Transcript ACEC/Kansas - Making the Call Presentation

Making the call:
Choosing the firm and process to
ensure successful public works
projects
ACEC Kansas
Kansas Contractors Association
APWA Kansas
Presentation Developed By:

Chip Corcoran, Olsson Associates, ACEC

Patricia Gentrup, Olsson Associates, ACEC

Clarence Munsch, George Butler Associates, ACEC

Mac Andrew, Director of Infrastructure and Transportation, Johnson County,
KS, APWA

John Walters, Walters Morgan, KCA

Bill Brungardt, Brungardt Honomichl, ACEC KS

Alan Farrington, Sherwood Construction, KCA

Scott Erickson, Smoky Hill Construction, KCA

Scott Heidner, Executive Director, ACEC
Project Delivery Systems
University of Kansas
ACEC/KCA Class for MPA Program
March 6, 2006
Definition

A project delivery system is a comprehensive
process by which a project is designed and
constructed, it includes:
– Definition of scope and requirements
– Contractual requirements, obligations, and responsibilities
of the parties
– Interrelationships among the participants
– Mechanisms for managing time, cost, safety and quality
– Forms of agreement and documentation of activity
– Actual execution of design and construction
– Closeout of the project and start-up of the new facility
Types of Project Delivery
Systems

Traditional (Design/Bid/Build)
– Fixed Price (Unit Price or Lump Sum)
– Cost Plus

Design/Build (D/B)
– Multiple variations, including operating,
maintaining, owning and turn-over

Construction Manager at Risk
– Variations include varying degrees of
management responsibilities
Traditional
Design/Bid/Build




Contract documents are fully
developed prior to construction
Competitive bidding – no choice, the
low bid wins
Potential for adversarial relationships
No “Guaranteed Maximum Price”
Design/Build

Performs both design and construction under one
contract between an owner and design build team
– Owner has the ability to hand pick the design-build team
– Single point accountability
– Conducive to “fast track” construction
– Reduces pre-construction services (i.e. cost control, value
engineering, sub contractor control, constructability
review)
Design/Build



Guaranteed Cost
Reduces owner
involvement beyond
program definition
Shifts project risk from
owner to D/B team
Project Risks
Traditional




Owner bears risk of
constructability and
design
Designers not
accountable for
construction cost
Owner is responsible
for interfaces
Owner is responsible
for QA/QC
Design/Build




D/B bears risk of
constructability and
design
Designers are
accountable for cost
D/B is responsible for
interfaces
D/B is responsible for
QA/QC
Construction Manager at Risk



Where the Construction Manager is also the
constructor
Allows the Owner, Construction Manager
and Architect/Engineer to work as a unified
team.
Based upon an Owner’s agreement with a
qualified construction firm to provide
– Leadership
– Administration
– Management throughout a project, within a
defined scope of services.
Construction Manager at Risk

Services may include:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Advising on all aspects of planning
Managing the design and construction phases
Establishing quality, cost and time parameters
Providing engineering suggestions & costs
Preparing conceptual and detailed estimates
Preparing bid packages
Preparing overall project schedule and updates
Guaranteeing the construction cost
Serving as the General Contractor
Qualification based selection process
Guaranteed maximum price option
Conducive to fast track
Reduces Pre-construction services
Project Delivery System Trends
Percentage
100
80
Traditional
60
Construction
Management
Design Build
40
20
0
1985 1990 1995 2005 2015
Year
Project Delivery System Box


Usual approach - designer and
contractor
Value added delivery system
– Financing
– Material and equipment suppliers
– Community relations experts
– Others
If…
Scope, quality, and O&M criteria cannot
be finalized early in the process:
Poor
DB
Good
CMR
Best
DBB
If the Owner is…
Concerned that regulatory and other
issues may change as the project evolves
Poor
DB
Good
Best
DBB - CMR
If the Owner must…
Have review and approval authority over
every step of the process
Poor
DB
Good
Best
DBB - CMR
If the Owner must…
Have review and approval authority
over every step of the process
Poor
DB
Good
CMR
Best
DBB
If the Owner will…
Manage the elements of the project
with independent departments.
Poor
DB
Good
CMR
Best
DBB
If the Owner’s goal is…
To achieve the lowest total cost project.
Poor
CMR - DBB
Good
Best
DB
If the Owner’s goal is…
To establish the total cost prior to
significant funds being expended
Poor
DBB
Good
Best
CMR
DB
If the Owner’s goal is…
That a single entity should be
responsible for the entire project
Poor
DBB
Good
Best
CMR
DB
If the Owner is…
Not well suited to accept the project risk
Poor
DBB
Good
Best
CMR
DB
If the Owner’s goal is…
To maximize the potential for
innovative solutions
Poor
DBB
Good
Best
CMR
DB
If the Owner does not…
Have the resources to plan and manage
the project
Poor
DBB
Good
Best
CMR
DB
If the Owner’s goal is…
To involve the operations staff
throughout the planning, design, and
construction of the project
Poor
DBB
Good
Best
CMR
DB
Summary

