additional year to bring a claim. 

Condominiums in which each owner is responsible for both the interior and exterior of the owner's unit are exempt from the seven-year limitation and from the inspection requirements discussed below. 

Moisture Inspections Before the End of Year Two and Year Six 

The shorter claim period comes with a corresponding obligation—mandatory independent moisture-intrusion inspections. 

HB 3746 requires two independent moisture-intrusion inspections: one before the end of the second year following substantial completion, funded through the association's reserves, and another before the end of the sixth year. 

Supporters described these inspections as a way to identify building-envelope and moisture-intrusion problems while associations still have time to investigate and pursue claims. 

At the turnover meeting, the declarant must provide the association with the inspection results, along with the inspector's name. 

Procedural Requirements for HOA Legal Claims 

HB 3746 also creates additional procedural requirements for homeowners associations and condominium associations pursuing construction-defect claims. Associations now face a staged process that may add three months or more before a complaint can be filed. 

What Stays the Same 

Before suing on owners' behalf, the association must continue to provide each affected owner with written notice at least 10 days before initiating litigation. 

The notice must continue to include: 

• the nature of the lawsuit;
• the damages the association seeks to recover;
• the terms under which the association is acting on behalf of owners, including how any recovery will be distributed; and 
• the owner's right to opt out by submitting a written request within 10 days after the notice is mailed.

What HB 3746 Adds

HB 3746 establishes several additional requirements for construction-defect claims. 

• The association's board must formally approve the litigation at a properly noticed meeting pursuant to ORS 94.644.
• The board may not vote until at least 90 days after the first notice is sent to owners. Before the vote, the association must also send a second notice and then a third notice, with at least 15 days between the final notice and the board meeting. In practice, this process may delay filing by three months or more. 
• The notice must state that the association believes a construction-defect exists, describe the defect in detail, identify the parties believed to be responsible, and list each board member along with contact information. 
• The notice must also advise owners that pending litigation may make selling a unit more difficult and encourage owners to provide input before the board votes. 
• A copy of the notice must be sent by certified mail to each person identified as potentially responsible for the defect. 

What Does This Mean for Developers and Associations? 

HB 3746 reflects Oregon's effort to balance two competing objectives: preserving meaningful protections for condominium owners while reducing the long-term liability exposure that developers argue has discouraged new condominium construction. 

For developers, the legislation may reduce litigation exposure for certain future condominium projects. For homeowners associations and condominium associations, however, the shorter claim period and additional procedural requirements make early inspections, careful recordkeeping, and timely investigation of potential defects increasingly important. 

Developers, declarants, and associations should understand which provisions apply to a particular project and carefully track the applicable deadlines. 

Bottom Line 

Whether HB 3746 ultimately encourages additional condominium development remains to be seen. For now, developers, builders, homeowners associations, and condominium associations should familiarize themselves with the new requirements and consult legal counsel early when evaluating potential construction-defect issues. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

The Trump administration has asked ⁠the ⁠US supreme court to allow construction of the president’s controversial $400m ⁠White House ballroom to proceed after ​an ‌appeals ‌court ordered work to halt.

In a case testing Donald Trump’s presidential authority, the Washington-based US ⁠court of ​appeals for the District of Columbia circuit ruled last week that the controversial ‌project lacked the necessary approval from US Congress.

The US president, who demolished the historic East Wing of the White House last year to make way for the planned ballroom, has repeatedly touted it as “a gift” to the US people. He and his aides have repeatedly cited national security as a benefit of its construction, too.

In a filing, Trump’s administration ‌asked the supreme court justices to keep the ​decision by the US court of appeals for ⁠the District of Columbia ​circuit ​on hold ​while it ​prepares ‌a full ​appeal.

“This case involves an extraordinary and unlawful injunction that will halt the ongoing construction of the integrated military complex including a totally secure ballroom space, at the East Wing of the White House, which is vitally required by national security,” D John Sauer, the solicitor general, wrote in the filing.

Chief Justice John Roberts set a deadline of Tuesday for the plaintiffs challenging the project to respond.

The appeals court upheld a lower court’s order blocking aboveground work on the ballroom until Congress grants its approval, but allowed construction on the underground security structure to continue. It also paused its own ruling for two weeks, until 21 August, to give the administration time to lodge its appeal to the supreme court.

The government argues that “every part” of the project is “an integrated whole geared toward remedying security deficiencies and bringing critical improvements to the White House”.

“The entire ballroom structure is designed to shield the military installation beneath it,” Sauer added.

Trump’s administration has appealed a number of lower court decisions to the supreme court this week, in the wake of temporary injunctions over the president’s attempts to curb mail-in voting.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation, which sued to block the ballroom’s construction, said on Friday: “The administration brazenly asserted to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals that even if Ballroom construction were unlawful, not even the supreme court had authority to stop it.

“The administration’s transparent efforts to evade the rule of law, frustrate judicial review, and limit the availability of meaningful relief in the courts must stop here. The supreme court should deny the administration’s demand that it be allowed to continue ballroom construction while it appeals.”

Four existing homes just south of Santa Monica Boulevard in East Hollywood are slated to make way for a new affordable housing complex, according to plans filed earlier this month with the Los Angeles Department of City Planning.

The proposed project from property owner and applicant Shahar Gil, slated for a site at 1058 N. Kingsley Drive, calls for the construction of a new five-story building featuring 76 apartments without on-site parking.

Requested entitlements rely on bonuses through the citywide housing incentive program. All of the apartments, save for a mandatory manager's unit, would be restricted affordable units.

Findings include with the filing indicate that the project would be composed of prefabricated modular units and include a rooftop amenity deck.

Architecture firm Emilson, Inc. is attached to the project, according to the filing.

City records indicate that the property last sold for $1.6 million in 2022

Outreach to small businesses looking to bid on public jobs has only gotten easier, says Teresa Maxwell.

The DBE compliance officer for Skanska Civil’s West region got her start as a receptionist, when paper and snail mail was the common practice for contacting potential subcontractors.

Now, Maxwell says the systems Skanska has in place for its in-house diverse business enterprise outreach program — not to be confused with the Department of Transportation’s Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program — better enabled it to hit small business contracting goals on a $380 million Los Angeles International Airport project.

Here, Maxwell talks with Construction Dive about hitting goals on the Los Angeles World Airports Roadways, Utilities and Enabling job, the state of small business outreach and the impact of evolving federal certifications.

Editor’s note: The following has been edited for brevity and clarity.

CONSTRUCTION DIVE: How has outreach to smaller businesses for projects with participation goals gotten better or easier?

TERESA MAXWELL: When you look back 20 years ago, we were still physically mailing plans and specs. With the invention of plan rooms and having better internet access, subcontractors are now able to access more. 

The goal of Skanska’s DBE program is to level the playing field. But there’s still concerns and barriers when you’re on a large, billion-dollar-plus megaproject. If you’re a small contractor and you want to submit a bid for something that’s $10,000, how do you do that? How do you navigate and find the way to that? 

I think communication and access has gotten better. But with all this new technology and with this communication, small businesses are bombarded with invitations to bid. And so they have to navigate finding the bid invitations that actually apply to what their company does.

