| Author |
Message |
Peggy White, CSI, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: peggy
Post Number: 9
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 01:27 pm: |    |
Hello
I'd like to take a informal poll and get your opinions on the use of the Division 01 Section "Summary", and the use of the Section Article "Summary."
Question 1, Division 01 "Summary" Section:
a. Do you typically include a Division 01 "Summary" Section in your project manual? (yes/no/sometimes)
b. Why yes, why no, or why sometimes?
Question 2, "Summary" Article:
a. Do you typically include a "Summary" Article in your specification Sections? (yes/no/sometimes)
b. Why yes, why no, or why sometimes?
Thanks,
Peggy |
William C. Pegues, FCSI, CCS
Senior Member
Username: wpegues
Post Number: 715
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 04:18 pm: | |
Summary Section, Yes, included, 100% of the time.
If you look at MF2004, we cover all the topics referenced under the broadscope title of Summary, 01 10 00. Why, because in our area, there I have an entry for almost every topic on ever job.
Summary Article internally in each section, yes in every section, but it is not detailed. Essentially it states, Provide xxx as shown on the drawings and as specified. As a place to let him know it is neither all in the specs nor all on the drawings. We actually get that now and then, that the contractor has to look at both drawings and specs. We just point to this paragraph.
As to detailed summaries, I have never had anyone request them (except for federal or military projects) and consider them very dangerous. "Your summary did not tell me about this situation in paragraph 2.5g3." Any kind of detailed summary is really not necessary. Read the spec, it says it all.
William |
Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED™ AP SCIP Affiliate
Senior Member
Username: lynn_javoroski
Post Number: 755
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 05:33 pm: | |
Division 01 Summary: yes, included - unless written/provided by CM.
Article 1.1 Summary per sections: yes, always and it's an overview. |
Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI
Senior Member
Username: rliebing
Post Number: 821
Registered: 02-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 07:10 am: | |
Division 01 Summary: yes, we always use them [on every project] to give a general overall view of the nuances of that specific project's circumstances.
Article 1.1 Summary per sections: yes, we always use them for an overview of the work required in the Section. |
David R. Combs, CSI, CCS, CCCA
Senior Member
Username: davidcombs
Post Number: 268
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 08:30 am: | |
#1: Yes, always; for the same reasons as stated above. Articles include the following:
1. Project information.
2. Work covered by the Contract Documents.
3. Phased Construction.
4. Contractor duties.
5. Work by Owner.
6. Work under separate contracts.
7. Owner-furnished products.
8. Access to site.
9. Protection of work and property.
10. Owner's occupancy requirements.
11. Specification formats and conventions.
12. Provisions for electronic media.
#2: Yes, always; for the same reasons as stated above. |
Doug Frank FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: doug_frank_ccs
Post Number: 215
Registered: 06-2002
| | Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 08:33 am: | |
Summary section in Division 01; Yes, always
Summary Article in each section; Almost Never! I don’t see benefit in telling the reader of a section entitled “Joint Sealants” that the work of the section includes joint sealants. The Only time I use a summary article is when there might be something unusual included in the work of that section. |
Don Harris CSI, CCS, CCCA, AIA
Senior Member
Username: don_harris
Post Number: 180
Registered: 03-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 10:36 am: | |
Division 01; Always, but usually very general unless it is a hard bid project.
Each section: It depends.
Never just to repeat the Section title as Doug states above.
If there are two types of roofs, or anything else for that matter, I will give a general description of locations.
Anything that can be said BRIEFLY in words to clarify something. |
Wayne Yancey
Senior Member
Username: wayne_yancey
Post Number: 32
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 10:58 am: | |
Division 01 Summary: Yes. It is our opinion that this section is intended to include basic identification of work, type of Contract, work by others or Owner which affect this Contract, work sequence, pre-ordered Products and similar work not readily identifiable from the Contract Documents.
