question - whats your experience in mid to high end residential construction administration with submittals. Can you get decent to good submittals? and by good i mean, organized - with a transmittal listing content, items complied in logic manner, contains items specified or a complete substitution that provides enough info to be able to judge the product against whats was specified. shop drawings that actually incorporate/bring together info from specs and drawings and coordinated with other trades, in such detail that someone could build from them.
The General Conditions portion of your spec should have language that dictates the format of any submittals. Tell the GC that any submittals not meeting the standards set forth in the spec will be rejected, and be sure to follow through with it if needed.
At my last job in NYC, we were adamant that all submittals and RFIs had to be sent to us electronically via Newforma, and we had language in our spec to that effect. As far as we were concerned, any submittals or RFIs that weren't sent via Newforma didn't exist, and it didn't take long for the GC to get on board.
It's rare but possible. Speaking as a former contractor, it sucks when an architect gives you vague specs and then rejects everything you provide. It can eat up a lot of PM time, which is always in short supply on mid-high end projects. Contractors who are used to doing truly high-end projects and working with architects should be willing and able to give you good, organized submittals.
All good information above. It takes three things to support good contract administration.
First you have to have well written specifications. They need to be clear in what is required. They need to not require stuff that isn't necessary.
You also need to have an architect that knows what is written in the specifications. It's not enough to just look at the list of submittals in Part 1 and check them off on the list as they come it from the GC. You also need to know what it says in Division 01 about administrative procedures. Did you know that full length MasterSpec wants action submittals submitted separately from informational submittals? Did you know there is a difference between action submittals and informational submittals?
Finally, you need to have a contractor that knows what the specifications require as well and is willing to do it. Obviously the contractor should not take a contract on if they aren't willing to fulfill its requirements, but architects have let them get away with so much for so long they are willing to take the chance. The architect has a lot of responsibility in assuring that the contractor follows the contract requirements. If you are getting bad submittals it could be a bad contractor, but it could also be a contractor that is just trying to see how much the architect is going to make them follow the contract. There is not an insignificant amount of money to be saved by leaving out a lot of paperwork if the architect doesn't ask for it.
submittals are all over the board - hand drafted cabinetry to 3d steel packages - My experience is you just have to roll with what you get, unless you have some super detailed specifications on the deliverables, even then, the reality is you get what you get.
Problem i see is more with the submittal review process where more often than not the GC just sends everything to the architect without reviewing it first. It should be a team effort and in the end - the GC is the one that has to coordinate the work and conformance with the intent. Lazy contractors suck.
my first ever CA job had a clause in the specs that any deviation from the spec was to be highlighted by the GC as a part of the submittal. Unfortunately I didn't find that until the project was half over
I didn't know CA existed in Residential.... hahaha.
You could easily exchange submittals for construction documents and come up with the same comments about Architects.
If you're not dealing with a sophisticated GC you're going to have to spend a lot of time educating. Easier up front than wasting your time and the Owners with multiple rejections. Usually, you get what you pay for.
^ It’s largely more complicated because the subs (where submittals come from) create the complication by their inability to create submittals…hard to do shop drawings in a pickup truck.
Residential at $1000/sf is a small small segment of the market.... Most GCs ive seen that do that kind of work are very sophisticated.... average residential contractor, even at $200SF is where you're going to run into problems...
If you're running into significant problems on 1000/sf... you recommended the wrong contractor.
That being said, shop drawings are a waste of time. Architects are wondering why the contractor can't draft and the Contractor is wondering why the Architect didn't finish his job.
Has nothing to do with submittal quality. It is about the complexity of construction - non standard systems, one-off hot rod construction on every level. The GCs on this type of work are smart and revit savvy - they don't hire shitty subs that can't produce a shop drawing.
Architects are wondering why the contractor can't draft and the Contractor is wondering why the Architect can't do his job. (small correction noted)
The ability to do the paper is pretty much a basic requirement for the lux market and builders have to be scaled and experienced accordingly, in which case a good portion of the cost is dedicated just to pushing paper. You're not going to get a low bid from these guys.
Agree with chigurh. My last GC in New York, for a high-end corporate headquarters project with lots of crazy field conditions, was pretty sophisticated and hired good subs who knew that they were being paid to deliver a quality project. For the most part, the shops reflected that.
