Skip to content

Prepare a useful project review.

Use these short guides to prepare the material, focus the discussion, and leave a record that another person can follow.

A useful review brief has five fields.

Illustrative structure. Replace every example with the actual project, source, decision, and responsible person.

Basis
Property or drawing revision, jurisdiction, source material
Question
The specific decision or condition the group must review
Evidence
Assumption, criterion, dimension, note, or highlighted location
Outcome
Decision, clarification request, or design response
Revisit when
The information or design change that should reopen the question
01

Prepare a site feasibility discussion

Begin with the decision you need to make, such as which preliminary arrangement to develop further. Assemble the property information before comparing options. Keep the intended use and the assumptions consistent enough that the differences between options are meaningful.

  • Identify the address, parcel, and land included in the study.
  • State the intended use and the question for this review.
  • Collect the available survey, prior study, and jurisdiction references.
  • List the development controls used by each option.
  • Record which option to investigate next and why.
02

Work through a drawing finding

Read the requirement and the reported result before jumping to a correction. Open the relevant sheet and inspect the surrounding context. A finding may identify a conflict, or it may identify information that the review could not establish; the response should address the actual outcome.

  • Confirm the drawing set and revision.
  • Read the criterion, reference, and allowed value.
  • Compare the provided value and extracted information with the drawing.
  • Inspect the plan highlight when one is available.
  • Write the question or response for the person responsible for the drawing.
03

Hand off an unresolved question

A useful handoff lets someone continue the work without repeating the investigation. Include the question, the material already reviewed, and the reason it remains open. Name the person or discipline best placed to resolve it.

  • Question: what exactly needs to be established?
  • Context: which site, drawing revision, or requirement does it concern?
  • Evidence: where can the next reviewer inspect the source?
  • Next step: who will investigate, and what will they return?
04

Close the review

Before ending the discussion, separate the decisions made from the questions still open. Record any changed assumption alongside the option or finding it affects. This makes the next review a continuation of the work rather than another reconstruction of it.