Coordinating consultant specs

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Elizabeth Kertesz Member Username: ekertesz Post Number: 3 Registered: 08-2019 Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2019 - 06:26 pm:    I have a question for the more experienced spec writers. I usually prepare the Architectural sections of the specs, and coordinate with the consultants to incorporate their sections into the project manual. Usually, Civil and Structural each have their own spec for Section 033000 "Cast-In-Place Concrete." Also, I find that sometimes Structural provides me with a spec for Section 061000 "Rough Carpentry," but the Architect wants me to help them prepare a separate section for the rough carpentry work results specified by the Architect. Usually I handle this by putting the two versions of Section 033000 and the two versions of 061000 into the project manual, with a note in the TOC and headers indicating who authored the spec. For example: 033000 Cast-in-Place Concrete (Civil), and 033000 Cast-In-Place Concrete (Structural). I don't like doing it this way, because it creates duplication, and the potential for contradiction in the Contract Docs. But I also don't want to edit the specs that the consultants give me, because those specs are associated with their seal and signature. What is the best practice in this situation? T.J. Simons, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: tsimons Post Number: 23 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2019 - 06:46 pm:    The Rough Carpentry scenario is a new one; it sounds like the architect needs to coordinate with their SE and get everything into one Section. We've had good results doing this with Structural Engineers to coordinate concrete finishes and exposed structural steel. For duplicate Sections by Civil or Landscape, I've had good results asking one of the consultants to rename/renumber their Section-for example, the 03 30 00 from Civil might be "03 30 00.16, Cast-In-Place Concrete-Site" or something similar Ronald L. Geren, FCSI Lifetime Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 1568 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2019 - 07:10 pm:    Civil specs belong in the Site and Infrastructure Subgroup (Divisions 30 - 39). Period. You have control over the organization, they have control over the content--enforce the organization. As for rough carpentry, what would be in your rough carpentry section that wouldn't be in the structural engineer's section? Ron Geren, FCSI Lifetime Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1241 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2019 - 11:10 pm:    For the rough carpentry consider using something that MasterSpec devised, Section 061053 - Miscellaneous Rough Carpentry for your Architectural content. Be careful to coordinate content with your SE's 061000 content if you do this. You don't want to build in errors or omissions. Civil should be coordinating content with Structural if they want to refer to Section 033000 and communicate their needs to the SE to make sure everything is covered in one Section. Otherwise they should follow Ron's suggestion of staying in Divisions 31 or 32 for their concrete requirements such as 310523 or 320523 (see www.Masterformat.com). Mark Gilligan SE, Senior Member Username: mark_gilligan Post Number: 913 Registered: 10-2007 Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2019 - 07:18 am:    My preference is to have separate specification sections for civil and structural concrete. Have different section numbers and different titles. I would also propose an article in the sections explaining their scope. When exposed building concrete slabs are adjacent to site slabs on grade you might want the sections coordinated so that the same mix could be used for both slabs. Edward J Dueppen, RA, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Senior Member Username: edueppen Post Number: 57 Registered: 08-2013 Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2019 - 09:13 am:    At the start of every project I draft an email listing various items of coordination with our structural consultants. Each email is unique to the content of the particular project. I will list items where frequent overlaps occur, such as rough carpentry, sheathing, CMU, shelf angles, steel lintels, etc. In the message I ask the consultant whether they are designing and specifying those items, or is the Architect (me). And if they are specifying them, I include instructions such as "lintels shall be hot-dipped galvanized". If they are specifying CMU, I advise them to use a number other than 04 2000 - Unit Masonry since that is what I will typically use. I send this draft email to the project architect and have them review and approve it. If it is acceptable, I have them send it to the consultant and await feedback. I have found that this greatly reduces many of the surprises just before assembly of the project manual. Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 909 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2019 - 10:36 am:    Coordinating with structural engineers is becoming more troublesome because many of the SE's I coordinate with are relocating their specifications to the drawings. MasterFormat section#-title conventions are ignored. Several are loath to coordinate. Their specifications are morphing into "general notes" with little regard for administrative and procedural requirements such as for submittals. The practice is to leave the general notes general. However, not all general notes will apply but they are left intact. Sorry if this is harsh, but the worst culprits are located on the left coast. My OCD and curiosity kicks in. I have to read the notes. I have projects in Canada but consultants are US based. One particular US plumbing/hvac/electrical consultant continued to reference the ADA for barrier free requirements. Guest (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2019 - 11:04 am:    I've seen and felt everyone's pain (and dilemma). In those instances, I throw ALL caution to the wind. 1) I generally don't "touch" consultant's specs section. 2) I create a separate "architectural" section...that most often overlaps/conflicts with consultant's section. 3) Rely on Div 01 requirement that conflicts in CDs be resolved with RFI...or, as with one A/E client, "price the most stringent" (which is typically my "architectural" section). 