Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Innovative Design and Delivery Strategies

823 views

Published on

Presented at Tradeline in 2014, Pat Malick, Kent Doss and Pamela Ward O-Malley share their expertise on the IPD success story for Health & Hospitals Corporation.

Published in: Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Innovative Design and Delivery Strategies

  1. 1. _ 5 . ' "-. I 1 I ». « i’-"7" A _; :i 4:. Js _; _f MT H‘: 3' = ,_ . ..u 4.. . l = _I. I.HivU‘is<. ~.isl _| ';ll= R1=lIl'i; i_l innovative Design & Delivery Strategies for Publicly Financed Projects Emcee:
  2. 2. Tradeline . we| come strategic facilities planning & management April - 7 & 8 - 2014 The Henry J. Carter Specialty Hospital and Nursing Facility: Innovative Design and Delivery Strategies for Publicly Financed Projects presenters: Kent Doss, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Lean Six Sigma Green Belt Principal Array Architects Patricia Malick, AAHID, EDAC, Lean Green Belt Principal, Practice Area Leader, Interior Design Array Architects Pamela Ward—QiMalley, AIDA Design Phase Manager Gi/ bane Building Company
  3. 3. @ course description Many hospital systems are dealing with budget shortfalls while simultaneously facing increasing patient demand. This is the case for The Health and Hospital Corporation, the nation's largest municipal healthcare organization, serving over 1.3 million New Yorkers annually with over 1/3 of their patients uninsured. So how do you reconcile budget constraints, meet an aggressive schedule, exceed the City's MBElWBE goals and design two state—of-the—art hospitals? Through innovative design, cost—effective material selection, efficient project delivery, time saving technology and team building incentive programs developed to encourage collaboration and creativity. This session will take you "behind the scenes" and share new design, project management and delivery techniques that will shape how hospital projects with tight budgets will be designed and delivered in the future. One of the largest healthcare projects undertaken by the City of New York, this project required extensive collaboration among a diverse stakeholder group and features unique incentive programs to meet an aggressive schedule necessitated by domino projects.
  4. 4. key learning objectives At the end of the this course, participants will be able to: Objective 1: Compare design strategies and building material selection to maximize energy efficiency and budget dollars and learn how utilizing Revit technology results in significant schedule savings. Objective 2: Review adaptive reuse strategy of existing Skilled Nursing Facility to incorporate updated codes and safety requirements for a diverse patient population. Objective 3: Learn Project Management techniques for rapid planning and procurement decision making in an accelerated project environment and identify strategies to maximize MBE/ WBE/ DBE participation on projects. Objective 4: Understand Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) concepts and how to develop a BIM Execution Plan that integrates all team members, allowing all disciplines to work more collaboratively. Analyze and evaluate if incentive programs are appropriate for your design/ construction team.
