CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW

SEMINAR
OBJECTIVES
W H AT I S A C O N S T R U C TA B I L I T Y R E V I E W ?

C O N S T R U C TA B I L I T Y R E V I E W P R O C E S S / E X A M P L E S

REVIEW TEAM OPTIONS

TOOLS & REPORTS

MILESTONES

H O W C O N S T R U C TA B I L I T Y R E V I E W A P P L I E S TO
VARIOUS DELIVERY METHODS

BENEFITS

ROLE OF THE DESIGN TEAM

E X P E C TAT I O N S

C O N S T R U C TA B I L I T Y R E V I E W V S . B I M
MEET OUR PRESENTERS

• Partner of Totum, a PM/CM and Design Firm

established in 2005

• Oversees all pre-construction and construction

related activities for Totum

• Prior to Totum, Danny worked as a General

Contractor for 7 years and then with CM firm 3D/I

• 25 years experience

• Licensed General Contractor, Certified

Construction Manager, LEED AP, Fellow of the
DANNY KAYE, CCM, PMP, FRICS, Royal Institute of Charted Surveyors and Project
LEED AP Management Professional
PRINCIPAL
TOTUM CONSULTING
MEET OUR PRESENTERS

• Managing Principal for Driver Consulting Group, a

firm that specializes in construction support
services

• 20 years of experience focused on Constructability

Review and Construction Quality Control

• Performed / Managed Constructability

Reviews on over 700 projects

• Licensed California Architect, Construction

Document Technologist, LEED AP

• Previous roles include Senior Plans Examiner and

PETER KOVACS, AIA, CDT, LEED AP
Director of Quality Control for C.W. Driver
MANAGING PRINCIPAL
DRIVER CONSULTING GROUP
MEET OUR PRESENTERS

• Responsible for Construction Management in the

right of way for the City of Long Beach Public Works
Department

• 30 years of experience in Public Works

Construction

• Past roles include Inspector, Supervisor and

Division Manager

• Master’s Degree in Public Administration from

CSU Dominguez Hills

MARC WRIGHT
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES OFFICER,
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF LONG BEACH
WHAT IS A
CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW?

REVIEW OF A PROJECT’S PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS BEFORE

CONSTRUCTION TO IDENTIFY ERRORS AND OMISSIONS THAT WOULD
NORMALLY CAUSE ISSUES OR DELAYS DURING CONSTRUCTION

WHY IS THERE NOT A “STANDARD”?

REDICHECK PIONEERED THE CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW PROCESS

OVER 30 YEARS AGO

LEVEL OF EFFORT AND REPORTING DEPENDS ON COST, TIMING AND

CLIENT NEEDS

EVERY PROJECT IS DIFFERENT

WHY IS IT NEEDED? DOESN’T THE DESIGN TEAM OWE US PERFECT PLANS?

CARE WITH THE REVIEW - THE INDEPENDENT REVIEWER IS NOT THE DESIGNER.
Who did the
CR on these
Projects….
Were they
successful?
SIMPLE INITIAL TIPS

Always check Title Page to see if the actual drawing name matches the list on the cover page.

Check every page DOES exists.

X Ref every detail to verify it exists and for it to be relevant.

If specifications are referenced, make sure they specifications exists and the spec # to be accurate.

Keep your eye and mind open for conflicts

Check (final set) for design professional stamps

SIMPLE INITIAL TIPS

Often plans have notes that may conflict with the specifications documents.

Don’t be afraid to have others check or engage outside MEP for example.

Start your own or  company “check list” of the key 20 items or so to check for each discipline.

Sit down with all design team members / GOTO meeting and review together

Make sure the design team understands why this is being done

What is in the design teams contract for E&O / Reviews

OWNER’S
PERSPECTIVE

What does the City of Long Beach Expect from the CR Process?

Who does the City engage for reviews?

In House Staff vs Consultants

Expected Results

Other thoughts from Marc:

CONSTRUCTABILITY
REVIEW PROCESS

All disciplines are systematically INTERDISCIPLINARY

reviewed against each other to verify
BUILD-ABILITY
COORDINATION
coordination at all points of interface.