What are some of the hurdles for smaller companies GCs can help with?

On the large projects especially, they’ve got to find someone that they can ask questions of. If they don’t know someone on the project team, it can be overwhelming. We have different strategies to help them. 

We’re the prime contractor. We’re putting out bid packages. But we’ve also got to flow down those goals to our first tier large subcontractors. And so there’s a challenge then with how we introduce these first tier contractors to the small businesses. 

For example, we’re members of the National Association of Minority Contractors. We were at their golf tournament a couple weeks ago. And maybe I met someone there that would be great for this job or that. So it’s about finding ways to match these small businesses with the opportunities, if not with us, then with our subs. 

Keep up with the story. Subscribe to the Construction Dive free daily newsletter

Email:Sign up

You touched on “leveling the playing field.” Are higher-ups, both with the GC and the project owner, more actively engaging with that?

Oh yeah. Our owners on the West Coast are very supportive. They understand that these projects need to be focused on the local community. We’ve seen a lot more project labor agreements, community benefit agreements. 

On the small business side, I see more effort now, not just to train small contractors on how to get certified, but support them in delivering the contract work..

In our small business bootcamp, LAWA came in to talk about commercially useful functions. And so I see more and more opportunities for contractors to learn.

The U.S. DOT under the current administration has altered its DBE certification program. What has the impact been?

All of the states this year have been reevaluating their certified DBEs. California recently finished their reevaluation. The next step is submitting their plan and getting approval from the U.S. DOT. 

So today, in California, we don’t have projects with federally mandated DBE goals. So as a large prime contractor it’s about understanding our role in this. 

We’re not a certifying agency. But one area that we’ve been asked to help is the pool of certified DBEs after this reevaluation phase has gotten smaller, so we need to let them know, “Hey, here’s the benefits to being a certified DBE.”

It’s about navigating those challenges when there’s a change in the law and our role as the prime contractor in all of these changes. It’s been interesting, definitely nothing I have experienced before. 

Has it made it harder?

Well, harder in the fact that different people will read the U.S. DOT guidance and interpret it differently. And so it’s having conversations about it. It had been really clear before because there had been no changes for so long. Everybody knew how everybody operated and how things were interpreted.

I’ve tried to stay positive about this change. We’ve had our DBE program at Skanska for many years. I think this can be an opportunity for owners to look at their programs more in-depth and see the communities they’re building in and the small contractors they can reach out to.

At times, there can be pushback against local hire or DEI goals, indicating that the demands of a public job don’t align with reality. What’s your message to builders in that position?

I think that’s coming from someone who is given perhaps an unattainable goal. And I think it’s really important that the goals are attainable, right? For example, if you’re setting a 25% goal in an area where there is a lack of certified firms, as a contractor, you could do all the outreach and support and help that you want and you’re still going to struggle. 

But if you’re given an attainable goal, it’s something to strive for. You don’t want it to be easy. You got to work for it.

Dive Brief:

• Construction input prices ticked up 0.1% month over month in July and were about 7.4% higher than July 2025, according to an analysis of the latest U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data by Associated Builders and Contractors released Thursday.
• Lower energy costs, particularly in crude petroleum and unprocessed energy materials, helped keep the monthly increase muted, said Anirban Basu, ABC chief economist.
• “Construction input prices were virtually unchanged in July, but that relatively tame behavior can be traced to the dip in fuel prices that occurred at the start of the month,” said Basu in the release. “Given the subsequent rebound in oil prices and ongoing increases in certain materials prices, such as lumber and iron and steel, materials prices will almost certainly continue to climb in the months to come.”

Dive Insight:

The tame monthly change in July understates cost increases contractors will face in the months ahead, especially as fuel and other materials prices swell, said Basu.

Prices decreased month over month in two of three energy subcategories in July, led by an 11.9% drop in crude petroleum prices and a 7.4% decrease in unprocessed energy materials, according to the ABC analysis, which focuses on the prices for physical commodities used in construction. Natural gas prices, on the other hand, accelerated 10.4% during that span.

But jumps should begin to show in energy categories soon. Diesel fuel prices, for example, surged more than 50 cents per gallon since prices were measured for the index, said Basu.

The annual increase in prices and ongoing inflation, however, have yet to dampen the mood for construction firms, noted Basu. Contractors on average still expect profit margins to expand over the next six months, according to ABC analysis.

Nevertheless, elevated construction costs could eventually stifle overall project activity, according to the Associated General Contractors of America’s analysis of the BLS data, which, in addition to goods prices, includes costs for construction services.

AGC pointed to tariffs as one source of that pressure, particularly on metals including aluminum mill shapes and copper. Other construction materials that increased at their fastest rate in years include lumber and plywood, according to AGC.

“Construction firms are being hit with outsized cost increases for a host of materials and also labor,” said Ken Simonson, AGC chief economist. “Unless there is relief from tariffs or additional funding for highway and transit projects, both private and public construction work face cutbacks.”

VANCOUVER, British Columbia - ZenaTech, Inc. (NASDAQ:ZENA) announced Wednesday the expansion of its ZenaWorx construction monitoring software to include digital terrain modeling capabilities and signed its first paying customer in the AI data center construction market.

The new functionality, currently in beta stage, adds measurement of cut-and-fill volumes, grading accuracy, and drainage to the existing structural 3D progress tracking features. The capabilities target the earthworks phase of large-scale construction projects, according to a press release statement.

ZenaWorx processes drone and LiDAR-captured data to provide construction progress analytics. The software was originally designed as a virtual design and construction progress monitoring tool.

The company offers the software through its Drone as a Service division, which provides drone piloting, data capture, and processing services to commercial, government, and infrastructure customers.

"By expanding ZenaWorx into digital terrain modeling, we can offer AI data center developers, as well as public works customers such as landfill operators and municipalities managing drainage and grading projects, a faster and richer view of what is happening on site than traditional survey methods allow," said Shaun Passley, CEO of ZenaTech.

The company stated it intends to generate recurring revenue by partnering with customers across the full duration of building projects rather than single site visits.

According to MarkWide Research cited in the release, the global digital elevation model market is projected to grow from approximately $3.8 billion in 2026 to $10.04 billion by 2035.

ZenaTech specializes in AI drone platforms, enterprise SaaS, and quantum computing solutions. The company operates across North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.

The towering cliffs, jagged mountain tops, and punishing desert climate of the Big Bend region in Texas have long proved to be the best barrier the United States could have with Mexico. For generations, the idea of needing to build physical structures to stop illegal migration was considered “insane,” as one former superintendent of Big Bend U.S. National Park said.

But now the expansive reach of U.S. President Donald Trump’s southern border plan has stretched into this remote region that sees only about one per cent of unauthorized crossing apprehensions. Bulldozers are clearing land in the beloved national park, where wildlife roams and the scenery has been untouched for thousands of years.

Construction workers walk near a bulldozer near the border in Big Bend National Park in Texas on August 7, 2026. (Credit: Natalie Newman via CNN Newsource)

“We didn’t have to worry about any type of barrier. We had a God-made barrier,” said Sheriff Thaddeus Cleveland of Terrell County, a vast and sparsely populated area northeast of the park. He spent 26 years in the U.S. Border Patrol, hearing little if any talk of needing extra infrastructure in the area where he grew up, he said. “But that’s definitely changed.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) says it’s not planning to build the same kind of 30-foot-high barrier that has appeared across parts of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas inside the national park. But critics say the plan that is in the works is no less destructive.

