 |
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT: |
This discipline should be employed early in the Architectural process, at least the design submittal stage. If the Design has costly bugs, they continue to exist after Construction. Many projects go astray when the design is to complicated for construction costs. Even if you are looking for a project with above average curb appeal, over runs, of more than 10%, are always unacceptable.
|
COST OF CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES: |
Although our experience is with Architects who always use quantitative Estimates, we have found, unfortunately, most do not. Most use a square foot cost handbook to arrive at their projected costs. With a reliable estimate, one sees the problem areas quickly. Cursory, Value Engineering is often done through this task.
|
VALUE ENGINEERING: |
This requires the above Estimate. Matching this to the Design and Spec. parameters one quickly finds where Design changes may be made with out forfeiting the over-all concept arriving at a "bigger bang for the buck".
|
PROJECT COORDINATION: |
If you are an old hand developing Projects you know a really sticky part is when the project goes to bid. A faulty set of Contract Documents make the problem worse. A majority of successful Contractors became that by accident and are set in their ways. After Construction Contracts are signed Contractors often insist on changing the Documents. Tempers flair and fixing blame becomes an aggravation. Make sure all are aware of the bugs, before the "Arrows Fly".
|
CODE EVALUATION: |
We have never understood why most "Professionals" hate to be wrong. A sticky problem anytime it occurs. It seems to happen frequently during or because of "Plans Examination". The ego challenge between Professional and Code Officials are explosive, often resulting in problems after the fact. Even when the explosion is not visibly evident, the egos stew during the project. We have experienced both ways.
- Where the Architectural firm insisted on complying on the letter of the code (after discussion with Officials.) Much fewer field related code problems.
- A firm where the Principals wished for compliance, but, were influenced by the employees argument they could successfully circumvent the Official decision. This usually ended in
"after the fact" heartaches.
- A firm where the Principals believed all Code Officials were ignorant, not only to the code, but everywhere else. The Manager then insists all employees challenge the Officials decision. Bummer.
Before we became aware of this type of conflict, we had a Project shut down due to beliefs similar to these. (You want a Financial Heart Burn? Try this one.) The Inspector would accept nothing other than opening upwall spaces to satisfy his curiosity. The strange coincidence about this phenomenon is the later firms also instructed their Designers, "never look at Contract Documents with out improving the design". Another "Budget Buster".
(ADA compliance included.)
Conclusion: Code Compliance, with rare exceptions, saves money.
Remember:
- Comply with all jurisdictive Codes. The only acceptable deviation from this rule is when one takes the time to request a variance.
- Sign off on the design before Design Development is 50% complete.
Some time SITE EVALUATION circumvents "after the fact" costs: Recently, involving a site in Tennessee, we warned the Architect about additional design costs due to an oversight involving the site. The Civil disagreed. We were dismissed, without compensation for the trip. Although we have not tracked the project we understand problems exist involving differential settlement.
EXISTING PROJECTS:
|
FEASIBILITY STUDIES: |
(These may be cursory or involved. They may be taken to any length. Occasionally may require other Specialists.)
We have considerable depth in Rehab and Restoration. This allows us to make reliable judgements about what's "in the wall space". What's not seen is often a "Pandoras Box" of problems. Speculation as to the building support or probable, other forthcoming problems, wether or not to restore the "Box Gutters", etc..
- For Building Stability: There may be indications of continuous settlement.
- Mechanical Systems: Frequently insufficient for end use. At times needs replacement. There are times when the property is just a poor choice or major re- construction is in order.
- Shell and/or Interior condition and/or compatibility with planned end use.
- ADA compliance.
- Cursory Inspection: At times just a general inspection of the anticipated project is apropos. This is usually done before contracts are signed, construction funding is committed and/or Limited Partners are signed.
Phone: 850 234 3317
