Services
A second set of eyes — before the first pour
Independent client-side review of building services design — catch coordination gaps before they become construction costs.
Design errors caught during construction cost 10 to 100 times more to fix than errors caught during design. Yet most projects proceed to tender and construction without an independent engineering review of the building services documentation. In practice, services documentation is often rushed to meet programme milestones, and coordination gaps between disciplines are the single largest source of construction variation claims.
MRGN provides client-side peer review — an independent assessment of the building services design, conducted by a senior engineer who has delivered projects of similar scale and complexity. The review looks at completeness, coordination between disciplines, compliance with the BCA and Australian Standards, and — critically — buildability. We flag issues before they reach the site.
What we review
- Design completeness — is every system fully resolved, or are there outstanding assumptions that the contractor will have to resolve?
- Cross-discipline coordination — do the electrical, mechanical, hydraulic, and fire services drawings align? Are penetrations, clearances, and spatial allowances adequate?
- Code and standard compliance — BCA, AS/NZS 3000, AS/NZS 1668, AS 2118, and any project-specific standards
- Buildability — can the design be constructed as drawn, with realistic access and installation sequencing?
- Scope gaps — what's missing that will surface as a variation later?
A peer review is not design certification and is not a statement of compliance — it is an independent engineering opinion on the quality and completeness of the design at a point in time, for the client's use in managing their project risk.
Because MRGN's principal is an electrical engineer with multi-disciplinary delivery experience, our peer reviews catch coordination issues that single-discipline reviewers miss. We check how electrical, mechanical, fire, hydraulics, and VT documentation interact — not just whether each discipline's drawings are internally consistent. See our full design offering.
Frequently Asked Questions
- When is the right stage for a peer review?
- Ideally at 100% design development, before tender. This gives time to address findings without delaying procurement. Reviews at 50% DD can also be valuable — catching coordination issues early.
- Does a peer review replace the design consultant's own QA?
- No. It's an additional, independent layer. The design consultant remains responsible for their own quality assurance. Our review catches what their QA may have missed.
- How is this different from a building surveyor's review?
- A building surveyor checks for BCA compliance. Our review goes further — it checks for coordination, buildability, completeness, and scope gaps that a building surveyor's compliance review doesn't cover.
- Can you review a single discipline or does it need to be the full services package?
- Either. We can review the full package or focus on specific disciplines, depending on where the risk sits.
Talk to Sam
Engineering input from a senior practitioner who carries the work end to end.
Get in touch