YOU OWE IT TO YOURSELF (TO GET INVOLVED WITH CSI OR USGBC)

The standard talking points arguing for us to get involved with some sort of selfless, public-spirited activity such as CSI or USGBC emphasize the good we can do for others by our service.

That’s true.  We can all make a positive difference in our communities, both the virtual and geographic types of community, by serving.  And we should do it if we can, because it’s the right thing to do.

I happen to be pushing CSI and USGBC specifically because I already belong to these two organizations.  But if CSI or USGBC aren’t your cup of tea, substitute AIA, ALA, ASHRAE, ASID, ASCE, AGC, DBIA, or any of the other worthy organizations that try to bring order and standards to the AEC business.  Just find a way to get involved that works for you.

In addition to altruism, an underappreciated and frequently maligned virtue by the way, there’s another really good reason to get involved:  You owe it to yourself.

Here’s part of why you owe it to yourself to get involved with CSI or USGBC:

• Networking:  In this turbulent economy, you can never have too many contacts and friends.  CSI and USGBC members are plugged into the AEC business.  Come to a program, participate in the local organization, and you never know who you’ll meet or what you’ll learn about the business.
• Community:  This could be thought of as a subset of networking, but it’s much more than that.  Both organizations are part of the broader AEC community of thoughtful, smart, and, yes, opinionated people.  Plug yourself into the community and its ongoing dialog. You’ll feel validated and challenged.  You’ll gain as much as you contribute.
• Entertainment:  If the choice is between spending your evenings watching TV and working on CSI or USGBC, the choice seems clear to me.  TV is mostly sensational, worthless, repetitive crap, driven by the need to get your attention and brainwash you into buying stuff.  Be honest with yourself.  Have you memorized the dialog in all of the AFLAC duck commercials?  Does the Empire Carpet jingle (“Five-eight-eight-two-three-hundred-Empire”) pop into your consciousness when you least expect it?  Another year or two of this stuff and your brain cells will start to atrophy.  Liberate yourself from TV’s visual waterboarding by getting involved with CSI or USGBC.  You’ll be glad you did.  And you won’t feel like your time’s been wasted at the end of the evening.
• Education:  The two dominant trends in design and construction you will have to be knowledgeable about in the immediate future are BIM and green building.  Activity in CSI and USGBC is the best way to get, and keep, yourself up to speed.
• BIM:  CSI’s national technical leadership is in the forefront in integrating specs and BIM.  Sign up for the CSI BIM Practice Group monthly webinars for just one way to get started with this.  In addition, Northern Illinois CSI’s chapter programs and lunchtime call-in Roundtables run the gamut from construction issues to professional practice considerations.  You’ll always learn something from a chapter program, even if it’s not focusing on your particular area of expertise.  See what CSI is all about at:  www.csinet.org.
• Green Building:  Many organizations are doing important work in green building, but USGBC has the most comprehensive approach.  Activity in USGBC is a great way to keep learning about all aspects of green building.  Incredibly, I continue to run across people who are skeptical about green building and USGBC’s LEED green building rating system.  My advice is:  Scoff at this trend at your peril.  To be blunt, if you don’t become LEED accredited or at least knowledgeable about LEED, you’re soon going to be a dinosaur, professionally speaking. Explore USGBC at: www.usgbc.org.

Finally, I want to put in a shameless plug for you to volunteer for service in our very own Northern Illinois CSI Chapter.  For the next fiscal year starting in July 2011, several members of our chapter leadership are transitioning to other roles in the chapter.  We’re looking for volunteers to step into our old roles.

The role I’m most interested in filling happens to be newsletter editor.  I’ve been the editor of the Northern Illinois CSI Link for the last five years, and I’m moving on to another job in the chapter.  I have really enjoyed being the newsletter editor.  I got to meet and correspond with lots of interesting new people.  I learned (well, sort of learned) Microsoft Publisher.  I got to work with our chapter board, a friendly and open group of people with world-class skills.  The new editor should find her or his own path of course, but I’ve got all sorts of records and templates to pass on to a new editor to make it easy to step into the role.  And I’ll coach and mentor the new editor as much as she or he wants.