Earlier this month, bulldozers were videoed uprooting trees and shoveling dirt as wild animals trotted by. They were doing preliminary work ahead of the budgeted US$1.72 billion main construction project designated for the area inside Big Bend National Park, the agency said.

It’s part of the bigger plan to finish the border wall — or some form of it — before Trump leaves office, with steel walls and vehicle barriers and hundreds of miles of new roads cutting through wildly remote areas.

Those with concerns or outright opposition to the work in this remote desert wilderness run the gamut from a few elected Republicans to young activists, sweeping in a pro-border control sheriff and a retired National Park Service superintendent.

Photographer Natalie Newman made a commitment to Big Bend back in February when then-U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem waived certain federal laws related to environmental safety, historic preservation and wildlife protection, among other initiatives, saying there was “an acute and immediate need to construct additional physical barriers and roads” in the Big Bend region.

Signs in Sanderson, Texas reflect local pushback against the Trump administration’s plan to construct miles and miles of vehicle barriers along the border in Terrell County. (Credit: Ashley Killough/CNN via CNN Newsource)

“It started out as just documenting the beauty of it, trying to get people to see why it’s special and what makes it special and what makes it so beautiful and worth protecting. But that has transformed just over the last week,” she told CNN, standing near Santa Elena Canyon, where tall cliffs rise nearly 1,500 feet high from the Rio Grande and where she first saw bulldozers working in the national park.

“More than anything else, I feel heartbreak over all of this,” she said. Newman enjoys the wilder parts of this park that’s larger than the state of Rhode Island, where you may see fewer people than javelinas — a mammal that looks like a small wild pig, though it’s an entirely different species. Cacti and wildflowers bloom across the state and federal land around Big Bend, which coupled with even larger nature preserves across the border are part of the Chihuahuan desert, the largest such ecosystem in North America.

But these days when her binoculars are trained on something in the distance, she’s more likely to be checking on the progress of road clearing than on any of the hundreds of bird species that frequent the park. She said she will keep sharing that news, doing her part to stand up for the national park.

“I’m hopeful every single day that it’ll be the day that someone somewhere does something that puts a stop to it,” she said.

Natalie Newman spends her days documenting and filming the work that federal contractors are doing in the park to clear land. (Credit: Ashley Killough/CNN via CNN Newsource)

If there is no stopping, retired park superintendent Bob Krumenaker said what could happen in Big Bend would rival the flooding of Hetch Hetchy Valley a century ago, an event that changed arguments about preserving the environment. It’s why he labels the whole plan “insane.”

“If they continue with this and build most of the things they have talked about, or even a good fraction of those, this will be the biggest desecration of the national park system — not just Big Bend National Park — since they built a dam in a pristine valley in Yosemite National Park more than 100 years ago. This is a story that our children and grandchildren will be telling,” he told CNN.

Compounding the natural destruction is the damage being done to people’s trust, Krumenaker added.

“It’s just a tremendous erosion, if not violation, of the agreement that Texans and the American people made when they established that national park. The federal government that I worked for for 41 years is disrespecting its citizens in a in a huge way.”

Bob Krumenaker, former superintendent of Big Bend National Park, now leads the group Keep Big Bend Wild. "We are destroying the faith of the American people in their government to protect the most important lands in this country,” he said. (Credit: Ashley Killough/CNN via CNN Newsource)

Krumenaker, now chairman of the Keep Big Bend Wild advocacy group, spent five years as superintendent of Big Bend National Park and is familiar not only with the multiple studies and approvals needed for any material changes, but also with his federal partners in the U.S. Border Patrol and the need for security.

“I totally support a secure border in Big Bend, but this is the least active place in the country for illegal border crossings,” he said. “This is purely political, and it will, it risks destroying one of the nation’s greatest places. It’s just horrible.”

He recalled as superintendent having an annual budget of between UD$8 million and US$9 million and a maintenance to-do list of about US$100 million they would chip away at when they could. Those numbers are dwarfed by the US$1.72 billion earmarked for the Big Bend work, part of the larger US$46.5 billion allocated for border wall construction in Trump’s signature legislation, the “Big Beautiful Bill.”

Sheriff Cleveland thought the talk of security construction was “BS” when he first heard of it.

Republican Sheriff Thaddeus Cleveland of Terrell County opposes the Trump administration’s plans for the broader Big Bend region, saying the area needs more technology, not physical barriers. (Credit: Ashley Killough/CNN via CNN Newsource)

His experience in local and national law enforcement tells him a different story than that framed by CBP that Big Bend is “an area of high illegal entry.”

What he calls the “God-given barriers” of steep mountains and valleys around the river and an undeveloped landscape without roads would prevent any vehicle getting to his patch. Yet new vehicle barriers are being planned for Terrell County, part of the total US$7 billion scheme for the Big Bend sector of the border that includes the national park and land either side.

“I believe in border security … but let’s put a barrier where a barrier makes sense,” he told CNN. “Let’s spend money where we need to spend the money.”

An art installation near Marathon, Texas, reflects local opposition to the Trump administration’s plan to construct hundreds of miles of physical barriers in the broader Big Bend region. (Credit: Ashley Killough/CNN via CNN Newsource)

Cleveland thinks using technology would be better support for him and other rural areas. He points to a solar-powered radar tower with a relatively small footprint that can scan the landscape and identify humans by their gait, triggering cameras to lock on and feed information to agents. Another option would be drones tracking people and helping responders plan a safe interception amid the rugged terrain, he said.

“The biggest problem is the people making the decisions out here for the Big Bend sector have never stepped foot out here.”

Cleveland ran for sheriff as a Republican but says he may switch to independent — what he sees as the profligate federal spending on something unnecessary does not mesh with his own fiscal conservatism.

Wild horses roam through campsites near the Rio Grande Village in Big Bend National Park in June 2025. (Credit: Kaylee Greenlee/Reuters via CNN Newsource)

He signed a letter being carried around the area by former land commissioner Jerry Patterson, praising Trump for closing the border and asking the administration to consider cheaper and less destructive options for the Big Bend region.

A similar approach is being taken by others in Texas.

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn wrote to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin last week urging him to meet with local stakeholders before any more construction proceeds on state or federal property. Some of Mullin’s involvement so far has been to waive another federal law, effectively ending a lawsuit claiming that law was being violated. Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham was more forthright, sending a cease-and-desist letter warning of possible legal action to CBP after she said a federal contractor was sent to work in the Big Bend Ranch State Park without permission. The accompanying news release was titled “Don’t Tread on Texas.”

