Multiple Tenant Projects

[cgrover]

I'm currently working on the "shell" for a two story professional office building. The building will contain 8 suites with approximately 15,000sf. I will be doing the tenant improvements for each suite and am treating each of these as a "new" project as they will be for separate clients.

My question is how or where the model resides. I started by doing each tenant improvement as a separate workset and phase. Is this the best way to go about this? Could I link the shell model into a new file and then draw the tenant improvements in a separate file? I can see where this may cause some problems down the road if the shell project moves or it's path were to change.

Just curious if anyone else has tackled a multiple tenant building and what process was for the model.

Thanks,
grover

[beegee]

I definitely would not link, because you cannot align lock elements in the parent file with the linked file, which would most likely cause problems.

Phases may be required, but with 8 tenants and existing/demolition/new work, that could be a logistics nightmare.

Worksets seem to me to be the best solution for controlling display and printing of the work for each individual tenant, while still maintaining relationships within and to the "shell" building.

[Steve_Stafford]

I'd tend to agree with worksets. Phasing I'd be inclined to remain loyal to existing demo and new...I can imagine a scenario where you want to show the second tenant next door to the seventh and you "can't" because the second phase is too far in the past so to speak... So I think worksets are the best choice.

[cgrover]

Beegee,

This ties into a post the other day about phases and bid packages. With separate bid packages and multiple tenants am I best to put "all" new work on one phase and then control visibility with worksets? In a few trials I wasn't able to get certain views to "show" exactly what I wanted.

So I've tried phases and worksets and it works about exactly opposite of the way I want it to. For example; For below grade work it will (first phase) it will show with dark lines but I cannot get future work to show greyed out. Then when I get to the "second Phase" it works because the above grade work is in dark lines while all work related to the previous bid package (below grade) is shown and in a grey tone. Maybe I'm asking for something which isn't possible.

So if all work is on one phase and with worksets I'll be able to control what is on and off, but will not be able to control the "lineweight" of what I want to show. The deeper I get into this the more confused I seem to be getting. Maybe additional views would work?

Thanks,
grover

[Wes Macaulay]

Is this a construction management project? i.e. with multiple tenders? i.e. showing the building at a variety of stages? Because that's a different matter.

If you're just doing base building as one package and tenant improvements as another, try this:

use one phase for base building
use a later phase for TI's if you'd like the base building to be shown lighter, or differently, to graphically differentiate the TI work from the base building work
use worksets for each of the separate TI's so you can turn them off individually
use separate views for each area of the building being improved, and turn on/off the appropriate worksets
Does that make sense? Sounds like a great project -- to do the building and the TI's all in Revit.

If you're doing each TI as a separate bid package you'll have to break up your drawings and schedules (using filters) in such a way that the whole shootin' match can reside in the one Revit file, but still be broken up into the separate packages.

[cgrover]

Wes,

I think you said exactly what I was thinking. The only other twist into the project is it is a fast track and we have let the footing and foundation package already along with a few other miscellaneous items. So now doing all the above grade work is being documented. It is the splitting of the project which has been giving me fits, because I really wanted to show the below grade work or the work being bid in "normal" line weights while showing the above work (future) in a grey tone. I ended up using notes to delineate the work being bid and the work being shown for additional information purposes.

It has been great to have this project, especially since I started my own firm and this is my first project. It is in a very high profile location and has gotten a lot of good press so far. Hopefully it will continue that way. I also was successful in convincing the owner to require the individual tenants to use the same design team and contractor, so we are happy with that decision.

Thanks,
grover

[SCShell]

Hi there,
I do a lot of these type of projects. In addition, I do tenant improvements for several large office buildings here, some 8 storys, some 2. The method I use is a very simple one, based on the way we did things in the "old" days; however, it has worked well for me!

I create the "existing" building shell model and save it as a separate project labeled "shell - built out".
Then, I copy the entire file and re-name it the "T.I. Project's Name" and start entering my first T.I. Once the walls, doors, windows, cabinets, ceilings, floor tile etc, is modelled, I save it before adding any notes, annotations, dimensions etc. Then, I copy that file as "shell - built out" to replace the original one. I then go back to the "T.I. Project" and finish the T.I. project, cropping it as required.

(On some projects, I simply copy and paste back to the building shell's file, shown in the existing phase, so that, in the future, this T.I. will be shown as "existing", ready to be remodelled.)

In essence, I am creating an ongoing file which shows the shell building with each T.I. as I do them. Once that is complete, I have a model of the entire building, kinda like a "background" drawing, ready for any future TI remodels which can be modified to show everything as "existing".

This method has another benifit. I have had to do exterior remodels and additions to some of my buildings. It is nice having the entire building in my system without any notes etc.

I know this is a little more work than normal; however, it really pays off later. (*I am in this for the long haul! I am only 45.)

Hope this helps
Steve Shell

[Tom Dorner]

I struggle with this issue as well since do a lot of TI work in existing buildings and are required to maintain a "as-built" of each building. The big issue is that we end up doing space plans that may never be built due to leases falling apart. Plus there is always the element of time lag to completion. For example we may do the plan a year in advance of the tenant actually moving in. In that case I cannot show the new tenant's space in the "as-built" as the old tenant is still there. I've played with worksets, phases and design options, but none seem to really meet our needs. The best thing I can think of would be to somehow define a "region" on the building project that could then take on its own set of phasing and design options.

In the AutoCAD world we would maintain a seperate "as-built" file for each floor where we would cut and paste the new TI build outs into when they were completed. Lots of work and hoping to avoid resorting to this in Revit.

Any additonal insights into this matter will be appreciated.

Tom

[SCShell]

In the AutoCAD world we would maintain a seperate "as-built" file for each floor where we would cut and paste the new TI build outs into when they were completed. Lots of work and hoping to avoid resorting to this in Revit.

Any additonal insights into this matter will be appreciated.

Tom

This is one way that I do this now, and have in the past with Revit. I simply cut and paste the T.I. into the master Building Shell as built file. Now with 6.1, it even pastes to it's correct location on the floor plate because they are similar to each other. The best part, if you have your master Shell Building plan view set to "existing", anything you paste into that view will automatically be changed to "existing" as well. (*even though it was "new" in the T.I. project.)
How cool is that!

Hope this helps
Steve Shell