The editor job is a great opportunity for someone that wants to write, edit, and communicate, so consult your inner writer and then get in touch with one of the following to ask questions or to volunteer:

Me:  jwoneil@larsondarby.com

Chapter President Susan Johnson:  sjohnson@muller2.com

President-Elect Fred Burr:  FBURR911@sbcglobal.net

SCARLETT O’HARA, MY WRITING COACH

“I can't think about that right now. If I do, I'll go crazy. I'll think about that tomorrow.”  - Scarlett O’Hara, the indomitable but flawed heroine of “Gone With the Wind”, Margaret Mitchell’s 1936 historical novel of the old South.

Writers’ block does not just afflict creative writers.  It hits technical writers like yours truly, too.

When I get (spec) writers block, it’s not that I can’t write, really.  I don’t do much real writing anyway.  I mostly edit, and tweak, and modify language from master specs, and attempt to coordinate with project drawings.  No, my writers’ block takes the form of difficulty in getting an angle, of figuring out the overall strategy of the documents. 

CSI’s platitudes about making specs “clear, complete, concise and correct” are only indirect guidance when I’m trying to produce construction specifications for unusual projects (of which we seem to have quite a few). The specs may have to accompany drawings that are still in progress, making final terminology coordination difficult.  It may be tough to get the client’s attention, even though that’s vital to understanding his or her objectives.  There may be little or no documentation of project decisions and other needed data.  Key AE decision makers may be unavailable or have extremely limited time to give me the lowdown on the project.  All the while, project deadlines loom.

The biggest challenge is always to make the documents change-order proof and loophole proof, and that’s where the strategy, the angle, the AE business creativity if you will, comes in.

As a spec writer, I have come to take Scarlett O’Hara’s coping strategy - I'll think about that tomorrow - as my guide.   Whenever I’m stumped by a spec writing project, I put the project out of my mind, go home, and get a good nights’ sleep.  For years I thought I was just procrastinating, but now I realize I was on to something.

The next morning, usually when I’m tying my shoes of all things, an answer often comes to me.  I may think of someone from whom I can get good advice.  I may realize the current project is analogous to another from the past.  I may think of some way to coordinate better with the project architect even though he’s still detailing the project.  I may figure out a way to set aside other projects for a while so I can concentrate better on the current one.  The answer can take many forms.

Thanks for the advice, Scarlett.

COPING WITH THE FLOOD: MICKEY MOUSE AND ME

Like most of us in architecture and construction, I’m inundated with information of all sorts in both hard copy and electronic form.    

Some of it has to do with specific projects in our office. It’s not always easy to find a place to put stray, as yet unconnected, project-related factoids and spoken reminders so I can find them and put them to use when necessary. Will the “model” (as in BIM) be any help in this?

Lots of incoming information has to do with CSI and USGBC.  Mostly this affects my calendar so it’s easy to deal with.

I get a continuing stream of hard-copy magazines and hard-copy product literature.  I confess that although we converted the specs from MF95 to MF04 early on, I have yet to convert our product literature files to MF04, so for the time being, for example, site fence product literature is still lingering in the old Division 2, rather than in Division 32 where it belongs.

In addition, I receive an average of about 60 email messages a day at work and another 20 or 30 on personal email accounts.

Plus I use Google Reader and Google Alerts to find articles and blog posts on all sorts of subjects that interest me.  It’s now mid evening so it’s been about 9 hours since I last checked my Google Reader list during the lunch hour. Google has obediently gathered 139 items for me to look at.  I usually glance at a few of the most interesting, and I might read two or three of them carefully.

All together this flow of information resembles a real-life flood.

Reminds me of the Mississippi valley springtime floods. I grew up in the river town of Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin, so I know about floods. 

Trying to cope with all of this, I sometimes feel like the Mickey Mouse Sorcerer’s Apprentice character in Walt Disney’s great 1940 animated film “Fantasia”.  Sorcerer's apprentice Mickey wearies of carrying buckets of water. When the Sorcerer leaves, Mickey dons the Sorcerer’s hat for its magic powers, conjuring up a spell to animate a broom and order it to carry the water for him.  Mickey runs into trouble when the broom won’t stop carrying water and floods the place.   The sorcerer finally returns, takes control, and restores order.   

Will BIM be our sorcerer, and help us bring clarity and order to our information flood? 

Or will it be the apprentice?

NO, NO, NO!

On TV recently, I saw a short video clip of the late Senator Ted Stevens’ famous “NO” speech  It reminded me that sometimes architects have to say no to contractors. 

