PROGRESSIVE DESIGN BUILD WHAT IS IT? AN UPDATE FROM LAST YEAR

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "PROGRESSIVE DESIGN BUILD WHAT IS IT? AN UPDATE FROM LAST YEAR"

Gervais Hart
6 years ago
Views:

National Chairman of DBIA Presenters: Geoffrey Neumayr, SE Chief Development

Capital Projects San Mateo County Community College District PRAFUL KULKARNI, AIA

M. Architecture, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL B.

University, Malibu, CA Honorary Doctorate, Anaheim University, Anaheim, CA

project management, planning and design coordination of complex facilities.

Since the beginning, gkkworks vision has been to design and build buildings with a

1 PROGRESSIVE DESIGN BUILD WHAT IS IT? AN UPDATE FROM LAST YEAR Moderator: Praful Kulkarni, AIA President/CEO of gkkworks National Chairman of DBIA Presenters: Geoffrey Neumayr, SE Chief Development Officer San Francisco International Airport Chris Strugar-Fritsch, DBIA Director of Capital Projects San Mateo County Community College District PRAFUL KULKARNI, AIA gkkworks President and CEO National Chairman of DBIA Education and Certifications: M. Architecture, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL B. Architecture, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India MBA, Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA Honorary Doctorate, Anaheim University, Anaheim, CA Registered Architect, California Years of Experience: years of expertise in project management, planning and design coordination of complex facilities. Praful founded gkkworks in Since the beginning, gkkworks vision has been to design and build buildings with a uniquely integrated services/customized solutions approach. Affiliations: DBIA - National Board Chairman and National Executive Board Member President Emeritus, DBIA Western Pacific Region Fellow, Rockefeller Foundation 1

2 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES DESIGN BID BUILD (HARD BID) The traditional project delivery method, which customarily involves three sequential project phases: Design, Procurement, and Construction Advantages Competitive bidding, based on Low Resp. price Disadvantages Quality/Qualifications OWNER A/E More Owner Control Familiar & Established Change Orders/Delays Adversarial GC A/E of Record Services as Owner Liaison Lump-Sum/Closed Book, No Early Involvement SUBS ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES CM MULTI-PRIME An important variation of Design-Bid-Build is multiple prime contracting, in which the Owner holds separate contracts with contractors of various construction work disciplines, such as general construction, earthwork, structural, mechanical, and electrical. In this system, the Owner, or its CM, manages the overall schedule and budget. Advantages Competitive Prime Trades, Early involvement from CM for cost and schedule controls Eliminates GC premiums CM is on owners side Disadvantages Administrative difficulty; Direct trade and A / E conflicts Lack of single risk bonded price, higher risk with subs. Lump Sum / Closed book, potential overlap or gaps in scope of work. CM P OWNER P A/E P 2

3 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES CM AT RISK (CMAR) A project delivery method in which the Construction Manager acts as a consultant to the Owner in the development and design phases, but assumes the risk for construction performance as the equivalent of a constructor. Advantages Disadvantages Qualifications Based Risk is on CM, Subs Assigned to CM Pre-Construction Work, Early Involvement with Procurement, Schedule, Budget, etc. Lack of Subcontractor Transparency since Based on Lump Sum Legal Authorization for Delivery Method No Common Standards for Methodology CMAR/ GC OWNER SUBS A/E ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES DESIGN BUILD A project delivery method that combines architectural and engineering design services with construction performance under one contract. Advantages Disadvantages OWNER Qualifications Based Newer Form of Delivery PROJECT DELIVERY SUPPORT Risk with Design/Builder Team/Integrated Approach/ Creative Solutions Minimal Change Orders, Early Budget and Design Estimates, Scope Controls Potential Lack of Design Control Higher Learning Curve for Delivery Method A/E D/B ENTITY D/B SUBS Best Value Award 3

GEOFFREY NEUMAYR, SE, CCM San Francisco International Airport Chief Development Officer

University, San Luis Obispo Registered Civil Engineer Registered Structural Engineer

Manager and Vice President of Operations.

2011. Affiliations: Incoming Board Member, DBIA National Member, American Association of

Luis Obispo Architectural Engineering Department THE CONFLICT IN THE LAW Standard of Care

generally defined as the ordinary and reasonable care usually exercised by one in that

Spearin (248 U.S. 132), also referred to as the Spearin doctrine is a 1918 United States

The owner impliedly warrants the information, plans and specifications which an owner

The contractor will not be liable to the owner for loss or damage which results solely

