This presenation is a basic overview of the various delivery approaches for a Parking Facility. The goal is to provide owners with information so that they can ask more informed questions such as: Who is the Design Team Project Manager (Prime) leading the design effort? How does the Design Team Project Manager plan on achieving alignment? What is our goal for the parking facility? What is our procurment process? Who will perform a Scope Gap Analysis? Who is leading the Pull Schedule meeting? How will the Design Team Project Manager maintain alignment throughout the project life cycle?

1. Project Delivery Approaches:
“Which one is right for my facility?”
March 27, 2014
Jacob Gonzalez, P.E.
Brian Lozano, PMP
©

2. AGENDA
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN BID BUILD
DESIGN BUILD
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AT RISK
INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY
OPEN DISCUSSION
©

3. Which project delivery approach was utilized?
Marq-E Entertainment Garage
Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus MiGo GarageWoodlands Waterway Square Garage
©

4. DESIGN TEAM PROJECT MANAGER
©

5. PROJECT MANAGER RESPONSIBILITIES
scope
budget schedule
©

6. DESIGN TEAM PROJECT MANAGER RESPONSIBILITIES
Scope
Budget Schedule
Scope
Budget Schedule
Scope
Budget Schedule
Scope
Budget Schedule
Scope
Budget Schedule
Scope
Budget Schedule
Landscape
Architecture
MEP/IT
Civil
Traffic
Parking Design
Scope
Budget Schedule
Structural
©

7. DESIGN TEAM CONSTRUCTION COST EXAMPLE
70.0%
15.0%
7.0%
5.0%
1.5%
1.0% 0.5%
Structural
Architect
MEP/IT
Civil
Parking Consultant
Landscape
Traffic
©

8. PROJECT ALIGNMENT
©

9. PROJECT ALIGNMENT
DEFINE VISION AND GOALS
UNDERSTAND THE DELIVERY APPROACH
UNDERSTAND THE PROCUREMENT METHOD
PERFORM A SCOPE GAP ANALYSIS
PERFORM A PULL SCHEDULE
MAINTAIN ALIGNMENT THROUGHOUT
©

10. DESIGN BID BUILD
Terminal E FIS Garage Phasing
Marq-E Entertainment Garage Harris County Parking Garage
©

11. The Construction Management Association of America
DESIGN BID BUILD
©

12. OWNER
DTPM CONTRACTOR
SUB CONTRACTORSDESIGN TEAM
contractual obligation,
direct communication
& collaboration
Indirect communication
& minimal collaboration
DESIGN BID BUILD
STRUCTURE
©

13. PROJECT SCHEDULE
DESIGN-BID-BUILD: 25 MONTHS
RFP Design Permit Procure Construction
2 5 2 142
©

14. DESIGN BID BUILD ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES
• LONGER DURATION
• MORE RISK FOR OWNER
• CHANGE ORDERS
• OPEN COMMUNICATION
BETWEEN OWNERS AND
DESIGNERS
• DESIGN CONTROL
• COMPETITIVE PRICING
X
©

15. DESIGN BID BUILD PROJECT EXAMPLE
Rusk Garage Ramp Reconfiguration
©

16. DESIGN BUILD
500 South Main Garage, Las Vegas, NV
Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus MiGo Garage UTMDACC Braeswood Garage
©

17. DESIGN BUILD DEFINITION
The Construction Management Association of America
©

18. OWNER
DESIGN
BUILDER
SUB CONTRACTORSDTPM / DESIGN TEAM
direct communication
& collaboration
contractual obligation, direct communication
& collaboration
DESIGN BUILD
STRUCTURE
©

19. PROJECT SCHEDULE
DESIGN-BID-BUILD: 25 MONTHS
DESIGN-BUILD: 21 MONTHS
RFP Design Permit Construction
ConstructionRFP Design PermitBridging
Documents
2 5 2 14
122 22 3
2
Procure
©

20. DESIGN BUILD ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES
• LESS DESIGN CONTROL
• DESIGN BUILDER CONTROLS
COMMUNICATION
• QUALITY OF MATERIALS
DICTATED BY DESIGN BUILDER
• RISK BY DESIGN BUILDER
• FASTER SCHEDULE
• LOWER COST
X
©

21. DESIGN BUILD PROJECT EXAMPLE
500 South Main Garage, Las Vegas, NV
©

22. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AT RISK
Texas Medical Center Garage 19
Texas Medical Center Garage 18Woodlands Waterway Square Garage
©

23. OWNER
DTPM CONTRACTOR
SUB CONTRACTORSDESIGN TEAM
contractual obligation, direct communication
& collaboration
direct communication
& collaboration
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AT RISK STRUCTURE
©

24. PROJECT SCHEDULE
DESIGN-BID-BUILD: 25 MONTHS
DESIGN-BUILD: 21 MONTHS
CM@RISK: 21 MONTHS
RFP Design Permit Construction
Construction
Construction
RFP
RFP
Design
Design
Permit
Permit
Bridging
Documents
2 5 2 14
12
12
2 5 2
2 22 3
2
Procure
©

25. CMAR ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES
• ADDITIONAL FEES PAID FOR CM
SERVICES
• ESTIMATES CARRY LARGER
CONTINGENCY
• REQUIRES STRONG PRECON
TEAM FROM CONTRACTOR
• MORE CONTROL OVER DESIGN
• CAN ESTABLISH GMP SOONER
• OPEN COMMUNICATION
BETWEEN ALL TEAM MEMBER
X
©

26. CMAR PROJECT EXAMPLE
Texas Medical Center Garage 19
©

27. George Washington University Hospital Renovations
INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY
©

28. INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY
-The Construction Management Association of America
©

29. OWNER
INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY
DTPM CONTRACTOR
SUB CONTRACTORSDESIGN TEAM
Contractual obligation,
direct communication
& collaboration
©

30. IPD ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES
• TEAM SHOULD HAVE LONG
HISTORY OF WORKING
TOGETHER
• OWNER SACRIFICES FINANCIAL
STAKE IF TARGETS NOT MET
• BETTER FOR COMPLEX
PROJECTS
• REQUIRES STRONG
LEADERSHIP OR FACILITATORS
• INCENTIVE CONTRACTS
• RISK SHARED EQUALLY BY ALL
PARTIES
• HIGHLY COLLABORATIVE
• FASTER SCHEDULE
• LOWER COST
X
©

31. OPEN DISCUSSION
©

32. Jacob H. Gonzalez, P.E.
jgonzalez@walterpmoore.com
713.410.6760
Brian Lozano, PMP
blozano@walterpmoore.com
713.231.3417
Walter P Moore
1301 McKinney, Suite 1100
Houston, Texas 77010
©