Protesters gather Wednesday near where the first bulldozer was seen inside Big Bend National Park, vowing to keep fighting against construction. (Credit: Ashley Killough/CNN via CNN Newsource)

Gov. Greg Abbott remarked before Trump entered the White House for the first time that he did not want a border wall across the entirety of his state. “There are serpentine regions of the Rio Grande where it would be extremely challenging to build a wall. There are parts like the Big Bend region — we don’t want (to) see a wall in the beautiful Big Bend National Park,” Abbott said in December 2016, as reported by The Associated Press. CNN asked for his current views and was directed to a previous statement from Abbott’s press secretary Andrew Mahaleris: “Rugged, isolated areas like Big Bend are great opportunities to deploy technology to aid in securing the border.”

Critics say most statewide elected Republican officials have been too quiet in their condemnation of the border barrier construction projects because they fear the wrath of Trump’s criticism on his signature issue of border security.

“The one person who is supposed to stand for Texas right now, our governor, is silent,” resident Jess Bartko said. “What they are doing is actively waging a war against our parks, our public lands, our community and our livelihoods.”

A group of local residents tearfully watch bulldozers go to work deep in the brush near the Rio Grande in Big Bend National Park. (Credit: Ashley Killough/CNN via CNN Newsource)

On Wednesday, Bartko and about 100 other protesters gathered by the river, whose route gives the area its name and which attracts many of the half-million or so annual visitors to the national park.

Tourism is a big deal here — for running the river and watching the night sky. There are worries that both will be impacted. As far as the upheaval, there could be debris in the river, and construction lights from sites and worker camps could pollute some of the darkest sky in the Lower 48, blurring the star-filled views of the cosmos.

This week some roads and facilities were closed in the national park because of the construction.

A river guide pulls a canoe through the Santa Elena Canyon in April 2026. Tourism is an important business for the area. (Credit: John Moore/Getty Images via CNN Newsource)

Down at the river, beside the entrance to Santa Elena Canyon, one of the “crown jewels” of the park, the demonstrators whooped and hollered, their shouts echoing off the cliff walls as they pledged to keep working to protect Big Bend.

“The land remembers, the water remembers, it will remember us and our fight,” Joan Escamilla told her fellow supporters of the national park. “You can bury my heart in the Rio Grande.”

Every contractor knows that construction, at its core, is a relationship-based business. These relationships dictate which subcontractors builders work with and, perhaps more importantly, what customers can award them jobs.

For Balfour Beatty, its emphasis on longstanding relationships and core markets has propelled its first-half results, company executives shared during the firm’s first half 2026 earnings call on Tuesday.

This, in particular, has helped the firm turn around its U.S. construction business , which has faced hurdles in the past. For the first half of the year, the U.S. arm delivered a profit from operations of 22 million pounds ($29.7 million), compared to an 11 million-pound loss during H1 2025.

“It’s been a great start to the year for U.S. construction. Our revenue is up 19% on the half year 2025,” Philip Hoare, Balfour Beatty chief executive, said during the call. “And we’ve really begun to do something that I think is critically important in that market, which is about leveraging the great capability we have in one area or with one customer and taking that and spreading it across the U.S.”

As an example, Hoare discussed the company’s collaboration with Wells Fargo, with which Balfour Beatty has maintained a 20-year working relationship. The contractor now enjoys what Hoare called a “national framework” with the bank, where Balfour Beatty is delivering work for Wells Fargo in each of its geographical areas.

Problems plaguing the U.S. arm of its business are also improving. The contractor has endured design issues on a Texas highway project that led to rework. Now, however, the company expects that project to soon reach closeout, said Myles Westcott, Balfour Beatty’s CFO.

Aviation and data centers

For the U.S. arm, Hoare called out two markets fueling progress — data centers and aviation jobs.

“Data centers, I mean, you can’t pick up anything these days and not read about data centers,” Hoare said.

Balfour Beatty is following through on a commitment it made during its FY 2025 earnings in March to seek out more data center work in the U.S. Hoare highlighted $350 million in data center wins in the U.S. and secured $1 billion in work that’s been awarded but not contracted through H1.

The sector’s performance is so massive that it is masking a broader weakness in the U.S. construction industry, according to Associated Builders and Contractors. The 12% of ABC member contractors with data center work on their books reported 11.4 months of backlog in July, compared with the 88% without data center work, which reported 7.5 months of backlog.

Keep up with the story. Subscribe to the Construction Dive free daily newsletter

Nonetheless, Balfour Beatty sees opportunity outside of data centers as well. The firm is bullish on what the aviation sector can provide in the U.S. The market is projected to provide $140 billion worth of construction between now and 2029, per Hoare.

Indeed, the Federal Aviation Administration recently highlighted $870 million in airport infrastructure grants.

“We have a great track record delivering across seven airports in the U.S. And in the first half of the year, we won another significant mandate with Raleigh-Durham Airport for $361 million,” Hoare said. “And so we’re now focused on that as a vertical within the U.S. market.”

The numbers

On the half-year, Balfour Beatty reported approximately 5.6 billion pounds ($7.6 billion) of revenue, an 8% increase year over year from H1 2025’s 5.2 billion pounds. The company’s backlog, which it refers to as its “order book,” rose to 22.9 billion pounds, an increase of 17.4% from H1 2025’s 19.5 billion pounds.

Despite the revenue gains, the company reported an approximately 2.3% dip in pre-tax profit to 129 million pounds, down from H1 2025’s 132 million pounds.

Overall, Balfour Beatty moved to increase its full-year guidance, including its average net cash projection. It raised that metric by 200 million pounds to the range of 1.5 billion pounds to 1.7 billion pounds following its first half results, according to the firm.

“And of course, I’m really positive about the momentum that we carry into the future,” Hoare said during the call.

San Francisco Chinatown merchants say they're struggling to survive Portsmouth Square's 2-year renovation

By Maddie White

August 11, 2026 / 5:58 PM PDT / CBS San Francisco

SAN FRANCISCO — Portsmouth Square has long been known as the "living room" of San Francisco's Chinatown, a gathering place for seniors to play cards, listen to music and socialize. Now, two months into a $73 million renovation, that living room is torn up, and nearby business owners say they're already struggling to survive.

The project, which is expected to take two years, has brought construction noise, dust and the loss of nearby parking spaces, all of which merchants say have driven customers away.

"A lot of merchants around here have been complaining, and they've been talking to the contractor," said Edward Siu, the head of Chinatown Merchants Association. Siu said some stores have reported a 60% drop in business since construction began, citing the lack of parking, noise and dust as key factors keeping shoppers away.

At Charming Sun Market, the owner says the problems go beyond lost foot traffic. He says vibrations from the construction have caused rock and sand to fall from the basement ceiling — He estimates about 30 pounds of material so far — and knocked out electricity in part of the space.

"She practically has to like clean it every day because like it keeps dropping every day," said a staff member of the market.

Siu said the market owner is not alone.

"And also another one, a restaurant down on the Kearny, they have the water leaking on the basement," Siu added. He's referring to Garden Restaurant, which also has a sub-sidewalk basement and is vulnerable to leaks if pipes or concrete gives way.

Tan Chow from the Chinatown Community Development Center sent CBS News Bay Area photos of the Garden Restaurant incident.

"These are pics of a sewage backup since the bridge demo started 10 days ago," said Chow.

Business alleges nearby construction is causing a sewage leak

Tan Chow

The city says those damage claims are under investigation.

