would you rather the contractor didn't ask the question?

perhaps you could improve the relationship by having perfect construction documents ..

haha. givemeastamp. both of your responses were the exact responses that ran through my mind when i read this post.

i wouldn't have said them; they were just my own answers to myself about how this situation could be averted. always taking things on ourselves aren't we?

yeah, but don't forget that the gc bids the job and many times doesn't read the spec or fully comprehend the working drawings. i can't tell you how many times people in my office had to deal with those kinds of contractors, and how they had to pretty much lay the smack down on these guys. word to the contractor - read and comprehend before bidding.

There are bound to be RFI's that ask about portions of the drawings that truly are uncoordinated. In these instances, I humbly appreciate that the contractor is doing his job and thoroughly thinking through what needs to be done.

I think our specifications address "frivilous" RFI's, and I won't be afraid to fire back if I ever receive a series of them. Luckily, this has never happened to me.

Despite your best efforts, no set of contract documents (drawings & specs) are absolutely bulletproof. There will always be questions, RFIs, etc.

The best approach is for you and your contractor to get on the same page that you're both working in the best interests of your client. Keep the dialogue open, dig in and problem solve. If the contractor really wanted to, they could totally rake the architect over the coals, make the architect look like a doofus in front of the owner, and leave you for dead.

However, there are a lot of contractors out there whose main goal is to be annoying and find as many holes in the documents in order to issue as many change orders as possible to make more $$$. There are actual contractor seminars around the country that focus on this. It's scary.

My advice would be to build on this experience. Whatever questions are popping up now, you'll remember to address them when your doing CDs on your next project, resulting in a tighter set of drawings.

Good luck and hang in there!

I chuckle every time I see the title of this thread ("One.MEEELLion RFI's")

I thought of this thread today as I ASKED my GC to send me an RFI if he felt there was a conflict (versus the casual FYI that he sent my way).

While I agree that there is no such thing as a "perfect set", most sets of drawings are pretty bad, usually from being rushed. The old saying "there's never enough time to do things right, but always enough time to do things twice, usually applies.

Be thankful you ahven't been novated to the contractor! Once you work for them they do whatever the hell they want...untill they screw it up, then they expect you to fix it for them.

However, I would be worried if I never got queries, because everybody misses something, somewhere in their CDs.

The real trick is making sure they can't claim the answer as a variation or your client will take you off the xmas card list.

i am still dealing with a clarification from august of 05!!!

Have I mentioned how thrilled I am when an RFI is written in such a way that suggests the contractor is truly doing a good job in coordination?

I got an RFI this week in which the precast guy questioned (i.e. found a mistake in) the metal railing detail. Wow.

In those instances, I want to include a compliment in my response like "Good catch!" or "Bravo!," but I talk myself out of it at the risk of sounding too girly.

taliesin, god...i totally agree with you, and how. it's really amazing how many times i've been involved in CD processes where the proportion of time spent debating line weights and sheet organization to the amount of time spent coordinating drawings and applying basic detailing technique was like 100:1. and then the drawings get rushed out the door, not even checked or barely so...

...and then you get to RFI #1000 and you just thank God that at least the contractor isn't making the shit up on the fly.

just spent a week deleting 600k (over 15%) from a project. deleted items in just about all spec sections/trades. via 8.5x11 addendum. wanna guess what i'll be dealing with for the next year?

well my contractor won't even give me RFI's. He calls and leaves nasty messages instead. I was in the boss' office yesterday when a message was played on speaker for our enjoyment. It was downright nasty, unprofessional and rude, he said he needed the structural drawn in isometric because the drawings were unreadable. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry, so I laughed, as my boss paced the office, turned red and gritted his teeth. So we are having a meeting to walk this dodo thru the drawings, again. This is my house-builder guy that's been on the project since May and we still don't even have a hole in the ground.

steven, why wouldn't you reissue full size if there were that many changes?

ooh ooh steven, i know, i know! ...a client who asks where all those things that you deleted are, when the thing starts to get built? ...constantly having to explain to client that they asked for 600k to be taken out, which means that parts of the scope had to be eliminated? ...negotiating with contractor over the scope for every single trade in order to actually get that 600k back?

