CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Progressive Design‐Build An Emerging Option for Collaboration and Design Excellence Brandon Dekker Robert Brykalski Jose Nuñez gkkworks | CannonDesign Build‐LACCD San Mateo County CCD David S. Gehrig Corrie Messinger Yanely Pulido Hanson Bridgett LLP McCarthy Building Companies San Mateo County CCD Progressive Design‐Build What is it? J. Brandon Dekker, M.S., DBIA, LEED GA Principal gkkworks | CannonDesign 1 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop The Conflict in the Law Designer is accountable to a reasonable standard STANDARD OF CARE of care, therefore Errors and Omission are The common law standard of care for performance acceptable within a limit. 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. CONFLICT GAME ON SPEARIN DOCTRINE Builder can assume contract is error free with no omissions. 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 Thedefects in suchOwner information, plans and specifications. Loss of Productivity 2 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Advantages/Disadvantages DESIGN BID BUILD (HARD BID) The traditional project delivery method, which customarily involves three OWNER sequential project phases: Design, Procurement, and Construction A/E Advantages Disadvantages Competitive bidding, based on Quality/Qualifications GC Low Resp. price More Owner Control Change Orders/Delays Familiar & Established Adversarial A/E of Record Services as Lump‐Sum/Closed Book, No SUBS Owner Liaison Early Involvement Advantages/Disadvantages CM AT RISK (CMAR) A project delivery method in which the Construction Manager acts as a OWNER consultant to the Owner in the development and design phases, but assumes the risk for construction performance as the equivalent of a constructor. A/E Advantages Disadvantages CMA Qualifications Based Lack of Subcontractor R/GC Transparency since Based on Lump Sum Risk is on CM, Subs Assigned to Legal Authorization for Delivery CM Method Pre‐Construction Work, Early No Common Standards for SUBS Involvement with Procurement, Methodology Schedule, Budget, etc. 3 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Advantages/Disadvantages CM MULTI‐PRIME An important variation of Design‐Bid‐Build is multiple prime contracting, in OWNER 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 Disadvantages CM A/E Competitive Prime Trades, Administrative difficulty; Direct Early involvement from CM for trade and A / E conflicts cost and schedule controls Eliminates GC premiums Lack of single risk bonded P P P price, higher risk with subs. CM is on owners side Lump Sum / Closed book, potential overlap or gaps in scope of work. Advantages/Disadvantages DESIGN BUILD A project delivery method that combines architectural and engineering design OWNER services with construction performance under one contract. PROJECT DELIVERY SPPORT Advantages Disadvantages D/B Qualifications Based Newer Form of Delivery ENTITY Risk with Design/Builder D/B A/E Team/Integrated Potential Lack of Design SUBS Approach/Creative Solutions Control Minimal Change Orders, Early Higher Learning Curve for Budget and Design Estimates, Delivery Method Scope Controls Best Value Award 4 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Integrated & Collaborative Elements • Integrated Project Delivery • Integrated Technology Systems • Qualification Based Selection • Lean Construction Tools • Stakeholder Engagement Process • Structured Collaborative Partnering Progressive Design Build Delivery Lines of Communication Contractual Relationship Design Phase Progressive Buyout to GMP Designer Designer Collaborate Owner and Owner Align Expectation Procurement of Packages Trade Builder Builder Builder Risk Risk Assignment: Risk Assignment: Assignment: • Vision • Design . Vision • Construction . Designg . Construction 5 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) TradeDesign PackageProgrammingDesignBuilder Builder BuilderReservesManagementDesign Fee Services Contingency Services ServicesTrade Packages Base Work • ProgrammingProjectArchitecturalDirectAllowanceOverheadDesign cost Managementerrors & forof Profit Design constructionVerification&undefined omissions ServicesStaff or • ProgramProjectEngineeringNegotiatedunquantifiableBondsSchedule &Engineering InsuranceVisioning Acceleration self Services scope performed