BUILDING BID-ABILITY
SYSTEMS
CONSTRUCTABILITY
REVIEW PROCESS Plans are reviewed to uncover potential
weaknesses in the design and detailing to
ensure the project can be constructed to
the desired budget, timeframe and level of

INTERDISCIPLINARY quality.
BUILD-ABILITY
COORDINATION

BUILDING BID-ABILITY
SYSTEMS
CONSTRUCTABILITY
REVIEW PROCESS

INTERDISCIPLINARY
BUILD-ABILITY
COORDINATION

BUILDING BID-ABILITY
SYSTEMS
Construction documents are reviewed to
verify scope of work is clear and consistent,
increasing the chances of more accurate
and timely bids from trade contractors.
CONSTRUCTABILITY
REVIEW PROCESS

INTERDISCIPLINARY
BUILD-ABILITY
COORDINATION

BUILDING BID-ABILITY
SYSTEMS
All building systems are independently
reviewed for design integrity,
coordination and completeness.
 WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
INTERDISCIPLINARY
C O O R D I N AT I O N

“LOCATION OF ROOF ACCESS LADDER WILL CONFLICT WITH DUCTWORK

ABOVE. COORDINATE WITH SHEET M1.07U.”
 WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
INTERDISCIPLINARY
C O O R D I N AT I O N

“FULL HEIGHT INTERIOR PARTITIONS WILL NOT WORK WITH RETURN AIR
PLENUM SYSTEM.”
 WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
INTERDISCIPLINARY
C O O R D I N AT I O N

“POWER IS MISSING TO WATER COOLER.”

 WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
INTERDISCIPLINARY
C O O R D I N AT I O N

“DIAGONAL BRACE FRAMES ARE PASSING DIRECTLY THROUGH DOOR OPENINGS.”

WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
BUILD-ABILITY

“ELEVATOR OVERRUN ENCLOSURE AND SKYLIGHT ARE TOO CLOSE TO EACH

OTHER. FLASHING CANNOT BE INSTALLED AS DESIGNED.”
WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
BUILD-ABILITY

“HOW IS DRYWALL INSTALLED BEHIND STRUCTURAL STEEL COLUMNS?”

WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
BID-ABILITY

PLANS

FRONT END BID

SPECIFICATIONS
DOCUMENTS
 WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
BID-ABILITY

“PROVIDE DETAILING OF ROOF OVERHANG. HOW IS IT ATTACHED TO

THE STRUCTURE?”
 Danny
WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
BUILD-ABILITY
WHAT IS
REVIEWED?
BUILDING SYSTEMS
REVIEW TEAM

EFFECTIVE ON SMALL / SIMPLE PROJECTS

PROJECT
BROAD RANGE OF EXPERIENCE AND VARIETY MANAGER
OF ROLES CAN BE A BENEFIT TO THIS METHOD

ALTHOUGH TEAM MAY HAVE DECADES OF

CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE, THEY ARE
USUALLY LIMITED ON CR EXPERIENCE

A THOROUGH CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW IS

EXTREMELY TIME CONSUMING. PROJECT
TEAMS ARE TYPICALLY JUGGLING MANY
THINGS AT ONCE, MAKING IT A CHALLENGE
SUPERINTENDENT PROJECT ESTIMATOR
TO DO IT PROPERLY.
ENGINEER

GENERAL CONTRACTOR
REVIEW TEAM

SUGGESTED FOR MEDIUM TO LARGE SCALE

PROJECTS

LEAD REVIEWER
THE WORKLOAD IS SPREAD ACROSS MULTIPLE
SPECIALISTS, RESULTING IN A THOROUGH
REVIEW AND ACCEPTABLE TIMEFRAMES

LOOK FOR TEAMS WITH ACTUAL CR

EXPERIENCE…THE MORE, THE BETTER

TYPICALLY MORE COSTLY, BUT THE

PAYBACK DURING CONSTRUCTION
IS MUCH GREATER

ARCHITECTURAL STRUCTURAL MECH/PLUMB ELECTRICAL

SPECIALIST SPECIALIST SPECIALIST SPECIALIST

CM FIRM / THIRD-PARTY REVIEW FIRM

CHECKLISTS
Keep them updated. Plans and
issues evolve on every project.
REDLINED
PLANS
BLUEBEAM
SAMPLE
REPORT
SAMPLE
REPORT
 REVIEW MILESTONES

100% DD DESIGN TEAM 50% CD DESIGN TEAM 90-95% CD DESIGN TEAM 100% CD
REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS BACK CHECK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

