Alternative Project Delivery Status Update 2013

Transcription

1 Alternative Project Delivery Status Update 2013 Eric Kahlig Division of Construction Management Alternative Project Delivery Innovative Contracting Manual Separate from Division of Innovative Delivery Traditional Funding Sources DB / Incentive Disincentives / A+B / Etc. Value Engineering Change Proposals LPA Construction Monitoring 1

2 Alternative Project Delivery Two major Initiatives OHIO CMGC Deployment Implementation Team Design Build Background Primary focus Design Build Contracts Background Definition Owner executes a single contract with one entity (design builder) to provide engineering services and construction services. Preliminary authority to enter into Design Build contracts in

3 Design Build Background ODOT currently has the authority to enter into Design Build contracts per ORC effective Min = 2 / year Max = 26 / year (2013) $5 million to $550 million per year 148 projects using the Least Cost Method $725mill FY 2013: $136Mill Design Build Background An amendment to the ORC (6/29/2011) ODOT allowed to combine technical qualifications and competitive bidding elements Value Based DB CUY 90: Cleveland Innerbelt Bridge CCG1 Fra 71/670: Columbus Crossroads Project internally identified issues 3

4 Design Build Background Initially developed Value Based without extensive industry input First 2 VB DBs resulted in litigation CUY90 Innerbelt concerning interpretation of Scope Requirement Dismissed FRA 71/670 Columbus Crossroads Concerning responsiveness to project requirements Stipend Paid Design Build Last 5 years Fiscal Year Total Projects Sold Total Contract $ Total DB Projects Sold DB Total Contract $ % $ of total program $1,223,823, $9,041, % $1,318,291, $13,493, % $1,545,548, $81,710, % $1,556,481, $558,819, % $1,264,950, $114,496, % Note: FY2011 Cleveland Innerbelt Bridge Ph1 and Columbus Crossroads Ph1 both sold. 4

5 Year Design Build Next 5 years # of DB Projects DB Value Total Program % $ of total program $138,731, $ 1,892,817, % $513,402, $ 1,810,499, % $39,793, $ 2,148,813, % $157,153, $ 2,003,443, % $1,043, $ 2,108,204, % FY 2014 include DB Finance CUY90 Adjusted = 12% 7 ODOT 2 FHWA 5 OCA Members 5 ACEC Members 5

6 Task Force Scope: Review existing alternative project delivery techniques, assessing usage and value of each Identify new alternative project delivery techniques Design Build Evaluation, Usage, and potential Improvements in Ohio Low Bid / 2 Step / ATC Process / Standards Every Day Counts Initiative Round 1 Implemented changes: Least Cost Design Builds Projects of value less than $20 million 8 weeks minimum advertising w/ a PreBid Meeting being optional Projects of $20 million or more will be Advertised for 12 weeks with prebid meetings being mandatory 6

7 DB Project Type Changes Signal and Signage projects considered separately Signage projects no longer allowed to be DB projects Signal projects may be DB Noisewall Projects no longer allowed to be DB Simplified project plans to be developed PN124/125 A+B (Price + Time) Considered usage on all: not being implemented Usage to continue to be District decisions no mandatory usage per project type Revised table changes to be addressed: Time portion to be Day for Day. Removal of anticipated weather days for B impacted work 7

8 PN128 Windows Contracts Rename to Flexible Start / Windows Contract Open up allowed contract types. New Bridge / Bridge Replacement allowed Four Lane Resurfacing & Overlays allowed No Major Reconstruction / Major New Note to apply to entire project not just portions Contractor Designed MOT Traffic Engineering Manual: Item 614 Maintaining Traffic The Contractor shall be responsible for designing and maintaining safe and effective traffic control 24 hours a day for the duration of this project. The Contractor shall devise a maintenance of traffic scheme which shall be stamped by a professional engineer, and present it to the Engineer for approval. 8

9 Contractor Designed MOT ODOT District Usage last 5 yrs. Dist. 1, 8, &11 Have used extensively Dist. 3, 4, & 12 Have used some Dist. 2, 5, 6, 7, & 10 Have not used Contractor Designed MOT Pros No Wasted Designer Effort Most Efficient design employed (Contractor controlled) Fast Plan Prep in Design Cons Waste of multiple designs Owner concerns = Safety. Contractor concerns = Safety + Money Unleveled Bidding field Who owns changes? Not controlling overall Design 9

