National Academies Press: OpenBook

A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods (2009)

Chapter: Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach

« Previous: Chapter 3 - Advantages/Disadvantages of Each Project Delivery Method
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 41
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 42
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 43
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 44
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 45
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 46
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 47
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 48
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 49
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 50
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 51
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 54
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 55
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 56
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 57
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 58
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 59
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 60
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 61
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 62
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 63
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 64
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 65
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Tier 1 Analytical Delivery Decision Approach." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14238.
×
Page 77

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Introduction No single project delivery method is appropriate for every project. Each project must be exam- ined individually to determine how it aligns with the attributes of each available delivery method. The Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach (Tier 1 approach) provides transit agencies with a structured approach to choosing the most appropriate project delivery method for an individual project. The Tier 1 approach has three primary objectives: • Present a structured framework to assist agencies in examining 24 pertinent issues involved in the project delivery decision, • Assist agencies in determining whether there is a dominant or obvious choice of project deliv- ery method, and • Provide a structure for documenting the project delivery decision in the form of a Project Delivery Decision Report. The Tier 1 approach provides a framework for agencies to use in defining project goals and examining the advantages and disadvantages of each delivery method within the context of these goals. The aim of this approach is to help agencies understand project delivery method attri- butes and to help them determine whether their specific project goals align with the attributes of a particular delivery method. The Tier 1 approach also provides a “go/no go” review to deter- mine whether one or more project delivery methods should be excluded from the examination. At the completion of the Tier 1 approach, there is a possibility that an agency may not have one clear and logical choice for a project delivery method. If this is the case, the agency will be advised to move to the Tier 2 or Tier 3 approaches with the best delivery method options yielded in the application of the Tier 1 approach and create a more detailed analysis to select the final project delivery method. The Tier 1 approach includes six distinct steps listed below and shown in Figure 4.1: Step 1. Create Project Description Step 2. Define Project Goals Step 3. Review Go/No Go Decision Points Step 4. Review Project Delivery Method Advantages and Disadvantages Step 5. Choose Most Appropriate Project Delivery Method Step 6. Document Results The objective of Step 1 is to create a project description in sufficient detail for documenting the project delivery decision. A template is provided to assist agencies in describing the appro- priate level of detail. The description is provided to summarize the key variables and provide a “snapshot” of the project scope at the time when the project delivery decision was made. 41 C H A P T E R 4 Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach

Advantages and Disadvantages Delivery Methods Considered Step 4. Review Project Delivery Method Advantages/Disadvantages Step 5. Choose Most Appropriate Project Delivery Method Step 6. Document Results Project Goals Project Description PROJECT DELIVERY DECISION REPORT Step1. Create Project Description Name: _______________ Size: _______________ Location: _______________ Type: _______________ … : _______________ … : _______________ … Step 2. Define Project Goals Time: _______________ Cost: _______________ Quality: _______________ … : _______________ … : _______________ … Step 3. Go/No-Go Decision Points Go/No Go DBB Adv 1 Adv 2 …. Disadv 1 Disadv 2 …. Advantage CMR DB DBOM Disadvantage Adv 1 Adv 2 …. Disadv 1 Disadv 2 …. Advantage Disadvantage Adv 1 Adv 2 …. Disadv 1 Disadv 2 …. Advantage Disadvantage Adv 1 Adv 2 …. Disadv 1 Disadv 2 …. Advantage Disadvantage Critical Issues Figure 4.1. Overview of Tier 1 approach.

Research and practical experience have shown that the definition of project goals is a key suc- cess factor in the project delivery decision. The objective of Step 2 is to provide guidance to agen- cies on how to write and rank their project goals. The guidance provides general categories for goals. This section also provides examples of goals from transit projects across the country to show how agencies have defined their project goals for a variety of project delivery methods. Materials for completing Steps 1 and 2 (a project description checklist and a blank form on which to document the project goals and objectives) are included in Appendix C, available on the TRB website at http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=10054. The objective of Step 3 is to exclude those project delivery methods from consideration that are not viable options. A legal review of project delivery and procurement laws in the United States revealed that some delivery methods are not allowed in all states. There are additional schedule and third-party issues that could exclude a delivery method from consideration. Step 3 describes a quick go/no-go decision process to determine whether a delivery method should be excluded from consideration. The primary objective of Step 4 is to present a comprehensive listing of the generic poten- tial advantages and disadvantages of each delivery method in 24 critical areas (forms for working through Step 4 are included in Appendix D, available on the TRB website at http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=10054). These potential advantages and disadvantages must be examined in the context of each individual project. Variations in the project character- istics, the people involved, and the processes used by an agency (the “three Ps”) will determine whether the potential advantages or disadvantages of a project delivery method are actual advantages or disadvantages for a particular project. In Step 4, agencies will have to consider actual advantages and disadvantages and rate each project delivery method as “most appro- priate,” “appropriate,” or “least appropriate or not applicable” on each of the 24 issues. A form for this rating and a structure for documenting comments are provided (see Table 4.29 and Appendix D). The objective of Step 5 is to make the final project delivery choice if a dominant or obvious choice exists. Upon the transference of the 24 individual ratings from Step 4 into an overall sum- mary, agencies must determine whether there is a dominant choice. In Step 5, the agencies con- sider the significant benefits of what appears to be the most appropriate delivery method as well as any risks or fatal flaws of that delivery method. If a dominant method is not apparent, the user will document the Tier 1 approach and move to the Tier 2 approach for further analysis of the most applicable methods emerging from the Tier 1 analysis. The objective of the final step, Step 6, is to provide a framework for documenting the decision made on the basis of the Tier 1 approach. This is done in the form of a Project Delivery Decision Report. This report will provide an archival record for the project delivery decision. It will serve to communicate the decision to interested stakeholders and to justify the decision if issues arise years later. The framework organizes the report into sections that follow the five previous steps in the Tier 1 approach—project description, definition of project goals, go/no go decision points, advantages and disadvantages, delivery method decision, and any relevant appendices. Step 1. Create Project Description The first step in the Tier 1 approach involves the creation of a concise, yet comprehensive, project description that serves to communicate the important project characteristics to decision- makers and also to provide a “snapshot” of the project scope at the time in which the project deliv- ery decision was determined. Projects differ in scope of work and major elements (e.g., people Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 43

