Lessons Learned/Best Practices: Case Study- Design-Build at SFO

Transcription

1 Lessons Learned/Best Practices: Case Study- Design-Build at SFO Speaker(s): Clay Paslay Moderator Ivar Satero, SFO Steven Rule, Turner Bill Hooper, Jr., Gensler

2 SFO s Delivery Options SELECTION TYPES Price Definition Designer & Contractor 2 separate contracts 1. Low Bid Total Construction Cost Design-Bid-Build (Lump Sum) NA 2A. 2B. Price and other Qualifications Total Construction Cost Fees, General Conditions, Contingencies Etc. NA CM/GC (Low Bid/Best Value) NA Design-Build (Low Bid/Best Value) 3. Qualifications ONLY Based Selection None NA NA

3 Terminal 2 Renovations $383M Project 10 Gate Int l to 14 Gate Domestic Complete Refurbishment Seismic Upgrade NTP 4/1/08 Substantial Completion 3/2/11

4 Terminal 2 Renovations

5 Terminal 2 Renovations

6 Terminal 2 Renovations

7

8 Terminal 2 Renovations Topics for Discussion Communication Organization/Structure/Roles Design Control/Subs as Designers Out of Sync Drawing Development Budget/Contingency/GMP

9 Lessons Learned from SFO Terminal 2 Communications Contractor needs to provide strong design manager leadership to maintain communications and approvals. Have a planning Summit at start of project where roles and responsibilities and lines of communications are defined. Define communications and approval process up front and keep people working within that structure. SFO established Quick Response Teams (QRT s) made up of users / stakeholders, information developed became program. QRT process in use now for activation planning. Organization / Structure / Roles More specific definition of Roles / Responsibilities required More continuity with original Design Consultants even if EOR is a subcontractor Get CA services from original Design Consultants.

10 Lessons Learned from SFO Terminal 2 Design Control / Subs as Designers SFO is considering master architect and bridging documents with future DB projects. Will keep qualifications based DB selection v. Lump Sum for selection of builder team. Out of Sync Drawing Development SFO will use bridging type Master Architect to get drawings to a point where there is a comfort level that design has considered the stakeholders then use quals based process to select DB team. Team needs to balance design and construction schedule against exposure holds in GMP to account for early packages and continuing design. Budget / Contingency / GMP SFO to look at what point GMP is determined. Would prefer Construction Contingency rather than exposures or allowances shift risk to DB team.

11 Terminal 2 Renovations Q&A

12 Terminal 2 Renovations Reference Slides

13 Design-Build Terminal 2 Renovations - Procurement Process Schedule analysis of delivery options indicates design-build only option for achieving 36-month schedule. Airport to provide conceptual drawings in the Request for Proposals (RFP), based on a previous feasibility study. Airport to initiate Quick Response Team (QRT) process to expedite Program Development. RFP to include SFO s boilerplate for full A/E services, from Programmatic Phase through CA, with all of the same milestone deliverables for r an Airport-controlled design effort. Contract structured as progressive GMP.

14 Design-Build Collaboration Benefits Design-Bid-Build Bid Cost Savings Begin Buyout Design/Build w/gmp GMP Buyout Collaboration Time Savings Time

15 Design-Build Contract/Bidding Process DESIGN Bridging Documents Design Builder Civil Package Structure Package M/E/P Package Systems Package Building Package Final GMP Awarded Cost CONSTRUCTION Final GMP Time

16 Design-Build Terminal 2 Renovations Selection of Design-Builder Best Value selection process, with 40% of evaluation based qualifications and 60% on costs, as required by the pending new ordinance. Qualifications evaluation scored based on: Team Qualifications Key Personnel Experience Management Approach Cost evaluation scored based on: Design Fee General Conditions OH&P Markup Significant issue to bidders in Best Value is cost weighting.

17 Design-Build Terminal 2 Renovations Selection of Design-Builder For Example Firm #1 Firm #2 Design Fee $10,000,000 $12,000,000 General Conditions $20,000,000 $22,000,000 OH&P Markup 10% 12% Estimated Direct Costs $300,000,000 $300,000,000 Overhead & Profit Fee $30,000,000 $36,000,000 Total Cost Evaluation $360,000,000 $370,000,000 Lowest - 60 Points Maximum 60 2 nd Low - % Difference on Cost 60 (.027*60) = 58.38

18 Design-Build Terminal 2 Renovations Selection of Design-Builder Airport received 3 proposals from well-qualified firms. The firm ranked 2 nd in qualifications, but had the lowest cost structure, prevailed. When extended over the anticipated cost of construction, the total forecast cost of the highest ranked proposer resulted in a $22M savings as compared to the 2 nd ranked proposer. NTP was issued on April 1, 2008, with a September 30, 2010 Substantial Completion date. Current date for completion is March 2, 2011