DESIGN INTERFACES
Design errors and omissions are a part of most Holloway Consulting construction cases. The source of most construction design errors and omissions are the points where the various design interfaces with each other. Contractors know this is a predictable area in which the risks of construction design errors, omissions, and change orders are incredibly high. Different project objectives will determine the relative priorities of each design component. In any case, the structural, mechanical, electrical, site, architectural, and specialty systems must satisfy their requirements while also satisfying the overall design concept and must do so without sufficient interferences or contradictions with each other.
DUPLICATION OF DESIGN
Duplication can occur in the plans, specifications, or both and can manifest itself in several forms, such as:
- An engineer included the specifications for the same or similar items in two sections.
- The architect included the specifications for additional items intended for the same function in two different specifications.
- A specification includes multiple descriptions for items intended for the same function.
When duplication is discovered, the owner often assumes they are entitled to the work in question. In addition, the owner will often contend that it’s specified twice.
As the dollar value of the work increases, the more important it becomes to understand the concepts in construction contracts. The contractor may be able to channel owner approval directly to the preferred specification or method by applying the basic rules of contract and construction law. In certain cases, it may be possible to demonstrate that even though the work is in fact described in two places, it was left out of the bid altogether due to the deficient contract structure and/or rules of contract interpretation.
Contractors are advised to work with his consultant and attorney to better understand the law and principals regarding:
a. Reasonable expectations
b. Ambiguities
c. Interpretation
d. Rules of precedence
e. Trade custom
f. Reasonable Review
g. Intent vs. Indication
h. Performance and Procedure Specifications
DESIGNER NOTES
Notes such as “As Indicated” or “See Specs” on the plans can be an indication that final design coordination checks had not been completed. These notes may expose assumptions on the part of the designer that someone else would provide the details. Design details are sometimes assumed to be complete only because they were supposed to be complete. The plans may be in worse shape than they first appear if a designer has not been able to coordinate all such details. As Shown, See Structural, See Plans, and other language that does not contain precise references are other telltale phrases that often point to a lack of design follow-up.
In contrast, indications that the architect had completed the design coordination process include the presence of references such as “See 3/551” instead of “See Structural” or “See Section 04200” instead of “See Specs.” These kinds of remarks indicate that the designer cross-checked the documents to ensure the architect provided the respective details.
Contractors are advised to review each drawing in the contract set to identify vague cross-references and then record each in a log. As a general practice, contractors should look for notes such as:
a. As Indicated
b. As Shown
c. See Plans
d. See Architectural
e. See Structural
f. See Specs
g. Per Specs
The contractor would be better served by researching each one early in the job to either find that the completed detail does exist or confirm that it does not. This is preferable to allowing each design issue to impact the job one at a time, as the respective details become relevant. Each incomplete, conflicting, or missing reference should be logged and arranged on a priority basis. Each missing detail is a potential change order to be addressed either individually or collectively.