we've got a contractor on a jobs of ours, and he didn't know what an RFI was until last week when he realized how far in the hole he is on the project. now that he is fighting time/money, he is sending 15 a day trying to make us look bad in front of our client who he is incurring massive delay penalties from. fortunately for us, our client seems to be in our corner, and every time he asks a question we refer him to a page in the drawings or spec. unfortunately, the time this is taking is killing the project manager.

just yesterday we had to stop work on the project because he substituted waterproofing membrane that was not for the intended application. now they are probably gonna have to rip it off losing more time and money. if only they would have gotten our approval/disapproval first.

wow, that sounds so familiar, momentum. sucks.

still trying to convince the construction manager that a reissue of full sheets would be a good idea, straw.

also 100% with you, steven. there is nothing like a cut-and-paste addendum to completely get lost in the pile of crap on a contractor's desk.

DCA, when my contractors catch something that saves me a hassle later, I am effusive in my thanks. Just yesterday I left a voicemail telling my GC how much I appreciate all the coordination he has been doing around a stupid counter templating error that has turned into a huge deal - he responded with an email thanking ME for my patience while he's been dealing with it! Spread the love, as long as it is done in carefully professional language it will make everyone happy.

Also, this is another good place to remind everyone: even if you have issued 25%, 50%, 75%, and 99% CD packages, never label a set "100%", because it isn't. Lawyers would love to get ahold of that. Call it "Construction Set" or "Issued for Construction" and leave it at that.

rfi's are mostly litigation avoidance procedures. he(she) who is on top of them has an ass that has less risk of being sued

dca- was that ..ahhem- meant for my comment on the disadvantaged women blah blah discussion? just wondering.

my gc (i'm actually on site 100%) cant escape me - nor I him. i've decided to make it clear the my goal, as should be his, is to make sure this bldg gets up with everyone's best interests kept to an acceptable standard.

i dont think he agrees.

yet...

I once went to a conference about controlling construction costs. The first slide was a photo of a yacht named The Change Order...

Good advice LB on the 100%

Have you hugged your design build general today?

if it's in your control, always include a general note in the drawings to this general effect:

these documents are to be considered "working documents" and by nature cannot contain 100% of the information required to execute the work. these documents are expressly not represented to be "full", "complete", or "100%".

when you issue the drawings or when the bid is awarded, try to document the fact that you informed the contractor of this sentiment. even further, try to document their reaction. the simple "oh, yeah, we know" will be worth recording.

this defuses the argument, later on, that the drawings were "not complete" and moves it to the more qualitative realm of whether or not there was "enough" information. will there still be conflict? yes, but you won't have shot yourself in the foot with a "complete" set of drawings that wasn't.

a proper understanding of the nature of contract documents is key. they outline the architect's intent and are meant to be interpreted by the contractor based on knowledge, judgment, reason, and the circumstances of construction.

liberty bell: Good advice on the 100% Sets. I once made the mistake (internally, to my PM and our consultants) by setting a schedule for "100% documents due on ___ date." I was immediately reminded that no drawings are ever 100% complete, save for an as-built drawing.

However, I am conflicted as to how to convey to our consultants that we want a fully coordinated set. Calling it a 99% set gives the impression that it's okay if they don't put in 100% effort to coordinate the set.


kyll: My original comment was not directly pointed at you. Rather, I was recognizing my urge to be girly. (I would gush praise all the time if I knew people would take me seriously. Unfortunately, this business is at times unforgiving.)

DCA, I have in the past issued "99% CD" sets, which were just a final coordination check for all the consultants, plus one set for the Owner's rep or main contact just to see progress. Everyone knew that the 99% still had a wee bit of tweaking to be done, and it was mostly for internal review. Then one or two weeks later we released "Issued for Construction" sets to contractor and Owner.

Just wait until you buck up the RFI's beast of a cousin the RCO

the requested claim order

Everyone has made some good valid points above.
The older I get, I have realized that I can detail the hell out of a project, but that it doesn't matter what I draw...the subs may have a different method of construction that is better...I completely agree with outlinining "architect's intent " in many instances.

