01Establish what is known about the existing wall
Before arranging a visit, confirm who provides the contractor estimate, who performs any required professional assessment or design, whether design is included or separately contracted, and which written scope and exclusions the estimate will contain. Gather permit records, design or geotechnical documents, surveys, product information, drainage plans, invoices, photographs and prior repair notes. Compare the records with visible geometry and label contradictions. Do not infer hidden reinforcement, embedment, foundation width, backfill or drainage merely from the wall face. A decision based on an assumed wall system can underestimate the investigation, temporary works and scope needed to repair or replace it.
- Existing drawings and permit history
- Visible construction versus recorded construction
- Missing evidence listed as unknown
02Map the condition across every wall segment
Divide the wall into named segments and record lean, bulge, cracks, displaced units, settlement, erosion, water and changes in adjacent grade. Compare dated observations across the full length instead of focusing on the most obvious defect. Include transitions, returns, stairs, fences and connections to other structures. This condition map supports investigation; it does not determine whether the wall is stable or whether a localized repair is appropriate.
- Consistent station or segment labels
- End conditions and transitions
- Dated change rather than a single snapshot
03Define the problem each option is meant to address
Ask the reviewer or proposer to connect every recommended intervention to documented evidence. A repair option should state which condition it addresses, the wall limits involved, the remaining conditions and the evidence that would make repair unsuitable. A replacement option should state whether the full wall, selected segments, drainage, adjacent grades or connected structures are included. Avoid accepting solution labels that do not explain the decision basis.
- Condition-to-scope cross-reference
- Limits of proposed intervention
- Evidence that would change the recommendation
04Expose excavation and temporary-condition dependencies
Repair and replacement can require excavation behind or below the wall, temporary water control, shoring, stockpiling, soil export and protection of nearby property. Map equipment routes and the space required to construct the work, not only the finished footprint. WorkSafeBC requires underground utility locations to be accurately determined before powered excavation or drilling. The contractor and professional team should define safe methods and responsibilities for the actual site.
- Construction access and staging plan
- Utility location and protection
- Temporary support and water-control roles
05Compare repair, partial replacement and full replacement
Place all alternatives on the same wall plan and use matching segment names, dimensions and elevations. Identify which facing, structural elements, reinforcement, retained fill, drainage, outlets, caps and restoration are included in each. Record how each option interfaces with wall portions that remain. Similar proposal wording can conceal materially different quantities and design boundaries, so require clear drawings or marked scope limits before comparing cost.
- Matching wall limits for each option
- Interfaces with retained construction
- Separate base scope and alternates
06Set rules for concealed conditions and changes
Before excavation, agree on the evidence to collect when the base, soil, buried drainage or undocumented construction becomes visible. Identify which findings pause work, who reviews them, and how revised design, quantity, schedule or price receives written approval. Require photographs and notes before concealment. A contingency allowance is not a substitute for describing the trigger, unit basis and authorization process for a changed condition.
- Stop-work and review triggers
- Photograph and field-review points
- Written change authorization before proceeding
07Write the final intervention decision record
After investigation, summarize why the selected path addresses the documented condition and why the other alternatives were not chosen. Reference accepted drawing revisions, professional inputs, permits, field-review requirements and closeout records. List adjacent or subsurface conditions that remain unresolved. The record should explain the decision without promising future performance or suggesting that replacement automatically resolves drainage, slope, boundary or neighbouring conditions beyond the defined project scope.
- Selected option and supporting evidence
- Rejected alternatives with reasons
- Unresolved limits and maintenance obligations