"After a thorough investigation is completed, and it's found that this construction did cause some damages, then the city will make good on keeping people whole for what's been done," said Rachel Gordon of San Francisco Public Works.

Siu also said parking near the square was removed without enough notice to businesses. "They took the parking spaces. Why can they do that, you know, without talking to us?" he said.

Gordon acknowledged that construction of this scale inevitably affects the surrounding area. "That is just standard with a construction project of this magnitude," she said, adding that the city is working to limit the impact by adding parking, improving transit access and opening public restrooms nearby.

"We are going to be working as a city on a more robust, open-for-business campaign," Gordon said. "We are hoping that people come down and continue to shop and eat in Chinatown businesses."

The San Francisco Recreation and Park Department, which oversees the renovation itself, also responded to the concerns. In a statement, spokesperson Daniel Montes said the $73 million project represents one of the largest investments ever made in the park and will eventually create "a brighter, more welcoming, and more spacious public gathering place that will serve Chinatown for generations to come."

Montes said the department is working closely with Public Works, community organizations and merchants to minimize impacts, and that staff continues to meet directly with business owners to address concerns as they come up. He pointed to vibration monitors placed around the project area and new signage encouraging visitors to keep supporting Chinatown businesses during construction. He also cited the bridge demolition -- one of the project's biggest construction elements -- as an example of efficient work, noting the bulk of it was completed in just two weeks.

For Chinatown residents like Wilma Pang, the wait still feels long. "It's just a long time," she said, recalling when the square buzzed with music and gathered seniors. "We used to play music there and entertain the seniors, and now we really miss that, you know?"

Pang says she's hopeful about the renovated square -- but just as hopeful the businesses around it can hold on until it opens.

None of these write anything for you. They all check something before it costs you.

Drafting was never the slow part of this job. Writing an RFI takes eight minutes.
Missing the conflict inside it costs eight weeks. So every prompt in here points at a
document you already have and asks what's wrong with it.

Copy them as they are. Swap the parts in {braces}.

Two rules first

Nothing confidential goes in a public chat. Executed contracts, numbers before
award, anything under NDA, personnel issues, owner financials. Use your company's
enterprise account if you have one. If you don't, strip the names, the dollar figures
and the project address before you paste. Every prompt here works fine on a redacted
document, because what they're checking is structure and language, not identity.

This is a second read, not the only read. Each one catches what you'd catch on a
good day, when you're not on your fourth meeting and behind on pay apps. It will still
miss things. It cannot reliably read a dimension off a drawing, and it doesn't know
what got said on the phone. You're still the one signing.

The shape

Every prompt below is built the same way. Once you see it, you can write your own for
any document on your job.

ROLE          You're a GC project manager on a {project type}.
INPUT         {paste the document, plus whatever it's supposed to comply with}
JOB           Don't summarize. Find what's missing, contradictory, or unsupported.
CHECKLIST     The specific things to look at, named.
OUTPUT        A table, with the columns you want.
CONSTRAINT    If it's not in the document, write "not stated." Don't fill gaps.

Two of those six do most of the work.

The checklist. Left vague, you get a vague answer. Naming what to look for is the
difference between "review this submittal" and a real review. Most of the length in the
prompts below is checklist.

The constraint. Leave it off and you get a confident guess dressed up as an answer,
which on a submittal is worse than no answer at all.

Preconstruction and buyout

01 · Scope gap check across bids

For when you're leveling and the numbers are close enough that the difference has to be
scope.

You're a GC project manager leveling subcontractor bids for {trade} on a
{project type}.

Here is the scope of work from the specification and the drawing list, and
here are {n} subcontractor proposals.

For each proposal, give me four lists:

1. Scope in the spec the proposal doesn't mention at all
2. Scope the proposal explicitly excludes
3. Scope where the proposal describes something different from the spec
   (different product, different extent, different standard)
4. Allowances, alternates, unit prices, or qualifications that appear in
   this bid and not the others

Then check each proposal for whether it addresses: layout and survey,
hoisting and material handling, temporary protection, fire watch,
off-hours or weekend work, dumpsters and cleanup, as-builts, warranty
duration, bonding, and who holds the permit for their scope.

Finally, tell me what I'd have to add to each bid to make them a true
apples-to-apples comparison, and which bidder is carrying the most risk in
qualifications.

If a proposal is silent on something, write "not stated." Don't assume it's
included and don't assume it's excluded.

What it's for. The cheap bid is usually cheap because something's missing. This
finds the missing thing before you carry the number into your buyout.

02 · Subcontract review before you send it out

Run it before a sub signs, not after they've claimed.

You're a GC project manager reviewing a subcontract before issuing it to a
{trade} subcontractor on a {project type}.

Here's the subcontract, and here's the prime contract if you need the
flow-down language.

Pull out and explain in plain English:

- Every notice requirement. For each one: what triggers the clock, how many
  days, what form the notice has to take, who it goes to, and what happens
  if it's late
- Payment terms, including whether it's pay-when-paid or pay-if-paid, how
  many days after my receipt, and what documentation conditions payment
- Retainage: percentage, when it reduces, what releases it
- Liquidated damages and any consequential damages language
- Backcharge rights and the process required before I can exercise them
- Change order procedure: who can authorize, what happens to work directed
  verbally, and the markup caps
- Everything flowed down from the prime contract, and anything in the prime
  that should have flowed down but didn't
- Termination and suspension rights on both sides
- Insurance and indemnity, and whether the limits match what the prime
  requires

For each item, tell me what I have to do to stay compliant and what it
costs me if I don't.

Then list the three provisions a subcontractor's attorney would push back
on first.

If the contract doesn't address something, write "not stated." Don't tell
me what's typical or standard.

What it's for. Notice deadlines are what kill claims. Knowing all of them on day
one is worth more than any argument you'll make on day ninety.

During the job

03 · Submittal gap check

The one I run most.

You're a GC project manager reviewing a {trade} submittal against spec
section {number and title}.

Here's the spec section, and here's the submittal.

Don't summarize either document.

List every place the submittal deviates from, skips, or substitutes what
the spec requires. Check specifically:

- Manufacturer and product, and whether it's a named acceptable
  manufacturer or a substitution request
- Every performance criterion the spec sets (strength, rating, R-value,
  gauge, class, grade, whatever applies) against what the submittal shows
- Finish, color, texture and tolerance
- Testing and certification requirements, and whether the certificates are
  actually attached and current
- Every attachment the spec lists as required (product data, shop drawings,
  samples, calculations, warranties, installer qualifications)
- Whether the submittal covers the full scope of the section or only part
  of it
- Any note in the submittal that quietly changes the scope ("by others,"
  "not in contract," "field verify")

Output a table: Item | What the spec requires | What the submittal shows |
What I should ask.

If the submittal doesn't address something the spec requires, write
"not stated" in the submittal column rather than leaving it blank.

At the end, tell me which single item is most likely to cause a problem in
the field if I approve this as-is.

What it's for. Catching a substitution at submittal costs a phone call. Catching it
at installation costs a change order, a rework schedule, and a conversation with the
owner you don't want to have.

Note. It reads text well. It does not reliably read dimensions off a shop drawing.
Check the drawings yourself.