  5. 5. @ key drivers " i i Design a building to integrate with patient needs and neighborhood ; ‘ Program existing and new building to meet planning goals A ‘A Design criteria and quality goals " ‘ Maintain project budgets Create a healing and pleasant environment for SNFl LTACH patients and staff Meet move in dates Collaboration Collocation Rapid planning / deliverables / procurement lncentivized IPD process using BIM
  6. 6. .3 ¢". . $. ‘.‘1_'-. vi-.1!-xnmu l l*. §:y sol‘a: l:cholc! ei‘s - New York City Economic Development Corp ; ._ ‘ 3 Emil Martone, AIA Vice President - NYC Health & Hospitals . Corporation (HHC‘)”: ._ Marsha Powell, AIA “Director of Engineering Services T L - Cdler-Goldwater Specia| ty*H®pita'l'a'nd Nursing Faci 3 Michael Bucholtz / "xi"/ #3 3 Senior Exeguflvla(l)irectqr «* x - Henry J; Cart ‘R. -r. lily; Speciat‘y Hospit_a. l.a. nd-ll. ;,ursj_r¥1g Facility LTACH — Long rm Acute‘Care Hospital and SNFl’: illed Nursing Facility l Patients, Staff an ‘Families E in‘: i / /E
  7. 7. O welcome e . a . . ~ w o w e o » a s s a s y v u c ix 0 project overview
  8. 8. project budget LTACH SNF HHC Total $153,191,000 $131,301,000 $ 284,492,000
  9. 9. site location Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH) ' Renovation of former North General Hospital, 1879 Madison Avenue, New York, NY project location map ° 276,385 SF Inpatient Acute Care Hospital ° 201 Beds relocated from existing facility on Roosevelt Island Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) ° New Construction ° 164 Beds ° 130,000 SF ° Connection to Renovated LTACH 1 Goldwater (Roosevelt Island) Goldwater _ A - - Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) 1879 Madison Ave (cuneiifslte) V _ _ - _ _ _ esvsv ‘ ' . - Institute for Family Health (FH) 1824 Madison Ave 1 Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH) 1879 Madison Ave
  10. 10. site location 7 50 Beds (Medicalj 6 40 Beds (Medicalj 5 36 Beds (Ventilator) 34 Beds 4 40 Beds (Ventilator) 34 Beds 32 Beds 3 35 Beds (Ventilator & Weaning) 32 Beds 2 Diagnosticlclinical — 32 Beds 1 Lobbyl Community c°""°°‘°' 1 Lobbyl Community MADISON AVENUE 2 ,1!-4;‘, 72,1 Long Term Acute Care Hospital Skilled Nursing Facility (Former North General Hospital) 754 BEDS N 201 BEDS N
  11. 11. project goals & amenities - 1‘ Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH) § Patient Profile: 1 Patient with a range of acuity levels with a significant length of stay and specialized needs. project goals project amenities ° Provide safe, equitable, patient—centered 0 Places of worship, healing gardens care environment meeting wide range of acuity levels ° Café, Resident Lounges, Outdoor DininglLounge space, in-house radio station facility. ° Provide appropriate treatment spaces ° Semi-Private, Private, Isolation, and Vent Rooms. ° Provide areas of respite and contemplation Private Patient Bathrooms and Central Bathing areas. ° Provide opportunities for collaboration - Physical Therapy, Dental Care, Eye Care, OB GYN, and Imaging ° Connect to Skilled Nursing Facility ° Activity Concourse will connect through both facilities; complimentary palettes, and design vocabularies
  12. 12. project goals & amenities 1 1?’ Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) 1 _ Patient Profile: I ' A" Resident who will live and reside in the facility as their home and their neighborhood, while still .2 requiring medical care and attention. project goals project amenities ° Provide collaborative, rehabilitative, ° Community Meeting Hall: communal resident environment . Gathering Space, Performance Space, Seminars, Events and Activities ° Facilitate partnerships and opportunities for connectivity with East Harlem Community ° Public Activity Spaces: Salon, Library, General Store and Places of Worship ° Foster caregiver and resident collaboration ° Learning and Participatory Spaces: ° Encourage participation in life affirming Music and Movement, Arts and Culinary activities and a sense of home ° Living Floors: ° Connect to Long Term Acute Care Hospital Living and Dining Areas per floor Private and Semi-Private Rooms Areas of Personalization ° Activity Concourse will connect through both facilities; complimentary palettes, and design vocabularies
