You can design the most beautiful building on the planet, but if the contractor can't actually build it as drawn, you've got a problem. Constructability reviews exist to catch that problem before it becomes a change order.

A constructability review is a structured evaluation of construction documents by people with hands-on construction experience. The goal is straightforward: confirm that the project can be built using standard construction methods, that the documents are clear enough for competitive bidding, and that the finished product can be maintained over its life.

This matters for the ARE because it sits at the intersection of design quality, project risk, and professional liability. Under the Spearin Doctrine (United States v. Spearin, 1918), the owner makes an implied warranty to the contractor that the drawings and specifications are adequate and constructible. When documents fall short, the architect's firm often absorbs that liability through negligent design claims.

The review process works best when construction-experienced personnel join the design team early, not at 90% completion when changes become expensive and contentious. Timing, team composition, checklists, and a clear resolution process for reviewer comments all determine whether the review actually improves the documents or just checks a box.

For PjM, expect questions that ask you to evaluate when a constructability review should occur, who should participate, and how to handle conflicts between reviewer recommendations and design intent.