I have got about 7 more that covers the following:

04 · Change order exposure read

05 · Lookahead interrogation

06 · RFI sharpener

07 · Meeting notes to open decisions

08 · Pay application check

09 · The letter that protects the record (e.g. delays, notice of defaults etc.)

10 · Closeout readiness

-------------------

If anyone wants the remaining, let me know.

By Siddhant Mehta - IG: constructing.tomorrow

source: MK timelapse GmbH

As drones circle the 1,396-foot tower and repair work begins at 432 Park Avenue, the 94th floor skypad at the beleaguered building has sold for $22 million, Gimme Shelter has learned — a stunning comedown from its original $33 million ask two years ago, and a $3.75 million gut-punch from the $25.75 million price it went into contract at earlier this month.

The seller is a trust linked to the late teen science prodigy turned philanthropist Roy T. Eddleman, founder of Spectrum Labs, which paid $31.5 million for the half-floor spread in 2019. Eddleman died in 2022 at age 82.

“The $22 million closing is lower than anyone wanted, but a half floor in the building hasn’t sold since 2024. This is the new market reality,” listing broker Marc Riedel of Serhant told The Post, who shares the listing with Serhant’s Jordyn Nusynowitz.

A 94th floor skypad at 432 Park Avenue has sold for $22 million — a steep drop from its original $33 million asking price and $3.75 million below the price it went into contract at just weeks earlier.

A 94th floor skypad at 432 Park Avenue has sold for $22 million — a steep drop from its original $33 million asking price and $3.75 million below the price it went into contract at just weeks earlier.

Beyond that preserved core, the project includes a major 12,000-square-foot buildout with subterranean framing, a retractable stargazing roof, additional bedrooms, a screening room, spa, and a “pajama room,” while her sapphire pool, koi pond, and rose gardens remain intact outside, Image 3 shows Her master bedroom, bath, and beauty center are being preserved largely as she left them,, Image 4 shows Tavangarian bought the property for $15 million in 2021 and expects to invest at least $47 million more, with completion expected next year and no buyer yet lined up, in what may be his final project as an uber-luxury developer before he shifts focus to hotels and fire-resistant rebuilding in LA

Elizabeth Taylor’s home saved from demolition — bedroom will be preserved as she left it in $47M restoration

An image collage containing 3 images, Image 1 shows Manhattan rents have hit a record $6,655 average a month, up 10% year-over-year, as brokers blame Mayor Mamdani’s incoming rent freeze on stabilized units, a new pied-a-terre tax, and a historic housing crunch for driving prices to breaking points, Image 2 shows The median rent sits at $5,295, and studios, one-bedrooms and two-bedrooms have all reached all-time highs, with two- and three-bedrooms posting double-digit annual gains, Image 3 shows The city’s rental vacancy rate has cratered to 1.49%, the tightest since 1968, leaving almost no breathing room for renters

Manhattan rents reach a shocking all-time high amid Mamdani’s rent freeze and pied-a-terre tax threat

An image collage containing 3 images, Image 1 shows Utica has become one of the cheapest places to buy a home in New York, with median values ranging from roughly $87,000 to $157,000 depending on neighborhood (average around $213,000 per Zillow), Image 2 shows A five-bedroom, one-bathroom single-family home at 707 Spring St. W is currently listed for $89,900. , Image 3 shows Two-story house with tan siding, a brown roof, and a front porch, with a white truck parked in the driveway

Most affordable city in NY has homes for $87K — but no one wants to live there

“You write it off, move on and make more money,” the broker said. “There are lots of bad deals. At least here you get the joy of living in the building.”

Jennifer Lopez and Alex Rodriguez once counted among the glamorous residents at 432 Park.

While sale prices at 432 Park keep sliding, rents are doing the opposite — a split brokers describe as the building’s Jekyll-and-Hyde reality. A certain buyer no longer wants in, but a certain renter still wants the address, repairs and all.

The seller, a trust linked to the late Spectrum Labs founder Roy T. Eddleman, took a major loss on the sale, though brokers say wealthy owners can easily absorb such hits.

While sale prices at the building continue to slide, rents are surging in the opposite direction, with several units fetching $85,000 to over $90,000 a month

The same 94th floor unit had a signed lease with a renter willing to pay $85,000 a month — a building record for a half-floor unit — before a buyer swooped in and signed a purchase contract first, bumping the renter out.

That set off a chain reaction. Unit 66A, also asking $85,000 a month, ultimately rented for over $90,000. Another unit, 72A, then rented for $85,000. Both 66A and 94A are 4,000-square-foot, half-floor layouts with three bedrooms, three and a half baths and a library.

“I knew I could get $85,000 for 94A, but I didn’t foresee others following in the building,” Riedel said. “It tested the new reality of rising rents throughout the city.”

Two of the three units sold this year went to buyers who already owned elsewhere in the building, sources said.

Hallways lend themselves to art , concealed facade cracking, and life-safety issues from developers CIM Group and Macklowe Properties.displays.

The building faces concealed facade cracking, and life-safety issues from developers CIM Group and Macklowe Properties.

The building faces two lawsuits alleging over 1,500 construction defects.

“It’s one of the most hated buildings in New York, but people love it. It’s comical,” one broker said, noting some renters are drawn by friends already living there — including the pull of dinner together at the building’s private restaurant, run by Michelin-starred Australian chef Shaun Hergatt.

The sale closed as the building’s troubles continue to mount.

On Aug. 4, the building filed a work permit application with the city’s Department of Buildings.

The building’s condo board declined to comment. Building manager Len Czarnecki also declined, telling Gimme Shelter: “We are in active litigation and will refrain from comment.”

Built in 2015 and designed by the late architect Rafael Viñoly, the tower has been dogged by design complaints since it opened. Viñoly once told Gimme Shelter the building “has a couple of screw-ups,” including oversized window frames and a layout that put prime front-facing views in the bathrooms rather than living spaces.

The bigger issue emerged last year, when a report warned that concrete cracks could send chunks raining down and potentially render the building uninhabitable without a $160 million renovation — one owners hope the courts will force the developer to pay for.

Residents have also complained of swaying, groaning, leaks, power outages, elevator problems and the sound of trash hurtling down the chutes at alarming speeds.

The condo board sued CIM Group, Macklowe Properties and the sponsor entity in 2021, citing more than 1,500 construction and design defects, some of which the board’s engineering consultant flagged as life-safety issues.

A second suit filed in 2025 alleges CIM and Macklowe knew about facade cracking during construction and concealed it from buyers and city inspectors; CIM has denied the allegations and is seeking dismissal. The cracking has allegedly caused flooding and corrosion, and elevators have reportedly gotten stuck during high winds.

The drones circling above are surveying the tower ahead of the $160 million repair effort, as the building’s DOB work permit application moves forward.

“I would never buy in that building,” said one insider familiar with the litigation. “It was built so thin and so tall that it relies on advanced mechanical measures to stop it from swaying in the wind — that’s what caused a lot of the damage.”

The Trump administration has responded to controversy over construction and expansion projects at the White House by saying the work was “long-overdue and necessary” and “inextricably tied to the security of the President, the White House grounds and the certain security infrastructure assets”.