  13. 13. Q welcome » a s s a a e o o e o s a a x o o a o c o all Q project overview 0 site context
  14. 14. chai'ac'tei-istics View from l22nd and Park AVENUE ~ aw nurf: . J19‘ '¢{Ij: i;: < Irjitn P', irl, fiviirilngal ngvklrn} ¢vn| a|l
  15. 15. site context March2012 -, ~ _ai
  16. 16. ecology CLIMATE I Temperature Average: 62.2° F (High) I46.9° F (Low) Extremes: 85.1 ° F (Jul) I 25.3° F (Jan) Winter Winds CLIMATE I Heating Degree Days Yearly TotaI:4804° F Extremes: 1039° F (Jan) I 0° F (Jun — Aug) CLIMATE I Cooling Degree Days Yearly Total: 1094° F Extremes: 365° F (Jul) I 0° F (Nov —Apr) CLIMATE I RAINFALL Average: 44.4 in (Year) Extremes: 4.2 in (May + Nov) I 3.1 in (Feb) Summer Solstice Sunset SOLAR ORIENTATION I Summer Solstice I 1 __ . Sunrise: 5:25am I 57.6°AngIe I -0.7 Elevation summer gfitstice Sunset: 8:30pm I 302.2°AngIe I -0.7 Elevation ‘ Sunri ' : SOLAR ORIENTATION I Winter Solstice " Sunrise: 7:17am I 120.6 Angle I -0.7 Elevation Winter Solstice Sunset: 4:31pm I 239.0 Angle I -0.7 Elevation Sunset PREVAILING WINDS Winter: West—Northwest (December) Spring: Northwest (March) Summer: South (June) Fall: South I East—Northeast (September) . _.Winter Solstice ~ s S_u nris ' _ Optimal Orentatiorr Summer Winds
  17. 17. H e t n 0 c e .1“ S | Staff Circulation/ Entrance Ivisitor Circulation/ Entrance 2;. .. | AmbuIette Entrance | Loading Dock
  18. 18. urban greenery 2 Site/ Street Greenery
  19. 19. MADISON AVENUE ground floor plan 122 ND 24'l'RIiI-2'1‘ OXYGEN FARM , ‘ ‘ ' ' TRASH AMBllL1;"l'l'I; ' —. — ‘ — l. OAl3lNG DOCK PARK AVENU E
  20. 20. project influencers $ Equitable & Compassionate Environment K L? Budgetary Alignment Accelerated Schedule Functionality and Efficiency
  21. 21. context
  22. 22. technical design influencers (0, I (( Acoustical ControI/ Proximity to Elevated Rail Schedule Pressuresl Material Procurement and Installation Speed Long-Term Costsl Low Maintenance and Long Lifespan Materials
  23. 23. experiential design influencers I 4; : Creating a healing environment which ‘ — : promotes a sense of community Fostering collaboration through activities for daily living Nature-infused, urban-inspired & sustainable materials
  24. 24. finding balance appropriate choices new vonx cm: HEALTH MID NOSPIYALS conrocnnou PATIENT & RESIDENT CENTERED PROJECT CONSTRAINTS
  25. 25. design strategy metal glass I wood Iandscapei I I II I I I I V WA. ,— W Efii. _ I _ _, I architectural mesh , a_.1.' precast light , I " precast dark i "F-u. -Y-%**v: —*~'
  26. 26. exterior material mapping Resident Rooms: 6" Precast with punched window openings , ' -: :i L_g_g Punched windows are utilized to minimize noise infiltration in sleeping areas 1,: U '. ,,l' Public Areas: Enclosed by glass to maximize views and natural light. Shear Wal| s/ Penthouse: Light weight and overall economy I ‘ , .. 11111111 l Wood Trim: . I: Street level soffits and continuing into the Lobby 3 H 1 ‘(I . - "V . I It “: I I ‘ ' 1 I 1 - Metal Panel/ Trim - ~ _ - I .
  27. 27. facade articulation based on functional zones . . . -_ “pi? i
  28. 28. desienstrateev facade articulation based on functional zones . . _. . . .4. . . . . . t_ . _ . , - J . . . . . , . . ,1 £7 . . , ._ : .. 0. . . . . . . . , . .. . . . ,3 . J K. .. .. .. . . ,. . . . . , . ,r . . _ . I . ,. n . . If k. , . , , i . ..z . , .4 . . . . ii . ; ' D . i . ,l. ..4.. ta. z §§- =5: S. . . 1.1 . ,, ~ % E -‘~ -. . 5553.-u EH | Wm. ..