4 GEOFFREY NEUMAYR, SE, CCM San Francisco International Airport Chief Development Officer Education and Certifications: BS Architectural Engineering, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Registered Civil Engineer Registered Structural Engineer Years of Experience: 33+ Over 33 years of experience as a Provider in AEC as a Project Manager and Vice President of Operations. He is currently Chief Development Officer at San Francisco International Airport since Affiliations: Incoming Board Member, DBIA National Member, American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE) Advisory Board of California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Architectural Engineering Department THE CONFLICT IN THE LAW Standard of Care The common law standard of care for performance of design professional services is generally defined as the ordinary and reasonable care usually exercised by one in that profession, on the same type of project, at the same time and in the same place, under similar circumstances and conditions. Perfect performance is not required by the common law. Spearin Doctrine United States v. Spearin (248 U.S. 132), also referred to as the Spearin doctrine is a 1918 United States Supreme Court decision. It remains one of the landmark construction law cases. The owner impliedly warrants the information, plans and specifications which an owner provides to a general contractor. The contractor will not be liable to the owner for loss or damage which results solely from insufficiencies or defects in such information, plans and specifications. CONFLICT GAME ON The Airport Designer is accountable to a reasonable standard of care, therefore Errors and Omission are acceptable within a limit. Builder can assume contract is error free with no omissions. 4

LOSS OF PRODUCTIVITY DOMAINS OF PROJECT DELIVERY Organization Organization Structure is Project Alliance Behavior: is Built The on project individual Hierarchical Common team Purpose members behavior

Requirements Commercial Terms Terms: Lowest of Cost, You Bid Scope will Wins and get the behavior Schedule you contract Qualifications is Co-Created for what are not Prior is the to contractual

5 LOSS OF PRODUCTIVITY DOMAINS OF PROJECT DELIVERY Organization Organization Structure is Project Alliance Behavior: is Built The on project individual Hierarchical Common team Purpose members behavior will depend Blame is Assigned to Party Partnered on the Approach leadership to style Issue - How is the Based on Contract Identification participant and control Resolution structure organized? Requirements Commercial Terms Terms: Lowest of Cost, You Bid Scope will Wins and get the behavior Schedule you contract Qualifications is Co-Created for what are not Prior is the to contractual Finalizing relationship? Considered Qualifications are Considered Dictated Co-Created Requirements Operating Management: Requirements Behavior will reflect Pull Critical Planning the Path way or the to Push Promote project Scheduling is Improvement managed how Target Fixed is the Cost Value project Based Budgeting management on Low Bid plan created? 5

PERCEIVED PROJECT RISK thinks the designer will: only be concerned with the own ego be over budget not

change orders and additional cost never finish on time cut corners to save money thinks the builder

and drawings are deficient thinks the Airport will never make a decision keep changing the design blame

never be satisfied with the quality of the work not pay for changes never acknowledge schedule delays

understandable always fault the contractors for missing things in their bid PROJECT RISK REALITY Risk

expectations Interpret vision Build project in accordance with Funding expectations Communicate design

expectations Focus On Develop Aligning project contract Expectations budget Project outcome

6 PERCEIVED PROJECT RISK thinks the designer will: only be concerned with the own ego be over budget not be what is wanted or needed miss program elements thinks the builder will: never do what we want pursue change orders and additional cost never finish on time cut corners to save money thinks the builder will: deviate from the design look for errors and ask to many RFI s always say it is not constructible and drawings are deficient thinks the Airport will never make a decision keep changing the design blame the design for change orders always want additional design services for free thinks the Airport will: never be satisfied with the quality of the work not pay for changes never acknowledge schedule delays thinks the designer will: provide incomplete unconstructable drawings claim the drawings are perfectly understandable always fault the contractors for missing things in their bid PROJECT RISK REALITY Risk Vision Will Risk Always Stay With Design the Risk Responsible Organization Construction Risk Budget expectations Interpret vision Build project in accordance with Funding expectations Communicate design contract documents Schedule expectations Develop Project Program Build project within approved Scope expectations Focus On Develop Aligning project contract Expectations budget Project outcome expectations drawings Build project within approved Sharing vision with team Not Develop Assigning project specifications Risk schedule 6

ALIGNED PROJECT DELIVERY Lines of Communication Contractual Relationship The Project Team

International Airport Director of Capital Projects Education and Certifications: Master of

Summa Cum Laude, Northwood University Associate Degree, Lansing Community College

Department of Labor, Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training Years of Experience: 35 Director

development and management of all capital projects at the District s three colleges and

Executive leader in higher education capital outlay projects, administrative services,

commercial and industrial project development, planning, and construction implementation

Integrated Planning Member City of Lansing/Ingham County Bike Share Feasibility Committee

