Design & Architectural

  • Brief & scope formulation
  • Site adjudication
  • 3D & animated visualization
  • Brand portfolio development
  • Brand mix development
  • Conceptual planning
  • Foodservice design
  • Design Development package
  • Preliminary budgets
  • Architectural drawings
  • Engineering drawings (MEP)
  • Construction drawing set
    for permitting


  • Site Feasibility Studies
  • Programming
  • Materials Counseling
  • Value Engineering
  • Planning and Scheduling
  • Life Cycle Energy Analyses
  • Cost Engineering
  • Budget Development
  • Municipal Approvals / Permits
  • Cash Flow Projection


  • Cost Containment
  • Manpower Resource Leveling
  • CPM Scheduling
  • Procurement and Expediting
  • Equipment Installation
  • Quality Assurance
  • Labor Relations
  • Safety
  • Management Information Systems
  • Field Supervision
  • Risk Management

Value Engineering

In order to reduce the cost of construction, it is feasible to introduce a Value Engineering approach whereby secondary designs, multiple bids & alternate General Contracting systems can be implemented. The primary goal of value engineering should always be to preserve the initial project as it was intended, whilst developing clever & cost effective scenarios that allow a reduction of the overall cost of the project. Maintaining the function & form of the project’s end goal is paramount to achieving cost savings that add value to the project rather than detract from the final outcome.

Team Members
are made up of the governing designSMART members paired with the outsourced expertise of the following categories of professionals on a per project basis:

  • Site & Realty developer
  • Feasibility Study provider
  • Brand Consultant
  • Conceptual Designer
  • Interior Designer
  • Foodservice Designer
  • Architect
  • Mechanical Engineer
  • Structural Engineer
  • Civil Engineer
  • General Contractor
  • LEED Compliane specialist

Selecting the appropriate Delivery Method for the project

A client/owner embarking on a construction project must make an important decision regarding the method by which the project is designed and constructed-the project delivery method. This decision has become more difficult in recent years as several “alternative delivery methods” have been developed to address weaknesses in the traditional design-bid-build scenario. Methods that have gained in popularity include at-risk construction management, fast-track construction, multiple prime contractors, and design-build. Proponents of particular alternative methods promise improvements over the traditional system in terms of cost, project control and reduction in disputes.

For the client, the wealth of choices can be both good and bad. The downside is that with the variety of delivery systems-along with the accompanying assurances of the superiority of one method over others-confusion can be inevitable. The upside lies within the increased number of alternatives which then offers the client or developer more flexibility to choose an appropriate and effective system for its particular project.

Process management is a discipline uniquely tailored to the planning, design and construction management of projects. It has proven effective when paired with the right contract form and project delivery method. Indeed, Process Management has been used successfully in contracting methods and delivery systems by clients who do not continuously maintain the staff expertise or numbers necessary to deal with the complex responsibilities involved in the management of major projects.

Specialized knowledge can be very beneficial, particularly in large and complicated projects, since experts in various specialties can provide valuable services. However, it is advantageous to understand how the different parts of the process fit together. Waste, excessive cost and delays can result from poor coordination and communication among specialists. It is particularly in the interest of owners to ensure that such problems do not occur. And it behooves all participants in the process toheed the interests of owners because, in the end, it is the owners who provide the resources and have the final say.

By adopting the viewpoint of the clients /owners, we can focus our attention on the complete cycle of process management for constructed facilities rather than the historical roles of various specialists such as planners, architects, engineering designers, constructors, fabricators, material suppliers, financial analysts and others. To be sure, each specialty has made important advances in developing new techniques and tools for efficient implementation of construction projects. However, it is through the understanding of the entire cycle of process management that these specialists can respond more effectively to the owner's desires for their services, in marketing their specialties, and in improving the productivity and quality of their work .