  29. 29. facade articulation based on functional zones / m/ .., /// , ¢»¢1I#fimlI##flI4rffl, a«fqI. %.W, . / / / , ma, .5 4.? £9. _ .2», u. .
  30. 30. urban edge I"““"| I I L. _.__. J
  31. 31. interior materials selection .15 _. ,.. .., ..wf1,. ... t£. ..». ._1.. _ w, i.a. ..n. .., owl . 4.: __ _ , _ . , _ i . we: « u i i _ Q. ‘ . : __. . . ,_ _ # . .—. .. . ,._, _ A h _ S. rt . .u. , . ._ . _ .1 . . I.. ... , W . S . M, : Ph, C_ . m., ».wl. .JA. i. l ‘ 1. . . . n . ._ H-rwnnflsfid, . <.~
  32. 32. 1 I ‘I | Public, Communal '| ”ier 1, High Impact | Circulation I Patient Corridors _, Resident Bedroom & Bathroom Patient Support/ Amenities | Nurse/ Communication Stations Staff Support T3ac7:fl-lcfie/ Support Zones
  33. 33. interior design influencers Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF)
  34. 34. desienstrateev interior design influencers Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF)
  35. 35. interior design influencers Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF)
  36. 36. renovation design strategy
  37. 37. renovation influencers / I _‘_ If L ! Renovate to create parity between “ 3‘: *9 new & existing Minimize level of renovation to promote/ protect schedule and budget, while still meeting programming needs ‘y Q Addressing unforeseen issues
  38. 38. renovate to create parity Tee, T e‘ ' Lulllzl “l= I|nIu: o1I. Il= »-31:11:» = to1~11ofll= _lL-§l; ’AIi'. ‘.‘}
  39. 39. minimal level of renovation - Minimize Demolition, Maximize Transformation - Simplify Patient Room Renovation - Deeply Explore Programming Needs ? l $22? l Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH)
  40. 40. addressing unforeseen issues - Existing Roofing - Existing Brick Facade Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH)
  41. 41. economy of scale moments of impact identity life—cyc| e
  42. 42. I welcome - g . . o ¢ o e o e e a - - - a a a g e o 9.: <_ project overview <_ site context lj design strategy . u a a o o o o . a u a a o. < project delivery
  43. 43. original schedule 0 NYC Agency Project (Wicks Law) 0 Design/ Bid/ Build Delivery 0 LTACH— Renovate and Upgrade 252,000 SF (10 stories) 0 SNF— New Construction— 131,000 SF (8 stories) 0 Build “As of Right. ” 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 design -16 months bid / awards construction — 12 months design—16 months bid / awards construction— 25 months - Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) 1 Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH)
  44. 44. schedule acceleration 0 Hyper Fast Track to vacate Roosevelt Island 0 NYCEDC and Mayor’s Office Participation 0 Not built “As of Right” . Change in Project Direction from Mayor’s Office 2012 2013 2014 2°15 V V V V I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' "I l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __| _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ : bid / awards ' design — 8 months ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' : - - - -_ - - - - - - - - I LCOl’lSIl’UCIlOl'l — 12 months I - bid / awards ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' L construction — 14 months ! design—16 months I L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — — — — — — — — — I _' bid / awards I L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ "I . design _12 momhs I construction— 25 months I I - Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) I COWSUUCNOW ‘ 13 m°mh5 1 Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH) I EM“ Original Schedule i 2011 V 4