7 ALIGNED PROJECT DELIVERY Lines of Communication Contractual Relationship The Project Team The Project Collaborate CHRIS STRUGAR FRITSCH, DBIA San Mateo County Community College International Airport Director of Capital Projects Education and Certifications: Master of Science, Administration, Central Michigan University Bachelor, Business Administration, Summa Cum Laude, Northwood University Associate Degree, Lansing Community College Journeyman Carpenter, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training Years of Experience: 35 Director of Capital Projects for San Mateo County Community College District rresponsible for development and management of all capital projects at the District s three colleges and District Office. Executive leader in higher education capital outlay projects, administrative services, facilities management, and operations for multiple campuses, leadership and management in commercial and industrial project development, planning, and construction implementation with various delivery methods: design/bid/build, GC GMP, integrated project delivery, and construction management services. Affiliations: Society for College and University Planning Institute: Certified Planner; Integrated Planning Member City of Lansing/Ingham County Bike Share Feasibility Committee Mayoral & Lansing City Council appointment Saginaw Street Corridor Improvement Authority Licensed Builder, State of Michigan # Standardized Emergency Management Systems (SEMS) FEMA Certification National Incident Management Systems (NIMS) FEMA Certification Design Build Institute of America (DBIA) Design Build Professional 7

San Mateo County Community College Migration to Progressive Design Build PRESENTER Chris Strugar-Fritsch, DBIA Director of Capital Projects Cañada

California CCD to use Design-Build AB 1000: Enacted in September 2002.

Swinerton Management Consultants lobbied legislature to approve AB 1000 Current California Education Code 81700 81708 allows CCDs to use

8 San Mateo County Community College Migration to Progressive Design Build PRESENTER Chris Strugar-Fritsch, DBIA Director of Capital Projects Cañada College B1N Kinesiology & Wellness [Blach/ELS] SMCCCD History with Design Build Cañada College B1N Kinesiology & Wellness [Blach/ELS] SMCCD first California CCD to use Design-Build AB 1000: Enacted in September Allowed Design- Build to be used by five CCDs as pilot programs until December 2007 José Nuñez, SMCCD Vice Chancellor for Facilities and Jeff Gee, Swinerton Management Consultants lobbied legislature to approve AB 1000 Current California Education Code allows CCDs to use Design-Build for project > $2.5M through 2020 SMCCD two previous Bond Measure Programs has constructed ~$400M of capital projects using Design-Build Current Bond Measure Program using Design-Build ~$250M Progressive Design Build 8

SMCCCD PRACTICES Skyline B1N Social Sciences & Creative Arts [Turner/Snohetta/DLR Group] Past Architect Develops Bridging Documents RFSOQ and RFP Process to Select Design- Build-Entity Design

College/District Input GMP Established After Design is Fully Developed, Agencies Permit Processes and Buyout Completed Progressive Design Build DESIGN BUILD PROCUREMENT PROCESS Best Value

qualifications-based selection along with a prequalification questionnaire based on the Department of Industrial Relations guidelines Allows for a larger pool of qualified firms to participate Three

9 SMCCCD PRACTICES Skyline B1N Social Sciences & Creative Arts [Turner/Snohetta/DLR Group] Past Architect Develops Bridging Documents RFSOQ and RFP Process to Select Design- Build-Entity Design Competition Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) Established at Contract Award Current RFP Qualifications/Best Value Selection Process No Bridging Documents No Design Competition Design Completed with College/District Input GMP Established After Design is Fully Developed, Agencies Permit Processes and Buyout Completed Progressive Design Build DESIGN BUILD PROCUREMENT PROCESS Best Value Qualifications + Cost Request for Statement of Qualifications Request for Proposals Cañada College B23N Math, Science & Technology [McCarthy/HGA] Employs evaluation criteria traditionally used for qualifications-based selection along with a prequalification questionnaire based on the Department of Industrial Relations guidelines Allows for a larger pool of qualified firms to participate Three highest ranked Design-Build Entities are invited to participate Employs objective evaluation criteria as required per Education Code 81700; price, technical expertise, life cycle costs, skilled labor force availability, and acceptable safety record Allows for price or costs to be considered with qualifications Progressive Design Build 9

10 REASONS FOR IMPLEMENTING CURRENT PRACTICE District Has More Influence on Design After Contract Award District Can Hire DBE Team that is Best Fit for College Improved Integrated Design Process Leverage IPD and Lean Construction Practices Improved Speed to Market Open Book/Transparent Cost Management Improved Competition Skyline B12N Environnemental Science [XL Construction / DES Architects] Progressive Design Build PRESENTER CONTACT INFORMATION Praful Kulkarni, AIA President/CEO gkkworks National Chairman of DBIA pkulkarni@gkkworks.com (949) Geoffrey Neumayr, SE Chief Development Officer San Francisco International Airport Geoff.Neumayr@flysfo.com phone number Chris Strugar Fritch, DBIA Director of Capital Projects San Mateo County Community College District strugarfritschc@smccd.edu

11 QUESTIONS? 11

Successful Use of Progressive Design-Build in California Community Colleges

Successful Use of Progressive Design-Build in California Community Colleges The Panelists Bill Pate Devaney Pate Cameron & Morris LLP Chris Strugar-Fritsch San Mateo County Community College District Dennis