BUILDING A

SUSTAINABLE FUTUREA D A P T L E A D T R A N S F O R M

2 0 1 6 C S U F A C I L I T I E S M A N A G E M E N T C O N F E R E N C E

1

BEST PRACTICE AWARD CATEGORY: CONSTRUCTION DELIVERY METHODKey Challenges

1. Minimum 90 percent recycling of non-hazardous building materials.

2. Ensure there were no unknowns during abatement phase. After performing the pilot project, the only unknowns allowed were if something was buried under another material. Varying thickness of texture coating and soils were not allowed to be considered an unknown.

3. Minimize change orders.

4. Minimize disruption to the occupants of adjacent facilities.

5. Developing a completed detailed scope when project contained so many unknown conditions.

What makes this project a Best Practice Award Winner?

1. Innovative: Use of pilot project for the abatement phase to reduce the number of unknowns and risk factors for the abatement contractors. Bidders were given funds and a certain amount of time to abate and try out different methods of abatement to ensure an accurate bid. Bidders were prequalified to reduce the pool to three who were able to develop scope based on an equal platform to provide the owner with a competitive bid per the public contract code.

2. Cost Savings: $2,500,000

3. Process Improvement: Limit the risk for the abatement contractors and owner since the previous demolition of this building type had many unknowns and there was no time to try different processes of removal because of tight timelines. The pilot project gave them a chance to see how extensive and how much abatement was needed prior to a hard bid. It reduced the potential for unforeseen schedule delays and reduced risks to worker safety as well.

4. Replicated on Other Campuses: Yes, if other campuses have a repetitive building type demolition project with abatement issues or project of similar challenges. It could also translate to creative ways to handle the unknowns of a project, whether demolition or not. This gives owners a new method for delivering a project that cannot have the scope known and discoverable. This could be used on a portion of a single building project as well if multiple buildings are not in the scope.

BPA WINNING CAMPUS:California State University, Monterey Bay

PROJECT NAME: Big Demo – Pilot Project

BUDGET: $9,500,000

DELIVERY METHOD:RFQ/RFP

KEY CONTRIBUTORS: Katie LaPlace, CSU Monterey Bay Kathleen Ventimiglia, CSU Monterey Bay Chuck Bove, Vista Environmental Consulting BKF Engineers/Surveyors/Planners

SCHEDULE: Pilot project April 2015 Big demolition June 2016

BUILDING A

SUSTAINABLE FUTUREA D A P T L E A D T R A N S F O R M

2 0 1 6 C S U F A C I L I T I E S M A N A G E M E N T C O N F E R E N C E

2

5. Contribution to Success of the Campus: Yes, it reduced the unknowns to the contractor and limited the number of change orders to the project, which allowed the bidding contractors to submit more competitive bids. It also helped the contractor calculate the amount of time and type of equipment necessary to get the abatement completed, which translated in bid savings. This protected the owner from change orders related to unforeseen conditions.

6. Other Criteria Developed by Committee: This process was extremely innovative and essentially created a new way to bid projects with these types of challenges. This project demonstrates out-of-the-box thinking that the CSU system needs. This project shows how the prescriptive requirements of the public contract code and state legislation can be interpreted to allow new ways of thinking. This method brought true value to the campus and thus to the CSU.

Project Description The Big Demo project included the abatement of nine Hammerheads (former military structures) located between 6th and 7th Avenues and Butler Street and Colonel Durham Road, and Hammerhead 4796 at the corner of 7th Avenue and Inter-Garrison Road. Each building was approximately 42,560 square feet. The “Pilot Project” delivery method was a trial project for pre-qualified contractors prior to the actual bid process for the Big Demo project.

The Pilot Project included abatement and demolition of three of the Big Demo buildings (4754, 4562, 4568). Pre-qualified contractors were each given one building to abate over a four-week period in April 2015. They had an allowance of $300,000 and were provided minimum requirements and specific details. The pilot project work was performed on a time and material basis, using signed daily tags and prevailing wage determinations, with a set percentage mark-up submitted as part of the RFQ process. The selected contractors had to submit “Hourly Rate Worksheets” for each classification to be used on site, including any and all subcontractors. General Conditions and Supplemental General Conditions applied as well as all applicable federal, state and local laws. This allowed the contractors a trial and error period in order to prepare accurate bids and minimize the potential for change orders.

BPA WINNING CAMPUS:California State University, Monterey Bay

PROJECT NAME: Big Demo – Pilot Project

BUDGET: $9,500,000

DELIVERY METHOD:RFQ/RFP

KEY CONTRIBUTORS: Katie LaPlace, CSU Monterey Bay Kathleen Ventimiglia, CSU Monterey Bay Chuck Bove, Vista Environmental Consulting BKF Engineers/Surveyors/Planners

SCHEDULE: Pilot project April 2015 Big demolition June 2016