Summary Article in Part 1: Yes. Use Paragraphs for "Section Includes" and "Related Sections." Note of Caution. This "Section Includes subparagraph should be bullet point style and brief so that it does not conflict with contents of "System Description" Article. I have seen information in "Section Includes" paragraphs repeated in "System Description" Article later in Part 1 creating potential conflict as well as being downright redundant.
I would also like to know who uses "RELATED REQUIREMENTS" Article ala AIA MasterSpec and "Related Sections" and "References"? Why or why not? |
Richard Baxter, AIA, CSI
Senior Member
Username: rbaxter
Post Number: 72
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 01:27 pm: | |
I always include the Division 01 Summary, even when I am told, against my better judgement, to not include Division 01. At very least, the project needs to be identified in the specs.
I always include a Summary in the section as well. Even when it is perfectly clear to me what will be included in a section, it may not always be clear to others. This is especially true for sections like "Metal Fabrications". I like to write my specs as if the reader has never read specs before. |
Christopher E. Grimm, CSI, CCS, LEED®-AP, MAI, RLA
Senior Member
Username: tsugaguy
Post Number: 140
Registered: 06-2005
| | Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 07:05 pm: | |
1.1 Summary
A. This Section includes the following:
1. Division 01 Summary
2. Part 1 Summary
B. Related Sections include the following:
1. Yes it is redundant.
2. It is getting late, I'm going home now.
1.2 Division 01 Summary:
A. Normally always yes, except on military projects or CM projects where someone else writes that document.
1.3 Part 1 Summary:
A. On institutional and large commercial projects, mostly done using MASTERSPEC base documents, nearly always. We are aware of the burden of coordination, but it can help us out in return when doing document review.
B. On small commercial projects, usually not.
C. On federal projects that use SpecsIntact, never, the system does not have a summary per se. They expect people to read the entire spec, and they get their way, starting by setting a good example of doing so themselves. There is the option of what they call a "Section Table of Contents" which we do not use. It is quite lengthy. No coordination needed though, as long as you use XML tags correctly. |
Doug Frank FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: doug_frank_ccs
Post Number: 216
Registered: 06-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 08, 2008 - 08:56 am: | |
In response to Wayne‘s second part of the question;
Related Requirements; Occasionally, like referring the storefront section to the curtainwall section for wind design data.
References; Rarely; can’t see any reason to create a list of references that are included in the actual section.
Related Sections; Almost NEVER. Just look at the Table OF Contents. And, if used, where does one draw the line? It could be argued that, if you neglect to include a section in the “Related Sections” list, you’ve excluded that work. (Oh, you wanted the drywall painted? But it wasn’t listed as Related Work so I didn’t include it.) Further, if you add a section by Addendum or some such, do you then go back through all previously issued sections and add the newly issued section to the list of Related Sections where appropriate? If not, why not? If it was so important to include a Related Sections listing in the first place, why would anyone be comfortable with the list not being complete and correct?
I just don’t get it. It creates a Ton of extra work that requires close coordination that can’t actually happen until the spec is almost ready to issue. I’ve got lots more important things to worry about at the last minute than to try to remember to go back and include a section added late to the list in a bunch of other sections. Even CSI’s Section Format (March 2006 update) says use of this Article is “Optional”. |
John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: bunzick
Post Number: 875
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 08, 2008 - 09:26 am: | |
I use both summaries. Within a section, it is only the briefest of lists, however. No attempt to scope the work. To quote the new SectionFormat, the Summary article "permits the reader to assess section content quickly. This Article should not 'scope' the section or imply trade jurisdiction; the integrity of a section does not require its use."
Related sections; usually, but also a very brief list and in some sections none at all. As an example, I may list the Roof Specialties section as related work in the Roof Accessories section. The new SectionFormat calls this "Related Requirements."
I may use a references article for the purposes for which it is intended: The new SectionFormat includes "abbreviations and acronyms," "definitions," and "reference standards" in this article. Under "reference standards," SectionFormat explains that "the purpose of this Article is to fully identify standards that are referenced elsewhere using an abbreviated nomenclature." |
|
4specs.com Home Page