I know this is going to sound as though I’m biased against contractors, but I’m really not.  I cheerfully acknowledge that 99 and 44/100 percent of the time, construction contractors do the right thing.  Sometimes even when it’s not what I specify.

Still, sometimes we just have to say no.

So, taking my cue from another famous naysayer, Amy Winehouse, I have composed this little ditty. 

Sing to the tune of Amy Winehouse’s great rendition of “Rehab” (Subtitled “They wanted me to go to rehab, but I said no, no, no”).  See one of many versions of this song here.

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

            I’d rather be at work on the next job

            I ain’t got any fee left

            I have to listen to you bidders sob

            That my spec ain’t deft

            Don’t you bury me in RFI’s

            Just trying to get a rise

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

            How many more substitutions

            Are you gonna ask for?

            I specified eleven paints

And you want me to approve one more?

           

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

            You’re billing 70 percent of the drywall

            But the studs aren’t even up.

            You forget some waivers of lien

            Still you want us to pay up

            It’s not just the money

            Retainage ain’t funny

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

           

            The specs and drawings ain’t contradictory

Or full of conditions unforeseen

            Documents are complimentary

            Better than they’ve ever been

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’      

FILE THIS UNDER SECTION 01 50 00 – TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS

My son Jerry and I came across this portable toilet in Chicago last summer.

Whoever picked the name for this company is a marketing genius.

Photo by Jerry O’Neil

THE SPEC WRITER SONG

News Item:  Apple announced Tuesday that the music of The Beatles will now be available from Apple’s on-line iTunes Store.

Yesterday I happened to hear the Beatles’ 1966 recording of “Paperback Writer”.  Now I can’t get the tune out of my head. 

I’ve always liked the song, but I can’t really identify with the aspirations of a paperback writer.

So I think it’s high time someone wrote a song about spec writers.

Proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that I’m better at prose than poetry, here’s my attempt.  My apologies to songwriters and poets everywhere.  (Sing to the tune of the Beatles’  “Paperback Writer”).

I’m a spec writer (I’m a spec writer)

Dear Sir or Madam, will you bid my book?

It took me weeks to write, will you take a look?

It’s based on MasterFormat, so don’t treat me like a doormat.

And I need a bid, cuz I’m a spec writer.

I’m a spec writer.

It’s the sad story of an under funded job.

And an indecisive owner that’s in too big a hurry.

Of addenda thus we’ll have a flurry.

But don’t you worry.

I’m a spec writer.

I’m a spec writer (I’m a spec writer)

It’s a thousand pages, and of volumes two.

I’ll be writing an addendum in a week or two.

I can make it longer, do you want to go to trial.

I can change the font from Courier to Arial.

I’m a spec writer.

I’m a spec writer (I’m a spec writer)

If you like my book you can give me a bid.

I’ll assume that read it thoroughly you did.

You realize it’s LEED.

So don’t underbid, I plead.

I’m a spec writer.

I’m a spec writer (I’m a spec writer)

For architects and engineers I have to be clairvoyant.

To the contractor I’m just an annoyance.

Soon the bids are due.

Only after that you sue.

I’m a spec writer.

            I’m a spec writer (I’m a spec writer)

            This book is all about the Work.

            And written by a team of dorks.

            Just don’t ask me for a change order.

            Cuz I really said it right, sorta.

            I’m a spec writer.

            I’m a spec writer (I’m a spec writer).

            Don’t dare front-load the job.

            Or extra retainage I’ll lob.

            Meet all requirements at closeout.

            Or the quality of Work I’ll doubt.

            I’m a spec writer.

FASCINATED BY CHAOS

George Soros says he is “…fascinated by chaos. That’s really how I make my money: understanding the revolutionary process in financial markets.”

Some time ago I ran across this quote in an article about George Soros, the controversial billionaire investor. Mr. Soros has been financially successful in understanding and exploiting chaos and change in the world’s financial marketplace.

It occurred to me that the AEC industry, in which I’ve been immersed for over forty years as an architect and specifier, and which I’ve always found fascinating, is even more fascinating now because it's currently in chaos.

Several major waves of change are rolling through the industry, and combined, their effect is the business equivalent of a tsunami.