4) I then "move-on". I don't waste my time attempting to "coordinate" consultant's specs language...to most often be "ignored" or "de-prioritized". Elizabeth Kertesz Intermediate Member Username: ekertesz Post Number: 4 Registered: 08-2019 Posted on Thursday, October 17, 2019 - 09:33 am:    Thank you so much for the advice, everyone! Ronald, to answer your question - on my projects, the Architect's rough carpentry spec is usually for blocking. Mark Gilligan SE, Senior Member Username: mark_gilligan Post Number: 914 Registered: 10-2007 Posted on Thursday, October 17, 2019 - 02:24 pm:    Am unclear why a specific section is needed for blocking. What is the content? Part of the problem with consultants and specifications is that few engineers have any training in how specification sections are organized and what is good practice. If the refusal to produce specifications will mean that the engineer does not get to work on the project they will produce specification sections. In response to the problem where some engineers producing general note but no specifications I suggest that this will not be a problem if the Architects hiring the engineer would insist in the engineers contract that the engineer will provide specification sections. T.J. Simons, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: tsimons Post Number: 24 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Thursday, October 17, 2019 - 07:01 pm:    I agree with Mark-this is a very simple requirement to communicate to the Structural Engineer. To me, that's not worth writing a Section for. Relative to the concrete work from the Civil Engineer, Ron is 110% correct about this being Division 32 work. If it's paving or flatwork, it's definitely Division 32 work, and wouldn't be called "Cast-In-Place Concrete". If they're trying to pick up the concrete work for something like post footings for a chain link fence, that could be covered in the Chain Link Fencing section in Division 32. Or they could reference the Structural Engineer's Division 03 Section for this kind of concrete work. Don Harris CSI, CCS, CCCA, AIA Senior Member Username: don_harris Post Number: 325 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Monday, October 21, 2019 - 12:24 pm:    I let Structural write the concrete and then I remove their 10 (or sometimes 6) mil poly vapor barrier and put in a decent Class A product, both product and installation. Then I add the correct finishes, and definitions and criteria for Ff and Fl numbers. After that we have a pretty good section. Structural usually looks to the Architect for wall and slab finishes. Mark Gilligan SE, Senior Member Username: mark_gilligan Post Number: 916 Registered: 10-2007 Posted on Monday, October 21, 2019 - 02:18 pm:    Don's comments regarding concrete finishes and vapor barriers points out the need for more coordination. This is something the Architects and specification writers need to do a better job of. This coordination takes more time and will inevitably reflect the reality that each participant does not understand the concerns of the other. The inclusion of vapor barrier in the concrete specification is a result of historical practices. I can argue that the vapor barrier is not typically in the engineers scope of work. While supporting the need for coordination it is hopped that any edits to the concrete sections is only done in cooperation with the engineer. Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 672 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, October 21, 2019 - 02:33 pm:    We use our own DIV 07 Section for under slab vapor barrier/retarder membranes. I usually send it to the SEOR as an example of a Section formatted for the spec we are working on and point out they need to work with that. Regarding the rough carpentry comments, many or most of our projects are Type 1 construction where the only wood items in the rough carpentry section are plywood panels to attach telephone and other low voltage boxes to. The SEOR has no responsibility for this Section. Don Harris CSI, CCS, CCCA, AIA Senior Member Username: don_harris Post Number: 326 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Monday, October 21, 2019 - 04:24 pm:    The reason I keep vapor barriers in the concrete section is that I want the concrete sub to do the work so there is no finger pointing afterwards. I had a job years ago when I did a Division 07 section and it took a while to convince the GC to let the concrete sub do the vapor barrier. It was a one off, but... Marc Chavez Senior Member Username: mchavez Post Number: 530 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Monday, October 21, 2019 - 04:35 pm:    oh wait I thought we did not select trades ..haha - I place the underslab vapor retarder in Div 03 too as I feel the work is essential to the concrete setup prior to placement. who does it? I dont care. but I dont want it "forgotten" Don Harris CSI, CCS, CCCA, AIA Senior Member Username: don_harris Post Number: 327 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Tuesday, October 22, 2019 - 10:23 am:    The power of subliminal suggestion. I thought I read about that in the Practice Guide. Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 646 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Monday, October 28, 2019 - 08:08 pm:    I publish a spec coordination checklist for consultants at the beginning of a job. We do this. You do that. Sometimes it's read. I also publish a spec section template, which consultants are getting better at following. We start our TOC, then send it around in Word format, so consultants can add their stuff and we don't have to provide clerical help to them. Consultants appear to be getting better at this lately. Or maybe my standards are slipping. I at least scan their stuff to eliminate their duplications. I think they're surprised and a little embarrassed that someone is reading their specs when they don't. I don't generally change consultant specs, but the architect is paying us and if the consultant specs are really bad, I chuck out the stuff that has nothing to do with the project to save our architect the RFI time; I copy the consultant so they know I'm helping them out and they don't mind. Their name goes in the header so the world knows who to blame.