Public Architects Committee

Do you find a difference between public/hi-ed  and multi-fam/residential (development) projects for the CCA phase ? We do both types of work, but when it comes to CCA there seems to be a lack of understanding on how to use specifications for the work. For the Multi-Fam GC it's purely a vehicle for submittals. All other scope requirements are ignored. They want all these "directions"  noted in the drawings! The specs are ignored and they say they don't read it! It's not a huge spec either 350 pages for Architectural sections.

This is my example- this is the situation for Multi-Family/Residential work:- The exposed steel equipment supports on the roof were not primed nor painted by GC. It's now rusting, (as exposed steel would here in So Cal). We pointed this out in the AFOR and indicated it needed to be primed and painted. Spec section 05 0513 - Shop Applied Steel Primer ; Section on Surface Preparation  indicates the Application & Surface Preparation. Section 09 9100 - Painting states "Unless otherwise indicated, paint all surfaces throughout the Project, except the following. 
a. Concrete. 
b. Steel decking. 
c. Roofing. 
d. Insulation and its facing. 
e. Finish hardware, except items specified with a USP finish. 
f. Prefinished metal surfaces, including anodized aluminum, chrome plating, powder coatings, and similar pre-finished materials. 
g. Natural finish metal surfaces, including mill finish aluminum, stainless steel, copper, bronze, brass and similar finished materials. 
h. Walls or ceilings in concealed and inaccessible areas, including furred areas, chases, and shafts. 
i. Moving, mechanical, or electrical parts of operating units, including valve and damper operator linkages, sensing devices, motor and fan shafts.. 
j. Nameplates and required labels, including UL, FM, and other equipment identification, performance rating, or name plates. 

Where surfaces are not specifically indicated, paint them to match adjacent similar materials or areas. "

The GC has the Owner convinced we are at fault as there wasn't a "note" on the drawings. We believe the specification above is a sufficient, requiring priming for steel & painting of the exposed steel. The GC submitting a CO to the Owner &  the  Architect being blamed, (apparently the spec was never read to that level of detail, so it doesn't count!). This would not be the case for the public work. They read and comply. Steel in the same location on a public project is painted!  Any thoughts on this or am I just dealing with "bad" actors (meaning a lesser quality of contractor than those doing public/commercial work).  We have been documenting and copying the Owner to insure the liability paper-trail. 

------------------------------
Janene Christopher AIA
Steinberg Hart
San Diego CA
------------------------------

Case law that I'm aware of is that out of the two, specifications override anything on the drawings. I think we are getting into scary territory where contractors don't know what they're doing and expect us to show them how, but that's crossing over into means and methods. 

------------------------------
Weston Burrer AIA
Staff Architect
Pueblo County Government
Pueblo CO
------------------------------

Janene, I experienced a similar circumstance working in a development management role on a multi-housing project to completely replace the community amenities, renovate the office and build a new modern community house project. The project was taken as a favor - beware of favors!! 

The low bid contractor that the owner hired hardly looked at the specs. and seemed to pick and choose what part of a spec they thought they needed to use.  In addition, the GC did not adequately read product data, installation or application instructions that they did receive. It took many, many extra hours eating into our fee and patience to educate a very inexperienced contractor superintendent about the documents and specs and how they work. Luckly, most of the contractor's proposed change orders were deflected. However, I could not recover the hours/fee lost due to a poor performing residential sector contractor.  Before I was on the project, I found out that contractor talked the owner into not requiring any type of surety or performance bond - the owner thought he was saving money.  The project was finally completed many months late, the owner lost revenue, there was a number of unfinished punch list items, and the owner still paid final payment even with our recommendation to not pay final or to at least modify the final contract amount due to the unfinished punch work.

The project got so absurd that I recommended to the other company leadership to terminate for convenience to stop the bleeding and headaches - they tried to stick it out and things just lingered on and got worse. We did tell the owner we were going to leave the project after CO. We won't work again with that owner or contractor. 

For the higher-ed, tech-ed and public sector projects I have done, the specs were significantly used by the contractors and subcontractors.  Some of the higher-ed and tech-ed clients in Georgia even have internal teams in their agencies that review the specs. This was very helpful to the entire A/E team.