A few examples:
• CAD to BIM Transition: Although slowed by the economic downturn, the transition from producing construction contract documents using CAD-and-word-processed-specs to BIM-and-linked-specs will eventually pick up speed. Spec writers will have to learn how to work with BIM, and to some extent BIM users will have to become de facto spec writers. This will eventually result in better contract documents because BIM will impose some much-needed rigor and consistency in the terminology we use. But the transition will be an adventure for all concerned.
• Conditions of the Contract: The decades-long dominance of the AIA and EJCDC contract documents is being challenged by AGC's new "Consensus Documents" (Consensusdocs). The AGC had a series of contract documents before, of course, but now the coalition they're leading is aggressively promoting their new family of documents by drawing all kinds of organizations, including CSI, into "endorsement" of their documents, whatever that means. The AIA and EJCDC documents primarily reflect the interests of AEs and owners, and Consensusdocs presumably place primacy on the interests of builders. I predict a steep learning curve for AEs working on projects with Consensusdocs, plus some real challenges for the authors of any future updates to the CSI Project Resource Manual / Manual of Practice which has been based since its first edition many years ago on the AIA/EJCDC documents. (Here’s something for you irony fans out there to savor: The AGC withdrew from the long-established industry consensus around the AIA documents, and then named their documents "Consensusdocs".)
• Green Building Issues and Goals: Consider the effect on the AEC industry of LEED, upgraded energy codes, the ambitious goals of the AIA’s 2030 Challenge, etc. The result is an increasingly complex matrix of design considerations, and more liability for AEs. Determining all the regs that apply to a new project is already much more complicated than the traditional code search, and it’s going to get even trickier in the next few years.
• Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) blurs and redefines the traditional responsibilities of building owners, designers, and builders. Though IPD was conceived with the noble goal of reducing the wasteful and adversarial behavior of the players, the business consequences of its use, especially involving shared responsibility for the “model”, are only just beginning to emerge.
• Paperless, Cloud-based Construction Administration Tools: Lots of potential to do things better and more efficiently; probably lots of new ways to make mistakes, too.
• The economic downturn itself is suppressing project design and construction and idling thousands of persons in all parts of the AEC industry. A significant percentage of members of our CSI chapter have had serious interruptions in employment since the downturn started the pain in 2008.

If this doesn’t add up to a chaotic and revolutionary situation, I don't know what does.

I just wish I could figure out how to straighten out some of this chaos.

And make billions.

Frank Lloyd Wright's Petit Memorial Chapel

As Ralph Liebing has pointed out in his Per-SPEC-tives articles which appear in CSI chapter newsletters, most spec writers didn't enter the design professions with the intention of writing construction specifications.

I certainly didn't.  I wanted to be a designer.  My fascination with the buildings of Frank Lloyd Wright and Mies van der Rohe motivated me to go to IIT’s architectural school in Chicago.

After I started working in an AE firm, I was deployed pretty much exclusively as a drafter and detailer (the old-fashioned kind of drafting, long before CAD).  My attempts to get assigned to design work were unsuccessful.  Then the late Bill Lohmann offered me a job as a spec writer.  I accepted his offer.   I’m glad I did and I can honestly say that in 37 years as a specifier I've never had a boring day.

Anyway, yesterday I came across a building that reminded me why it's a good thing for the world that I became a wordsmith instead of a building designer. 

The building is Frank Lloyd Wright's Petit Memorial Chapel.  It sits in a cemetery in Belvidere, Illinois and was built in 1907.

I could never have designed anything this good.  I do a pretty good job arranging words, but as an architect I could never have achieved the degree of focus, elegance, and simplicity that Frank Lloyd Wright did with this building.

I find most of Wright's buildings breathtaking, but this one is special because it's so pure, so cerebral, and so refined.  Compared to most of the eclectic crap that was being built in 1907, this must have stood out like a spaceship from mars.

The photographs I'm attaching barely hint at the zen-like purity of this little building.  If you get the chance, go see it for yourself.

BTW, if someone offers you a job as a spec writer, I’d advise you to jump on it.  If you get lucky, you could be in the vanguard of the long-awaited integration of specs and BIM.  

Why Is The Project Manual So Big?

“Do you spec writers get paid by the pound?”

Sooner or later, on almost every construction project, somebody in a meeting comments on the size of the project spec, to general guffaws all around.  Each participant tries to outdo the other in displaying a dismissive attitude toward construction specs.

Then, within a few days, someone locates and distributes a grainy tenth-generation photocopy of that seventies-era cartoon showing a construction-site outhouse with a speech balloon saying “Damn!  We’re out of specs.”