GOOD VALUE ON LARGE/COMPLEX PROJECTS

FOCUSED ON MAJOR COMPONENTS

EARLY IDENTIFICATION OF IMPORTANT

ISSUES THAT MAY REQUIRE REDESIGN

2 TO 3 WEEK REVIEW TIME

 REVIEW MILESTONES

100% DD DESIGN TEAM 50% CD DESIGN TEAM 90-95% CD DESIGN TEAM 100% CD
REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS BACK CHECK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 REVIEW MILESTONES

100% DD DESIGN TEAM 50% CD DESIGN TEAM 90-95% CD DESIGN TEAM 100% CD
REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS BACK CHECK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

GOOD STARTING POINT FOR MOST PROJECTS

COMPLETE REVIEW OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT

DUE TO LACK OF DETAIL, CANNOT BE AS

THOROUGH AS 90-95% CD REVIEW

IDENTIFY HUNDREDS OF ISSUES EARLY

2 TO 4 WEEK REVIEW TIME

 REVIEW MILESTONES

100% DD DESIGN TEAM 50% CD DESIGN TEAM 90-95% CD DESIGN TEAM 100% CD
REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS BACK CHECK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 REVIEW MILESTONES

100% DD DESIGN TEAM 50% CD DESIGN TEAM 90-95% CD DESIGN TEAM 100% CD
REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS BACK CHECK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

MOST IMPORTANT REVIEW ON ALL PROJECTS

(UNLESS BID OCCURS AT EARLIER DESIGN PHASE)

COMPLETE REVIEW OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT

EXTREMELY THOROUGH REVIEW IS POSSIBLE

DESIGN TEAM NORMALLY HAS TIME TO

RESOLVE ISSUES BEFORE BID

3 TO 4 WEEK REVIEW TIME

 REVIEW MILESTONES

100% DD DESIGN TEAM 50% CD DESIGN TEAM 90-95% CD DESIGN TEAM 100% CD
REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS BACK CHECK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 REVIEW MILESTONES

100% DD DESIGN TEAM 50% CD DESIGN TEAM 90-95% CD DESIGN TEAM 100% CD
REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS REVIEW CORRECTIONS BACK CHECK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

PERFORMED ONCE DESIGN TEAM HAS

INCORPORATED COMMENTS

SIMPLE, BUT EXTREMELY IMPORTANT STEP

UNRESOLVED ISSUES WILL LIKELY SHOW UP DURING

CONSTRUCTION, CAUSING RFI’S, CHANGE ORDERS, OR DELAYS

1 TO 2 WEEK REVIEW TIME

DELIVERY D ESI G N -B I D - BUI L D NEGOTIATED/GMAX DESIGN-BUILD CM@RISK
METHODS
MOST COMMON FORM OF PROCUREMENT FOR PUBLIC AGENCIES, ALTHOUGH THERE
ARE MOVEMENTS TOWARDS LEASE-LEASE BACK, MULTI-PRIME, ETC.

CONTRACTOR NOT INVOLVED UNTIL PROJECT IS BID AND AWARDED

LOW BID TYPICALLY WINS MAJORITY OF BID PROJECTS

OFTEN, THE BIDDER WHO MISSES THE MOST, WINS THE PROJECT…THEREFORE, IS
CHANGE ORDER HUNGRY

UNLESS A DILIGENT BIDDER IS INTERESTED IN SUBMITTING PRE-BID RFI’S, CONFLICTS,

ERRORS AND OMISSIONS ARE NOT FOUND…UNTIL THE AWARDED CONTRACTOR STARTS UP

THIS DELIVERY METHOD IS MOST PRONE TO CHANGE ORDERS. OWNERS SHOULD KEEP AN
INTERNAL CONTINGENCY OF 5-10%.

CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS ARE EXTREMELY CRITICAL WITH DESIGN-BID-BUILD

CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS CAN MITIGATE MANY OF THE ISSUES. OWNERS SHOULD USE
INTERNAL STAFF OR THIRD PARTY TO CONDUCT REVIEW AND NOT RELY ON THE DESIGN TEAM
DELIVERY DESIGN-BID-BUILD N EG OT IAT E D /G MAX DESIGN-BUILD CM@RISK
METHODS

THE MOST COMMON FORM OF PROCUREMENT FOR PRIVATE CLIENTS

CONTRACTOR IS SOMETIMES INVOLVED DURING PRECONSTRUCTION. IF SO, THEIR

CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW IS CRITICAL.