  45. 45. schedule acceleration 0 Design Deliverables overlap construction 0 Fastest possible route to start construction 0 Ongoing reconciliation between work released and work in design START 7/11 OWNER OCCUPY 11/13 . Reduced From 42 to 28 Months . $284 M 2011 2012 2013 V 'lJe§§F —'1e'rn'orTm's ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' : : bid / awards ' design—8months ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ": -—-—_-—: - — - — - -1 Lconslrucllon 112 months I - bid / awards ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 2014 2015 V V construction — 14 months _ _ i. ____________ _ _ ! design—16 months ! ‘I L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . I _ 1 construction‘! -25 months I design - 12 months '— — — — — -I — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Z - Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) ! . i COHSWUCNOW ‘ 13 momhs 1 Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH) i mmmm ii Original Schedule i i - 1 tralgwzias ' ' "r
  46. 46. shift in thinking 0 Acceleration concepts to meet schedule 0 Incentives offered to assuage staffing hardships Traditional Delivery Information Flow: Owner/ Userseb Design Team T Constructor T iiilri Greatest Challenge: Changing traditional adverse relationships l between contractors, owners, and designers to a new way of thinking Project Required Information Flow: Ownef/ Users mconstructor in the Field Design Team Constructor
  47. 47. integrated team concepts 0 Rapid Planning with Owner / Architect / Constructor / NYC present 0 Monday Morning “Pull Meetings” 0 Collocation 0 Shared challenges and team solutions 0 ALL project decisions were “value based” 0 ALL drawings shared with full team while in progress slam mining rum . Iudnrfrulur Complete collaboration to finalize ALL decisions and lock in budgets at the completion of schematic design ' Certificate of Need ° NYC funding ° All opening approvals
  48. 48. collocation strategy Collaboration concepts for accelerated / IPD environment: 0 Team work collocation on site 0 Rapid planning and scope validation with all stakeholders 0 Enhanced accelerated decision making 0 Instant responses and validation of issues to accelerate planning and documentation of project Location Design Phase: Collocation at HHC Building Construction Phase: Collocation at Project Site
  49. 49. E gmjtsroti v-1 .1. Q strategy for bid packages Philosophy/ Planning of Bid Packages to be in sync with proper timing of Project Buys: 1* Incentives required that Bid Packages be completed by Design and construction team and issued to subcontractors on a specified date 0 A/ E/C developed the bid scopes of work in tandem 1» Bid scopes were developed while drawings were still on the “boards” , .,, ,_t- 1 ol 1
  50. 50. git-jteroi :1 in 'gv/ strategy for bid packages Bid Package deliverable schedules alignment with Construction schedule and major equipment/ materials lead times: 9 Identification of lead times 1* Infrastructure packages to maximize early buys SEP - DEC 2011 JAN 2012 FEB 2012 MARCH 2012 - JULV AUG 2012 CONSTRUCTION RAPID PROCUREMENT Site Demo & Foundation/ Switchgear Structural superstructure, exterior Excavation/ and Concrete Architectural and Envelope Underground Elevators Frame MEP MEP Structure/ (Core and Shell) Pre Cast Package Fit Out Architectural & Finishes, MEP Fit Out Electrical, Tele/ Data & Conformance Set I I 2 I ; v V » Foundation/ Excavation/ - Underground MEP SNF Packages Schematic Design, Site Demo & exterior Envelope DOB Foundation Submission DOH Life Safety Submission 4._. __. _.. ._ 4 A 5.1 5 Switchgear and Elevators DOB Amended Building Permit Submission Structural Concrete Frame Structure/ Pre Cast Design Build Package superstructure, Architectural and M EP (Core and Shell) <, <———————————— 4______________ Fit Out- Walls & Doors, MEP Fit Out 1 fir I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I V 10 Architectura| Finishes, Electrical, Tele/ Data & Conformance Set . ' v
  51. 51. strategy for bid packages Coordination of Department Building approvals/ Permits with individual packages: 0 Package Approval strategy 0 Working with new DOB review process “the HUB” to expedite coordinated approvals 0 Sequencing of over 20 approval packages and permits for SNF & LTACH Value Engineering bid packages to conform to subcontractor cost reduction suggestions Jointly managed contingencies within Bid packages I . Procurement Schedule Review 1“ "3-3:‘- : E . . ° LTACH/ SNF— Status 5 _: ~ I, 5 S ° Estimates vs Buyout . § .5, I i " V , .‘ ° Vendex / Approvals / Contracts Release