Illustrated different types of Project
Delivery Systems

The strengths and weaknesses of each

Methods to select a Project Delivery
System that fits your project needs
Outline for Merits of QBS
in Choosing Design
Professionals
Procurement Process

Qualifications based
selection

Selection based on low
bid

Selection based on
qualifications and low
bid
History and Status of QBS

In use since the Civil War

Public law 95-582 (Brooks Bill) required in
federal procurement

Public law 100-464 reaffirms the Brooks Bill

Kansas statute 75-5801 required in state
procurement

Missouri law RSMo Section 8.285 – 8.291
requires QBS
History and Status of QBS
(continued)

Both the American Bar Association and the
American Public Works Association have
policies encouraging the use of QBS

The majority of U.S. state require QBS in state
procurement of design professionals

Cities and Counties are free to use selection
process of their choice, unless state or federal
dollars are being used
What Steps are Involved in QBS?
1. Owner has project and drafts basic scope of services required
2. Owner sends out Request for Proposals (RFP) or Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) to design professionals
3. Responses are reviewed and the top three firms are interviewed
4. Firms are ranked after interviews
5. Negotiations begin with top-ranked firm


A full scope of services is produced by the owner and design firm
A reasonable fee is negotiated, appropriate for the complete scope of
services
6. If negotiations fail in either capacity, the Owner may terminate
negotiations with the top-ranked firm and begin negotiations with
the second highest-ranked firm
Why Use QBS?

It’s all about the scope
– RFPs and RFQs almost never contain enough
detail

Cannot offer an accurate bid
– Unforeseen difficulties

RFQ/RFP’s almost never spell out issues such as
right-of-way, public involvement, historical
preservation, landmark, and environmental issues

Ingenuity and skill of design professionals
are the best assets to address project
complexities

Including all life-cycle costs of a project,
design work is about a very low percentage
of a projects budget
– A mistake during the design phase could result in
enormous additional costs
Factors in Selecting a Firm

Expertise and training of design
professionals

Experience with specific types of
projects

Owner’s experience with firms
on previous projects

Current workload of firms

Comfort in communication with
firms
Other Procurement Processes
Pros and Cons…
Asking for cost and taking the low bid
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The fastest selection method
Often the cheapest initial cost
Yields the poorest quality work
Many design firms will refuse to participate
Often results in more change orders as design
progresses
Asking for and weighting both cost and
qualifications
–
–
Allows owner flexibility
Weight of different party (price, qualifications,
etc.) can be tailored
Once price is a component, it tends to
become the component, especially in
public sector projects
Problems using QBS

Elected Officials
– Term in office is shorter
than city staff
– Savings today is more
important than longterm value

Public
– Difficult to explain why
low bids should not be
requested and used as
decision maker
– Little experience with
design matters
Project Management
Presented by:
Joe Johnson, P.E.
- Leawood Public Works
Director, APWA KC Chapter
President
Chip Corcoran
- Olsson Associates
Project Management




Managing a project is like sailing a ship
You must know where you are, how far you
have left to go, and what direction you are
headed
To not know this, will result in failure to
make your port
Project managers must actively steer their
ship to port
Why Project Management?

To meet the owner’s goals and objectives of the project

To meet the project schedule

To meet the project budget

To provide for quality assurance/control

To maximize utilization of scarce resources

To maximize the profit potential of a project (private sector)

To obtain future work based upon project management
performance (private sector)
Who are Project Managers?

Any individual charged with championing a project and
carrying responsibility for achieving some or all of a project’s
goals and objectives.