THE CM SHOULD OVERSEE THIS PROCESS AND REVIEW ALL DOCUMENTS SINCE NOT
ALL CONTRACTORS PUT IN THE BEST EFFORT

PRECONSTRUCTION FEE CAN OFTEN GO TO THE CONTRACTOR WITH IT BEING RETURNED

OR PRORATED SHOULD THEY BE AWARDED THE CONTRACT

THE CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW MAY NOT CAPTURE ALL ISSUES, BUT SHOULD MITIGATE
MANY. OFTEN A CONTINGENCY WITH THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD COVER E&O.
DELIVERY DESIGN-BID-BUILD NEGOTIATED/GMAX D E S I GN - B UI L D CM@RISK
METHODS

OWNER HAS ONE CONTRACT WITH THE DESIGN-BUILD TEAM (CONTRACTOR

OR ARCHITECT LED)

THE OWNER’S RISK IS LIMITED WITH DESIGN-BUILD

REGARDLESS OF THE DELIVERY METHOD, ALL PROJECTS CAN BENEFIT

FROM THE CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW PROCESS

CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO THE

DESIGN-BUILD TEAM, SINCE THE CONTRACT AND ARCHITECT ARE
WORKING TOGETHER AND BOTH ARE MUTUALLY LIABLE FOR THE SUCCESS
OF THE PROJECT
DELIVERY DESIGN-BID-BUILD NEGOTIATED/GMAX DESIGN-BUILD C M@R I S K
METHODS

THE CM@RISK DELIVERY METHOD HAS THE ADVANTAGE OF REDUCING RISK TO THE
OWNER, BUT NOT ALL RISK.

CONTINGENCIES THAT CAN COVER CHANGE ORDERS RESULTING FROM POOR PLANS
ARE LIMITED AND ANY OVERRUNS WILL STILL FALL ON THE OWNER

THE CM FIRM IS TYPICALLY INVOLVED EARLY IN THE DESIGN PROCESS AND SHOULD
PERFORM CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS AT VARIOUS STAGES DURING DESIGN

DURING THE CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW, THE CM CAN REQUEST VALUABLE FEEDBACK

FROM SUBCONTRACTORS
BENEFITS

SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE…
CHANGE ORDERS

RFI’S

COST OVERRUNS

SCHEDULE DELAYS

DISPUTES & LITIGATION

IMPACT ON
CHANGE ORDERS
12

11

STUDY SHOWED
10 9.7%
65% REDUCTION
9
IN CHANGE ORDERS
8
7.6%
7.2%
7

6
CHANGE
ORDER % 5

4.2%
4

PROJECTS WITHOUT
3 CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW
2.3%
2.1%
2

PROJECTS WITH
1
CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW

0
2008 2009 2010
ROLE OF THE
DESIGN TEAM

RESOLVE ISSUES AFTER EACH

REVIEW

PROVIDE RESPONSES TO EACH

COMMENT

PROVIDE CLARIFICATION AS
NEEDED
EXPECTATIONS

NOT ALL ISSUES WILL BE FOUND

3-4 WEEK SWEET SPOT DIMINISHING RETURNS

CHANGE ORDERS AND RFI’S WILL
NOT BE ELIMINATED

DESIGN CHANGES AFTER REVIEW(S)

WILL ALSO CAUSE ISSUES

ISSUES
EXPECT 50%-75% FEWER
CHANGE ORDERS & RFI’S

TIME
BIM VS.
CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW

BIM “CLASH DETECTION” SHOULD NOT BE

USED AS A REPLACEMENT FOR
CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW

CLASH DETECTION IDENTIFIES TWO OR

MORE COMPONENTS THAT TAKE UP THE
SAME SPACE, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE
COMPONENTS THAT ARE MISSING?

CLASH DETECTION IS EXTREMELY

VALUABLE WHEN TRADE CONTRACTORS
ARE ON BOARD GOING THROUGH THE
MEP COORDINATION PROCESS.

PLANS MUST BE REVIEWED DUE TO THE

FACT THAT THEY ARE USED FOR
BIDDING, NOT THE MODELS
?
QUESTIONS
AND
ANSWERS