Watching a building come to fruition is the ultimate thrill of being an architect.  This is what we live for and what sleep-deprived architecture students dream of. One of the perks of being an architect (aside from being the life of the party) is witnessing what you conceived becoming a reality. Each time I walk a construction site of a project I helped design, I’m reminded of the day I laid out the structural grid or that time I struggled with a curtain wall detail. Seeing something that I sketched and conceptualized right in front of me is really an amazing experience.

But with that thrill also comes the realization that as much as we perform our due diligence during the design development and construction document phases, unexpected problems do occur. And there is a commonality among the problems in that many begin outside the confines of our architectural offices. After years of working on construction sites, I’ve noticed some recurring themes that I find to be helpful reminders for when I’m back in the office:

1. Don’t design a Swiss Watch. Since Rolex won’t be bidding on my job, I’ll keep the Swiss watch making to those who know best. But there is no denying that over the past 25 years, the infrastructure needed to support a building’s functions has become increasingly complicated, not unlike the workings of a timepiece. Combine the IT revolution with the rise of LEED and spatial requirements for consulting engineers (including, but not limited to MEP, FP, FA, IT, AV, BMS, Geotechnical, Vertical Transport, Lighting, Acoustics, Security, etc. For brevity, blogger will use MEP) have literally gone through the roof……and ceiling and floor.  Compounding this complexity, some buildings have limited area for equipment or reduced floor to floor heights for any number of reasons. Others have mandated programmatic or performance requirements that need to be achieved to meet regulatory guidelines. So, to avoid the Swiss watch making:

Note to Self: Place special emphasis on avoiding MEP bottlenecks that might otherwise increase the likelihood of RFIs, bulletins, or field modifications that might lead to change orders or delay claims by the contractor.

2. Build the entire building before you get to the site. With the advent of BIM, it’s much easier than it used to be.  Now I’m not yet a BIM user, but a colleague familiar with BIM once told me that the model is only as good as the information being put into it.  For me, this means not assuming the 24” high duct on the mechanical drawings is really 24”.  In reality, that 24” high duct has 1-1/2” flanges, is wrapped in 2” of insulation and supported on 1-1/2” unistruts which adds up to 33” (I know it doesn’t add up, it never does).  Pipes, ducts and conduit always have accessories that need to be accounted for when modeling what will be built in the field. So, to ensure I don’t miss anything:

Note to Self: Bombard consultants with questions about what exactly they need to physically support and maintain the performance of their systems.  Also, contact structural engineer to inquire about anticipated slab and beam deflection at critical ceiling heights where MEP is highly congested.

3. Constantly meet with your consultants. Most problems I experience on the construction site are not related to the architectural drawings per se. More likely problems occur in those special voids that exist between us and our consultants. Orbiting those voids are differing world views of the same object. Our consultants are trained to design mechanical systems, determine head pressure, and calculate amps on panel boards.  I’ve learned the hard way not to assume they’re looking at the spatial and structural implications for these assemblies the same way I would.  And I shouldn’t assume they’re communicating among themselves.  So to avoid  any miscommunication:

Note to Self: Above and beyond the weekly coordination meetings, visit each consultant’s office every other week to ensure the lines of communication between them remain open and that everyone is on the same page.

4. Think like a contractor. Their agenda is different than ours. We want to get on the cover of a prestigious architectural magazine; they want to get in, build it, and get out. And that’s the way it should be.  But all too often the process is not so clear cut.  On my shelf in the construction trailer I keep a copy of The Contractor’s Guide to Change Orders by Anthony Civitello Jr. This is a great reference manual for any architect who wants to get into the head of a contractor. More importantly, it provides a window into why change orders occur. The book, when read from a contractor’s perspective, provides a detailed change order process analogous to a fishing expedition. But when read from the architect’s point of view, it provides a preemptive strategy for not swallowing the bait. So, when putting a set of drawings together:

Note to Self: Think about the project from the contractor’s perspective. Refer back to Anthony Civitello’s ‘Contractor’s Guide to Change Orders’ in order to mitigate potential construction site problems.

For me, the challenge of the construction site is navigating our design through the confluence of time and money. As architects, we are a highly focused bunch; designing buildings, meeting deadlines and staying on budget, not to mention keeping everyone happy. But an understanding of how others parties perceive a project often affects how we perform on the construction site and ultimately how the project turns out. This understanding alone cannot prevent the unexpected from occurring during construction, but it can make life easier out in the field.

Mark on Hunters Point South Intermediate & High School Construction Site

This is the first in a series of an architect’s observations and perspectives from a construction site.