Project Manager’s may include one or more of the following:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Owner (Public or Private)
Owner’s Representative (in-house or contracted)
Professional Consultant
Sub Consultants
Contractors
Sub Contractors
Material Suppliers
Utility Companies
Attorneys
Note: Large projects may include deputy or sub-task project managers
Seven Basic Keys to Successful
Management
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Know what the owner
understands
Plan your work, work your
plan
Establish project team buyin on owner expectations
Know where you are and
where you are going
Always have a Plan B
Lead, don’t manage
Develop a relationship and
maintain communication
with the owner
Project Management Tools

Project Contact List

Work Break Down

Budgeting by Task

Scheduling By Task

Critical Path Analysis
Sample Project Contact List
Route 63 - Macon - Roadway Design Hours
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Route 63 from Route 36 / 63 Interchange to 4 miles north of Route 36
- Urban 5-Lane Section from Route 36 to Lake Street (1.0 miles)
- Rural Median-Divided 4-Lane from Lake Street to North End of Job
- Three Temporary Crossovers
- Realignment of Lake Street
- New Entrance Alignment for Crossroads Church
- Approximately 40 Entrances
SURVEY
Sample
GBA
Work
Break Down
Structure
Research and Recon/Property Contact
Establish Centerline &Project BM's
Section Corner Locations/Mapping tgts
Supplemental Surveys
Base Mapping/R/W,Survey
Set R/W
Drive Time
Aerial Mapping Fee to M.J. Harden
SURVEY DATA & PROJECT START-UP
Q.C. of Topography & Survey Info to Comply with MoDOT Standards
Site Visit & Field Review of Topographic Information
Integration of Additional Utility Information
Project Kick-Off Meeting
PRELIMINARY PLANS
PLAN SHEET GENERATION
Title Sheet (use / modify sheet from Study)
Typical Sections (use Study + Sections for Shoo-Flys & Church Ent.)
Plan & Profile Sheet Set-Up
- Route 36 to Lake Street (50 scale, 1300 ft / sheet = 4 sheets
- Lake Street to Koch Project (100 scale, 2600 ft / sheet = 6 sheets)
- Side Road Sheets (2 @ Lake, Jungle, Klondike, Rte. DD = 5 sheets)
- Temporary Shoo-Fly Detours (3 Sheets)
- Crossroads Church Roadway (1 Sheet)
- Comfort Inn Parking Lot Reconfiguration Details (1 Sheet)
Plan & Profile Sheet Labeling (20 Sheets)
- Owners, Property Lines
- Section Lines & Section Labels
- North Arrow, Scale
- Utilities
- Benchmarks
- Ditch Grades & P.I.s
- Roadway Geometric Data
- Existing R/W & Easements
- Stationing & Profile Grid
- Right-of-Way and Easement P.I. labels
Cross Section Sheet Set-Up & Clean-Up
- Mainline: Route 36 to Lake @ 50' + Entrances, 3 xs/sheet, ~ 45 Sheets
- Mainline: Lake to Koch @ 100' + Entrances, 3 xs/sheet ~ 58 Sheets
- Side Road Sections, estimate 2 xs sheets per location ~ 10 Sheets
- Shoo-Fly Cross Sections, estimate 5 xs sheets per location ~ 15 sheets
- Crossroads Church Roadway, ~ 2 sheets
Horizontal Control Sheet
Route 63 - Macon - Roadway Design Hours
PRELIMINARY PLANS (continued)
DESIGN
Mainline Route 63
Define Baselines in Geopak (north to south)
Define Mainline Profile for S/B Lanes
Proposed Roadway Linework in Plan
- Route 63 Pavement / Curb Lines
- Entrances
- Lake Street Intersections
- Sideroads
Sample Route 63 Existing Ground Cross Sections
Write Geopak Criteria for Proposed Sections
Sample
GBA
Work
Break Down
Structure
- Route 36 to HBC Road
- HBC Road to First Curve
- Transistion through Curve
- First Curve to Lake Street
- Lake Street to Jungle Street
- Jungle Street to MoDOT Maintenance
- MoDOT Maintenance to South of Route DD
- Route DD to Koch Project
- Cross Sections @ Entrances Design (approximately 40 locations)
Ditch Design
- S/B Outside Ditch - Lake Street to Koch Project
- N/B Outside Ditch - Lake Street to Kock Project
- Median Ditch - Lake Street to Koch Project
Set Preliminary Construction Limits
Set Preliminary Right-of-Way & Easements
Sideroads
Define Sideroad Profiles
Define Sideroad Baselines
Sample Sideroad Existing Ground Cross Sections
Write Geopak Criteria for Proposed Sections
Ditch Design
Set Preliminary Construction Limits
Set Preliminary Right-of-Way & Easements
Crossroads Church Roadway
Define Roadway Profile
Define Sideroad Baselines
Sample Sideroad Existing Ground Cross Sections
Write Geopak Criteria for Proposed Sections
Storm Sewer or Ditch Design
Set Preliminary Construction Limits
Set Preliminary Easements
Temporary Shoo-Flys
Establish Baseline for Temporary Crossovers (3)
Establish Profiles for Temporary Crossovers (3)
Sample Shoo-Fly Existing Ground Cross Sections
Integrate Route 63 Existing & Proposed Pavement
Write Geopak Criteria for Proposed Sections
Temporary Ditch Design
Temporary Drainage Structure Design
Set Preliminary Construction Limits
Set Preliminary Easements
Drainage Structure Design
Preliminary Storm Sewer Layout - Route 36 to Lake Street
- Size Drainage Areas
- Preliminary Hydraulic Analysis (Mannings Flow only)
- Inlet Locations & Pipe Layout (plan only)
Cross Road Drainage Structures
- Size Drainage Areas
- Hydraulic Analysis
- Culvert Sections & Plan View Drafting
Entrance Pipes
- Size Drainage Areas
- Hydraulic Analysis
- Culvert Sections & Plan View Drafting
Median Drainage - Inlets & Discharge Pipes
- Size Drainage Areas
- Hydraulic Analysis
- Culvert Sections & Plan View Drafting
Route 63 - Macon - Roadway Design Hours
PRELIMINARY PLANS (continued)
DESIGN COORDINATION WITH TRUCK STOP DEVELOPER
Providing Plans and/or Electronic Files
Coordination Meeting
Design Revisions based on Developer Input
DESIGN COORDINATION WITH CITY OF MACON
Providing Plans and/or Electronic Files
Coordination Meeting
Design Revisions based on City Input
