In the world of Department of Transportation (DOT) projects, we’re seeing a growing push for adopting Building Information Modeling (BIM) processes. BIM’s promise is significant—it’s designed to streamline project delivery, improve data accuracy, and enhance the coordination and visualization of complex infrastructure. However, despite these advantages, many DOT projects are still tied to traditional submittal processes, creating roadblocks that prevent BIM from reaching its full potential.
One of the biggest hurdles to adopting a true BIM process isn’t necessarily a lack of technology or skills; it’s often the established review stages that keep us anchored to legacy methods. Here’s a closer look at why DOT reviewers are unintentionally becoming a barrier to BIM—and how we might need to rethink these review processes to unlock the full potential of model-based delivery.
The Traditional Submittal Milestones: 30%, 60%, 90%, and Final
Most DOTs follow a structured series of submittal milestones: 30%, 60%, 90%, and Final Design stages. Each of these milestones typically requires a formal review by the DOT, with plan sheets submitted to ensure design intent and compliance. These reviews are primarily document-based, often focusing on graphic presentation—linework, color, symbols, and layout—instead of the underlying design parameters and data. In this approach, reviewers focus on the graphic standards and information consistency of 2D plan sheets rather than the 3D design model itself.
While these milestones and their associated reviews have value, they were developed for an era before the advent of BIM, when 2D plans were the primary means of communication. Today, however, the model—not the plan sheets—is where the true design lives.
BIM’s Promise: The Model as the Deliverable
With BIM, the goal is to make the 3D model itself the primary deliverable. Unlike traditional plans, a BIM model integrates geometry, design data, material properties, and more, creating a holistic view of the project. When done right, a model-based deliverable can provide a level of detail, accuracy, and visualization that plan sheets simply can’t match.
However, when we add 2D plan sheets at each submittal milestone as part of the review requirements, it often results in redundant work. Engineers and designers are essentially creating two deliverables: the model for the design itself, and the plan sheets that meet review standards. This duplication doesn’t just take extra time; it often doesn’t provide additional value to the design, creates inefficient workflows, and doesn’t fully leverage the benefits of BIM. The model becomes the primary design tool, yet the reviewers are still grading based on the plan sheet output, not the model.
The Cost of Sticking with Outdated Review Standards
With BIM, the goal is to make the 3D model itself the primary deliverable. Unlike traditional plans, a BIM model integrates geometry, design data, material properties, and more, creating a holistic view of the project. When done right, a model-based deliverable can provide a level of detail, accuracy, and visualization that plan sheets simply can’t match.
However, when we add 2D plan sheets at each submittal milestone as part of the review requirements, it often results in redundant work. Engineers and designers are essentially creating two deliverables: the model for the design itself, and the plan sheets that meet review standards. This duplication doesn’t just take extra time; it often doesn’t provide additional value to the design, creates inefficient workflows, and doesn’t fully leverage the benefits of BIM. The model becomes the primary design tool, yet the reviewers are still grading based on the plan sheet output, not the model.
Rethinking the Review Process for BIM Success
For DOTs to fully adopt BIM, they’ll need to rethink their review processes. A 3D model-centered review would mean shifting focus from graphics to data integrity, from color and line weights to geometry and design parameters. It would require training and tools that allow reviewers to interact directly with the BIM model, gaining a more comprehensive understanding of the design as a whole rather than in isolated, plan-by-plan segments.
This transition is possible: some agencies are already piloting model-based reviews or reducing the need for 2D plan sheets. Early adopters show that, with model-based reviews, the quality and efficiency of the review process improve significantly, resulting in fewer misunderstandings, less redundant work, and faster project delivery.
Conclusion: Breaking Down the Barrier
DOT reviewers are not intentionally hindering BIM adoption, but the traditional review process remains a significant barrier. Moving away from plan sheet-based reviews and toward model-based evaluations will require a cultural shift within DOTs, but the potential benefits—increased efficiency, accuracy, and true design integration—are worth the effort. By modernizing review practices to focus on data and design intent rather than graphics, we can finally allow BIM to deliver on its promise.
Contact EnvisionCAD today to find out how we can help break down the review roadblocks in your organization.