work • ProgramDesignPrepareCoreWorkExpressedScope Tradeis gaps Management to BidDevelopment be as WorkDocumentsbetween includeda percent trades with • DevelopmentFieldDesignEquipmentTradeAppliedWork Office notPackage Servicesto identified Trade ProcurementAdministration of Base BasisforPackage in Tradework of Design Bidsof • CostContractConstructionSubcontractedAppliedPackages AddedEstimating to Trade to Tradetrade Package workPackage • PullSupervisionBuildingMinimumBaseReservesAny PlanningRemaining work Information of 3of Bids Subcontractors contingency for Modeling is • DevelopQualityNegotiatedsubcontractedTradeAppliedreturned Reserve Control/Assuranceto Costto Change AfterOwner Model workwork Programming Orders is • DevelopCostPhaseExcludesnegotiatedIt is not submitted applied Schedule Trade after withtoReservesscope Design RFQ/P is • CostdefinedServices submitted with RFQ/P • Fee submitted with RFQ/P Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) Components of the GMP Programming Services Builder Management Services Design Services Trade Package Base Work Trade Package Reserves Design Builder O/P Fee Design Builder Contingency 6 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Progressive Design‐Build Amount Contract Progressive Design Build Done Right 7 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Curriculum 1. Introduction to Progressive Design 4. Organization, Behavior, & Build Management • Design Build Done Right • Stakeholder Engagement • What is Progressive Design Build • Structured Collaborative Partnering • Why Choose Progressive Design Build 5. Management Tools • Obstacles to Progressive Design Build • Cost Model 2. Why Chose Progressive Design Build • Last Planner • Domains of Project Delivery 3. Procurement, Selection, & Contract • Contracting Phases • Progressive Modifications to Contract Progressive Design-Build: An Emerging Option for Collaboration and Design Excellence Community College Facilities Coalition 2018 Annual Conference Pre-Conference Workshop Hyatt Regency, Sacramento, CA September 10, 2018 David S. Gehrig, Partner 415-995-5063 (direct) [email protected] www.infrastructreblog.com 8 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Agenda 1. Summary of Community College District Design-Build Statutes (Education Code Sections 81700-81708) 2. Traditional v. Progressive Design-Build 3. How Progressive Design-Build Fits with Community College District Design-Build Authority Community College District Design-Build Statutes (Ed. Code Sections 81700-81708) • CCD design-build statutes were adopted by the CA legislature in 2002 • The statutes were initially adopted as part of a pilot program limited to 3 specific districts: Los Angeles, San Jose- Evergreen and San Mateo • 2007 amendments expanded design-build authority to all community college districts • Additional minor amendments in 2012 and 2014 9 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Community College District Design-Build Statutes (Ed. Code sections 81700-81708) • The framework for design-build under 81700-81708 is similar to other public agency design-build statutes: – Must prequalify all DB entities first – RFP process follows prequalification – Can award to lowest bidder or on a “best value” basis – Best value award must establish objective criteria – Following factors must receive at least 10% of total weight: price, technical expertise, life cycle costs over 15 years or more, skilled labor force availability, and safety record – Design-build-operate contracts are prohibited – District may conduct discussions and negotiations Community College District Design-Build Statutes (Ed. Code Sections 81700-81708) • Procedures for final selection “shall be based on one of the following criteria” (81703(c)): – 81703(c)(1): To the lowest bidder after lump sum bids are submitted – 81703(c)(2): A “design-build competition based upon performance and other criteria … [such as] design approach, life cycle costs, project features, and project functions” and being ranked from most advantageous to least advantageous to the district 10 CCFC 25th Annual Conference ‐ Pre‐Conference Workshop Community College District Design-Build Statutes (Ed. Code Sections 81700-81708) • Award pursuant to the “design-build competition” under 81703(c)(2) continued: – Implies that the “design competition” will involve a