DESIGN COORDINATION WITH UTILITIES
Providing Plans and/or Electronic Files
Coordination Meetings (Estimate 3 Meetings)
Design Revisions based on Utility Input
Sample
GBA
Work
Break Down
Structure
PRELIMINARY PLANS QUANTITIES & ESTIMATE
Quantities
- Mill & Overlay
- Curb & Gutter
- Earthwork
- Storm Sewer Inlets
- Storm Sewer Pipe
- New Pavement
- New Shoulder
- Temporary Pavement
- Drainage Structure Extensions
- Signing & Striping (Lump Sum % Estimate for Prelim. Plans)
- Temporary Erosion Control (Lump Sum % Estimate for Prelim. Plans)
- Traffic Control (Lump Sum % Estimate for Prelim. Plans)
- Seeding, Mulching, Sodding (Lump Sum % Estimate for Prelim. Plans)
- Right-of-Way & Easement Areas
- Data Entry into MoDOT Cost Estimating Program
DESIGN EXCEPTION FORM
PLOTTING
Plotting Plans for In-House Review
Plotting & Shipping Plans for MoDOT Submittal
Outside Blue Printing
QUALITY ASSURANCE
In-House Review
Corrections to Plans based on In-House Review
Corrections to Plans based on MoDOT Review
PROJECT MANAGEMENT & CLIENT MEETINGS
Project Management & Billings
Project Meetings with Client (Estimate 2 in Preliminary Plans Phase)
In-House Project Coordination Meetings
Meeting Minutes
Phone Calls
Mailing / Shipping
Vehicle Rental / Fuel
PUBLIC MEETING
DISPLAY AND HANDOUT PREPARATION
Public Meeting Display Boards
Public Meeting Handouts
Coordination with MoDOT on Displays & Handouts Format
Revisions to Displays & Handouts Based on MoDOT Input
Printing, Board Mounting, Copying
PUBLIC MEETING
PUBLIC MEETING DOCUMENTATION
Support Information to MoDOT for Public Meeting Transcript
Public Meeting Transcript to be Completed by MoDOT
Route 63 - Macon - Roadway Design Hours
RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS
PLAN SHEET GENERATION
Intersection Detail Sheets for Lake Street (20 scale - 2 Sheets)
Storm Sewer Profile Sheets (estimate 66 inlets - 8 S.S. Profile Sheets)
- Sheet Set-Up
- Import Existing Ground Profiles
- Sheet Grids - Elevations & Stations
- Graphical Detailing of Inlets & S.S. Pipes in Profile
- Labeling of Profiles (elevations, grades, sizes, locations, etc.)
Sample
GBA
Work
Break Down
Structure
Update Typical Sections for Final Pavement Recommendation
Special Detail Sheets (Special Inlets, Parking Lot Details, etc.)
Calculation & Tabulation of R/W and Easement Areas
Final Labeling of R/W & Easement P.I.s & Line Bearings
Permanent Erosion Control in Plans (Ditch Lining & Construction Notes)
Finalize Ditch Profile Labels (Grades & P.I.s)
DESIGN
Finalize Horizontal Design
Finalize Profiles
Design Modifications Based on Public Meeting Input
Storm Sewer - Finalize Design
- Pressure Flow Analysis
- Set Storm Sewer Alignments in Geopak
- Sample Existing Ground Profiles for Storm Sewer Runs
- Establish Finished Ground Profiles for Storm Sewer Runs
Update Geopak Criteria & X-Sections for Final Pavement Rec.
Special Detail Sheets (Special Inlets, Parking Lot Details, etc.)
Curb Return Profiles (4 at Lake Street - Entrances are Std. Detail)
Preliminary Temporary Erosion Control (to establish easement needs)
Permanent Erosion Control (Ditch Lining)
Preliminary Construction Sequencing (to establish easement needs)
Finalize Culvert Sections
Finalize Ditch Design
RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS QUANTITIES & ESTIMATE
Update Preliminary Plans Quantities
Recalculate Earthwork
Finalize Right-of-Way and Easement Areas
Data Entry into MoDOT Estimate Program
PLOTTING
Plotting Plans for In-House Review
Plotting & Shipping Plans for MoDOT Submittal
Outside Blue Printing
QUALITY ASSURANCE
In-House Review
Corrections to Plans based on In-House Review
Corrections to Plans based on MoDOT Review
PROJECT MANAGEMENT & CLIENT MEETINGS
Project Management & Billings
Project Meetings with Client (1 Plan Review & 1 Field Check)
In-House Project Coordination Meetings
Meeting Minutes
Phone Calls
Mailing / Shipping
Vehicle Rental / Fuel
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
To Be Completed by MoDOT
Route 63 - Macon - Roadway Design Hours
FINAL PLANS
PLAN PREPERATION
Temporary Erosion Control Plans
Striping Plans
Signing Plans
Signal Plans (HBC Road)
Construction Sequencing Plans
Traffic Control Plans
2B Sheets (Quantities)
D-2 Sheet (Standard Plans List)
Sample
GBA
Work
Break Down
Structure
DESIGN
Design Revisions Based on Property Owner Negotiations
Temporary Erosion Control
Striping
Signing
Signal Design (HBC Road)
Construction Sequencing
Traffic Control
Finalize Non-Standard Details (structural, entrances, parking lots, etc.)
FINAL QUANTITIES & ESTIMATE
Finalize & Check all Project Quantites
Finalize MoDOT Data Entry & Estimate Form
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
Create Job Special Provisions
Coordination & Revisions with MoDOT HQ
PLOTTING
Plotting Plans for In-House Review
Plotting & Shipping Plans for MoDOT District 2 Submittal
Plotting, Signing & Sealing for MoDOT HQ Submittal
Outside Blue Printing
QUALITY ASSURANCE
In-House Review
Corrections to Plans based on In-House Review
Corrections to Plans based on MoDOT Review
PROJECT MANAGEMENT & CLIENT MEETINGS
Project Management & Billings
Project Meetings with Client (1 Plan Review Meeting with District 2)
In-House Project Coordination Meetings
Meeting Minutes
Phone Calls
Mailing / Shipping
Vehicle Rental / Fuel
PROJECT CALCULATIONS DOCUMENTATION
Compilation of Project Calculations
PROJECT ELECTRONIC FILES PREPARATION
Creation of CD-ROMs & Index of Files for Electronic Plans Submittal
Creation & Checking of Electronic Staking Reports
Creation & Checking of Finished Ground TIN
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
To Be Negotiated at a Later Date
Sample MS Project Schedule
Project Management Reporting