  52. 52. project delivery challenges- keeping drawings on a path forward 0 Core shell documents released before interior fit—out design was completed 0 Keeping drawings current with construction to minimize change orders inherent in fast track construction Gilbane Interdisciplinary Document Control Renovation ° 7 project average # of IDC Issues per $1 OM by national healthcare firms ® ° Goldwater LTACH — E New Construction ° 6 project average # of IDC Issues per $10M by national healthcare firms @ ° Goldwater SNF — ® Results:50% Reduction in Drawing Conflicts
  53. 53. construction challenges- Accounting for Mother Nature & Murphy’s Law 0 Mold 0 Rock 0 Hazardous Materials & Soil 0 Two Hurricanes — Irene and Sandy 0 Implementation of Design Changes to: — Fuel Oil System — Emergency Power Systems — Communication Redundancies 0 Owner Project (1) Month Hold 0 Review their bed downsize plan 0 Business plan to confirm bed count 0 Study of alternate locations and sizes
  54. 54. approach to diversity DIVERSITY CRITERIA Goals: 0 Design: 20% of total A&E contract to be M/ WBE 0 Construction: 50% of total dollar value of all subcontracts under contract amounts of $1 million are to be performed by M/ WBE as compared to the total dollar value of all subcontracts under this contract for amounts under $1 million Results: Construction Contracts Design Total under $1 MIIIIOI1 contract I 50% Requirement I 20% Requirement 1 I I I 22% Achieved I 64% Achieved Additional local labor force requirements imposed by the Harlem Community Board
  55. 55. . welcome ~ . . » a c e u a o a n s q c a c » e s c so Q project overview Q site context O design strategy a e o c u u e c a o a o o a-. , project delivery O integrated project delivery in action
  56. 56. design- co| |aboration— acceleration 0 B| M— Technology 0 Integrated Project Delivery 0 Design/ Construction Executive Process PROECT DEIION MUD cON8TRUc'l’ION CONSTRUCTION DEflGN DIVELOPIINT DOOUIINYB PIOOESI Entire tern meets Collaboration Precise models Early planning at earliest stage. between help reduce increases inprwing architect. uncedeinty during efficiency In accuracy of contractor. and construction. construction. Less decisions. engineers hebs vnele. faint RH‘! improve quality and has chunge and rritlgete risk, ordeu mean projects are cormieted on time and on budget. IPD PROCESS I TRADITION _L [ I: EFFORT TIME INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY: EARLY EFFORT REDUCES COST 8 RISK
  57. 57. BIM project scope execution planning process Scope: 0 LTACH renovations contemplated to be designed under traditional documentation methods 0 SNF project structure will utilize a fully integrated BIM process 0 BIM Execution Plan delivered within 30 days Why develop a BIM Execution Plan? Clearly understand/ communicate roles & responsibilities Outline addition resources, training and competencies needed Clearly understand/ communicate contractual obligations
  58. 58. BIM project scope execution planning process Meetings over 45 days to: Identify the appropriate BIM goals and uses Design the BIM execution process Define the BIM deliverables Identify the supporting infrastructure to successfully implement the plan Array Team: Gilbane Team: ° 5 experienced BIM firms ° Experienced BIM user ° 2 first time BIM firms ° 2 firms not required to used BIM HHC / NYCEDC Team: ° Limited BIM experience
  59. 59. BIM project execution planning process ll‘. hirer. -a‘Lg| na lira gum: =)x(= ro1I. Illom-1omror= i.~l: -T . .. Lavn|1' BIM Encullon Planning Frocon "’°’°" “"9 Dvsmew Procass Mzlp » Laval 1 l mu Hellman rem». suumm, Inc Clwllll uvcsnc mm Golflnuleruomi Iumaon on. my 12‘ mi 54.. K D>w1<: . , m , : , ___, __, __m Dixie: mu J a . K e V‘ , l W T K ‘‘. ... .m JSCIM , .. .-. ... , , , , Ill 0 1 -4 ll: 3 is « I 3
