Project Delivery Methods: Board of Trustees April 12, 2005

Project Delivery Methods
Board of Trustees
April 12, 2005
Facilities Excellence
Agenda
Phases of a Project
Overview of Project Delivery
Design/Bid/Build
Design-Build
Multiple-prime
Keys to Success
Next Steps
Models
Three Phases of Design & Construction

Project / Scope Definition project requirements
& constraints, estimate of cost & time for
delivering it
Design schematic design; design development,
construction drawings & specifications
Construction procurement, shop drawings,
fabrication, site construction & project closeout
PD
Design
Construction
Common Misconceptions
Architects and Engineers

are PERFECT
Engineers Estimate
The cost of
construction
in heaven
Contractor
A gambler
who never gets
to shuffle, cut,
or deal
Bid
A wild guess
carried out to
two decimal
places
Low Bidder
A contractor
who is
wondering what
he left out
Design-Bid-Build
CM Multi-prime
Design-Build
Selection Criteria
Owners culture
Project / Scope complexity
Budget / cash flow
Time available
Special user needs
Risk distribution
Design-Bid-Build
Owner
A/E
CM
General
Contractor
Sub
Sub
Sub
Sub
Sub
Design-Bid-Build Pros:
Competitive bidding process.
Easy to manage, universally understood.
The Owner has a defined, fully designed
project prior to bid.
The CMs responsibility is to protect the
interest of the owner.
Design-Bid-Build Cons:
Contractors take advantage of competitive
process.
The process is linear
Design does not benefit from direct
contractor and subcontractors involvement.
Changes orders are common.
Owner has full exposure to change orders.
Delay claims and disputes are common.
Design-Bid-Build:
Project Delivery Timelines
Design-Bid-Build
Keys to Success
Prequalified General Contractor
Experienced GC Staff
Experienced Owner Staff
Experienced Design Team
Complete Bid
Documents
Fair and equitable contract
CM Multi-Prime
Owner
CM
Prime
Contractor
A/E
Prime
Contractor
Prime
Contractor
CM Multiple Prime Pros:

Economy of scale
Cut out the middle man (General Contractor)
Closer relationship between Owner and each
trade/contractor
No GC mark-ups on trade contracts
Hands-on all aspects of project
The CMs fiduciary responsibility is to the Owner
CM Multiple Prime Cons:

Not suitable for complex or custom projects.
Multiple contracts will impact administrative
staff workload.
Owner acts as GC responsible for coordination
of trades during construction
Owner liability in the event one prime trade
contractor damages another.
Lack of a single, guaranteed, bonded price for
the total project
CM Multiple Prime Cons:
Multiple-Prime
Keys to Success
Experienced Owner acts as General Contractor

Experienced CM
Properly structured Construction Contract
Design-Build
Owner
CM
DBE
A/E
Subs
Subs
Subs
Subs
Subs
AB 1000
Enacted in September 2002
Allows Design-Build to be used by the following:
Los Angeles Community
College District
San Jose-Evergreen Community College District
San Mateo County Community College District
State Chancellors Office to select as many as five
individual projects from other community
college districts
Design-Build Pros
Simplified contracting
Reduction of adversarial relationships
Cost containment
Speed of delivery
Shifting of risk
Early involvement of the builder
Validate another project delivery
method for community college districts
Design-Build Cons
Significant up-front investment of time
Potential lack of experience in local community
Potentially
less control over design

May be more difficult to compare proposals
Institutional capabilities
Approval agency capabilities
- Local Fire Marshal
- Division of the State Architect
- State Chancellors Office
- Department of Finance
- Legislative Analyst Office
Intensity of effort required for implementation
Design-Build:
Project Delivery Timelines
Design-Build
Key To Success:
Success
Clear and articulate Request for Proposal
Project Program
Design Parameters
Campus Standards
Proposal Requirements
Limited, but sufficient
Ability
of the Owner to let go
In Physics, e = mc
In Construction, t = m
Which Method is Right for COM?
Design-Bid-Build Examples
KTD Harlan Center

KTD Fine Arts
KTD Fusselman
IVC Capital Preservation
Design-Build Examples
New Construction x2
Energy Efficiency
CM Multiple-Prime
Examples
(Districtwide and/or
Campuswide)
Restroom Upgrades
Exterior Painting
Roofing
Carpet
Vinyl Floor Tile
Asphalt
Project Delivery
Keys to Success
Early identification of project goals

Realistically assess capabilities
Choose a project delivery model to meet
project goals and leverage Team capabilities
Next Steps
Ed
Plan Road map to future

Space Inventory
District Architect (Design /Bldg standards)
District Surveys (CEQA/Civil/Geo/ Energy)
Program Definition
Scope / Schedule / Budget

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Jos D. Nuez
Measure C Executive Director, College of Marin

[email protected]
(650) 574-6512
Jeff Gee
Program Executive, Swinerton Management & Consulting

[email protected]
(415) 421-2980
Program Manager, Swinerton Management & Consulting
[email protected]
(415) 710-2248
Dave Kirn

Project Delivery Methods: Board of Trustees April 12, 2005

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Delivery Methods: Board of Trustees April 12, 2005

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Delivery Methods: Board of Trustees April 12, 2005

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Delivery Methods

Three Phases of Design & Construction

Architects and Engineers

Project Delivery Methods

CM Multiple Prime Pros:

CM Multiple Prime Cons:

CM Multiple Prime Cons:

Experienced Owner acts as General Contractor

less control over design

of the Owner to let go

Which Method is Right for COM?

KTD Harlan Center

Early identification of project goals

Plan Road map to future

Project Delivery Methods

Measure C Executive Director, College of Marin

Program Executive, Swinerton Management & Consulting

You might also like