The status of a project should be evaluated on a
recurring interval consistent with the overall project
schedule. Project reports should include the
following:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Project Manager
Task Manager(s)
Budgeted Cost – by task
Actual Cost – by task
Measured Progress – by task
Planned Progress – by task
Forecast Cost
Scope Definition and Variance
– Cost and Schedule Variances
Project Management Role Play
Quick to Drain Drainage Basin Improvements
City of Shawnee, Kansas
Project Number DROP-IN
Project Description:
Design storm sewer improvements to upgrade existing rural type roadside drainage with
enclosed storm system and inlets. Drainage Basin is 27.5 Acres, Estimated 2100 LF of new
Storm Pipe, 800 SY of Pavement Removal and Replacement, 2700 LF of 5 foot Sidewalk
Removal and Replacement, Compliance with ADA Guidelines
Project Schedule:
Design Schedule:
Notice to Proceed
Preliminary Storm Sewer Layout
Public Meeting
Final Plan Submittal
Letting Date
March 1, 2005
May 2, 2005
May 19, 2005
June 6, 2005
June 30, 2005
Construction Schedule:
Notice to Proceed
Substantial Completion
Construction Completion Date
August 9, 2005
Dec. 1, 2005
Dec. 12, 2005
Project Budget:
Design
Construction
Utility Relocations
Easement Acquisition
$60,000.00
$475,000.00
$40,000.00
$25,000.00
TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET
City Portion of Budget
SMAC Portion of Budget
$600,000.00
$125,000.00
$475,000.00
Public Works Projects:
Maximizing Engineering and
Construction Efficiencies In Your
Projects
University of Kansas
ACEC/KCA Class for MPA Program
March 6, 2006
Bill Brungardt, PE
Brungardt, Honomichl & Company, P.A.
Consulting Engineers Serving Clients
Throughout the Midwest
John Walters, PE
Walters-Morgan Construction, Inc.
General Contractors Specializing in Public
Works
Overview




