Fresh Eyes, Fewer Change Orders: The Strategic Value of Independent Design Review
Key Highlights
- Reduce operational, safety, and compliance risks. A third-party design review protects not just the construction budget, but the building’s long-term reliability and reputation. Owners can avoid future performance failures by identifying hidden design conflicts, life-safety conflicts, equipment misalignment, and system vulnerabilities early.
- Confirming Feasibility, Coordination, and Schedule. Engaging an independent reviewer during the design phase provides a fresh, unbiased perspective that can improve system coordination, ensure feasibility, and enhance overall project outcome.
- Investing Upfront to Avoid Downstream Cost Overruns. Rework often requires substantial additional expense outlays. It doesn’t need to be that way. Including a design review in the project budget is good insurance against potentially avoidable and expensive delays and cost overruns.
Every construction project begins with a clear vision. However, as a project progresses from engineering and architectural design into construction, the original design intent can drift. Budget adjustments, construction constraints, and product substitutions may lead to modified details and changed assumptions. In some cases, key recommendations are not fully carried through to the final construction documents or installation.
The result? The structure that gets built may no longer fully reflect the one that was envisioned. The disconnect can go beyond aesthetics or minor adjustments. It often leads to a reactive cycle of RFIs, field modifications, and change orders – issues that are significantly more expensive to resolve once construction is underway.
Main Outcomes of Rework
One of the most immediate outcomes of rework is increased project cost. Every instance of rework consumes labor, materials, and equipment that were already paid for, effectively doubling some portion of the cost. In addition, rework often triggers construction change orders, extra inspections, and redesign efforts, all of which amplify the financial impact.
Industry benchmarks from the Construction Industry Institute (CII) and other analysts studies estimate that rework can account for five to twenty percent of the total project costs, with higher percentages on projects that involve dense mechanical electrical plumbing (MEP) systems, tight tolerances, or highly-regulated environments such as healthcare or laboratories.
Skipping a formal design review for construction projects increases the likelihood that technical, operational, and compliance issues will go undetected until construction or occupancy. A third-party design review acts as an early risk-control measure, shifting issue resolution from the field to the drawing set, where corrections are less costly and less disruptive.
Why Independent Design Reviews are Frequently Overlooked
Design reviews frequently are overlooked due to a mix of schedule pressure, cost concerns, overconfidence, and process timing issues.
When projects have aggressive timelines, a design review often is viewed as something that will slow things down. Others may see a third-party review as an extra cost and because rework hasn’t happened yet, the risk feels theoretical. Also, teams feel pressure to issue drawings quickly, while milestones are tied to permitting or procurement. There also is a misconception that commissioning is enough, without realizing that it is not substitute for an early design review because commissioning is about verifying performance while a design review is about proactive risk prevention.
Additionally, developers may assume that an independent design review of a “simple” office or educational building isn’t worth the added cost. Of course, even today’s seemingly simple buildings are made up of many thousands of integrated pieces. In reality, modern buildings are increasingly complex and tightly integrated, and without an early, independent design review, blind spots, coordination gaps, and conservative default assumptions can quietly carry forward, only to surface later as RFIs, change orders, and costly field corrections.
The ROI of an Independent Review: Optimizing Performance, Capital and Operational Costs
An independent design review delivers a measurable return on investment by identifying risks, inefficiencies, and misalignments before they are embedded in construction documents, procurement decisions, and contracts. At this early stage, changes are inexpensive and often limited to drawing revisions or specification adjustments rather than costly field modifications. Every issue identified prior to construction protects the owner from downstream change orders, schedule delays, and duplicated labor.
Beyond risk avoidance, design reviews actively optimize capital expenditures. By challenging conservative defaults, legacy approaches, and unnecessary system complexity, independent reviewers frequently uncover opportunities to right-size equipment, eliminate redundant systems, simplify controls, and improve coordination among architectural and MEP disciplines. These refinements reduce first costs while maintaining and improving performance.
The following examples illustrate some read-world outcomes of a third-party design review.
Avoiding Performance Issues
For the John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, a U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) facility, the project’s design specifications stipulated opposed blade dampers for both outdoor air and return air in the building’s air handling units. If the opposed blade dampers had remained in both the outdoor air and return air paths, the building could have experienced several operational and performance problems, including static-pressure safety trips, reduced airflow to occupied spaces, increased energy consumption, along with other long-term maintenance and reliability issues. During the independent design review, EH&E recommended parallel blade dampers for one of the two to avoid flow restriction (and static pressure safety trips) while both are partially open.
Ensuring Performance Avoids Occupant Dissatisfaction, Unexpected Maintenance Costs
A new building project that omitted the design review proved to be problematic when the new building’s facility management team fielded 1,900 operational and system failure calls during the first months of occupancy. System failures that might have been identified with an early design review led to significant occupant dissatisfaction and several hundred thousand dollars in maintenance and renovation costs for the building owner.
Eliminating Redundant Systems Saves Millions
A design review for Boston Children’s Hospital revealed that the planned chilled water system was overly complex. The original design included three separate loops operating at 44, 38, and 32 degrees to support dehumidification. EH&E determined that a single 38-degree loop could meet all performance needs, eliminating unnecessary equipment and controls. This simplification reduced capital costs, lowered ongoing energy use, and ultimately saved the hospital millions of dollars.
Avoid Comfort Issues and Increased Energy Costs
In another client project, a small control room housing mechanical support equipment generated more heat than anticipated. The design assumed the main air handler would provide adequate cooling even when the space was unoccupied. The design review identified this mismatch and recommended adding exhaust or a dedicated cooling unit, avoiding future comfort issues and significantly higher energy costs.
Fresh Eyes Spot Critical Safety Oversights
A project that omitted the design review was nearing occupancy when it was discovered that a mechanical room had piping going across the exit. The contractor, in the throes of completing the project, had neglected to secure an RFI, leaving the owner to handle this serious safety oversight. Identifying it early would have allowed the owner to correct the issue before occupancy.
A client design review, focused on MEP, flagged a water-tank curb that couldn’t handle overflow. Without this catch, a failure could have flooded the area. Fresh eyes spotted this oversight, preventing a potential disaster down the road. Together, these examples demonstrate how design reviews not only optimize costs and performance but also protect owners from operational failures and safety risks that can have long-term consequences.
Bridging the Gap Between Design and Reality
It’s natural for designers and contractors to overlook details in drawings they’ve reviewed countless times. As deadlines approach and the pace of work intensifies, unresolved issues can be easily missed. But most importantly, a design review only matters if the project team acts on the findings. It’s the responsibility of the building owner and design team to vet the recommendations and incorporate them into the final design where appropriate.
An early design review catches problems before equipment is purchased or installed, keeping the project on schedule and saving the owner time, headaches, and money. Every issue identified early is a lasting win for the project, its owner, and its future occupants.
Interested in discussing an independent design review for your project? Contact us today!
Subscribe
to our blog
"*" indicates required fields