Reduce liability risk.
Fewer permit comments.
Every set has gaps the team that drew it can't see. The ones that reach the county become permit comments. The ones that reach construction become RFIs, change orders, and claims.
I review your architectural drawings and project manual against each other, against Hawaii codes and county requirements, and against how a contractor will build them.
QC review services for Hawaii architects and mainland firms with Hawaii projects. Most reviews take one to two weeks per submittal.
24+ YEARS
ARCHITECTURE, SPECIFICATIONS, AND ESTIMATING.
$2 BILLION
HAWAII AND PACIFIC CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES PRICED.
CLIENTS I'VE WORKED WITH:
INK ARCHITECTS • AM PARTNERS • BKF & ASSOCIATES • ARCAT
WHO'S REVIEWING YOUR SET
Vinson Hiraoka
AIA, CSI, CCP
Aloha! I've been the architect who drew the details, the estimator who priced them, and the specifier who writes them into the construction documents. That's three different reads of the same set, and a QC review uses all three.
I've worked in Hawaii AEC for 24+ years on public and private projects from $100K to $100M, and priced $2 billion in Hawaii and Pacific construction. So I read documents the way a bidder does, and I know where the gaps tend to hide.
Every review is done by me personally. Principal level. No juniors, no handoffs.
WHY GAPS MAKE IT TO BID
Quality control review gets squeezed.
Every firm wants a clean set at bid. When gaps get through, it's usually for the same few reasons, and none of them is a lack of effort.
Those gaps don't go away. The ones that reach the county come back as permit review comments. The ones that reach construction come back as RFIs, change orders, and claims.
No Formal Quality Control Process
Without a written checklist, every review depends on who does it and what they remember to look for. One person catches the door hardware, another catches the fire ratings, and whatever nobody thinks to check goes out with the set. The same gaps show up again on the next project.
No One Owns Quality Control
Most firms don't have a dedicated QC reviewer. The people experienced enough to review a set are also running projects, meeting clients, and writing fees. So the check between drawings and specs waits for a free afternoon that rarely comes.
Too Close to See It
After months on a project, you see what you meant, not what's drawn. A conflict between a detail and the spec slips right past the person who created both. That's normal. Catching it takes an outside reader who sees the set the way a bidder will.
Deadlines Squeeze Coordination
When the schedule is tight, coordination is the first thing to go. Each discipline finishes its own sheets, the specs get written in parallel, and the places where they meet get checked last, if at all. Those are the gaps that turn into RFIs.
A SOLUTION FOR YOUR QUALITY CONTROL PROBLEMS
Independent review with local knowledge.
Fewer permit comments and RFIs.
Code and Permit Review
I review the architectural drawings against current Hawaii code editions and county requirements, and flag what a plan reviewer is likely to comment on. Fixing it before submittal costs less than another round of review.
Detailing and Constructability Review
I check the architectural details the way a contractor will build them: assemblies that don't shed water, dimensions that don't work, and details that can't be built as drawn. I've priced Hawaii construction, so I also flag what will drive the number up.
Project Manual Coordination
I review the project manual against the architectural drawings so products, materials, and assemblies match. Nothing shown on the drawings is left unspecified. When a detail and the spec disagree, it gets addressed before bidding.
Full Set Coordination Review
When the schedule is tight, the places where disciplines meet get checked last. I check them first: ceilings, penetrations, equipment clearances, and anything each consultant assumed the other covered.
THE SPESIFY STANDARD
Every review follows the same written checklist, so nothing depends on what someone remembers to check. Every comment I make is specific: the sheet or section, what's wrong, and why it matters at bid. No vague notes and no comments for the sake of volume. This is the standard every review is held to.
Easy to work with.
Accountability and Trust
Your success is my success. I take accountability for my performance seriously. Trust is earned every single day, not assumed at the start.
Relationships With Aloha
I know what local relationships, culture, and communication are worth here. Respect, responsibility, and humility are core beliefs, not a tagline.
No Aggravation Policy
QUESTIONS FIRMS ASK ME
Fair questions. Here are straight answers.
"We already do QC in-house."
Good, keep doing it. This doesn't replace your internal review.
It adds a read from someone outside the project. Your team checks what they know they drew and spec'd. I check the set the way a contractor will see it, cold, with no memory of what anyone meant. Those two reviews catch different things.
"We don't have time for more comments before bid."
Fair concern. That's why the review comments are ranked by importance and risk.
Fix the major items first. The rest are your call. Most of the high-risk items are quick fixes on paper: a mismatched product, a missing section, a vague sentence. The same items cost far more time as RFIs once construction starts.
"Will you second-guess our design?"
No. Design decisions are yours.
I check whether the documents describe your design clearly, completely, and consistently. If a detail and a spec section disagree, I'll point it out. Deciding which one is right is your call. I'm there to make sure the contractor understands what you designed.
"We're on the mainland. How does this work?"
The same way it works for local firms. You send PDFs, I send back marked-up PDFs and a written summary. We walk through it together in an online meeting.
You also get the local knowledge that's hard to bring from the mainland: Hawaii codes and county review, State and City spec formats, product availability in the islands, and how salt air, termites, and shipping affect projects.
GETTING STARTED IS EASY
Three simple steps to reduce your professional liability.
STEP 1
Contact Spesify.
Reach out to me using the web form below, email, phone call, or direct messaging on LinkedIn.
I'll respond to you within one business day or less.
STEP 2
Let's Get Acquainted.
I'll schedule a discovery meeting with you either in-person or online. Let's get to know each other, go over your company profile, project needs, and make sure Spesify is the right fit.
STEP 3
Send Your Project.
When your project is starting, send me the info for review, and I'll prepare a fee proposal. Once it's signed, I go to work. You'll get a schedule, regular coordination as the drawings develop, and your QC review delivered on time.