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