involved, physical project characteristics, project duration, project budget, and so forth). The project description should include necessary information about the project and address all aspects of the project that may be influenced by the selected delivery method. The project description will serve to communicate the decision to interested stakeholders and to justify the decision if issues arise years later. Below is a checklist of the important project character- istics that should be covered in the project description (see Figure 4.2 for an example of a project description): • Project Name • Location • Mode of Transportation • Estimated Budget 44 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Project Name: Weber County to Salt Lake City Commuter Rail Project. Location: Utah. Mode of Transportation: Commuter Rail. Estimated Budget: $196 million for the main contract (total program is estimated at $611 million). Estimated Project Delivery Period: 6 years (including design phase). Required Delivery Date: September 2008. Source(s) of Project Funding: FTA and Local Sales Tax. Project Corridor: From Pleasant View through the new Ogden Transit Center at 2349 Wall Street, in Downtown Ogden, and terminating at the Salt Lake City Intermodal Center at 600 West 200 South Street, just west of the central business district. Project Corridor Dimensions: 43 miles with 8 stations, starting from Pleasant View, Ogden, Roy, Clearfield, Layton, Farmington, Woods Cross, and North Temple in Salt Lake City (Future) and finishing at the Salt Lake Intermodal Center. Additionally, the project has 6 parking lots in its design. Major Features of Work: Track, at-grade stations, platforms, and parking lots. Ridership Forecast: 11,800 average weekday boarding. Major Schedule Milestones: Project completion date—September 2008. Major Project Stakeholders: Utah Transit Authority (UTA), Union Pacific-Santa Fe Railroad, FTA, and local jurisdictions. Labor Union Status: No labor union issues anticipated. Major Challenges: • UTA entered into an interlocal agreement to build in the existing freight rail corridor with the jurisdictions that it passed through to be able to build without the need to procure building permits from every single local entity. • The entire project requires working within 25 feet of the active mainline Union Pacific Railroad corridor from Salt Lake City to Ogden, which has up to 35 trains a day passing through at speeds up to 70 mph. The project runs through 14 different municipalities and intersects at 42 road crossings. Main Identified Sources of Risk: Storm drainage system, safety of construction (narrow corridor), coordination with Union Pacific for the work that Union Pacific has to do, unsuitable soil conditions, incomplete design on some aspects of the work such as station design. Sustainable Design and Construction Requirements: Enhance the environment through less traffic congestion and pollution. Figure 4.2. Project description example.

• Estimated Project Delivery Period • Required Delivery Date (if applicable) • Source(s) of Project Funding • Project Type (In Street, Rail Corridor, etc.) • Project Corridor or Site Dimensions • Major Features of Work—track, stations, parking structures, platforms, etc. • Ridership Forecast • Rate of Return on Capital Investment/Payback Period (if applicable) • Major Schedule Milestones • Major Project Stakeholders • Labor Union Status • Major Challenges (if applicable) – With Right of Way, Utilities, and/or Environmental Approvals – During Construction Phase – During Operation and Maintenance • Main Identified Sources of Risk • Sustainable Design and Construction Requirements Step 2. Define Project Goals Defining and communicating a concise set of project goals is perhaps the most important ele- ment in selecting an appropriate project delivery method. The importance of project goals in delivery method selection cannot be overemphasized. The definition of project goals is a key suc- cess factor not only in the project delivery decision, but also in the development of procurement documents and the administration of a project. The project will have technical goals that must be met (e.g., meeting anticipated ridership, meeting design standards, meeting safety standards, and so forth) and will also have performance goals regarding time, cost, quality, maintainability, and sustainability that must be met. The performance goals typically drive the project delivery decision. At project inception, the agency must identify the various performance aspects of the project that must meet its requirements. Generally, these performance aspects will fall into the categories of cost, schedule, and quality as defined by the technical design. Of these three factors, one fac- tor will be the most important for the project’s ultimate success—the preeminent factor. In order to achieve goals related to this preeminent factor, an agency would be willing to sacrifice pieces of the other two factors. For example, for its University Line, the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) in Salt Lake City had a fixed budget and certain quality standards to maintain; however, sched- ule was the preeminent factor because the project had to be finished before the start of the 2002 Winter Olympics. The primary importance of schedule was a major reason that UTA selected DB project delivery. In this case, the owner could not complete the necessary work using the tra- ditional process (DBB) in time to meet the deadline. A clear and concise definition of project goals not only assists with selecting an appropriate project delivery method, it also provides a clear measure for project success and clear directions for the CM or design-builder to complete the project. Project goals set the stage for decision- makers throughout the project lifecycle and keep the project priorities before decision-makers as they analyze different delivery methods. Project goals influence choice of procurement method, risk-allocation strategies, contracting, progress monitoring, and, at the end of the proj- ect, evaluation of project outcome. To define project goals, thinking in terms of performance categories can be helpful. Schedule, cost, quality, and sustainability are common categories. Table 4.1 provides some examples of generic goals in these categories. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 45

Choosing the goals that apply to a specific project is the second step in an agency’s selection of a delivery method. The third, and equally important step, is the ranking of the goals. Table 4.2 provides examples of goals from transit projects in which alternative delivery methods were used. The project goals in Table 4.2 vary in style and emphasis due to the unique needs of each proj- ect, but the goals all clearly link to the benefits of the project’s delivery method. For example, CMR was selected for the Portland Mall project in Oregon because there was a project goal of minimizing disruption to business and minimizing traffic control issues during construction. CMR helps with both of these goals through the contractor’s early involvement in design (some- thing that is absent from the DBB method). Likewise, in the T-REX project, the design-builder’s involvement in design helped to meet the agency’s primary goal of minimizing inconvenience. Additionally, the ability to confirm a fixed price and schedule early in design in the DB method facilitates the goals of meeting or beating the total program budget and schedule. Although not all the ranking of goals in Table 4.2 was provided by the project owners, rank- ing of the project goals is important. On every project there are tradeoffs among schedule, cost, and quality. It is to the project’s benefit if the agency, designers, and constructors are aware of, understand, and are in agreement with these project goals. For example, the Rail Runner’s first project goal is not to exceed the program budget and the third project goal is to minimize incon- venience to the public. This ranking provides clear direction to the design-builders that mainte- nance of traffic is important, but not at the expense of exceeding the program budget. As previously stated, understanding and communicating a concise set of project goals is per- haps the most important element in selecting an appropriate project delivery method. Agencies should take the time to identify project goals and achieve consensus on their relative importance. This time will be well spent as it will make the project delivery decision clearer. Defining and ranking project goals will also help to define and communicate the criteria for determining over- all project success, thereby informing designers and constructors of the agency’s project per- formance measures. Step 3. Review Go/No-Go Decision Points Among the pertinent issues that affect the project delivery decision, there are certain issues that render one or more delivery methods inappropriate. These issues involve project sched- ule constraints; federal, state, and local laws; third-party agreements; and labor union agree- ments. These issues and how they relate to the four primary delivery methods are shown in Table 4.3. The transit agency needs to review these issues to determine if they eliminate any of the delivery methods. In other words, the agency should make a go/no-go decision based on these pertinent issues. The result of this go/no-go study is a listing of delivery methods avail- able to the agency and a documentation of those that are not available for further considera- tion. The flowchart in Figure 4.3 depicts a step-by-step approach to the decision; a description of the approach follows. 46 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Schedule Minimize project delivery time Complete the project on schedule Accelerate start of project revenue Cost Minimize project cost Maximize project budget Complete the project on budget Quality Meet or exceed project requirements Select the best team Sustainability Minimize impact on the environment Achieve LEED certification Table 4.1. Examples of generic project goals.