10 Contractor Designed MOT Statewide Consistency a Priority Recommendation: No further usage of Contractor Designed MOT Limited projects within developed will be allowed to continue NO Excuse Incentive NEI The NEI Date shall not be adjusted for any reason, cause or circumstance whatsoever, regardless of the cause of the delay No Claims if Accepted 2 Pilot Project $3.0 Mill Incentive / $1.5 Mill 1 year off both Specifications relaxed on 2 nd implementation 10

11 No Excuse Incentive Feedback Like the Incentives, but DO NOT USE ARBITRARILY!!! Why No Claims? Why So Harsh if missed by 1 day? Re evaluating and reworking Value Based Design Build Shortlisting SOQ Discussion Heavy Weighting on Personnel Potentially Important to Design More weighting should be on Contractor s company Bait and Switch concerns Scoring of SOQ depends on RFQ details Under advisement.. 11

12 Upcoming ATCs in DBB 2 Step DB Not necessarily VB DB Task Order Contract for Ohio Upcoming DB Project Listing Update Monthly onmgt/designbuild/designbuild/forms/dbs.aspx 12

13 Construction Manager / General Contractor Construction Manager / General Contractor CMGC is a project management method which engages a selected Contractor to work with a selected Designer early in the development of a project Quality Based Selection (primarily) 13

14 Construction Manager / General Contractor Overall A Project Team consisting of three components: An Owner A Contract with a Designer A Two Phase Contract with a General contractor Phase one Construction Management consulting contract to help with design Phase two General Contractor Construction Manager / General Contractor Part one: Work with Owner, and Designer to design Project Provide advice on Constructability, Schedule, Materials, Budget When ready, Price the Project Part two: Construction Contract 14

15 Construction Manager / General Contractor Advantages Collaboration Risk Aversion and Risk Assignment Schedule savings Innovation Consultants continue to work for the owner Owner owns the design Gain the Best of All Worlds (potentially) Construction Manager / General Contractor Ohio Hurdles Legislative Policy Project Selection Construction Manager selection Management Strategy 15

16 Construction Manager / General Contractor Ohio Hurdles continued Perception Beauty Contest Limited Competition Shotgun Marriage Project Cost validation Construction Manager / General Contractor Every Day Counts and MAP 21 No longer requiring Special Experimental Project (SEP 14) consideration Still considered Innovative therefore allowed to be 100% federally funded per MAP21 Every Day Counts Initiative Round 2 16

17 OHIO CMGC Deployment Implementation Team OHIO CMGC Deployment Team ODOT/FHWA Co Chairing ODOT Deputy Director Construction Management FHWA Field Operations Team Leader ODOT 8 members OCA 3 members FHWA 2 members ACEC 2 members OHIO CMGC Deployment Implementation Team Preliminary Discussions Should not include a unit price component during CMGC selection Funding will need to be identified and committed 50% self performance requirement Substantial size to judge effectiveness No VECPs after award will be allowed Independent Cost Estimator 17

18 OHIO CMGC Deployment Implementation Team Potential CMGC Selection Evaluation Topics Project Team Capability of the Contractor Project Approach Project Innovations CMGC Design Process formalized Risk Management Model Understanding / Approach Approach to Price Proposal OHIO CMGC Deployment Implementation Team CMGC Pre Construction Services Constructability Reviews CPM Schedule (Design) Material Availability Reviews Identification of Long Lead Items/Issues Ongoing cost estimates Stakeholder Identification Risk Identification / Mitigation Potentials 18

19 OHIO CMGC Deployment Implementation Team Potential Project Selection Criteria Monetary Size $30 $80 mill. Constructability and Technically complex Schedule Issues Third Party Stakeholders Construction Flexibility OHIO CMGC Deployment Implementation Team Proposed Legislative Highlights Single pilot project CMGC for preconstruction fee based services Negotiated fixed price, fixed unit prices, or guaranteed maximum price All estimates within 10% to award construction Independent Cost Estimator Out for bid if negotiated pricing not reached Currently under review by Legislature 19

20 OHIO CMGC Deployment Implementation Team Candidate Project was discussed I 480 Bridge Redecking Difficult Bridge construction Phase Construction sequences Difficult MOT / Construction Access Team Evaluation of Pros/Cons Team Recommendation = Different Project Limited Solutions / Late in Process / Long Construction Timeline Thank You Eric Kahlig ODOT Division of Construction Management eric.kahlig@dot.state.oh.us 20