History of our work
Topics studied
Ten Project Elements reviewed
Two Project Element examples
History of Our Work

Partnering of KCA and ACEC of Kansas
– Joint Committee formed in 2000
– Mission:

To work cooperatively, encourage efficiency and
effectiveness in public works projects, and
communicate common issues to members, public
and others.
– For this mission committee decided to study
problems within the industry.
History of Our Work

Problems studied
– Brain storming sessions
– Priorities
– Two series of studies have been
completed
Project Elements I
 Project Elements II

Topics Selected for Study

Project Elements I (2001)
– Conflict Resolution
– Constructability Analysis
– Designer Involvement
– Communication
– Risk Allocation
Topics Selected for Study
(continued)

Project Elements II (2003)
– Construct Contract Time
– Shop Drawings Reviewed by Contractor
– Bid Proposal Forms
– Request for Information
– Underground Utility Coordination &
Relocation
Project Elements Review
Conflict Resolution
Definition: A mechanism for dealing with
problems/difficulties that arise on a project.

Recommendations:
– Problem resolution
should start from the
beginning:

Suggestions include:
– Weekly jobsite
meetings
– Conflict resolution
flow chart
– Established time
limits for finding
solutions
– Partnering charter
– Make a commitment to
resolve problems
quickly at the lowest
level of management
– Use step-by-step
process up the
management ladder
– Handle each issue
separately
Constructability Analysis
Definition: The process of reviewing design details with
construction professionals considering methods and processes to find
ways to increase efficiency, economy & quality.

Consider:
– When should a
constructability analysis be
used?
– How does a constructability
analysis work?
– How will this be supported
(and funded)?
Constructability Analysis
(continued)

Recommendations:
– Have design
professional and owner
conduct reviews during
design phase.
– Constructability reviews
should be performed on
specific conditions by
the owner and/or design
professional.
– Meet with contractor(s)
– Share ideas with all
involved
– Determine the best
design detail and
construction method
– Include the analysis
with the bid information
Designer Involvement
Definition: To involve the designer at some level with the
construction process.