  60. 60. IPD guictelines Principles: Incentive Deliverables: Collaboration Packages Appropriate use of technology Budget Continuous process improvement Move In K /4 ' / I~u'. -vv‘I ‘p u - in / / up _ K 1/ . . _. / / : b 4/ INTEGRATED PROJECT ORGANIZATION
  61. 61. WC’ III it-iflvlii What is an extra in lPl)? ‘‘In and Out of Scope” Keeping Budget in Check
  62. 62. establishment of deliverable IPD packages Acceleration Concepts/ Schedules: ° Collaborative Architect +CM must work together ° Missed package issue ° Owner encourages success “2“d Opportunities “Dry ln” package”
  63. 63. monthly IPD principles meetings . Budget- Cost report/ variances . Schedule- Variances/ acceleration Cost . Monthly Report . Design issues . lncentives- Billing, Achieved, Dispute Resolution . Procurement Schedule . Permits . Change Process ®lO5 O1-BOOK)-I
  64. 64. unexpected IPD obstacles The switch to Roosevelt Island and back to Harlem START 7/11 OWNER OCCUPY11/13 9 Reduced From 42 to 28 Months 9 K $284 M : 6 wk loss in schedule : 2011 ! 2012 2013 ! 2014 2015 V 5 V V V V IcTe; gF— 16 “roar; """" ‘ ' l ! l___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ —- : bid / awards K I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I bid/ awards | """| ' ' ' ' ' "T design ~ 8 months __h I design-1 6 months L__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ' — — — — — — — —— - ‘ _'bid/ awards I L L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — 1 consiruciioni 25 months I design - 12 months I — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) COHSTFUCNOW ‘ 13 m°"IhS 1 Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH) Original Schedule ' -
  65. 65. “move in” schedule never changed Acceleration Concepts/ Schedules: ° Project Deliverables ° Rapid Planning Concepts 0 Project design meeting functional and clinical needs 0 Advanced design and planning at an early stage using BIM modeling to expedite documentation 0 Collaboration on planning and scope with GM at early stage to validate and lock in on budget and SD Phase
  66. 66. IPD budget challenges “ispute- Resolution K V : /5 " . . K. r {-15 . l -e / / r , ;': l , f!—; <‘ ’ I
  67. 67. Henry J. Carter “current” IPD status « TCOs approved ‘ 1 ,4’ ' t ° DOH reviews ~ Packages achieved ° Budget on Track * Move—in
  68. 68. integrated project delivery (IPD) Key Principles: K / ° Transparent process ' / * Effective collaboration . . / ° Open Information Sharing ~ / * Team success tied to project success * Value based decision making / / ¥ * Utilization of full technology capabilities ~ Shared Risk & Reward
  69. 69. Q welcome » e s o a a o s o e e a u s s n w a e e n an O project overview O site context O design strategy o a c x z s n o o e a s a flu project delivery O integrated project delivery in action O questions & answers
  70. 70. :l I‘ ‘I um‘ 4 xx. 3.. . , ~~n ~5:. ..t _. e. __, .._; . F. :.. .1 . fir, |uH , : i. nrmrrii. _l. .lr. ilI I 'L)
  71. 71. the tradeline three Takeaway 1: Building Information Modeling brings delivering healthcare projects a higher level of coordination, and provides the client with more than a set of drawings when the project is completed. Takeaway 2: Creatively combining new construction and renovation, especially in a dense/ y—popu/ ated urban setting, offers adaptive reuse options blended with design elements only possible in a new building setting. Takeaway 3: Location of a project can offer many design inspirations — both inside and out. A/ ways explore the facility setting and draw the neighborhood into your designs.
  72. 72. thank you xx xfidsd. .. - § ‘ . -- In E ~-§! . .---. I- H3 §%%efl% _ : x1 . . §§§§§§~iI-E- L aIt'; I11tei: t5
  73. 73. 4 Boca Raton / Cleveland / Dallas / New York City / Philadelphia / Washington ARRAY-ARCH| TECTS. COM

×