Transcript ADPM Presentation - Government Finance Officers of Arizona

Peoria Design Build Case Study
Prisila Ferreira - City of Peoria
Bob Eubanks - Eubanks Consulting
(Project Management Consultant)
Eric Hedlund - Sundt Construction, Inc.
November 1, 2002
Peoria Design Build Case Study
City of Peoria
Alternate Project Delivery
Evaluation Process
Today’s Situation
• City Complex Has Serious Space Constraints
• Temporary Space Costly
– Not Optimal for Effective Operations
• Time Is Critical
• Legislation Provides Design Build Alternative
to “Hard Bid”
– Law Outlines Specific Selection Process
– Opportunity to Address Time Constraints
Traditional Hard Bid or Design-Bid-Build
• Owner Hires an Architect to Design Project
and Develop Bid Documents
• Architect Acts As Owner’s Representative
During Construction
• Contractor Is Hired Under a Separate Contract -
No Involvement in Design
– Contract Awarded to Low Bidder
• Time Is Not Critical
Expectations of Hard Bid Process
• Owner Expects Complete Documents -100%
• Architects/engineers Expect Understanding
of Design Intent
– Owner Knows What They Are Getting and
Contractor Included Everything
• Contractor Expects Documents Reflect
Owner Requirements
– Can Build As Shown, Meets Code, Anything
Not Shown - Increases Price
CM At Risk
•
Architect Hired on Qualifications/Experience
– During Pre-design, RFQ Issued for CM at Risk Firms
• Contractor Hired Based on Qualifications/Experience
– Is a Member of the Design Team
– Works to Meet Owner Budget, Schedule, Best Value
– Hired for a Set Fee or Percentage
• Contract - Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)
– Owner Gets Not to Exceed Cost, Any “Savings”
Go to the Owner
CM At Risk--Continued
• Best Suited for Projects Where:
– Time Is Critical
– Budget Control Is Important-Design to Construction
– Staff Time Is Limited or Inexperienced to Oversee
Design/Construction
– Owner Wants to Maintain Control Over Design
– Owner Has Say in Selection of Subcontractors
Expectations of CM At Risk
• Team Understands Documents Never
100% Complete or Accurate
• Everyone Participates and Asks Questions
to Understand Expectations
• Everyone Works Together to Ensure Items
Not on Plans, in Budget
• All Parties Work Together to Resolve
Missed Expectations
Design Build
• Owner Contracts With “Design Builder”
– Responsible for Design and Engineering
• They Can Perform In-house or Contract Out
• Team (Owner/Architect-Engineer-Contractor)
Define Requirements/Design
• Contractor Builds to Design/Engineering
• Same As “Master Builder” Concept
Used Last 100 Years
Design Build--Continued
• Best Suited for Projects Where:
– Time Very Important--Fastest Delivery System
– Budget Control Important--GMP, Builder
Responsibility for Bids to Come In or Under Budget
– Staff Time Limited/Inexperienced
– Owner Cares Most About the Function of the Building
– Owner Does Not Want to Referee Disputes
Between Designers and Contractor
Benefits of Team Managed Construction
• Cost Control Improved Over Hard Bid
• Flexible Scheduling
• Reduction of Change Orders--No Low Bid Game
• Ability to Reduce Cost Greatest Early in Design Whole Team on Board
• Ability to Fast Track
• Collaborative Process
Proposed Design Build Schedule
• Select Architect/Builder
• July 2001
• Preliminary Design
• November 2001
– guaranteed cost estab.
• Detail Drawings-45%
• March 2002
• Construction Begins
• April 2002
– design concurrent
• Construction Completed
• September 2003 *
Original Project Schedule
• Site/Space/Budget Study
June 2001
• Architect Selection
October 2001
• Design Completed
November 2002
• Award Construction
March 2003
• Construction Completed September 2004
Recommendation
• Proceed With Design Build Concept
– Identify/Address City Processes That Could
Slow Project Down
– Adjust Multi-Year CIP to Accommodate
Expedited Schedule
• Assemble Project Steering Committee
• Develop Requirements and RFQ
• Hire Project Management Consultant
7/18/2015
Project Scope
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Project Timeline
Sundt
Selection
Proposal &
Interview
Schematic
Estimate
Cost Model
SOW
Development
Program
Evaluation
Schematic
Design
Council
Approval
Council
Approve
Additional
Program
DD
Estimate
Final GMP
Construction
Design
Development Documents
Value
Engineering
Early GMP
Steel
Procurement
Design Builder Selection Process
• Clearly defined Scope of Work is Essential to
Delivery of High Quality Services
• DB or CM at Risk must be a PARTNERING
process with Owner, Designer & Builder
• Owner Should have Well Defined & Understood
Goals/Program & Budget
• Selection of the RIGHT DB or CM at Risk Team
lays the Foundation for Successful Project
Design Builder Selection Process
• RFQ Should be Specific to Project
– Document Key Issues
– Interview Stakeholders
– Define Key Issues/Program
• Clearly Define Submittal Requirements & Scoring
• Establish & “Train” Evaluation Panel
(A/E & Contractor)
• Full & Open Communications Throughout
the Process is a Must
Design Builder Selection Process
Peoria Design Build
Public Safety Administration Building
Sundt-Smith
TEAM B
TEAM C
TEAM D
TEAM E
TEAM F
TEAM G
TEAM H
TEAM I
TEAM J
TEAM K
TEAM L
TEAM M
TEAM N
TEAM O
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
97
81
79
90
80
85
84
73
70
79
79
74
67
59
39
93
90
89
85
74
93
72
66
84
68
54
80
74
55
43
81
77
69
61
59
62
68
79
63
56
64
72
59
52
28
68
70
65
62
59
55
52
68
49
50
57
49
41
56
38
97
98
89
64
94
44
72
57
59
88
48
39
50
22
18
71
69
78
80
42
65
80
63
75
49
48
44
