Finalize Implementation Plan Conduct Introductory Campus Meetings Kickoff Several Comprehensive Projects Secured Program Managers

Transcription

1 CBOC: Bond Update

2 Since the Bond Passed Finalize Implementation Plan Conduct Introductory Campus Meetings Kickoff Several Comprehensive Projects Secured Program Managers

3 Bond Implementation Plan Considers All Projects Market Conditions Escalation Execution Approach Management Capacity

4 Bond Implementation Plan Plan Documents Fiscal Year Detail Plan Comprehensive Project Schedule Comprehensive Summary Schedule AISDFuture.com

5 Design-Build Projects Update Doss/Murchison, Govalle, T.A Brown, and Menchaca Bridging Documents Confirm Swing Solution Sustainability Goals Successful Procurement Principals Participation Negotiations Underway NTP Set for March 1 st Menchaca ES Bridging Doc Sun Path Analysis

6 CMR Project Update Ann Richards YWLA and Eastside Memorial ECHS Design Teams Selected Planning Meetings Space Program Design Fee Negotiations Construction Firm Procurement Proposals Submitted Feb. 9th March Board Meeting Planning Meeting at Ann Richards YMLA

7 CMR Project Update Blazier Relief, Southwest ES Designers Selected CAT Orientation Meetings CMR Proposals Feb. 9 th March Board Meeting Joe Lee Johnson ES Tour

8 CMR Project Update Bowie HS Introductory Approach Meetings Due Diligence Parking Environmental Designer Proposals - Feb. 9th Contractor Proposals - Feb. 9th March Board Meeting

9 Campus Architectural Team (CAT) Bond Approval Pre-Meeting with campus planning teams CAT School Tours Schematic Design 2-3 months Design Review with community Rendering Presentation to community 03 Construction Documents 6-9 months CAT Design Reviews 05 Construction Groundbreaking & Rendering Presentation to community Project Construction Webcam Launch 06 Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Open House for community New Space Orientation & Tech Training for teachers New/Modern School Ribbon Cutting and Community Celebration Concept Development Academic Programming Campus Master Planning with community Design Charrette with community 04 Design Development 2-3 months CAT Design Reviews 07 08

10 Comprehensive Modernization Project Delivery Methods

11 Design-Build Single Contract Modern Delivery Method Widely Known and Used Designer and Constructor Form Team during Procurement Process Single Point of Contact via Single Contract with Design & Construction Team 2-step Procurement Process More Construction Risks Transferred to Private Sector than DBB Price for Work is Lump Sum Based Design-Builder

12 Design / Build (D/B) Benefits: Increased Price Certainty via Lump Sum Increased Schedule Certainty Clear Opportunity for Innovations to be Created, Evaluated and Implemented Overall Cost Reduction Limitations: AISD Cedes some Design Control Warranty Covers Only 1-2 Year Term Some, but Limited, Risk Transfer on Construction Selection Criteria can be Troublesome if not Properly Structured Integrated Team for Design and Construction Marketplace Acceptance and Comfort Very Good Competitive Tension, Drives Value Quality of Teams is Evaluated at RFQ Stage 12

13 Construction Manager at Risk Two Separate Contracts Designer Contractor Designer and CMR are both Agents to AISD Very Open, Transparent and Collaborative Approach Risk Management Accomplished by an Open Discussion and Accountability in Costing as the Scope Progresses Costing of Work is an On-going Element Scope of Work Adjustments Measured and Balanced Against Costing Estimates Designer Construction Manager

14 Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) Benefits: Increased Coordination between the Designer and Construction Manager Construction Manager Hired Based on Qualifications (and Fees) Construction Manager, Designer and County all Collaborate, Creating Enhanced Synergies Transparency is Enhanced, High Degree of Price and Risk Certainty via Lump Sum Innovations and Best Practices Folded into Work as Scope and Costs Develop Limitations: Not a Proven Cost Reducer Compared to Other Methods Low Amount of Competitive Tension Additional Cost for CMR Entity More Complex Relationships Reduces Low-cost Bid Element, which can Raise Overall Costs even with Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) Lengthy Time Possible as Design, Risks and Construction are Measured Against Costs 14

15 Comparison Analysis Project Objectives Traditional D/B CMR Timeliness Flexibility Design Integration with community Maximizes competition Local participation Fairness & transparency Environmental sustainability Risk allocation Cost certainty Value-for money Affordable KEY: Strongly Achieves Objectives Mostly Achieves Objectives Achieves Some Objectives 15