Click for next page ( 39


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 38
38 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue 22: Sustainable Construction Goals Sustainable construction is an important vehicle for achieving sustainability goals for new projects. The disconnect between designer and builder in some delivery methods can restrict the means and methods available for a project. The effect of various delivery methods on facilitat- ing sustainable construction is the focus of this discussion. DBB With DBB, an experienced constructor does not have the opportunity to give sustainable design features as inputs during the design phase. Sustainable materials and practices relevant to regional procurement and construction methodology may be unavailable to designers unfamil- iar with the project location. CMR With CMR, the owner has a unique opportunity to realize the economic returns for sustain- able systems performance as well as using sustainability as an evaluation factor for the selection of a builder. Sustainable construction features are more likely to be implemented considering the cooperative nature of the owner/constructor contracts in this delivery method. DB This project delivery method can result in an inherent coordination of design and perfor- mance with potential for accelerated economic returns for sustainable systems performance. The owner has an opportunity to use sustainability to evaluate potential design-builders although innovation with sustainable criteria related to more advanced technology could be limited due to a lack of previous installations. DBOM In DBOM, because designer, builder, and operator are contractually united, there is an inher- ent coordination of design and performance with the requisite guaranteed ability to implement sustainable construction and operational features. DBOM can realize accelerated economic returns for sustainable systems performance since DBOM contractors have an inherent bias toward minimizing operations and maintenance lifecycle costs. Added benefits can include par- ticipation in the development of evaluation criteria for new technologies as part of an ongoing review of installed systems and lifecycle costs. Other Issues This category includes issues that are important to project success that have not been previ- ously categorized in this chapter. Issue 23: Construction Claims The focus of this discussion is how each delivery method exposes the agency to potential con- flicts and claims. If a delivery method can reduce exposure to construction claims, that delivery method is a favorable choice, and if it increases the possibility of construction claims, it is an unfavorable choice. DBB This method typically has the highest occurrence of claims and disputes. Disputes often arise over authority, responsibility, and quality (Walewski, Gibson, and Jasper 2001). Furthermore,

OCR for page 38
Advantages/Disadvantages of Each Project Delivery Method 39 as the owner is responsible for design completeness, errors and omissions claims are common in DBB projects. Some contractors may bid low to win a job and try to enhance their final profit margin through claims and change orders, especially if design errors or ambiguities are present in the construction documents. Studies have shown that this delivery method results in the high- est rate of cost growth, which could be an indication of a large number of claims (Konchar and Sanvido 1998). CMR Assuming a well-structured contract, there is less possibility of claims and disputes in CMR projects once a GMP is agreed upon and the contract is signed. Because the CMR is present dur- ing the design process, there is less need for information and clarification of the design docu- ments. Some professionals think that this approach will result in very few construction claims, which is a major advantage of the CMR approach [Weber County Commuter Rail]. The qualifications-based selection methodology creates an effective deterrent to initiating claims by requiring the CMR to be "successful" on the current contract in order to be competitive for future projects. The qualifications-based selection process may reduce the possibility of hiring litigious contractors. DB Some research shows that the size and frequency of change orders are less in DB than in other project delivery methods (Riley, Diller, and Kerr 2005). This delivery method is less prone to claims and disputes, assuming a well-structured contract. For example, claims for design errors, a major source of DBB contractors' complaints, are reduced considerably in DB. At the same time, early pricing leaves the owner vulnerable to claims for scope that was missing in the RFP. The qualifications-based selection methodology creates an effective deterrent to initiating claims by requiring the design-builder to be "successful" on the current contract in order to be com- petitive for future projects. DBOM An advantage of DBOM is that at the time of the agreement among all the parties, the maxi- mum level of contractual obligation is signed. In other words, all parties have obligated themselves not only for the construction phase but also for several years of operation and maintenance. This will minimize the challenges of start-up claims and system integration in complex projects (Kessler 2005). On the other hand, if the DBOM contractor does not have the competencies and characteristics expected by the owner, or, if the owner has not defined the scope of work ade- quately, the project will face difficulties during the design, construction, and operation phases. Issue 24: Adversarial Relationship Transit projects can be hampered by conflicts between parties to the design and construction contracts. The higher the level of adversarial relationships in a project, the more likely the proj- ect will suffer from cost, schedule, and quality problems. Delivery methods define the relation- ships among all project parties. If the project delivery method encourages project parties to work together as a team to achieve the project goals and characteristics, it is considered a benefit. Con- versely, if the project delivery method increases the possibility of adversarial relationships, it is considered a detriment. DBB This delivery method can create an adversarial relationship among the parties to the contract-- mainly between the owner and the construction contractor (Walewski, Gibson, and Jasper 2001; Irwin 2003; Mahdi and Al-Reshaid 2005). Furthermore, the engineer and the contractor may