As depicted in the flowchart in Figure 4.3, the agency should first conduct research into the pertinent issues of federal, state, and local laws; project schedule constraints; third-party agree- ments; and labor union agreements. Federal, state, and local laws can be researched by the agency’s general counsel to identify any constraints that must be met during the project deliv- ery method selection process. For example, a jurisdiction with a law that requires award of Table 4.3. Go/no-go issue summary. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 47 Project DeliveryMethod Project Goals* Portland Mall Project, Oregon CMR 1. Work with builder to minimize disruption to businesses along right-of- way; 2. Minimize traffic control issues during construction; 3. Add auto and bike access routes in multimodal approach; and 4. Enhance commitment to public art program by furnishing space for expanded sculpture. Weber County to Salt Lake City Commuter Rail, Utah CMR 1. Maximize cost-effectiveness by using a “bare bones/no frills” approach to design in order to meet the project budget and qualify for federal New Starts funding; 2. Deliver ridership by developing a system that delivers short trip duration and on-time performance; 3. Solicit federal funding; 4. Develop means for outside local match dollars to be incorporated into the project; 5. Encourage involvement in the project development process by including internal and external stakeholders; and 6. Build a sense of project ownership with the public and community stakeholders. Transportation Expansion Project (T-REX), Colorado DB 1. Minimize inconvenience to the community, motorists, and the public; 2. Meet or beat the total program budget; 3. Provide for a quality project; and 4. Meet or beat the schedule of June 30, 2008. Rail Runner Phase 2, New Mexico DB 1. Cost not to exceed project budget established at $140,000,000; 2. High-quality, safe, environmentally responsible, durable, and maintainable project that meets or exceeds all performance specifications and design criteria; 3. Minimum disruption to the traveling public during construction; 4. Contract awarded and Notice to Proceed (NTP) issued by August 31, 2007; 5. Completion of the entire project by October 31, 2008, the Mandatory Completion Date, as specified in Contract Documents Part 1, Special Provision 108, Subsection 108.4.1; and 6. Valid basis for continued evaluation of DB delivery system. Hudson-Bergen Light Rail, New Jersey DBOM 1. Increase project delivery speed from lengthy planning and slow design pace; 2. Seek innovation in cost savings throughout the lifecycle; 3. Seek innovative financing if possible; and 4. Maximize owner staffing capabilities. *The project goals from the T-REX and Rail Runner projects were published in the RFP. The project goals for the Portland Mall project were published in the Tri-Metropolitan County Transportation District fact sheet. The Weber County to Salt Lake City Commuter Rail goals were published in internal project development documents. The Hudson-Bergen Light Rail goals were stated in research interviews. Table 4.2. Examples of project goals. Issues DBB CMR DB DBOM Project Schedule Constraints / X Federal/State/Local Laws / X / X / X Third-Party Agreements / X / X Labor Unions / X Note. Shaded areas do not need to be considered by the user. / X = Go/no-go decision point

construction contracts to the low bidder may have to adopt the low-bid DB award method in order to use DB project delivery. Next, the agency should review any major milestones that could create schedule constraints that would prohibit a traditional DBB delivery (e.g., an aggressive fixed end date, funding availability windows, and so forth). The agency then needs to determine the third-party agreements that will be required (e.g., railroad, utility, permitting, and so forth). Finally, the owner should collect any union agreements that deal with operations and mainte- nance issues of the transit system. The agency’s next step is to analyze the results of their review of pertinent issues in relation to the constraints of each delivery method. As depicted in Table 4.3, an issue may exclude one or two of the delivery methods from further consideration. For example, if the project is located in a state where the law does not authorize CMR, this agency can eliminate CMR from the list of available options. Details follow for each of the go/no-go issues. Project Schedule Constraints The traditional DBB delivery method is a linear process that requires the longest delivery period of all four methods. If a DBB project delivery will not yield a finish date within the proj- ect’s constraints, DBB need not be considered further. As mentioned in the previous section on project goals, project schedule can be a preeminent factor in project success. Agencies frequently 48 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods (3) Are any PDMs eliminated? (4) Document the reasons for excluding the PDM(s). Yes No (1) Collect pertinent information: - Relevant federal/state/local laws, - Schedule constraints, - Potential third-party issues, - Labor union agreements. (5) Continue with Step 4. Review PDM Adv/Disadv. (2) Review project delivery methods (PDMs) regarding law, schedule constraints, third- party issues, and union agreements. Figure 4.3. Go/no-go decision points.

give schedule first priority among competing project goals. Agencies most frequently cite short- ening project duration as the reason for using delivery methods other than DBB. Another case of schedule constraint is an agency that would like to award construction before the design is complete. The DBB method will not accommodate this constraint. This kind of schedule constraint may arise when the agency has a fiscal year budget for construction and needs to award the project before the design is finished or when the agency has an opportunity to com- plete a portion of the project before the design is complete (e.g., beginning construction before the end of the construction season). Federal/State/Local Laws Under TCRP Project G-08, a comprehensive survey was conducted of federal and state laws as they pertain to alternative delivery methods. While some states have fully authorized tran- sit agencies to use CMR, DB, and DBOM, there are still some states that prohibit the use of one or all alternative methods. Along with states that allow full use of alternative delivery methods and those that prohibit the use of all or some of the alternative delivery methods, there are states that allow alternative project delivery methods as long as certain conditions are met (e.g., requir- ing extra approvals for projects with alternative delivery methods, putting dollar value limits on the volume of DB or CMR contracts that a state may authorize, or putting limits on the number of projects using an alternative delivery method that a state may authorize each year). Although the results of the survey (based on state laws in December 2006) are included in this report for reference, state laws often change, and it would therefore be prudent for transit agencies to check relevant state and local laws at the time that a particular project delivery method is under consideration. If the federal, state, or local laws prohibit an agency from using an alternative delivery method, generally speaking, it should not be considered further. However, in some cases agen- cies have determined that the use of a particular alternative delivery method was essential for project success and have been successful in drafting legislation to permit an alternative deliv- ery method for a particular project or for general use. For example, DB was not permitted in the State of Colorado when the T-REX project was envisioned. The Regional Transportation District, in concert with the Colorado Department of Transportation, helped to pass legisla- tion permitting use of DB as a project delivery method. These agencies pursued this approval as they developed the project scope. If an agency decides to take this path, it is wise to have a contingency plan for traditional delivery in case the legislation is not approved. This contin- gency plan should be developed with an awareness of the duration of the process, the likeli- hood of achieving approval, and the benefits of using the alternative delivery method. Local laws may also place barriers on the use of a specific delivery method, so they should be checked along with the state laws. Third-Party Agreements All major transit projects affect third parties and require agreements to manage the impacts. Some third parties require a completed set of construction documents to execute an agree- ment. In this case, the requirement for a complete design renders DB and DBOM inappro- priate. For example, if the right-of-way is shared by the project and a railroad company, a full set of drawings may be required by the railroad company prior to signing an agreement or a memorandum of understanding (MOU). In such a project, depending on the circumstances and the rigidity of the third party, DB and DBOM might be eliminated from the list of avail- able options. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 49