67
76
47
Establish Short List
68
50
58
58
55
55
29
37
41
49
63
45
44
61
33
82.1
76.4
75.3
71.4
66.1
65.6
65.3
63.3
63.0
62.7
59.0
57.6
57.4
54.4
35.1
Summary
Ranking
Average
Score
Evaluator 7
Evaluator 6
Evaluator 5
Evaluator 4
Evaluator 3
Evaluator 2
Max Score
Team
Evaluator 1
Written SOQ Evaluation
Results & Ranking
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Design Builder Selection Process
• Interview is Important to Establish Rapport
• Pre-Interview Activities
– Check References
– Prepare Score Sheets Based on Key Issues
– “Train” Evaluation Panel
• Interview & Rank Top 3 Firms
Peoria Design Build
Public Safety Administration Building
Written SOQ
Reference Check
Interview
TOTAL
100
25
105
230
82.1
19.8
88.9
190.8
76.4
10.5
86.0
172.9
Team
C
Team
B
Sundt/
Smith
Category
Max
Score
Final Cumulative Score
75.3
7.0
45.4
127.7
Negotiate with #1 Ranked Team
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Project Timeline
Sundt
Selection
Proposal &
Interview
Schematic
Estimate
Cost Model
SOW
Development
Program
Evaluation
Schematic
Design
Council
Approval
Council
Approve
Additional
Program
DD
Estimate
Final GMP
Construction
Design
Development Documents
Value
Engineering
Early GMP
Steel
Procurement
Scope of Work Development
• Kick off Meeting
– Key Stakeholders
– Required Services Defined
– Focus Meetings Scheduled
• Scope of Work Draft
– Consultant Drafts Prepared
– Initial Draft Reviewed
• Final Scope of Work Prepared
• Master Schedule Teaming Meeting
Scope of Work Development
• Design & Preconstruction Fees
– Fees Developed Based on Scope of Work
– Review of Fees
• Contract Terms Finalized
• Approval by City Council
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Project Timeline
Sundt
Selection
Proposal &
Interview
Schematic
Estimate
Cost Model
SOW
Development
Program
Evaluation
Schematic
Design
Council
Approval
Council
Approve
Additional
Program
DD
Estimate
Final GMP
Construction
Design
Development Documents
Value
Engineering
Early GMP
Steel
Procurement
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Programming Phase
• Programming Strategy
– Base Program Validation
– Additional Program Feasibility
• Project Cost Model
– Budget Allocation Process
– Detailed Cost Model
• Base Program
• Additional Program
• Council Approved Additional Program
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Project Timeline
Sundt
Selection
Proposal &
Interview
Schematic
Estimate
Cost Model
SOW
Development
Program
Evaluation
Schematic
Design
Council
Approval
Council
Approve
Additional
Program
DD
Estimate
Final GMP
Construction
Design
Development Documents
Value
Engineering
Early GMP
Steel
Procurement
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Schematic Design
• Develop Schematic Design Concepts
– User “Gaming” Sessions
– Floor Plans & Elevations
– Multiple Exterior Elevation Concepts
Presented to Council
• Integrate Base & Additional
Program
• Steering Committee Update
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Schematic Design
• Schematic Estimate
– “Everything But The Kitchen Sink Approach”
• Road Map to Meeting the Budget
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Project Timeline
Sundt
Selection
Proposal &
Interview
Schematic
Estimate
Cost Model
SOW
Development
Program
Evaluation
Schematic
Design
Council
Approval
Council
Approve
Additional
Program
DD
Estimate
Final GMP
Construction
Design
Development Documents
Value
Engineering
Early GMP
Steel
Procurement
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Design Development
• Value Engineering Phase
– Brainstorm List
– Revisit Scope Priorities
• VE Acceptance Process
• Council Review Interior Finishes
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Design Development Estimate
• Goals
– Validate All VE Incorporated
– Determine Overall Budget Status
• Results
Project Under Budget!
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Project Timeline
Sundt
Selection
Proposal &
Interview
Schematic
Estimate
Cost Model
SOW
Development
Program
Evaluation
Schematic
Design
Council
Approval
Council
Approve
Additional
Program
DD
Estimate
Final GMP
Construction
Design
Development Documents
Value
Engineering
Early GMP
Steel
Procurement
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Construction Documents & GMP
• Phased Bid Packages
– Furniture & Flooring
– Fire Protection
• Early GMP
– Structural Steel
• Final GMP
– Building Package
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Project Timeline
Sundt
Selection
Proposal &
Interview
Schematic
Estimate
Cost Model
SOW
Development
Program
Evaluation
Schematic
Design
Council
Approval
Council
Approve
Additional
Program
DD
Estimate
Final GMP
Construction
Design
Development Documents
Value
Engineering
Early GMP
Steel
Procurement
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Benefits of Design Build
• Schedule - Saved 1 Year
• Better Aesthetics & Overall Quality
• Better Value
– 300 vs. 80 Secure Parking Spaces
– Firing Range Added
– Flex Space for Future Growth
– Channel 11 Studio - Full Build-out
– Increased Size to Accommodate 25 Year Program
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Benefits of Design Build
The Bottom Line is…
Original Program
Final Program
% Change
Building Area
(SF)
60,000
95,000
Secure Parking
Spaces
80
300
58%
275%
Better Value!
Cost
16,000,000
18,500,000
16%
Peoria Design Build Case Study
Prisila Ferreira - City of Peoria
Bob Eubanks - Eubanks Consulting
(Project Management Consultant)
Eric Hedlund - Sundt Construction, Inc.