Consider:
– What are the benefits to the owner and design
professional?
– What are the benefits to the contractor?
– How can open and positive “feedback” on design
performance be obtained?
– How can this influence future projects?
Designer Involvement
(continued)

Recommendations:
– KDOT could require
local owners to award
design contracts on the
same basis that KDOT

Using standard KDOT
contract form
– Pre-construction
conference is the best
time to establish
communication for
design feedback
– Feedback on design
issues should be both
positive, as well as
critical
– Don’t take constructive
criticism personally
– Conduct an “end-of-job
meeting” (at the expense
of the design
professional)

This promotes a sense
of contribution.
Communication
Definition: The verbal and written exchange of useful
information on a project between the parties, usually consisting of
the Owner, Engineer and Contractor.
Positive communication
will facilitate the
expedient, safe and costeffective completion of
projects.
Communication
(continued)

Recommendations
– Written communication
is best!
– Verbal communication
is most commonly used

It should be followed
with a written memo
that states the verbal
information.
– Partnering Concept
(AGC of America)


This concept stresses
the importance of
communication at all
levels
By following the
process of partnering goals and objectives of
the project can be set
and issues/problems
can be resolved
Risk Allocation
Definition: The thoughtful identification of project risks and their
appropriate assignment to the stake-holders with the best ability to
manage them; results in minimized impact related to project risks
and the fairest project cost with the least number of risks.

Examples of Risks include:
– Hazardous Wastes
– Delays in Construction Process
– Site Safety Responsibility
Risk Allocation
(continued)

Recommendations:
– Design Professional and
owner should meet
regularly

Discuss and assess
potential project risks
– Risks should be
assigned to:

Party best able to
evaluate, control,
manage, and assume
the risk
– Communicate project
risks and to whom each
risk is allocated during
the pre-bid conference
– Prepare reliable site
condition
documentation reports.

Use a differing site
condition clause in the
contract documents
– Continuous education is
recommended.

“Risk Allocation”
published by the AGC
– Conduct and document
post-construction
project reviews

This identifies and
assesses risks and how
they can be handled
Construction Contract Time
Definition: The total time it takes to construct the project, from
mobilization to total completion.

Consider:
–
–
–
–
–
How long it should take to
build the project
Time of year and duration
of the project
Availability of materials or
equipment
How the above
considerations fit into the
owner’s time schedule
The complexity of the
project and the
relationships between the
owner, design professional,
and contractor
Construction Time
(continued)

Recommendations:
– Each party should evaluate each
project and cooperate.
– All parties need to understand the
ramifications of their decisions in
regard to construction contract
time.
– Adjust construction contract time
prior to bid or by addendum when it
is in the best interest of all parties.
– Establish clear communication lines
between all parties.
– Use contract documents that cover
such issues as changes, conflict
resolution and coordination.
Shop Drawing for Review by the
Contractor
Definition: The contract documents assign the contractor with
the greatest burden of responsibility for review and verification of
shop drawings prior to submitting for engineer approval.

Recommendations:
– The contractor and engineer should take measures to be
expedient in their respective tasks
– Both parties should be thorough in submittal review
– Deviations and discrepancies from the plans and
specifications should be clearly noted on the submittal
Timely construction schedule prosecution relies on a timely
submittal/approval process flow.
Bid Proposal Forms
Definition: Bid forms are designed by the Engineer or Owner to
contain information for selection of the bidder. Bid proposal forms
are to contain enough information to allow selection of a successful
bid.

Considerations:
– Necessary info vs. “too much” info
– Time and speed of the bid process
– Accuracy of the PRICE
Bid Proposal Forms
(continued)

Recommendations:
– Always use the KISS rule




Limit required information
Bid numbers written long hand
Bid alternatives
Bid not include entire specification book
– Consider construction time determined by the contractor
– Don’t use long bid forms!!!
– Allow supplementary information within 48 hours
Contractor’s Request for
Information
Definition: The Request For Information (RFI) by the general
contractor to the consulting engineer to be used to resolve gaps,
conflicts, or subtle ambiguities in construction documents during the
bidding process or construction process.


Recommendation:
Include the following with each RFI:
– Identification of the construction or Contract
document clarification.
– Reference to Specification and deficiency paragraph
numbers, drawing numbers and drawing reference.
– Impact this clarification will have on schedule and
project costs.
Underground Utility
Coordination and Relocation
Definition: New projects must account for buried utilities by
working around them or ensuring relocation prior to construction.
This avoids delays, reduces liabilities and lost revenues and potential
harm to the general public.

