Presentation to the

Arlington Virginia County Board

Department of Management & Finance,

Department of Environmental Services &

Department of Parks and Recreation

Use of Alternative Delivery Methods

November 1, 2016

Work Session

Introductions Department of Management & Finance /

Office of the Purchasing Agent• Michael Bevis

• Krystyna Hepler

Department of Environmental Services –

Facilities Design & Construction Bureau• Greg Emanuel

• George May

• June Locker

• Michael Manos

Department of Parks & Recreation• Jane Rudolph

• Lisa Grandle

• Erik Beach

• David Husson

Leftwich LLC• Thomas Bridenbaugh

• Kavita AildasaniNovember 1, 2016 2

Background Previous Discussions on Alternative Delivery

• April 12, 2016 Work Session• Scope and Direction for Lubber Run and Long Bridge

• Possibility of Alternative Delivery Methods

• 2016 CIP Work Session• Alternative Delivery Methods

• Lubber Run, Long Bridge and Powhatan Springs

July 2016 Passage of CIP

Implementing Alternative Deliveries

• Engaged Project Delivery Consultant

• CAO and Purchasing Developing Contract Terms

• Pending Award for Lubber Run Design Structured for CMAR

• Developing Procurement Strategy

• Long Bridge

• Powhatan Springs Skate Park

November 1, 2016 3

Delivery Methods

Traditional Design-Bid-Build (D-B-B)

Construction Management at Risk (CMAR)

Design/Build (D/B)

November 1, 2016 4

Why Consider Alternatives

Recent Issues• Long Bridge

Alternatives in Use by Other Jurisdictions• Arlington Public Schools

• Discovery School

• Wilson Schools

• Other Virginia Jurisdictions

November 1, 2016 5

Why Consider Alternatives Projects are sometimes designed in a manner that exceeds

available budgets.

Designs are shared with stakeholders and the community

before the County knows what the costs are.

The County realizes that the project is over-budget late in

the process—after the design has been completed and

bids are received.

The County bears the risk of change orders that result from

design discrepancies.

Sequential procurement processes result in longer project

schedules.

The ITB process requires bidders to adopt a low bid

mentality.

The County holds most of the risk. November 1, 2016 6

OpportunitiesSome projects may benefit from alternative delivery methods,

where the following are key considerations:

Involve the builder earlier in the process to identify budget,

schedule and design deficiencies.

Utilize a process that allows the builder to price that which

is required for a complete project, rather than to price only

that which is on the drawings, as required in a low bid

exercise.

Transfer design risk and cost estimating to the builder—the

party that will ultimately serve as the County’s financial

counterparty.

Perform key pre-construction activities concurrently rather

than sequentially and reduce overall project duration.

November 1, 2016 7

Design-Bid-Build

Definition: a project delivery method in which the County

sequentially selects and awards two separate contracts:

1. a contract for design services for the project let through

an RFP; and

2. a contract for construction of the project based on the

design documents prepared by the architect let through

an ITB.

Suitable for typical projects with standard scopes and previous

experience (e.g., capital maintenance, interior fit-outs, roadway

work).

November 1, 2016 8

Engage Architect

Design

Procure Builder

Construction

November 1, 2016 9

Design-Bid-Build

Key Characteristics:

The builder has no input into the

design process.

The County does not receive a

price from the builder until after

the design is complete.

The design is shared with the

stakeholders and community

before it is costed by the builder.

Risks Retained:

Existing Site Conditions

Hazardous Materials

Zoning/Entitlements

Design (both early & detailed)

Uncoordinated Design

Design Errors (structural failure,

leaking building)

Construction Management At Risk

Definition: a performance-based project delivery method in

which the County solicits and awards into two separate

contracts, both let through RFPs:

1. a contract for design services for the project; and

2. a contract for construction management services.

The CMAR’s work is divided into two phases: pre-construction

and construction. Suitable for projects with increased

complexity and/or unique features.

November 1, 2016 10

Construction Management At Risk

During the pre-construction phase, the CMAR serves as a

consultant to the County, providing assistance in

estimating, value analysis, scheduling and constructability.

The CMAR develops a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)

after taking competitive bids from the trade subcontractors

that will build the project.

The County has full transparency into costs and the trade

bid process.

Once the GMP is established, the CMAR assumes the risk

for price and schedule and constructs the project.

November 1, 2016 11

Engage Architect

Design

Procure Builder

Pre-Construction

Trade Bidding

Construction

November 1, 2016 12

Construction Management At Risk

Key Characteristics:

The builder works with the

architect to identify and correct

problems with the design.

The County receives an indicated

price from the builder when the

design is approximately 65%

complete.

The design can be estimated

with builder input earlier in the

review process.

Risks Retained:

Limited Transfer of Existing

Site Conditions

Hazardous Materials

Zoning/Entitlements

Early Design

Limited Transfer of Detailed

Design (after 50%)

Design Error

Design-Build

Definition: a performance-based project delivery method in

which the County solicits through an RFP and awards a single

contract for design and construction services.

A design competition (to include public input) is part of the

selection process and an initial GMP.

Typically, a final GMP is developed after the design effort is

approximately 50% complete.

Once the GMP is agreed on, the D/B assumes design,

price and schedule risk.

Suitable for projects with increased complexity and/or unique

features where market creativity and ingenuity is leveraged to

solve budget, schedule and functionality challenges, as

appropriate.

November 1, 2016 13

Engage Design-Builder

Design

Pre-Construction

Trade Bidding

Construction

November 1, 2016 14

Design-Build

Key Characteristics:

The builder manages the design

process.

The County receives an indicated

price from the builder when the

design is approximately 35%

complete.

The design can be estimated

with builder input earlier in the

review process.

Risks Retained:

Limited Transfer of Existing

Site Conditions

Hazardous Materials

Zoning/Entitlements

Early Design/Program Scope

ConsiderationsPerformance

D-B-B CMAR D/B

Cost Realization 100% Design

(Latest)

65% Design

(Mid-Way)

35% Design

(Earliest)

Change Order Exposure More Moderate Less

Delivery Schedule Longest Shorter Shortest

County Design Control More More Less

County Risk More Moderate Less

Decision-Making Criteria Clear Relatively

Straight-forward

Complex

Complexity to the

County

Less Moderate More

November 1, 2016 15

Summary of

Delivery Method Features

Engage Architect

Design

Procure Builder

Construction

Engage Architect

Design

Procure Builder

Pre-Construction

Trade Bidding

Construction

Engage Design-Builder

Design

Pre-Construction

Trade Bidding

Construction

Design-Build

Construction Management at Risk

Design-Bid-Build

November 1, 2016 16

Delivery Methods Compared

County Board Decision

Community Process

Cost Realization

Cost Estimate

Cost Protection via Contractual Commitment

Early Release of Work

Next Steps. . .

Long Bridge Park

Lubber Run Community Center

Powhatan Springs Skate Park

November 1, 2016 17

Presentation to the

Arlington Virginia County Board

Department of Management & Finance,

Department of Environmental Services &

Department of Parks and Recreation

Use of Alternative Delivery Methods

November 1, 2016

Work Session