But the minute that any of the actors in a construction project need support for a position they’re taking, where do they look?

The spec. 

If the spec has information that settles the issue, everything’s fine.  But if the answer can’t be found in the spec, the spec writer puts on his or her thinking cap and wordsmiths something to make the documents better on the next project.

That’s why the spec book is so big. We spec writers get a lot of feedback.  And we’re driven by the need to strive for a loophole-proof set of construction documents.

The inevitable result of such feedback is more words and more pages in the Project Manual. 

Ultimately, though, we’ve got about as much chance of eliminating contract document document loopholes as the IRS has of eliminating tax law loopholes. Why? 

• Numero Uno, The Last War Syndrome:  No two projects are really the same, and the solution to the last project’s problem may not quite cut it for the current project.  Frequent criticism of the military is that they’re always fighting the last war.  Same thing for spec writers and loopholes.
• Numero Two-o, Contractor Attitude:  No two projects have the same cast of characters.  Project A’s contractor may be super-cooperative and dedicated to really satisfying the owner and getting continuing business.  Project B’s contractor may have bid the job low, always intending to make up the difference on change orders, in which case even a good set of contract documents will be under constant attack.  Contractor B might challenge provisions in the documents that contractor A would accept without question.
• Numero-Three-o, BIM!:  Whenever we emerge from this ghastly depression, BIM usage will take off like a rocket.  As entranced as I am with the idea of BIM and it’s possibilities for improving AE/spec writer productivity and document coordination, contractors will certainly find ways of exploiting information in the BIM model for all kinds of embarrassing change orders. Which leads me to…
• Numero-Four-o, Contractor Creativity:  The loophole-exploiting creativity of contractors, like that of tax lawyers, seems to be boundless.

Even though it’s a never-ending task, eliminating contract document loopholes remains an ideal we have to strive for, kind of like the holy grail.  Hence big spec books are here to stay.

Oh, by the way, the numero-uno, numero two-o thing.  I borrowed it from one of my favorite writers, the late Molly Ivins, who was fond of using this device for lists in her newspaper articles about Texas politics.

REVENGE OF THE NERDS?

For years I’ve carped about the shallowness and triviality of TV news and the human interest pieces they air rather than telling us what’s really happening in the world.

Imagine my surprise when I found myself liking one of Jeanne Moos’ goofy little stories on CNN the other day.  It was an amusing story about Peter Orszag, the White House Budget irector. 

Although the story was typical TV dreck, I found it weirdly heartening, not for anything Mr. Orszag is doing in connection with the budget, but for it’s possible implications for the reputations of spec writers.

The gist of Jeanne Moos’ story was that Mr. Orszag, who is reputed to be a brilliant economist but who bears a striking resemblance to some of the characters in the 1984 movie “Revenge of the Nerds”, has somehow finally succeeded in making it sexy to be a nerd.   The story focused on the divorced Mr. Orszag’s romantic entanglements and the fact that he was apparently considered to be one of Washington’s most eligible bachelors until he recently announced he would marry again.

So if the nerdy Mr. Orszag is considered sexy, can spec writers be far behind?  We’re the quintessential nerds, absorbed in the business of creating contract documents.  Not quite as nerdy as the algorithm-writing engineers at Google, but close.  (Full disclosure:  In college I did indeed have a pocket protector bursting with pens.  This was when I was an architecture student, even before I knew what specs were. I didn’t clip my slide rule on my belt like the engineering students, though.)

Mind you, we spec writers aren’t looking for romantic entanglements or groupies as a reward for our nerdiness, but it would be nice to get wider attention and acknowledgement for our contributions to the architecture and engineering professions.

Why I like MASTERFORMAT 2004, Numero Uno

Anecdotal reports, along with conversations in CSI gatherings seem to indicate that many architects, engineers and specifiers are lingering with the old, no-longer-supported-by-CSI, 16-division MASTERFORMAT 1995, instead of using the new (actually five years old now) 50-division MASTERFORMAT 2004.

I suppose old habits are hard to change, especially given the near-geriatric profile of CSI’s membership.  Full disclosure:  I’m getting close to this demographic myself, but I have enthusiastically embraced the use of MASTERFORMAT 2004.  I’d support MF04 anyway, just because it’s the product of the volunteer-driven consensus standard process that’s at the heart of professionalism and good professional societies. 

