Route a proposed tenant alteration for review
Northbank Centre is a fictional example. Use this page to prepare a tenant change for owner review—not to report an existing fault. Describe the proposed work and its building interfaces before routing it through the locally authorized request channel.
Choose the right route
Start with what is happening now.
A change is being proposed
- Describe the intended work and exact area.
- Include known effects on shared spaces or building services.
A building fault already exists
- Report the observed condition through the local fault process.
- Do not treat an alteration request as a repair report.
You need help routing a proposal
- Share the proposal area and a short description.
- Use verified local help contacts when available.
Prepare a reviewable scope
Give reviewers enough context to identify the right questions.
Before routing a proposal, capture:
- Work scope: what is proposed to be added, removed, relocated, or changed.
- Exact area: building, floor, room or suite, and the affected boundary where known.
- Timing: the requested start window and any relevant occupancy or access constraints.
- Delivery contact: the contractor or designer contact route, when known and appropriate to share through the authorized channel.
- Building interfaces: known or possible effects on shared walls, ceilings, building services, access routes, or occupied neighboring areas.
- Supporting scope information: a drawing or written description that helps explain the proposal, if available.
These details help reviewers decide what information or review may be needed. They do not determine technical suitability or replace the locally approved review process.
Who may need to review
Illustrative routing map only. The authorized local process determines which reviews apply.
| Proposal detail | Why it may matter | Likely review role |
|---|---|---|
| Work location and scope | Establishes which space and proposed change are under review. | Property management |
| Shared walls, ceilings, or neighboring areas | Helps identify interfaces with shared or occupied space. | Affected-space representative |
| Known or possible building-service changes | Helps identify whether a building-services review may be relevant. | Building-services owner |
| Requested timing and access needs | Helps reviewers understand potential coordination with occupancy and building operations. | Property management and affected-space representative |
Worked example: partition and doorway proposal
At fictional Northbank Centre, a tenant proposes adding a partition and moving a doorway. A useful request would identify the suite and room, describe which partition and doorway are changing, note the adjacent shared area, state the requested timing, and include a drawing or written scope description if the requester has one. If the requester knows of possible building-service interfaces, they should note them for review rather than assume they are unaffected.
This is a coordination example only; it is not submitted, approved, or technically assessed. By contrast, a ceiling leak already present is a building fault: route it through the established local fault-reporting process rather than this alteration review.
Understand the authorized-start handoff
A request starts review; it does not authorize work.
-
1
Assemble the proposal
Describe the scope, location, requested timing, known interfaces, and available supporting information. -
2
Route it through the authorized channel
Use the locally approved tenant-work request route. If the route is unclear, ask the property-management role responsible for tenant work. -
3
Respond to review questions
Provide clarification and information requested through the applicable local review process. -
4
Wait for explicit authorization
Do not treat a sent request, discussion, or review in progress as approval. Work may begin only after explicit owner authorization and any applicable conditions are communicated through the authorized local process.
Ownership and updates
Content owner: Project and Property Operations. The owner maintains the routing guidance and correction path. Review it when the request workflow, building interfaces, or local review responsibilities change. For a proposal-specific routing question, use the verified property-management help route available in your organization.
The local process and its authorized owners determine applicable reviews, authorization conditions, and the correct building-fault destination. This page does not establish those requirements.