Labor Unions In the states where public sector labor unions are dominant, this issue may affect the choice of delivery methods. It primarily affects DBOM delivery in cases where public unions control the operation and maintenance of the transit project. Public labor unions can also affect DB deliv- ery in places where transit agencies traditionally complete design with public-sector designers. In both of these cases, agency maintenance employees or designers may not allow a delivery method that can outsource jobs to the private sector. In these cases, DBOM or DB may be elim- inated from the list of available options. Upon reviewing these four go/no-go issues, agencies will have a list of viable delivery methods to further consider. Additionally, they should document the reasons for excluding any methods from further consideration. Table 4.4 provides a form for summarizing this go/no-go analysis. Step 4. Review Project Delivery Method Advantages and Disadvantages Step 4 of the project delivery decision involves a critical examination of the advantages and disadvantages of each remaining delivery method. There is no single project delivery method that is appropriate for every project. The objective of this critical examination of the advantages and disadvantages of the delivery methods is to determine how well each method aligns with project goals, project characteristics, agency characteristics, policy/regulatory issues, and lifecycle requirements. In Step 4, agencies examine 24 separate issues that affect project delivery method selection (see Chapter 3 for a discussion of these issues) and rate the appropriateness of each delivery method in relation to each issue. For each issue, an Advantages/Disadvantages Form listing the general advantages/disadvantages of each project delivery method for that issue and an Issue Summary Table are provided. To determine the appropriateness of each project delivery method in rela- tion to a particular issue, agencies should understand the issue, analyze the delivery methods, and complete the Issue Summary Table. These three actions are described in more detail in the following: • Understand the issue. Read the brief description of each issue. Refer to Chapter 3 for an expanded description of the issue if needed. • Analyze the delivery methods. Using the Advantages/Disadvantages Form provided, review the advantages and/or disadvantages of each delivery method in relation to the issue. Please 50 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issues DBB CMR DB DBOM Project Schedule Constraints Federal/State/Local Laws Third-Party Agreements Labor Unions Note. Shaded areas do not need to be considered by the user. = Applicable for further study X = Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.4. Go/no-go summary form.

Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 51 Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages DBB has been shown to work on projects of all sizes. As projects grow in size, the amount of owner staffing required to oversee DBB can become very large. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages CMR has been shown to work on projects of all sizes. If not managed well, the use of multiple bid packages to facilitate CMR can be difficult. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages DB has been shown to work on projects of all sizes. Some owners have noted that DB can facilitate better management of large projects due to the single source of responsibility. As projects grow in size, there can be large peaks in owner staffing requirements with DB (e.g., during RFP development, during design review, etc.). Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages DBOM is appropriate for large projects. Similar to DB, DBOM can facilitate better management of large projects due to the single source of responsibility. DBOM is not appropriate for smaller projects due to the overhead costs (e.g., for maintenance etc.) Similar to DB, DBOM can necessitate large peaks in owner staffing requirements. note that the advantages and disadvantages listed in the Advantages/Disadvantages Form are based on general experience with that issue; a specific project may have characteristics that will affect how knowledge gained from general experience applies. Users are urged to consider these general advantages and disadvantages as they apply to the specific project in question. Refer to Chapter 3 for an expanded description of the issue if needed. • Complete the Issue Summary Table. Upon reviewing the advantages and disadvantages of each delivery method in relation to the issue and analyzing the implications for the specific project in question, rate the appropriateness of each delivery method in the Issue Summary Table using the following symbols: ● – Most appropriate – Appropriate  – Least appropriate X – Not applicable The 24 issues to be considered are presented below grouped into the five categories in which they were introduced in Chapter 3: • Project-level issues, • Agency-level issues, • Public policy/regulatory issues, • Lifecycle issues, and • Other issues. Project-Level Issues Issue 1: Project Size Project size reflects the dollar value and physical dimensions of the transit corridor. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Project Size

52 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 1. Project Size Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.5. Project size advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Costs are known at bid time, before construction begins. Project can benefit from low bid procurement. Project can benefit from unit price bidding because quantities are defined prior to procurement. Construction costs are not fixed (or locked in) until design is 100% complete. Constructability advice and contractor innovations are not available to lower cost until post bid. The DBB process is prone to change orders and cost growth after award. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages CMR can be used in conjunction with a GMP pricing structure, which can be useful in negotiating and controlling costs. If open book pricing can be used, all costs will be known by the owner. Costs will be known earlier when compared to DBB. Early constructor involvement or construction advice can lead to cost savings through value engineering and constructability reviews. If multiple bid packages are used, the overall project cost could grow if later bid packages cost more than estimated. If a GMP pricing structure is used, owners may have some difficulty in negotiation. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages If a lump sum pricing structure is used, costs will be fixed early in the project development process. DB has been shown to have lower average cost growth than DBB or CMR. If a lump sum pricing structure is used, constructors must develop prices before plans are 100% complete and therefore must assume some risk in pricing. Issue 2: Cost This issue includes several aspects of project cost, such as ability to handle budget restrictions, early and precise cost estimation, and consistent control of project costs. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Cost

Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 53 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 2. Cost Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.6. Cost advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Owner is provided with fixed cost for design, construction, and maintenance very early in the process. Due to the large amount of risk being taken by the DBOM provider, costs may be higher if the providers are not given opportunities to find efficiencies. DBOM pricing may be hard to negotiate due to the complexity and timeframe of maintenance contracts. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages None. Likely to yield longest delivery schedule. Likely to yield the largest schedule growth. There is no opportunity to compress schedule due to the linear nature of DBB. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Facilitates fast-tracking, or the ability to bid multiple design packages. Studies have shown that CMR is faster on average than DBB, but slower than DB. Risk that overlapping design and construction packages may create delays if not properly coordinated. Fast-tracking schedule will require owner effort in design and construction reviews. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Provides a single point of responsibility (DB contractor) for schedule control. Provides early schedule certainty. Historically, provides the least schedule growth. Provides opportunities for flexibility in schedule compression. Studies have shown that DB is faster on average than DBB or CMR. Owner will sacrifice the checks and balances of having a 100%-complete design prior to start of construction. Rapid schedule will require owner effort in design and construction reviews. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Schedule Issue 3: Schedule This issue includes two aspects of project schedule—the ability to shorten the schedule and the opportunity to control and prevent time growth.