But here’s another reason:  It’s easier to produce HVAC, plumbing and fire protection specs with MF04 than with MF95.

Remember the interminable tussles between plumbing engineers, fire protection engineers, and HVAC engineers over the content of the so-called common requirements of the old Division 15 – Mechanical?

The various engineers could never seem to agree on what valves to include, or what insulation to include, or what pipe sizes and types to include, or what to say about painting or concrete equipment bases, or what to say about firestopping penetrations.  And on and on…

Division 15 could never be wrapped up until all three disciplines had edited the common spec sections. 

These problems were exacerbated when one or more of these engineering disciplines was contracted to an outside firm or firms.  The situation was almost hard-wired to create gaps and/or overlaps in bidding and contract documents, resulting in addendum items and change orders.

In contrast, MF 04 gives each of the three engineering disciplines their own Division, 21 for Fire Protection, 22 for Plumbing, and 23 for HVAC.  Each of these Divisions is self-contained, intended to include all of the components necessary to bid and build that work.

Thus MF 04 makes it easier for each of the three engineering disciplines to wrap up their specs.  Yes, it’s true that this means at least some redundant text in each of the three divisions, but I think it’s a small price to pay.

APPLIED CLAIRVOYANCE – WRITING SPECIFICATIONS BEFORE THE DRAWINGS ARE DONE

Clairvoyance:  perceiving things beyond the natural range of the senses (from Google Dictionary)

I don’t really believe in clairvoyance, but writing specs often seems to require something of the sort.  When drawings and specifications have to be produced simultaneously and within a short time, and the project schedule doesn’t allow time for a spec writer to see and coordinate with a complete set of the drawings before bidding, it’s a real challenge to get the documents right.

Everyone who has studied CSI’s Project Resource Manual or taken a CSI certification course has gotten the message that drawings and specifications should agree, or at least not disagree.  Clients have a right to expect no less, because flawed bidding and construction documents reflect poorly on their design-professional authors, complicate the bidding process and, if the flaws aren’t corrected by addendum before a contract is signed, subject the client to extra costs during construction.

Herewith a few clairvoyance-simulating tips and tricks I’ve learned over the years:

• Don’t wait for an official copy of the drawings. You’re better off starting project specs early even if you have to start with an in-progress “snapshot” of the drawings rather than an official “DD”, or “50% CD” or whatever the milestone is.  If you wait for an official printing milestone of some sort, you may not have time to understand the project adequately.  Ask the team for sketches, perspectives, or whatever materials the team has developed to explain the project to the client or to themselves.  If you can get your hands on viewer software that will allow you to view in-progress CAD drawings, do it.  If you can participate in contributing information to BIM models, do it.  I haven’t been able to get involved with BIM yet but I sure intend to do so as soon as I can, because that will put me into the project loop.
• Comb the drawings, project memos and emails for pertinent factoids, and mark up a copy of your master spec table of contents.  This usually generates questions you should ask the team.
• Ferret out a copy of the Owner/AE Agreement and read it.  Ditto consultant agreements and the Owner/CM Agreement if applicable. Start the bidding and contract requirements and Division 01 first (before the Division 02 through 14 sections) and send a draft copy to your AE project manager for in-house and client review.  Point out known issues, assumptions, wild guesses, etc., and ask for direction.
• Question!  Pepper members of the project team with questions.  Do plan drawings disagree with elevations?  Do schedules disagree with details?  Do drawings disagree with project memos and emails?  Do details agree with AE office policy?  Ask the team to clarify each apparent contradiction, preferably by email so you can keep track of responses.  I love email for its immediacy, but watch out and don’t depend on it too much. Keep the focus of each email narrow, and send multiple emails – one for each major subject.  People have a tendency to absorb only one thought from an email message and then fire off a response, so if you send a complicated message with many questions, you may not get all the answers you need.
• Interior Finishes:  Often interior finish material choices are made late in the CD process.  If you delay editing the spec sections for finishes until final selections are made, you may have difficulty finishing the Project Manual on time.  Talk to your interior designer and see if they will consider specifying proprietary color choices in a finish schedule on the drawings.  Then the spec section can focus on installation and workmanship standards and just refer to the finish schedule on the drawings for the actual product and color.  Thus any delay in finalizing finish materials will affect only the drawings and not the specs.