Here in the Midwest I'm working on wood-frame residential for cheapskate developers, and I'm shocked that some of these contractors even know how to spell their own names.
Serious question (asking the group, though I'm using language from gruen's post above) ... why is enforcing the contract considered being a dick?
Is that (making sure the contractor follows the contract) not our job? Isn't that what the Owner is paying us to do during CA? Where in the agreement or general conditions does it state that the architect is supposed to make sure the contractor doesn't get upset when the architect points out that they haven't followed the contract's terms?
Reality is a big part of doing your job. If you want to be a lawyer that's one thing, if you want to actually produce a good building that's something else entirely. Know your players (including the client) and what they are capable of. Some guys are all about paper, some guys are all about work. Your job is to find a happy marriage between the two.
Miles, I don't think I said we need to be lawyers, just that we need to know what is in the documents we created and are being paid to administer.
Submittals have less to do with the client and more to do with the architect and the contractor. Architect gives the contractor direction in the form of drawings and specifications (contract documents) ... contractor interprets design intent from contract documents and submits documents showing how they plan on meeting the requirements ... architect stamps and returns submittals confirming the design intent is met or pointing out where it falls short. Seems like this one of the faster and cheaper ways to produce a good building (assuming the architect has designed a good building). You could eliminate all submittals and just make the contractor rip stuff out and do it again when they don't get it right ... but I would suspect that would get expensive pretty fast.
If your drawings are not clear on design intent then you've failed at your job.
VIF, LOL.
Carrera, not directed at you. I was taught that the architect's principal responsibility is to complete the project. You have to fairly represent the owner AND the contractors. That means working with people, not against them. Got a sub who does great work but isn't so hot on paperwork, so what? That's infinitely better than the other way around. Work on developing the relationship and training them to give you what you really need, which is not necessarily what the legalese stipulates. Deal with reality, work to improve everyone. That's how you get a great job.
"If your drawings are not clear on design intent then you've failed at your job."
Could not agree more, but that's only part of the job that stops when you've delivered the CD set. The other part, which the owner is paying you to do during construction is to make sure the contractor builds the building according to the documents you produced. Regardless of how clear the drawings are, some contractor's don't want to follow them or pay attention to them. Or, maybe they think there is a better way, and they want to change the details but still give you the same intent because it is faster, cheaper, easier to schedule, etc.
"Got a sub who does great work but isn't so hot on paperwork, so what? That's infinitely better than the other way around. Work on developing the relationship and training them to give you what you really need, which is not necessarily what the legalese stipulates."
You (the architect) wrote the legalese (specifications) requiring the paperwork ... so why are you requiring them to give you things you don't really need in the first place? If you think there are submittals that aren't necessary, don't require them in the specifications. Then the guy who hates paperwork can focus on doing their work and will only be required to give you the paperwork you really need.
Miles...agree, thought the OP was wondering why he can't get good submittals, the reason is most on residential are not set up to do it…the workaround is the prescription…but I do hate the plethora of submittals in the first place.
I have a good working relationship with a few different contractors. They give me design referrals, I give them build referrals...each of them have their own strengths and limits. when you work with people whom you have an established relationship with many of the above problems go away. Mutual respect, the hope of future business, and good communication will get better results than anything on paper.
My thinking this morning, before coffee, is that a standard format for submittals may actually help in terms of the low bid situation in which no has any money for submittals. So what would that look like..
A transmittal 1 per spec section and already numbered Correctly.
with the required items listed with with check box as included in current submittal or pending with reason. example - submittal contains manufactured product samples - shop drawings pending approval.
or the opposite shop drawings for custom items included, samples pending approval of shop drawings.
actually the spec becomes the transmittal, they submit the spec section and check off what they are including, that way they have to hand you the list of all that they are not submitting.
Product Data
Shop Drawings
Testing
Samples
shit i have a headache just thinking about this, I'm getting to old for this shit.
quality construction submittals - do they exist.....
Greetings
question - whats your experience in mid to high end residential construction administration with submittals. Can you get decent to good submittals? and by good i mean, organized - with a transmittal listing content, items complied in logic manner, contains items specified or a complete substitution that provides enough info to be able to judge the product against whats was specified. shop drawings that actually incorporate/bring together info from specs and drawings and coordinated with other trades, in such detail that someone could build from them.
thanks
I don't do residential.