Issue 4: Risk Management This issue involves methods for coping with project uncertainties that are inherent in each delivery method. For more detailed guidance, please see Tier 3 for a risk-based approach to selecting project delivery methods. 54 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Provides a single point of responsibility (DB contractor) for schedule control. Provides early schedule certainty. Historically provides the least schedule growth. Provides opportunities for flexibility in schedule compression. Will facilitate start-up process due to a single point of responsibility for design, construction, and operation. Historically faster than DBB or CMR. Owner will sacrifice the advantage of having complete design prior to start of construction. Rapid schedule will require owner effort in design and construction reviews. Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 3. Schedule Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.7. Schedule advantages/disadvantage summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Provides historically well-defined and well- understood risk-management processes. Prescriptive designs and specifications allow for greater detail in risk allocation. Constructor cannot participate in risk management during design. Constructor’s ability to manage risk is constrained by low-bid procurement. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Construction manager understands and participates in risk-management process during design. Risk-management process can be more complex due to separate design, construction, and construction management contracts. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Single point of responsibility for risk management in design and construction. Owner may lose some ability to participate in the risk-management process. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Risk Management

Issue 5: Risk Allocation Each project delivery method has characteristics that affect risk allocation. The overarching goal should be to select the project delivery method that assigns project risks to the parties in the best position to manage them. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 55 Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Single point of responsibility for risk allocation in design, construction, operation, and maintenance. Owner may lose some ability to participate in the risk-management process for design, construction, operation, and maintenance. Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 4. Risk Management Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.8. Risk-management advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages A clear risk allocation has been established due to history of use and statutory case law. Constructor cannot participate in risk-allocation discussions during design. Conflicts can exist in risk allocation between separate design and construction contracts. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Construction manager understands and participates in risk allocation during design. Prescriptive designs and specifications allow for greater detail in risk allocation. Conflicts can exist in risk allocation among the separate design, construction, and construction management contracts. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Provides a single party for risk allocation in both design and construction. Design-builder owns risk for design errors and omissions. Risks must be allocated through conceptual design and performance specifications. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Provides single-party risk allocation in design, construction, and maintenance. Constructor owns risk for design errors and omissions in construction, operations, and maintenance. Risks must be allocated through conceptual design and performance specifications for design, construction, operation, and maintenance. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Risk Allocation

Issue 6: LEED Certification This issue concerns obtaining LEED certification for a project. Each project delivery method needs to be examined to discover its ability to include features that will facilitate obtaining LEED certification in accordance with the owner’s needs. 56 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 5. Risk Allocation Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.9. Risk-allocation advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages LEED certification can be established in more detail during design period. Provides the least opportunity for constructor to participate in LEED process during design. Separate design packages can create difficulty in coordinating LEED elements in construction. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Construction manager can offer its construction expertise during design decisions that involve LEED issues. Separate design packages can create difficulty in coordinating LEED elements in construction. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Owner can use some LEED certification elements to select constructor. Single point of responsibility is provided for LEED certification in design and construction. Owner may not be involved in all LEED decisions. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Owner can use some LEED certification elements to select constructor. In addition to having a single point of responsibility provided for LEED certification in design and construction, many LEED principles are in alignment with the constructor’s motivation to minimize operating costs. Owner may not be involved in all LEED decisions. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—LEED Certification

Agency-Level Issues Issue 7: Agency Experience The level of experience of an owner’s staff can affect the success of an alternative project delivery method application. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 57 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 6. LEED Certification Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.10. LEED Certification Advantages/Disadvantages Summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Since this is the traditional method of project delivery, owners will likely have the most experience with this method. None. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages CMR is similar to DBB in many key aspects where agencies have experience (e.g., separation of design and construction). Agencies may not have experience with GMP pricing or the negotiation that can be involved. Agencies may not have experience in the use of multiple bid packages to facilitate fast-track construction. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Agencies can take advantage of the sole point of responsibility for design and construction to leverage their experience. Agencies may not have experience authoring DB RFPs and conducting procurements. Agencies may not have experience administering DB contracts, particularly in the area of design review and administration. DB necessitates experienced staff to manage design and construction under one contract. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Similar to DB, agencies can take advantage of the sole point of contact for design, construction, and maintenance to leverage their experience. Agencies may not have experience authoring DBOM RFPs and conducting procurements. Agencies may not have experience administering DBOM contracts, particularly in the area of design review and administration. DBOM necessitates the most experienced staff to manage design, construction, and maintenance under one contract. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Agency Experience

Issue 8: Staffing Required This issue ultimately concerns the amount of owner involvement required by each delivery method. The total number of owner employees is one measure of the extent of owner involve- ment. Another important measure for the owners is the variation in the number of staff required throughout the project development process. 58 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 7. Agency Experience Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.11. Agency experience advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages The separation of design and construction phases provides less variation in owner staffing levels. DBB typically requires a larger owner staff than the other delivery methods. DBB typically requires a higher level of owner involvement. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages The CMR alternative can use the least number of owner employees if the CMR is allowed to take on the traditional owner tasks. The owner will need to have a number of staff members with the ability to oversee and negotiate with the CMR during the process. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages DB can greatly reduce the number of required owner employees Design and construction reviews can be done in shorter periods of time. DB creates peaks in owner staffing needs, particularly during procurement and design review periods. While fewer owner staff members are needed, more experienced staff members are required. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Similar to DB, DBOM can greatly reduce the number of required owner staff members. Design and construction reviews can be done in shorter periods of time. DBOM can create larger peaks in owner staffing needs during procurement and design review due to the inclusion of maintenance and finance issues in the process. While fewer owner staff members are needed, more experienced staff members are required. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Staffing Required

Issue 9: Staff Capability This issue regards the owner’s requirement to furnish a highly capable staff to complete the duties it must undertake in each delivery method. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 59 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 8. Staff Required Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.12. Staff required advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages DBB is traditionally aligned with owner staff capabilities. As projects grow in size, a more experienced staff is required. Owners typically have different staff members to oversee design and construction processes. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages The CMR can augment an owner’s capabilities with his own staff. Owners must have experienced staff to oversee the CMR. Owners may lack some capability in negotiating prices, developing designs, and managing the constructor’s inputs during the design phase. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages One entity will be responsible for both design and construction. Similar to CMR, DB is an alternative delivery method, and it is advisable to have staff members with DB oversight experience. Owners will need staff capabilities in developing procurement documents and performance criteria. Owners will need staff capabilities in reviewing design under a DB contract. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages One entity will be responsible for design, construction, operations, and maintenance. Similar to DB, DBOM is an alternative delivery method, and it is advisable to have staff members with DBOM oversight experience. Owners will need staff capabilities in developing procurement documents and performance criteria. Owners will need staff capabilities in analyzing complex financial proposals. Owners will need staff capabilities in reviewing design under a DB contract. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Staff Capability

Issue 10: Agency Goals and Objectives Agency goals define project success. The extent to which these goals align with the inherent attributes of each project delivery method has a significant bearing on delivery method selection. 60 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 9. Staff Capability Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.13. Staff capability advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages The DBB process allows for goals to be defined through the design process. Separate design and construction contracts can make goals more difficult to align and manage. If not developed correctly, detailed designs and prescriptive specifications can conflict with agency goals. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Agency can involve the CMR in refinement of goals while working together to refine the scope and the GMP. Qualifications-based construction manager selection can align the team with the project goals. The agency must have the goals substantially developed when the construction manager contract is awarded. The negotiation of a GMP may inhibit the alignment of project goals between the agency and the construction manager. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Best-value design-builder selection can align the team with the project goals. Properly written procurement performance criteria can help design-builders innovate to achieve project goals. To ensure success, agencies must completely understand goals prior to awarding the DB contract . Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages In addition to the DB advantages, DBOM allows owners to include lifecycle and maintenance goals in the contract. Similar to DB, agencies must completely understand goals prior to awarding the DBOM contract . Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Agency Goals and Objectives

