An interview with Ryan Adler of Crossland Heavy Construction.
The federal government estimates that more than $384 billion in capital investment is needed by 2030 to maintain the nation’s drinking water infrastructure. Publicly owned wastewater utilities need about $270 billion during the same period.
Innovation, what is it? Change, alteration, ingenuity, inventiveness. These are all words that describe the process and results of being innovative.
One of the benefits of collaborative project delivery is that it allows owners to transfer risks to the design-builder that they would normally have to retain in a standard design-bid-build project delivery framework; however, owners should resist the temptation to divest themselves of all project risk and transfer everything to the design-builder.
Rather, owners should carefully weigh the cost/benefit of risk transference and develop a project risk allocation strategy.
As 2015 came to close, the city of Houston, Texas, awarded a $900 million progressive design-build project to a joint venture of Water Design-Build Council member firms CDMSmith and CH2M for the design and construction of a 320-mgd water purification project. The project would expand the northeast plant from 80-mgd capacity in order to meet the demands for water by residents and businesses. Immediately signing the contract, the project teams began work in early 2016.
An owner’s choice of delivery method and procurement approach invariably influences the level of success of a project’s outcome. To be successful, owners should perform a comprehensive assessment of project requirements to establish a clear understanding of its objectives, expectations, capabilities, and priorities. Individually or together, these attributes guide selection of the most appropriate project delivery method. The selected project delivery method, in turn, affects the duration, complexity and cost of procurement.
The amount and length of control an owner “should” have, or “wants to have” in a design-build project has truly become one of the more discussed themes – most recently from WDBC’s Lessons Learned Survey as well as in our education sessions. And while it may be debated as to whether this question is the most critical one, especially within the context of the whole project, it is really a very important and serious question.
It is a question that Owners should thoroughly address, and decide upon at the beginning of any project. The reason is a very compelling and critical one, and one that has inter-related topics. In any project where risks are involved, there is the need to define how risk will be managed early on, in order to minimize and avoid the conflicting control roles later in the implementation process of the project.
The decision of the City of Olathe, KS to pursue a design-build delivery method to expand its existing 17-mgd water treatment plant to 36 mgd and then retaining Carollo Engineers to perform a feasibility study, were essential first steps towards achieving a successful project conclusion.
Following the feasibility study, the City not only contracted with Carollo for 30% design of the expansion; but also a joint venture of Carollo Engineers and Garney Construction to complete the design and construct the treatment plant expansion. This award-winning design-build project included the integration of membrane filters into the existing retrofitted lime-softening facility.
In furthering its ongoing research program, the Water Design-Build Council (WDBC) is seeking information identifying any type of federal project that has specifically used progressive design-build as its delivery method.
These “Recommended Guidelines for Best Practices,” Produced by the Water Design-Build Council, summarize the directions provided in the 3rd Edition of the Municipal Water and Wastewater Design-Build Handbook.