Even though Georgia has a contractor licensing requirement, it sometimes seems the people working at a housing sector project site are not necessarily the ones that are licensed.

Good luck.

------------------------------
Michael Katzin, AIA
Johns Creek, GA
Member - Johns Creek Planning Commission
------------------------------

On the face of it, why would anyone produce something to be ignored? Of course the specifications are part of the contract documents. You are going to have to dig into the General Conditions and see what it says, then look at the contract that they signed. Expect a long fight with an unsophisticated contractor

Sent from my iPhone

Unfortunately I don't think this is so much of a public / private project difference as a more general contractor discipline issue. In my current position I've had both contractors and architects say almost the same thing. We have a standard set of supplemental conditions and general design / finish standards which we provide at the front end of each project and well through design development it seems like they're rarely incorporated. 

Specifically addressing the drawings vs specs issue for the GC it seems pretty common for GCs and especially their subs to just look at the sheets. If they bother to question something at all they usually prefer to RFI the AEs instead of looking for an answer in the specs first. As a former GC I can shamelessly say this is equal parts expediency (or laziness depending on your point of view) and shifting liability to the AE for a "field resolution" regardless of what was in the specs. 

Again drawing on experiences from my former GC life, I would say that sub-contractor discipline is also a significant component here. Interested to see whether others concur. Seemed mostly based on project size but on medium to small sized projects I was lucky if the sub-contractor had a foreman or PM on site who had the most current set of drawings for their trade on hand. Most often I saw electricians, plumbers, and interior finishers with early versions of just the sheets relevant to them which didn't always capture later changes or field resolutions.

I've had some limited success in my current position enforcing an almost painfully detailed kickoff / partnering / pre-con meeting to review the specs as soon after award as possible. Ideal audience is PM, Owner Rep, AE and reps from each major discipline, GC (also foremen and superintendents depending on size of the project), and reps from major sub-contractors. I usually plan for it to be an all day thing and in person, it certainly doesn't have to be. This way it feels like you get everyone's undivided attention and can build in time for breaks for folks to break out into small groups or just rub their eyes a bit. We go through the drawings and specs page by page together and ideally 75% or greater of the early RFIs can be figured out right in the room. 

Certainly not a perfect solution and time intensive. Even with all that work put in I'd guess it's only been 50% effective in spreading awareness of the specs. At the very least it makes it easier to quash any "well that was buried in the specs but not on the drawings" type of liability arguments. 

------------------------------
Michael Sheu
Ohio Army National Guard
OH
------------------------------

Hi Janene,

We work in both markets you reference and I have experienced similar issues. The level of understanding of contract documents varies, especially at the subcontractor level. As others have pointed out, the key to your issue is the content of the contract between the Owner and the Contractor. The Owner/Contractor contract should reference and incorporate all of the Contract Documents, including the specifications as requirements for the Work. If the specs are incorporated in the contract, then the Owner's position is strong for requiring the GC to correct the painting at no cost to the Owner. If the Owner/Contractor contract is unclear or references the drawings only, then the position may be weak.

Cheers,

Andrew B. Moore, AIA

Glave & Holmes Architecture

------------------------------
Andrew Moore AIA
Glavé & Holmes Architecture
Richmond VA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 4/11/2025 9:58:00 AM
From: Andrew B. Moore
Subject: RE: Public/hi-ed and Multi-Family/Residential (development) and how to use specifications for the work.

Hi Janene,

We work in both markets you reference and I have experienced similar issues. The level of understanding of contract documents varies, especially at the subcontractor level. As others have pointed out, the key to your issue is the content of the contract between the Owner and the Contractor. The Owner/Contractor contract should reference and incorporate all of the Contract Documents, including the specifications as requirements for the Work. If the specs are incorporated in the contract, then the Owner's position is strong for requiring the GC to correct the painting at no cost to the Owner. If the Owner/Contractor contract is unclear or references the drawings only, then the position may be weak.

Cheers,

Andrew B. Moore, AIA

Glave & Holmes Architecture

------------------------------
Andrew Moore AIA
Glavé & Holmes Architecture
Richmond VA
------------------------------