Issue 11: Agency Control of Project The owner’s ability to control the details of design and construction varies with each project delivery method. (Note that discussion of cost control and time control is included in other issue descriptions.) Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 61 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 10. Agency Goals and Objectives Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.14. Agency goals and objectives advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages The use of prescriptive specifications and complete designs at the time of award provides agencies with the most control over the project. Separate design and construction contracts provide clear checks and balances. With additional control come added activities and responsibility for agency staff. The DBB method can be prone to change orders if any design conflicts or constructability issues are found. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages The CMR method benefits from early constructor involvement, but still has the benefit of separate design and construction contracts. Agency control of CMR delivery requires more effort due to the use of multiple design packages and the need for a GMP pricing structure. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages The transfer of design liability lessens the need for agency control over design. Award at a conceptual design level means that the agency will lose control over the details of the final design. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages The transfer of design liability lessens the need for agency control over design and maintenance decisions. Award at a conceptual design level means that the agency will lose control over the details of the final design. Since the DBOM will be responsible for maintaining the project, the agency could lose control over the detail of some maintenance decisions. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Agency Control of Project

Issue 12: Third-Party Agreements Each delivery method can facilitate agreements with third parties, such as political entities, utilities, railroads, etc. in a different manner. The extent to which designers or constructors can facilitate third party agreements is the basis for the advantage and disadvantage of each delivery method. 62 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 11. Agency Control of Project Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.15. Agency control of project advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages The use of complete plans and prescriptive specifications facilitates third-party agreements. Expediting third-party agreements in the DBB process can be cumbersome if it is required. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Construction managers can help facilitate third- party agreements. Construction managers typically do not guarantee costs that stem from problems with third-party agreements. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Design-builders can use innovative methods to assist in obtaining third-party agreements. Some third-party agencies can have codes that negate the use of DB, thereby excluding the DB method from consideration (see Step 3 -Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Design-builders typically do not guarantee costs that stem from problems with third-party agreements. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Design-builders can use innovative methods to assist in obtaining third-party agreements. Some third-party agencies can have codes that negate the use of DBOM, thereby excluding the DBOM method from consideration (see Step 3- Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Design-builders typically do not guarantee costs that stem from problems with third-party agreements. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Third-Party Agreement

Public Policy/Regulatory Issues Issue 13: Competition Each delivery method may affect the level of competition, and thus the effect of each delivery method on competition must be evaluated. Alternative project delivery methods allow agencies to package projects in sizes that can effectively enhance or reduce competition. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 63 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 12. Third-Party Agreement Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.16. Third-party agreement advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Owner benefits from large pool of potential bidders and high level of competition. There are issues that follow low-bid procurement, such as a higher probability of requests for change orders, disputes, and claims. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Qualifications-based selection factors can be applied to select only the most highly qualified construction managers. Presence of a constructor early in the project may give the owner less competitive leverage when pricing construction. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Qualifications-based selection factors can be applied to select only the most highly qualified design-builders. Proposal package size and bid preparation costs can decrease the number of qualified bidders. Opposition from public-sector employees, unions, or other interested parties can exclude the DB method from consideration (see Step 3- Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Competition

Issue 14: DBE Impacts The extent to which the delivery methods can be used to promote participation of disadvan- taged businesses forms the advantages and disadvantages of this issue. 64 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Qualifications-based selection factors can be applied to select only the most highly qualified design-builders. Proposal package size and bid preparation costs can decrease the number of qualified bidders. Lengthy contract duration and extra competencies required for the operation and maintenance part of the contract decrease the number of bidders. Opposition from public-sector employees, unions, or other interested parties can exclude the DBOM method from consideration (see Step 3-Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 13. Competition Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.17. Competition advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Agencies can include DBE requirements in both design and construction requirements. DBE involvement is known at time of award for design and construction. Low-bidding environment may harm future viability of DBE companies. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Agencies can include DBE requirements in both design and construction requirements. DBE involvement is known at time of award for design and construction. Due to the phased nature of CMR contracts, the final DBE involvement may not be known until the project is ultimately completed. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Agencies can include DBE requirements in the RFP for design and construction requirements. Owners can set DBE requirements, but because all subcontractors are not known at the time of award, there is a risk that design-builders may not achieve the DBE goals that they specify in their proposals. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—DBE Impacts

Issue 15: Labor Unions The choice of delivery method may have an impact on labor usage and hence labor union issues. These issues can be both internal to the transit agency as well as external with its contractors. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 65 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 14. DBE Impacts Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.18. DBE impacts advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Agencies can include DBE requirements in the RFP for design, construction, and maintenance requirements. Owners can set DBE requirements, but because all subcontractors are not known at the time of award, there is a risk that design-builders may not achieve the DBE goals that they specify in their proposals. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages The DBB process is well established, so there is generally no fundamental opposition from unions. None. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Similar to DBB, there is generally no fundamental opposition from unions. Construction managers do not generally guarantee prices if there are issues with labor unions. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages None. Opposition from public design unions can exclude the DB method from consideration (see Step 3-Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Design-builders do not generally guarantee prices if there are issues with labor unions. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Labor Unions

Issue 16: Federal/State/Local Laws Transit agencies many not be able to use some delivery methods due to state or local laws. Some of the states require that transit agencies go through several steps before being allowed to use an alternative delivery method. The advantages and disadvantages of each project delivery method for this issue reflect the level of difficulty of using a delivery method from a legal standpoint. 66 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages None Opposition from public design unions can exclude the DBOM method from consideration (see Step 3-Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Opposition from public maintenance unions can exclude the DB method from consideration (see Step 3-Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Design-builders do not generally guarantee prices if there are issues with labor unions. Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 15. Labor Unions Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.19. Labor unions advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages All states are authorized to use DBB. None. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Some states allow more flexible procurement regulations with CMR, which can be advantageous in appropriate situations to expedite project development. Some state agencies are not authorized to use CMR or need to get extra approvals (see Step 3-Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Some states allow more flexible procurement regulations with DB, which can be advantageous in appropriate situations to expedite project development. Some state agencies are not authorized to use DB or need to get extra approvals (see Step 3- Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Federal/State/Local Laws