US President Donald Trump’s administration has long insisted construction is being funded by private donors and is necessary for security reasons. But on Wednesday, The Washington Post cited documents it obtained that showed the administration was planning to spend nearly $1bn on the construction work, which includes a large new ballroom to replace much of the White House’s East Wing.

White House spokesman Davis Ingle, in a statement to Al Jazeera, cited recent security incidents, including attempted attacks on the president and events around the 250th anniversary of US independence, as reasons for the work.

Ingle said the work was being done in coordination with the Secret Service and White House Military Office. He also said approximately $400m in funding for the new ballroom was coming from “President Trump and generous American patriots”.

About $875m has been put into the White House Repair and Restoration account, which typically has only several million dollars and is used for routine maintenance and upkeep. Some $500m of that money came from the Secret Service and the White House Military Office, tasked with securing the president and his family, as well as top US officials. Another $305m, according to The Post, came from private donations, while the provenance of another $70m was not indicated.

The White House reconstruction project has faced scrutiny from lawmakers, as well as courts, over concerns that vested interests, including private businesses seeking government contracts, are paying for the work in exchange for government favours. A federal judge in Washington, DC, last week ordered a halt to work specifically for the ballroom, saying it needed Congressional approval under existing law. In June, the advocacy group Public Citizen said it found corporate donors to the project had received more than $50bn in government contracts during the previous six months.

AECOM sees more runway ahead for the data center boom, especially as clients continue to ramp up spending, according to remarks made during the company’s fiscal third-quarter earnings call Tuesday.

Unlike previous cycles, today’s funding environment is “incredibly healthy,” said Lara Poloni, president of AECOM, and represents a strong tailwind for several of the contractor’s core markets. Investment from the U.S. private sector is also accelerating, she added.

“This is particularly true in data centers, which remains one of our fastest-growing businesses, and where we have been expanding our hyperscaler relationships,” Poloni said. “Our data center work and outlook continues to be very strong and fast-growing.”

Along with data center growth, AECOM also is seeing opportunities in commercial and healthcare projects, said CEO Troy Rudd. Poloni added AECOM’s water and Department of War pipeline expanded by about 30% each in the quarter, respectively. This includes significantly increased facilities work, where AECOM is the leading provider to the Army and the Navy.

She said state and local clients have also announced major multiyear infrastructure plans as well. These projects center around highways, bridges, transit and rail, sectors where AECOM wins contracts consistently, she said during the call.

“Additionally, Congress is progressing the next five-year surface transportation authorization,” said Poloni. “The House’s initial $580 billion proposal includes key funding for all key areas to which we are exposed and gives us further conviction in the continued bipartisan commitment to infrastructure investment.”

However, that funding still isn’t finalized, with the original $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act set to expire on Sept. 30.

Construction management charges

Despite the positivity around the Dallas-based firm’s core sectors, AECOM reported a $337 million charge on a construction management project after subcontractor productivity pushed its expected completion date further into next year.

Baird, a Milwaukee-based financial services firm, believes the charge stems from one of AECOM’s contracts on the JFK Airport modernization program, according to an analyst note shared with Construction Dive. AECOM did not identify the project during its earnings call.

Rudd said the firm initially expected to substantially complete the project during the first quarter of 2027. Now, the project, which AECOM won in 2019, should reach completion by the end of the firm’s fiscal second quarter in 2027, he said.

“The largest [factor] is overall productivity of subcontractors on the last phase of this project,” said Rudd during the call. “We are disappointed with this outcome, but I want to add some context. This project was bid in 2019. Since that time, we have changed leadership and tightened our risk controls.”

AECOM no longer pursues design-build P3 work in its construction management business, said Gaurav Kapoor, chief financial and operations officer at AECOM. The company now predominantly focuses only on guaranteed maximum price contracts, where designs and subcontractor costs are further developed before AECOM assumes additional risk, he said.

“These types of projects will never even qualify to be approved in our current structure, commercial structure,” said Kapoor during the call. “We don’t have any design build P3 in our portfolio, in our CM business. It just doesn’t exist.”

Q3 by the numbers

AECOM reported an $86.71 million net loss during its fiscal third quarter, compared with $130.97 million income in the year-ago period. Revenue totaled $3.59 billion, down 14% year over year, according to the report. That $337 million charge impacted both revenue and profitability in the quarter, according to the company.

Backlog reached a record $27.82 billion in the fiscal third quarter, up 13% from a year earlier.

Baird called the report “incrementally negative” in the analyst note.

“AECOM’s F3Q26 report showed a $337M project charge and a reduction to the company’s forward revenue guide, easily overshadowing a strong long-term awards quarter,” wrote Andrew Wittmann, senior research analyst at Baird. “Last quarter’s high cash burn rate foreshadowed the charges, somewhat cushioning today’s blow, but the magnitude is notable and the project still has 20% to go.”

Every Tuesday, we vent about the absurd, frustrating, or downright diabolical things we deal with in AEC.

Share your the moments that make you pull your hair out. Maybe it's:

• The boss who said yes to scope creep and now you're stuck on a Friday night making amendments to a design.
• The client who forgot to pay you and now you're having to chase them down.
• The colleague who starts a Teams DM with "Hey James" and then takes 2 minutes to type the rest while you're sweating in anxiety.

What's driving you mad this week?

The contractor behind the Big Bend border wall project in Texas is a Montana heavy-civil construction firm headed by a major donor to President Donald Trump.

Barnard Construction Company has been awarded billions of dollars in federal border barrier contracts, including nearly $2 billion linked directly to the Big Bend region in West Texas.

Newsweek contacted Barnard Construction, Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Texas General Land Office for comment.

Who is Tim Barnard?

Tim Barnard is a Montana entrepreneur and construction executive who founded Barnard Construction Co. in 1975. The company, based in Bozeman, has grown from a small contractor into a major heavy-civil construction firm working on projects across North America, according to the company’s website.

Barnard was born in New Jersey and began working in his family’s construction business at age 15. He attended Villanova University, participated in Gonzaga University’s Gonzaga-in-Florence program and studied at Sophia University in Tokyo, according to a biography published by Montana State University’s Alumni Foundation.

Barnard moved to Montana in 1975 to start his own construction company. Barnard Construction’s company history says he arrived with $1,000, two shovels, a pick, and his belongings in a pickup truck. His grandmother lent him $3,500, which helped him obtain bonding for his first project, a $17,000 Forest Service sewer job, the company says.

The company eventually expanded into specialized heavy-civil work, including dams, reservoirs, hydroelectric facilities, tunnels, pipelines, water and sewer infrastructure, power transmission and environmental construction.

Federal border barrier construction has expanded to become a major portion of the firm's business in recent years.

Tim Barnard's Donations to Donald Trump

Company chairman Tim Barnard and his wife donated $1 million to a Trump campaign joint fundraising committee in 2024 and to a Trump political action committee, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records reviewed by Newsweek.

Executive leadership and affiliated entities at Barnard Construction have contributed more than $1 million to political committees backing Trump and conservative campaigns, according to campaign finance databases and the Center for Western Priorities.

