Thank you
Premium Sponsors!

For more information about becoming a website sponsor, please click here.

by Stephanie L. Dovichi, Pacific Program Management, Inc.

A constructability review is a review of the plans and specifications to check for buildability and bidability. The constructability review is often viewed as one of the services available, but not vital to the project. Generally, this opinion is formed when the constructability review is performed by inexperienced reviewers, the reviewer has a poor reporting format, or the review occurs too late in the process to positively impact the project. The constructability should reflect a milestone in the project that is measured using the "check-valve" process of the review. If the review comments are minor, the project is ready to be submitted for state approval or bid. If the review comments are major, the team needs to discuss a revised timeline that ensures the success of the project. It is important to not confuse constructability review with design review. The design review is a review to ensure that the design program has been incorporated and the design is complete. With this in mind, let’s review the fundamental areas of the constructability review: the who, what, when and how.

WHO

The firm chosen to perform the constructability must have expertise and knowledgeable staff that are consistent with the project. In other words, a firm with expertise in hotel construction may not be a good choice for a school modernization constructability. Also, the project manager must be available for questions from the constructability team, but the constructability review should be performed by a "fresh set of eyes". This newness is the same perspective as the contractors, and therefore, generates constructability comments from the same vantage. An individual with previous experience in the general contracting industry is also advantageous.

WHAT

Again, a constructability review is a review of the plans and specifications to check for buildability and bidability. When reviewing for buildability, we check for the completeness of the drawings. This includes a cross-check between the various disciplines (electrical, mechanical, architectural, structural, plumbing, civil, landscaping, etc.) to coordinate pipeline sizes & locations, power capacities, beam layout and sizing, and other major components that are essential to build the structure. Additionally, there may be dimensional errors in calculating radius courtyards that impact structural steel, site concrete, light bollards, and landscape. Critical dimensions are reviewed to prevent building delays and bidding errors. When checking for bidability, we perform an extensive review of details, notes, sections, elevations, site plans and specifications. As in any contract, the best contract is without ambiguity, error, conflict, and leaves little to interpretation. This review crosschecks the use of detail references and confirms consistent use of building finishes to specifications and other plan details. If, for example, the roof plan references the wrong type of soffit detail number, the bidder will price the work using the wrong detail. Then, when the bid is awarded, the contractor may write a "Request for Information" and request a "Change Order" to change to the desired soffit detail. This portion of the review is the most time consuming due to the level of detail. Literally, every detail, every section, every specification page and plan sheet is reviewed.

The work product of the review is a list of comments and a marked-up set of the plans and specifications to be reviewed by the project team. The list of comments is created using a spreadsheet software (i.e. EXCEL) so the list can be modified and prioritized by other team members. (It also serves as a checklist to confirm the incorporation of the comments to the documents before going to bid.) The project team should have a meeting to discuss each comment to determine whether to change the documents. The individuals who prepared the comments should be present.

WHEN

The time for the review is important. The best time for a constructability review is after the documents are complete, before state or local government approval and before issuing the documents to the bidders. If the reviewer is given the documents too early in the design phase, the reviewer will be unable to make specific comments and the impact to the project will be minimal. If the reviewer is given the project too late, such as during the bidding process or after state or local government approval, the changes may need to be issued through an addendum. This may impact the bid duration, quantity of bidders, or reduce the bidder’s confidence in the completeness of the bid documents. These impacts may result in higher bids.

HOW

Once you have selected individual(s) that are experienced and detailed oriented, the project manager needs to instruct the reviewer on the desired format of the comments. The format should be in a spreadsheet or database software available to all members of the project team. A general format may have the rows read: sequential item numbers, while the columns read: item number, sheet, detail, description, conflict, correction, and more info needed. This format needs to be tailored to fit the project needs.

Once the format is agreed, the constructability team should meet for a kick-off meeting to discuss the basics of the projects, the status of the design, the breakdown between team members, and the format of the work product. Additionally, it is helpful to develop a standard procedure to mark-up the drawings with changes. For example, green pen can be used to highlight question areas, orange pen can be used if the question is answered as the review continues, blue pen can be used to make corrections, and yellow pen can be used to verify the information was input into the spreadsheet format. With a standard mark-up policy, the constructability team can clearly show the owner and designer the process of how each comment was generated. Additionally, the incorporation of a change is easier when the designer can compare the marked-up sheet to the existing design.

If the project is small, only one review is needed. It is best to start with the same sequence the building is built, therefore, begin the review with the civil drawings and the 02000 specifications. Systematically check every note, detail, section, specification section, including pipe material and size, grading slopes, drain, pavement section, etc. Once there is confidence in the site work, proceed to the architectural drawings while remembering what you learned from the site review. Cross reference pavement transitions to sidewalks between both civil and architectural drawings. Make notes in the specification table of contents for items not easily found in specifications (trash enclosure, floor mats, tree grates, etc). These items may appear as the review continues, or they may have not been specified in error. Next, the other sections (plumbing, mechanical, electrical, landscape, or other specialty plan sections) can be reviewed. In some cases the individual reviewer may not have the expertise and may consult with another person for comments.

After the plans and specifications have been marked-up, each comment should be input into the spreadsheet format. The process of inputting the information is not just a clerical process, but also a "final pass" of the plans and specifications. Often additional comments are generated or questions are answered. Once the comments are input, the reviewer should prepare a narrative explaining the format of the comments and the general outcome of the review. The constructability report (the narratives and comments) should be forwarded to the project team and a meeting scheduled to review the comments.

Once a project team understands the fundamentals of a constructability review process, it becomes clear that the review benefits all members of the team. Conversely, the absence of this review can be detrimental to the project. Without this review, members of the team may become burdened with problems that were preventable by the review, and become unable to focus on the other basic needs during the construction process. The constructability review can reduce bidder’s questions, increase the likelihood of competitive bids, reduce RFI’s, change orders, and delays during the bid and construction process. It is much easier and less costly to make the changes to the plans and specifications prior to bid, rather than during construction.

Pacific Program Management is a member of the Association of California Construction Managers’ Board of Directors