Issue 17: FTA/EPA Regulations The extent to which the various delivery methods can accommodate FTA requirements and EPA regulations given the unique project characteristics constitutes the advantages and dis- advantages of this issue. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 67 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 16. Federal/State/Local Laws Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.20. Federal/state/local laws advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Some states allow more flexible procurement regulations with DBOM, which can be advantageous in appropriate situations to expedite project development. State laws and regulations for DBOM are similar to DB (see Step 3-Review Go/No-Go Decision Points). Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Familiarity of agencies with this method facilitates permit and funding process. The final cost and schedule are established long after the Full Funding Grant Authorization (FFGA), which can be problematic if FFGA cost and schedule estimates are not met. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Construction managers can help facilitate the environmental process. The use of a GMP with separate design and construction packages can result in a final cost and schedule confirmation long after the FFGA. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages FTA has gained some experience and has modified its procedures to use DB. Cost and schedule are fixed near the FFGA. The design required to acquire environmental permits before hiring a design-builder may cause delays and negate some of the advantages of the DB method. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages FTA has gained some experience and has modified its procedures. Cost and schedule are fixed near the FFGA. The design required to acquire environmental permits before hiring a design-builder may cause delays and negate some of the advantages of the DB method. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—FTA/EPA Regulations

Issue 18: Stakeholder/Community Input This issue addresses the opportunity for stakeholder involvement afforded by each delivery method. 68 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 17. FTA/EPA Regulations Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.21. FTA/EPA regulations advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Separate design and construction phases provide an opportunity to get stakeholders’ inputs before the commencement of construction. The opportunity for stakeholder changes in design can cause delay in the project and add to the costs in the form of change orders. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages The construction experience of the construction manager can help facilitate stakeholder input. Stakeholder input can make GMP negotiation troublesome if not managed correctly. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages The owner can require the DB contractor to include a public information and outreach program to facilitate communities’ inputs. Design-builders can be innovative in helping gain community involvement. Any change because of community inputs after the issuance of an RFP can be costly. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages The owner can require the DB contractor to include a public information and outreach program to facilitate communities’ inputs. Design-builders can be innovative in helping gain community involvement. Any change because of community inputs after the issuance of an RFP can be costly. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Stakeholder/Community Input

Lifecycle Issues Issue 19: Lifecycle Costs Delivery methods can influence costs in the operation and maintenance phase. This issue concerns the opportunities or challenges that each delivery method provides with regard to life- cycle costs. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 69 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 18. Stakeholder/Community Input Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.22. Stakeholder/community input advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages The agency can control lifecycle costs through completed design and performance specifications. The DBB system allows for little constructor input into lifecycle costs. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages CMR has all benefits of DBB, plus the agency can leverage the construction manager’s input into lifecycle costs. If lifecycle performance criteria are not well understood during the development of the GMP, lifecycle issues may be difficult to incorporate into the final product. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages The agency can use performance criteria to set lifecycle performance standards and rely on design-builder innovation to achieve these standards. If lifecycle performance criteria are not well understood at the procurement stage, they will not be incorporated into the DB contract. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages The design-builder is responsible for maintenance in the DBOM contract and will be highly motivated to provide optimal lifecycle designs. The agency can use performance criteria to set lifecycle performance standards and rely on design-builder innovation to achieve these standards. The agency will not have complete control over all lifecycle issues that are not included as performance criteria in the contract. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Lifecycle Costs

Issue 20: Maintainability The issue of maintainability involves the owner’s ability to specify quality and ease of mainte- nance. There are advantages and disadvantages to each delivery method with regard to how maintainability is achieved. 70 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 19. Lifecycle Costs Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.23. Lifecycle costs advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages The opportunity to view completed plans before award allows agencies to review maintenance issues in designs. There is little opportunity for constructors to have input into maintenance issues. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages CMR has all the benefits of DBB, plus the agency can leverage a construction manager’s input into maintenance issues. If maintainability issues are not well understood during the development of the GMP, they may be difficult to incorporate into the final product. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages The agency can emphasize maintainability issues through performance criteria and best- value award factors. If maintainability issues are not well understood at the procurement stage, they will not be incorporated into the DB contract. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages The design-builder is responsible for maintenance in the DBOM contract and will be highly motivated to provide optimal lifecycle designs. The agency can emphasize maintainability issues through performance criteria and best- value award factors. The agency will not have complete control over all maintainability issues that are not included as performance criteria in the contract. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Maintainability

Issue 21: Sustainable Design Goals Sustainable design is becoming ever more important in achieving overall sustainability goals for projects. There are advantages and disadvantages to each delivery method in terms of addressing sustainability issues and incorporating sustainable design in a project. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 71 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 20. Maintainability Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.24. Maintainability advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Agencies can work with designers to incorporate sustainable designs into complete designs. The process provides little opportunity for constructability reviews to ensure that sustainable designs can be constructed efficiently and are not cost prohibitive. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages CMR has all the benefits of DBB, plus the agency can leverage the construction manager’s input into sustainable design issues. The use of separate bid packages can create barriers in the integration of sustainable solutions if not approached correctly. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages The agency can emphasize sustainable design issues through performance criteria and best- value award factors. Integration of the design and construction team can enhance constructability of designs. If sustainable design issues are not well understood at the procurement stage, they will not be incorporated into the DB contract. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages The agency can emphasize sustainable design issues through performance criteria and best- value award factors. Integration of the design and construction team can enhance constructability of designs. DBOM contractors can realize economic returns for sustainable designs since they have an inherent bias toward minimizing operations and maintenance lifecycle costs. If sustainable design issues are not well understood at the procurement stage, they will not be incorporated into the DB contract. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Sustainable Design Goals

72 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue 22: Sustainable Construction Goals In addition to sustainable design, sustainable construction is an important vehicle for achiev- ing overall sustainability goals. There are advantages and disadvantages to each project delivery method with regard to facilitating sustainable construction. Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 21. Sustainable Design Goals Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.25. Sustainable design goals advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Prescriptive specifications can be used to define sustainable construction practices prior to construction. There is little opportunity or incentive for constructor to do more than what is specified in terms of sustainable construction practices. Agencies can assume liability when prescribing construction methods. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages The agency can leverage the construction manager’s input into sustainable construction issues. The use of separate bid packages can create barriers in the integration of sustainable solutions if not approached correctly. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages The agency can emphasize sustainable construction issues through performance criteria and best-value award factors. Integration of the design and construction team can enhance the use of sustainable construction practices. If sustainable construction issues are not well understood at the procurement stage, they will not be incorporated into the DB contract. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages DBOM contractors can realize economic returns for sustainable designs since they have an inherent bias toward minimizing operations and maintenance lifecycle costs. If sustainable construction issues are not well understood at the procurement stage, they will not be incorporated into the DBOM contract. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Sustainable Construction Goals

Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 73 Other Issues Issue 23: Construction Claims The effect of each delivery method on exposing the agency to potential conflicts and claims is addressed under this issue. Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 22. Sustainable Construction Goals Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.26. Sustainable construction goals advantages/disadvantages summary. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages DBB has a well-understood legal precedent for construction claims. DBB historically has the highest occurrence of claims and disputes, which often occur in the areas of authority, responsibility and quality. The low-bid environment can provide incentives for a constructor to file claims—particularly if there is any ambiguity in the plans. Construction Manager At Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Having the constructor on the team early during design can lessen the likelihood for disputes and claims regarding designs. Since design and construction contracts are separate, the potential for disputes and claims regarding design still exist. If multiple bid packages are not managed correctly, the coordination of these bid packages can result in claims. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages The single source for design and construction eliminates claims for design errors or omissions from the agency’s perspective. There is potential for claims with regard to scope definition if the form of the DB contract is not well understood. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages DBOM has similar advantages to DB and additionally eliminates claims regarding operating performance due to the integration of the operator. There is potential for claims with regard to scope definition if the form of the DBOM contract is not well understood. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Construction Claims

Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Advantages Disadvantages Roles and responsibilities in DBB contract are very well understood in the industry. DBB can create an adversarial relationship between the parties; primarily between the owner and construction contractor. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Advantages Disadvantages Inclusion of the construction manager in the design process can align team members and lessen adversarial relationships. Negotiation of GMP can create an adversarial situation if the process is not well understood. Design-Build (DB) Advantages Disadvantages Inclusion of the designer and constructor on the same team can lessen adversarial relationships. Due to the loss of control over the details of design, DB requires a high level of trust between the owner and design-builder. Without this trust, design-build can become adversarial. Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) Advantages Disadvantages Inclusion of the designer, constructor, and maintenance contractor on the same team can lessen adversarial relationships. Similar to DB, a DBOM delivery requires a high level of trust to succeed. 74 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Issue 24: Adversarial Relationship There are advantages and disadvantages to each project delivery method with regard to avoiding adversarial relationships on the project team. These advantages and disadvantages will vary depending on the nature of the project and the owner’s experience with the delivery methods. Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 23. Construction Claims Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.27. Construction claims advantages/disadvantages summary. Advantages/Disadvantages Form—Adversarial Relationship

Step 5. Choose the Most Appropriate Project Delivery Method Steps 1 through 4 of the selection process provide all the individual pieces of information needed to make a project delivery decision. The final step involves combining this information into a final comprehensive format that will aid in making the decision. Table 4.29 presents a form in which to summarize the advantages and disadvantages of each project delivery method with regard to each of the 24 issues. Following the table is an outline for use in documenting the final decision. Step 5 requires the following actions: • Review project goals. Review the project goals documented in Step 2 to be certain that any project delivery method selection is in alignment with the goals. • Transfer individual issue summary ratings. Transfer the 24 individual issue summary rat- ings (documented in the Issue Summary Table at the end of each issue analysis) to Table 4.29 to provide a complete picture of the analysis. • Review Table 4.29 to determine the dominant delivery method. Upon completion of Table 4.29, a delivery method may emerge as dominant. A dominant delivery method will contain a large number of “most appropriate” ratings in areas that align with the project goals. A dominant method will also have few or no “least appropriate” ratings. Counting the ratings should be avoided. If needed, review any comments from the previous issue analysis to help with the delivery decision. Note: If dominant method exists, make a delivery choice and move to Step 6. • Review “least appropriate” ratings. Review any “least appropriate” ratings to determine whether any of the issues raised red flags or problems that would make a delivery method sig- nificantly less desirable. • Choose the delivery methods to study in Tier 2. If a dominant method is not apparent, remove any inappropriate methods, document the decision as described in Step 6, and move to Tier 2 for a more detailed analysis. Step 6. Document Results The final step in the Tier 1 decision process is to document the results in a Project Delivery Decision Report. Whether one delivery method emerges as the dominant choice or none of the four delivery methods are eliminated from consideration in the process, documentation is a vital step. Documentation will assist in developing procurement and contracting strategies for the ultimate project delivery method. It will also serve to communicate the project delivery choice to interested stakeholders. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 75 Issue DBB CMR DB DBOM 24. Adversarial Relationship Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Comments _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.28. Adversarial relationship advantages/disadvantages summary.

The six-step process forms the basis for the Project Delivery Decision Report. Steps 1 through 5 can be combined for a complete report. The advantage/disadvantage checklist and the related comments will be important components for documentation. An executive summary should be added to the beginning of the report to summarize the decision. Any pertinent data or research (e.g., schedule constraint calculations, delivery code research, and so forth) should be added as appendices. A suggested Project Delivery Decision Report outline is the following: 1. Executive Summary 2. Project Description 3. Project Goals 76 A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods DBB CMR DB DBOM Project-Level Issues Rating 1. Project Size 2. Cost 3. Schedule 4. Risk Management 5. Risk Allocation 6. LEED Certification Agency-Level Issues Rating 7. Agency Experience 8. Staffing Required 9. Staff Capability 10. Agency Goals and Objectives 11. Agency Control of Project 12. Third-Party Agreement Public Policy/Regulatory Issues Rating 13. Competition 14. DBE Impacts 15. Labor Unions 16. Federal/State/Local Laws 17. FTA/EPA Regulations 18. Stakeholder/Community Input Lifecycle Issues Rating 19. Lifecycle Costs 20. Maintainability 21. Sustainable Design Goals 22. Sustainable Construction Goals Other Issues Rating 23. Construction Claims 24. Adversarial Relationship Other Other Other Key: Most appropriate delivery method Appropriate delivery method Least appropriate delivery method X Not applicable (discontinue evaluation of this method) Project Goals and Pertinent Issue Comments _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.29. Project delivery method advantage/disadvantage summary.

4. Delivery Methods Considered 5. Advantages and Disadvantages 6. Delivery Method Decision 7. Appendices Conclusion The Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach provides transit agencies with a struc- tured approach to choosing the most appropriate project delivery method for each individual project. At the end of Step 5, there may be a single, clear, and logical choice for a project deliv- ery method. If this is the case, that delivery method should be selected and the decision docu- mented in a Project Delivery Decision Report. If, at the end of this stage, a dominant choice has not emerged, the agency should document the results and move to the Tier 2 approach for a more detailed analysis of the remaining delivery methods. Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach 77

Next: Chapter 5 - Tier 2 Weighted-Matrix Delivery Decision Approach »
A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 131: A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods examines various project delivery methods for major transit capital projects. The report also explores the impacts, advantages, and disadvantages of including operations and maintenance as a component of a contract for a project delivery method.

A companion publication to TCRP Report 131 isTCRP Web-Only Document 41: Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods, which explores pertinent literature and research findings related to various project delivery methods for transit projects. TCRP Web-Only Document 41 also includes definitions of project delivery methods and highlights the existing selection approaches commonly used by transit agencies.

Appendix A: References and Appendix B: Definitions were published as part of TCRP Report 131. Appendices C through H of the report are available online.

Appendix C: Forms for Project Description and Goals

Appendix D: Forms for the Analytical Delivery Decision Approach (Tier 1)

Appendix E: Forms for the Weighted-Matrix Delivery Decision Approach (Tier 2)

Appendix F: Procedures for Determining the Weights of Selection Factors in the Weighted-Matrix Delivery Decision Approach (Tier 2)

Appendix G: Form for the Optimal Risk-Based Approach (Tier 3)

Appendix H: Application of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 Approaches to a Hypothetical Project

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!