But... yes?
Crappy contractors generate crappy submittals.
Good ones sometimes generate good submittals.
^ Ditto.
The General Conditions portion of your spec should have language that dictates the format of any submittals. Tell the GC that any submittals not meeting the standards set forth in the spec will be rejected, and be sure to follow through with it if needed.
At my last job in NYC, we were adamant that all submittals and RFIs had to be sent to us electronically via Newforma, and we had language in our spec to that effect. As far as we were concerned, any submittals or RFIs that weren't sent via Newforma didn't exist, and it didn't take long for the GC to get on board.
It's rare but possible. Speaking as a former contractor, it sucks when an architect gives you vague specs and then rejects everything you provide. It can eat up a lot of PM time, which is always in short supply on mid-high end projects. Contractors who are used to doing truly high-end projects and working with architects should be willing and able to give you good, organized submittals.
All good information above. It takes three things to support good contract administration.
First you have to have well written specifications. They need to be clear in what is required. They need to not require stuff that isn't necessary.
You also need to have an architect that knows what is written in the specifications. It's not enough to just look at the list of submittals in Part 1 and check them off on the list as they come it from the GC. You also need to know what it says in Division 01 about administrative procedures. Did you know that full length MasterSpec wants action submittals submitted separately from informational submittals? Did you know there is a difference between action submittals and informational submittals?
Finally, you need to have a contractor that knows what the specifications require as well and is willing to do it. Obviously the contractor should not take a contract on if they aren't willing to fulfill its requirements, but architects have let them get away with so much for so long they are willing to take the chance. The architect has a lot of responsibility in assuring that the contractor follows the contract requirements. If you are getting bad submittals it could be a bad contractor, but it could also be a contractor that is just trying to see how much the architect is going to make them follow the contract. There is not an insignificant amount of money to be saved by leaving out a lot of paperwork if the architect doesn't ask for it.
submittals are all over the board - hand drafted cabinetry to 3d steel packages - My experience is you just have to roll with what you get, unless you have some super detailed specifications on the deliverables, even then, the reality is you get what you get.
Problem i see is more with the submittal review process where more often than not the GC just sends everything to the architect without reviewing it first. It should be a team effort and in the end - the GC is the one that has to coordinate the work and conformance with the intent. Lazy contractors suck.
my first ever CA job had a clause in the specs that any deviation from the spec was to be highlighted by the GC as a part of the submittal. Unfortunately I didn't find that until the project was half over
Must be kidding….residential guys don’t even have fax machines.
I didn't know CA existed in Residential.... hahaha. You could easily exchange submittals for construction documents and come up with the same comments about Architects. If you're not dealing with a sophisticated GC you're going to have to spend a lot of time educating. Easier up front than wasting your time and the Owners with multiple rejections. Usually, you get what you pay for.
shit dudes - residential at 1000$+/sf is way more complicated than most commercial buildings.
just sayin.
^ It’s largely more complicated because the subs (where submittals come from) create the complication by their inability to create submittals…hard to do shop drawings in a pickup truck.
Residential at $1000/sf is a small small segment of the market.... Most GCs ive seen that do that kind of work are very sophisticated.... average residential contractor, even at $200SF is where you're going to run into problems... If you're running into significant problems on 1000/sf... you recommended the wrong contractor. That being said, shop drawings are a waste of time. Architects are wondering why the contractor can't draft and the Contractor is wondering why the Architect didn't finish his job.
Has nothing to do with submittal quality. It is about the complexity of construction - non standard systems, one-off hot rod construction on every level. The GCs on this type of work are smart and revit savvy - they don't hire shitty subs that can't produce a shop drawing.
++ wurdan freo
Architects are wondering why the contractor can't draft and the Contractor is wondering why the Architect can't do his job. (small correction noted)
The ability to do the paper is pretty much a basic requirement for the lux market and builders have to be scaled and experienced accordingly, in which case a good portion of the cost is dedicated just to pushing paper. You're not going to get a low bid from these guys.
Agree with chigurh. My last GC in New York, for a high-end corporate headquarters project with lots of crazy field conditions, was pretty sophisticated and hired good subs who knew that they were being paid to deliver a quality project. For the most part, the shops reflected that.
Here in the Midwest I'm working on wood-frame residential for cheapskate developers, and I'm shocked that some of these contractors even know how to spell their own names.
