I have a client who wants to use Outline Specifications for construction - and yes it is for a condominium - any takers on this one?
Tell him, he will only get an outline of a building with that level of specifications
Unless the client and the builder have worked before and this project is a clone, run away and hide.
Are you asking if I want the project? No.
I have written some pretty detailed outline specifications; actually not pretty but very detailed.
I remember discussions around the table when CSI first introduced the chapter on “short form” specifications. What are these really? There were some humurous alternative names for these things (maybe someone out there remembers other titles for a short form specification.) I have used the Uniformat and prepared very detailed “outline” specifications. just a thought.
I would think that for a condo project, the architect would want the tightest set of specs they could find – no matter how long they were.
However, I used to do “outline” level specs for spec office buildings; those included anything that could influence the price, including samples, testing requirements, and application standards. they ended up being about 1 page per section, but held up pretty well and were enough to get financing from the bank.
I would think that for a condo project, the architect would want the tightest set of specs they could find – no matter how long they were.
However, I used to do “outline” level specs for spec office buildings; those included anything that could influence the price, including samples, testing requirements, and application standards. they ended up being about 1 page per section, but held up pretty well and were enough to get financing from the bank.
There is an echo in here, in here.
I have done outline specifications for construction when (1) private work, (2) not bid, (3) Owner, Contractor, Architect have significant history together, and (3) size of project is relatively modest. Although these types of jobs do go south occassionally, my experience is that they do so very infrequently. This type of format leaves some room for discretion and “wiggle room” by the parties involved and takes more hands-on CA by the Architect, but it can be successful.
Against my better judgement, I have also used this format for public work that is non-bid (design/build or JOC procurement methods). I usaually try to beef up submittals and installation where appropriate. However, I would suggest that somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 the architectural sections in a Project Manual could simply state “Comply with manufacturer’s written instructions and recommendations for installation/application/erection.” without too much apprehension.
Again, the key for me is that the project involves entites who are known to each other and understand what quality of construction is really desired. Not sure I would do this on a condo. I would suggest that in the 1 case in 10 where the project does go sour, a full-length spec is probably not going to do a lot of good.
Jerome:
Is this the same client who wanted to do away with Division 01 for a condo?
Dave
Different client, same mentality.
Actually, problem has been averted, it is not a condo, but rather a rental residential building…fun, fun, fun.
What are “outline specifications?” How do they differ from “shortform specifications?”
Could they be the same as “sheet specs?” Or, are “sheet specs” even more abbreviated?
Can “outline specifications” be printed, bound and then become “book specs?”
I think there was some famous architect who said, “Less is less.” How do you keep from doing more than what is less enough? Do the concepts of clear, complete, correct and concise have any bearing on “outline specifications?”
Having worked with a couple of design studios running “wild west” practices, where they sent sketches to developers whose contractors were busy pricing without any specifications at all, I considered preparing outline specifications a real step in the right direction. At least the architect was choosing some of the products, instead of cringing and waiting to see what the contractor was going to submit, if there were any submittals at all.
This is the status of much of the architectural work in the US today. Participants in this forum are the exception, not the rule. So if issuing outline specifications to establish a basis of quality for the products and workmanship is what an owner is willing to pay for, that’s better than nothing at all.
Now, about that indemnification clause in the owner/architect agreement …
Jerome,
Ask your client if he wants “full outline specs” or “short form outline specs”.
David
Its already done, this was a fast track job. A buddy sent me a copy of a Masterspec created Outline spec, but I didn’t really like it, so I took my typical long form spec for that client and cut and pasted the hell out of it into a short form version…The client has it and they are putting in their two cents…once its fine tuned I guess I’ll try and sell it to those clients who don’t typically use specs, since I tgotally blew my budget preparing these for this project.
I find that outline specs take longer to prepare than regular “long form” specs.
David, I agree.
Jerome, I agree, too. It requires more thought… go figure!
and the PRM 5.14 says:
Unlike the preliminary project descriptions
or outline specifications that are
part of the early design phases, a shortform
specification is a legally enforceable
contract document.
… therefore, outline specs are not enforceable… definitions are the key I suppose. Maybe we need to bind a dictionary in every spec we produce 
As a communication tool, outline specs are invaluable. One of the real challenges we face is getting owners or project designers to review our specifications. They aren’t going to read a full size specification and comment on it meaningfully. The outline spec, however, is often enough for them to say “yes, that’s what we use” or “no, I want something else.” An edited and reviewed outline spec can cut the time involved in editing a full size set of specifications pretty significantly.
But as contract specs - they’re not. Never were intended to be a competitor with short form specs.