【Haichuan Building Review】Which stage of the review is most feared by designers? Talk about the loves and hates of drawing review experts and designers!

Thread Content

Colleagues in the design firms, have you noticed that these past few years people have been saying that there’s less work available, and things are getting worse? But the truth is that I feel increasingly tired, and the cost-effectiveness of working is also getting lower. There are many reasons: repeated efforts to modify the designs, unreasonable design timelines, pressure from the client, and submitting the preliminary construction drawings for project approval. There is another reason, which is to undergo review by experts at various stages. Dealing with reviews at these stages also represents a significant amount of work, as the documents need to be revised and reorganized. Just when you’re busy and tired, a project review report arrives; upon looking at it, you see a bunch of comments, many of which are unreasonable – I’m sure you’ve complained about this before. To be honest, there are indeed some problems here. Generally, it is easier to respond to comments on construction drawings, as the drawings are detailed at this stage and the reviewing agencies are highly professional. Since the comments need to be uploaded to a system, each one includes an explanation of its basis, so there are hardly any disputes. But the most troublesome aspects are the feasibility study and preliminary design reviews; the competence of the reviewers varies greatly, there is a lot of inconsistency in the standards used for evaluation, and personal subjective opinions play a significant role. For the same project, different experts can result in vastly different amounts of work for the designers; careful responses and revisions are required at these two stages, and inadequate revisions will lead to the work being sent back again. In a few cases, dealing with people who are too persistent and difficult to communicate with can be quite troublesome. I’m not complaining by writing this, because there are indeed problems in this regard. Here, it is hoped that designers and drawing reviewers can develop empathy. After all, the reviewers are also former draftsmen, and those who do drafting work now may end up reviewing drawings as well. With different roles come different ways of thinking, so it is necessary to show understanding and respect for one another, and to put oneself in the other’s shoes. Firstly, the review officer is also responsible for the project and for safety; the valuable suggestions they provide are helpful for the technical development of designers, and as designers, one should respect such review officers. Of course, the reviewers also come from practical experience, and they should understand the difficulties faced by designers. Issues such as those that go beyond the required depth of documentation, problems rooted in personal preferences and subjective opinions, and those that do not violate regulations but still require extensive revisions should be raised with caution. It’s all about work; we should respect and understand each other. We ought to love one another, not harbor hatred! Finally, something unrelated to the topic: who knows when the \"Technical Standards for Fire Protection in the Renovation of Existing Buildings\" will be released? The draft for public comments has been available for several years now, and this situation creates a lot of confusion regarding fire protection measures in renovations.