I'm working on developing a system that's simple-that gets better results from a residential GC.
For commercial-do a good spec & be familiar w it. Then set expectations early and be a dick about it early on. That helps tons moving forward.
^ Make sure they can sign with an "X"
Serious question (asking the group, though I'm using language from gruen's post above) ... why is enforcing the contract considered being a dick?
Is that (making sure the contractor follows the contract) not our job? Isn't that what the Owner is paying us to do during CA? Where in the agreement or general conditions does it state that the architect is supposed to make sure the contractor doesn't get upset when the architect points out that they haven't followed the contract's terms?
Reality is a big part of doing your job. If you want to be a lawyer that's one thing, if you want to actually produce a good building that's something else entirely. Know your players (including the client) and what they are capable of. Some guys are all about paper, some guys are all about work. Your job is to find a happy marriage between the two.
^ I never said that, thought we were discussing being able to get good submittals on residential work.
Miles, I don't think I said we need to be lawyers, just that we need to know what is in the documents we created and are being paid to administer.
Submittals have less to do with the client and more to do with the architect and the contractor. Architect gives the contractor direction in the form of drawings and specifications (contract documents) ... contractor interprets design intent from contract documents and submits documents showing how they plan on meeting the requirements ... architect stamps and returns submittals confirming the design intent is met or pointing out where it falls short. Seems like this one of the faster and cheaper ways to produce a good building (assuming the architect has designed a good building). You could eliminate all submittals and just make the contractor rip stuff out and do it again when they don't get it right ... but I would suspect that would get expensive pretty fast.
If your drawings are not clear on design intent then you've failed at your job.
VIF, LOL.
Carrera, not directed at you. I was taught that the architect's principal responsibility is to complete the project. You have to fairly represent the owner AND the contractors. That means working with people, not against them. Got a sub who does great work but isn't so hot on paperwork, so what? That's infinitely better than the other way around. Work on developing the relationship and training them to give you what you really need, which is not necessarily what the legalese stipulates. Deal with reality, work to improve everyone. That's how you get a great job.
"If your drawings are not clear on design intent then you've failed at your job."
Could not agree more, but that's only part of the job that stops when you've delivered the CD set. The other part, which the owner is paying you to do during construction is to make sure the contractor builds the building according to the documents you produced. Regardless of how clear the drawings are, some contractor's don't want to follow them or pay attention to them. Or, maybe they think there is a better way, and they want to change the details but still give you the same intent because it is faster, cheaper, easier to schedule, etc.
"Got a sub who does great work but isn't so hot on paperwork, so what? That's infinitely better than the other way around. Work on developing the relationship and training them to give you what you really need, which is not necessarily what the legalese stipulates."
You (the architect) wrote the legalese (specifications) requiring the paperwork ... so why are you requiring them to give you things you don't really need in the first place? If you think there are submittals that aren't necessary, don't require them in the specifications. Then the guy who hates paperwork can focus on doing their work and will only be required to give you the paperwork you really need.
I wasn't talking about me, I was talking about you. :)
Does your comment somehow invalidate my points about submittals, contract documents, and contract administration?
Miles...agree, thought the OP was wondering why he can't get good submittals, the reason is most on residential are not set up to do it…the workaround is the prescription…but I do hate the plethora of submittals in the first place.
Unfortunately papering the file has become the norm for most business.
I prefer to do actual work.
I have a good working relationship with a few different contractors. They give me design referrals, I give them build referrals...each of them have their own strengths and limits. when you work with people whom you have an established relationship with many of the above problems go away. Mutual respect, the hope of future business, and good communication will get better results than anything on paper.
My thinking this morning, before coffee, is that a standard format for submittals may actually help in terms of the low bid situation in which no has any money for submittals. So what would that look like..
A transmittal 1 per spec section and already numbered Correctly.
with the required items listed with with check box as included in current submittal or pending with reason. example - submittal contains manufactured product samples - shop drawings pending approval.
or the opposite shop drawings for custom items included, samples pending approval of shop drawings.
actually the spec becomes the transmittal, they submit the spec section and check off what they are including, that way they have to hand you the list of all that they are not submitting.
shit i have a headache just thinking about this, I'm getting to old for this shit.
Specs usually list the required submittals.
Hasn't stopped a contractor from doing what they want, yet.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.