As much as I'd like to say my docs. are great, they're not. RFI's can get really anoying if you don't have a good working relationship with the GC. Also many GC's, more to the point...the guy writing the RFI's doesn't know what a computer is. I was fortunate enough to work with some great GC's who had moved on to the 21st century...also having a kick-off meeting...happy hour...anything where the day to day people have a casual chat and understand each other is essential.
Ex: HITT construction (DC area...or at least the guys I worked with) are 100% digital. We actually ask GC's to have digital cameras and take pics of conflicts in the field and email them to us. This saves alot of time/$$.

so for the first time in my career, i'm the sole person in charge of CA, while i've had a large amount of experience with CA and on the site, it's always been as an "assistant" to a PM or such. i've also got a GC who builds extremely well but doesn't like to do ANY paperwork, in fact, i've been creating the forms FOR him so he'll write things down.

but of course, i'm probably being overly anal about everything and not letting him slide on anything. everytime he asks a question i ask him for an RFI. too much i think.

where do you, yes you, draw the line? any hints from the experienced out there?

i'd get some guidance from a co-worker but we've only 3 people in our office, one who's never really done CA, the boss who's doesn't have enough time to think, breath, or sleep, and myself.

it seems like if it would require a change to the drawings that's when it would be good to have one, but then most questions seem to require a change to the drawings.

OH THE RFI.

OH THE RFI.

Don't know what happened there...
I would rather get an rfi then a voice mail to 2nd strawbeary, and after some time of trial and error I try to use the phone game and face time to my advantage.

I ask GC's before hand to call before issuing a RFI so its a formality as opposed to a 'look what you forgot AGAIN" kinda thing. Because half the time it, as others have said, its in the drawings and they did not see it.

I also give the "we are a team working together for the owner" speech, and also tell them that if it is a true change order, they got my back and the owner should pay, and I will sign it, if not, then I will call them on it. All professionally of course. It's worked so far.

On big jobs, I release bi-weekly or monthly, status reports(normaly after the 2 week scheduled job meeting) that is sorta like minutes but more like a formal to-do list from our office- it has what we did since the last report, what we should do before the next report, and what we need to do but can wait... A mentor of mine that worked on huge jobs got me to do it and I love him for it to this day.... Everyone- owner, gc, arch principals, billings, all feel in the same loop. Alot less surprises.

At meetings, I try to use my physical prescence (6'-6" 230, nah, just kidding) to my advantage. I am not one for politics and such, but I read once about how LBJ had a practiced method of getting close (not too close) to someone he was trying to persuade, and also squaring his shoulders to his "opponent", doing the long pause with no response, and the staredown. Well not a staredown as much as a making sustained eye contact. Its sounds jackass-ish and intimidating, but I tried it once and was shocked it worked. I try to use it in a subtler way than the LBJ method, but boy does it work.

Also at meetings I try to take the time to review upcoming stages so the meeting is more about what is next as opposed to what do we do here. That's tough sometimes because it can get chaotic, owners asking Q, contractors on their nextel. (Has anyone noticed they are being used less and less? Or so it seems?)

Lastly, I have noticed photos of architects on jobsites from the 50's and 60's with the same LBJ stance- like Kahn, Lautner, can't think of any others right now. Or maybe its the grey suit and hat they all seemed to wear....

good experiences to share, jbirl. pretty true, from my experience.

i've found, too, that if you establish a congenial relationship with the contractor from the beginning that he/she WILL call before issuing an RFI without you asking for that. they don't want a bunch of paper, either. if they can get a quick answer, it makes their job easier.

my equivalent of the staredown is not so much a square shoulders glare thing as it is just a quiet consideration. if you're quiet long enough, other people feel compelled to fill the silence by talking. often it's 'well, ok, i could just do...' exactly what i want you to do.

and you don't have to answer right there on site. if it benefits me to answer on the site, i.e., i'm going to get what i want if i treat it casually, that's what i do. but if it seems that i've got to shift into a more formal mode or the intentions/details/etc are being challenged, or if i'm simply not sure and feeling rushed to make a decision but haven't considered everything, i always tell them that i'll have to go back to the office to study it in detail.

steven,

You're right, its not a stare down as much as the pause, look at the item being discussed, wait for the silence filling talk, turn my body and look to the eyes above the voice, pause, then answer. And that is only in situations where I need to use it. Alot of times what I finally say is that I need to think about it. Its not that mechanical and staged but more natural.

I feel like I'm discussing my jump shot. Look for the open man cutting across the lane, if ya got nothing, fake left, take one dribble right, square your shoulders and look right at the basket.

And I always try to keep the tone and conversation light but professional. An I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine kinda deal. What I can't stand is when GC's start asking you to refax or reprint dwgs because they left them in the truck or something.