The State of Kansas Underground Utility Damage
Prevention Act requires anyone planning to “dig” to
first call the center and ask for locates.
Underground Utility
Coordination and Relocation
(Continued)

Problems:
1) Not all utilities are required to register with
the one call center
2) Utilities may be miss-located by the owner
3) Many municipalities can’t tell you where the
utilities are
4) Gas companies won’t give out their drawings
for security reasons
5) Utility owners are not required to specify the
utility depth
6) Most utility companies use outside locating
services, creating higher likelihood of errors.
Underground Utility
Coordination and Relocation
(Continued)

Recommendations:
– Legislative - All parties
– Practical Applications

should encourage
legislation


This is required by utility
owners to establish the
depth and location
Municipalities should
require utility owners to
pot hole to locate utilities
in potential conflict area
identified by the design
professional


The design professional
should make efforts to get
the utility owner to
perform utility locates
The design professional
should call in a ticket and
the list of utilities.
Contact all known utility
owners for design locates
and ask if they know of
unregistered or private
utilities.
Underground Utility
Coordination and Relocation
(Continued)

Recommendations:
– Practical Applications,
continued



The Engineer should work
to get maps of buried
utilities.
The Engineer should
obtain pot holes to verify
existence or depth on
questionable utilities, as
well as include this in the
project budget.
Contractors may be
knowledgeable of utilities
and may provide input
about location utility
locations.




The Contractor should
assign a utility
coordinator to work with
the Engineer and utility
owners.
The Engineer should
conduct utility
coordination meetings
with all interested parties
during design. Project
Owners should require
these meetings.
A Web site link for utility
coordination and
relocation information
could be suggested as a
part of the project.
Owners need to be willing
to pay for these extra
services.
Element Examples


Constructability Analysis
Bid Proposal Forms
Construction Analysis Example
Hutchinson, Kansas
– Streetscape Improvements Project
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Project Overview





$1 million dollar + budget
Designed by BG Consultants/Rice-Foster
Remove/replace all sidewalks inside area bordered
by red line
Fall reconstruction of intersections at 1st/Main and
2nd/Main with 10” concrete pavement
All curb and gutters removed/replaced
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Key Map
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Key Owners
Objectives


Complete the project under budget
Complete the project before November 1st – start of
the Christmas shopping season
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Issues Prompting
Review

Schedule concern
– Bid Issue June 8, 2004
– Start Construction, July 15, 2004
(3-1/2 months to construct)


Maintaining access to businesses on Main Street
Original thought was for a phased approach and
maintaining two way traffic on Main Street
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Constructability
Analysis Team

Owner Representative:
– Harold Welk, Inspection Director - City of
Hutchinson

Designers:
– Sid Arpin, Project Manager - BG Consultants,
Mike Rice - Rice-Foster

Contractors:
– Scott Erickson - Smoky Hill
– Bill Wenger - Cornego & Sons
– Jeff Wilson - Pavers, Inc.
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Constructability
Objectives

Determine the phasing and traffic control necessary
to complete the project by November 1, while:
– Minimizing disruption to businesses on Main Street
– Maintaining access to these businesses
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Key Map
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Conclusions and
Recommendations




Not possible to complete on time and maintain two
way traffic on Main Street
Must close Main Street between 1st and 3rd to work
both sides simultaneously.
Parking for businesses along 1st and 2nd Streets
Presented to City Counsel in May, 2004
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Public
Reaction/City Response


Business Owners signed petition asking for project
to be delayed until 2005
City Counsel called meeting to discuss:
– Not possible to complete by Nov. 1
– Delay to 2005 would cost more $$$

City ultimately decided to delay the project to 2005
Hutchinson Downtown
Streetscape: Constructability
Analysis Conclusion



It Worked!
Obtained reliable scheduling review that indicated
more time was needed!
Saved Tax payer money!
Bid Proposal Forms Example

Wastewater Treatment Facility
– City of West Point, Nebraska

Water Treatment Plant Facility
– PWWSD No. 20
Bid Proposal Forms Example

West Point, Nebraska
– 311 unit-price items
– Seven alternate items
– 19 treatment equipment listings
Bid Proposal Forms Example

PWWSD No. 20
– 13 unit-price items
– Four alternate items
– 12 supplier items

Bid estimate = 28 computer pages
Bid Proposal Forms Example

KISS—these bid forms are too long—this
complicates price accuracy

Allow supplemental information to be submitted
within 48 hours
Conclusion


Q&A
Discussion