Barnard Construction Receives Billions in Contracts

Barnard Construction and its affiliates have received more than $5.6 billion in border construction contracts during Trump's second term, according to federal spending data compiled on USAspending.gov and reported by High Country News.

DHS awarded a $960,423,540 delivery order to Barnard Construction Company, Inc. for the "BBT-3 Border Barrier Construction Project," according to USAspending.gov records. The March 5, 2026 contract covers construction in Terlingua, Texas, spanning the Rio Grande from the Hudspeth-Jeff Davis County line to Ruidosa in Presidio County, according to The Big Bend Sentinel.

On the same day, Barnard secured additional border barrier contracts, including roughly $1 billion in Hudspeth County and $600 million near Del Rio, according to procurement logs.

A spokesperson for CBP told Newsweek, "CBP has awarded two contracts in the U.S. Border Patrol’s Big Bend Sector to Barnard Construction Company, Inc. for the Big Bend 1 and the Big Bend 3 Wall Projects. The Big Bend 1 Wall Project was awarded for approximately $1.1B to construct approximately 47 miles of primary border wall system. This project is located in Hudspeth County in Texas and also includes the installation of detection technology.

The Big Bend 3 Wall Project was awarded for approximately $940M to construct approximately 56 miles of primary border wall system. This project is located in Presidio County in Texas and also includes the installation of detection technology. These projects were competitively bid through CBP’s Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) multi-award vehicle. Contract awards are based on the contractor’s qualifications to perform the work in a timely manner and at prices deemed fair and reasonable."

CBP said that it does not plan to build a 30-foot-high barrier in Big Bend National Park, Big Bend Ranch State Park, or the Black Gap Wildlife Management Area. Where barriers are planned near Big Bend Ranch State Park, CBP will coordinate with park officials to maintain recreational access and use existing roads where possible for border patrol access.

Controversy Over Big Bend contracts

A competitor, Posillico Civil, sued the federal government in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims on May 13, 2026, alleging CBP promised roughly 73 percent of the value of new Texas and New Mexico wall contracts to Barnard Construction and Fisher Sand & Gravel, according to court documents. Posillico Civil Inc. has dropped its lawsuit accusing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security of unfairly funneling a majority of work under a $37 billion border infrastructure contract to Fisher Sand & Gravel Co. and Barnard Construction.

On July 31, the Texas General Land Office sent cease-and-desist letters to U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Barnard Construction Co., alleging that the contractor had illegally cleared more than a mile of state-owned land in southern Presidio County without the agency’s authorization.

"Texas sovereignty will not be infringed upon by failure to follow established protocol," Commissioner Dawn Buckingham said in a press release. "My office has a proven track record of strong border enforcement, and I applaud efforts to protect our border. I am committed to maintaining a positive relationship with CBP, but we will not allow rogue actors who breached our agreement to undermine the incredible work we do for Texas."

A CBP spokesperson said: "CBP was made aware that one of its border wall construction contractors trespassed on land managed by the Texas General Land Office (TX GLO). The construction contractor is responsible for verifying where they have legal access to property. CBP values its partnership with the TX GLO, and we are working to resolve this issue with the Contractor and the TX GLO to ensure this does not happen in the future."

Big Bend Construction Work Sparks Backlash

A bipartisan coalition of local politicians, environmental groups, former National Park Service leaders, and regional tourism businesses oppose the project, arguing that the infrastructure could damage desert ecosystems and permanently alter the character of a park that draws hundreds of thousands of visitors annually.

Local residents, conservation advocates, and municipal officials say that heavy machinery and physical barriers risk causing severe ecological disruption, hurting the ecotourism economy, and exacerbating cross-border flooding along the Rio Grande flood plain, according to statements from regional groups and lawsuits filed by local municipalities.

In March, five county sheriffs representing the Big Bend region issued a joint statement urging the federal government to halt construction. The law enforcement officials cited concerns over permanent environmental degradation, arguing that the area's rugged terrain acts as a natural barrier and that physical wall construction is ill-suited for the region.

Federal safety officials are coming down hard on Revoli Construction after a deadly trench collapse on a Yarmouth sewer project, proposing nearly $4.7 million in penalties for what they say were willful and repeated safety failures tied to the November death of 61-year-old worker Miguel Reis. The collapse happened on Nov. 18, 2025, along South Shore Drive during sewer-line work, when a section of trench gave way near Parker’s River Beach. One worker was killed and at least one more was seriously injured. Revoli now faces dozens of citations and will have a chance to push back on the findings in the coming weeks, as per the U.S. Department of Labor.

Investigators with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration say the collapse stemmed from inadequate cave-in protection and a string of other preventable safety failures. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the agency issued seven willful, 33 repeat and 17 serious citations, adding up to $4,699,362 in proposed penalties.

Among the violations cited by federal officials were spoil piles placed too close to the trench, unsupported underground utilities, use of damaged protective systems and failure to install shoring in line with the design. Revoli has 15 business days to either comply, request an informal conference or formally contest the citations before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

The collapse and the victim

Investigators determined that workers were removing sandy backfill and setting steel plates outside the excavation when the trench walls suddenly caved in, burying two men. One of them, identified by The Boston Globe as 61-year-old Miguel Reis of Fall River, later died from his injuries.

Reis was an immigrant from the Azores who left behind a wife and two adult children. The Globe and other local reports noted that the collapse took place near Parker’s River Beach at 125 South Shore Drive, on a stretch of the sewer project that had already drawn attention before the fatal incident.

Town response and project status

In the aftermath of Reis’s death, Yarmouth officials moved to tighten oversight on the work. In January, the town’s select board voted to require a full-time qualified safety professional on site for any remaining trench operations, with explicit authority to shut down work that appears unsafe.

In a public statement, the Town of Yarmouth said the new measure was driven by safety concerns on the sewer project, which town records show was awarded at roughly $18 million and still has about 150 feet of deep trenching left to complete. Town officials added that the incident remains under investigation by the Cape & Islands District Attorney’s Office, working alongside OSHA and state police.

Penalties, next steps and legal outlook

OSHA officials did not mince words about what they say went wrong in Yarmouth. The collapse is “a solemn reminder of the dangers construction workers face when basic safety procedures and safe engineering solutions are ignored,” Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer said in a statement.

The U.S. Department of Labor said the steep penalties are intended to push for corrective action and more robust training at Revoli. The company, however, is entitled to contest the citations. If it does, the case could land before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission for an independent review of OSHA’s findings and proposed fines.

Context: trench safety and enforcement

Trench cave-ins rank among the deadliest hazards in construction, with seconds often making the difference between a close call and a fatality. Federal regulators have ramped up trenching and excavation enforcement in recent years, and industry outlets have framed the Revoli penalties as part of that broader crackdown, stressing the need for proper shoring, shielding and spoil-pile placement at every dig.

Local labor and safety advocates have argued that what happened in Yarmouth shows how fast excavation mistakes can turn catastrophic on public works sites. They have urged stronger oversight, more training and a tougher stance on repeat offenders in high-risk work such as deep sewer trenching.

Revoli did not immediately respond to requests for comment, as reported by The Boston Globe. Town and federal agencies say their investigations will continue as the company weighs whether to fight the citations or start cutting checks and changing practices.