---

id9 Approach – IPD

It’s important to understand all delivery methods and how to implement them to be able to fully grasp the best approach to design and deliver a quality building efficiently, sustainably and for the best possible price. Therefore, id9 prefers integrating all the best qualities of all the delivery methods to ensure the best possible outcome utilizing IPD, see section A1.1. and A3.1 Eliminating the Cost Issue.

Project Delivery Methods

Design-Bid-Build (DBB)

This project delivery method is the “traditional” means of delivering a construction project and creates a clear separation between the design and construction process.

Typically, the only criteria for selection of a contractor in design-bid-build (DBB) projects is the lowest construction price. To begin the DBB process, an architect or engineer (A/E) is hired by an owner to create design documents (drawings and technical specifications) for a project. In addition, the A/E will usually develop a project cost estimate and schedule. Once the design documents are completed, a Request for Bids (sometimes called a Request for Proposal) is created and released to contractors. Contractors will then evaluate the project documents and provide a price for the work. The A/E is responsible for answering bidder questions and for assisting the owner in evaluating the received bids. Once a bid is selected, the owner establishes a contract with the chosen contractor and work begins on the project.

Having been the traditional means of delivering projects, the DBB method is typically the most familiar to those in the industry involving three roles: Owner, Architect & Contractor. The Owner contracts separately with the Architect for the design and with the Contractor for construction. The Architect does not contract with the Contractor, and the Contractor does not contract with the Architect.

It also has, in theory, the ability to deliver a low-cost project. However, since this method isolates the contractor from the design process, there is a high potential for project cost increases due to conflicts between the design documents and the constructability of the project in the field. Also, selecting a low bidder can result in a decrease in the quality of the finished product, as the contractor must often determine ways of achieving a profit on the job, working under a budget that was the lowest of all contractors submitting pricing.

In general, the DBB process is best used on projects that are simple, that are not under a tight time crunch and that have a limited budget.

The Design – Bid – Build approach has several characteristics and benefits:

• Three linear phases: Design > Bid > Build
• Well-established and clearly defined roles
• Carefully crafted legal and procedural guidelines
• The lowest qualifying bid provides a reliable market price
• Contract documents are typically completed before construction begins, requiring construction-related decisions in advance of actual execution, and allowing for easier pricing
• Complete specifications produce clear quality standards
• The design and details of the finished project are agreed to by all parties before construction begins.

Construction Manager at Risk (CM@R)

In a CM@R project, the owner selects a “Construction Manager” (CM) who is responsible for building the project. The selection of the CM is made using criteria in addition to the construction cost, such as quality, proven track record, detailed project approach and ability to meet the schedule of the project. In this delivery method the design work and construction work are contracted separately.

The selected CM becomes a project team member early on in the project process and, working directly with the owner and the A/E, provides input as the project moves through design into construction. The CM provides input on items such as project budget, construction cost estimating and the overall schedule as well as providing review of design drawings to identify constructibility issues and potential cost savings. Typically the pricing of the construction is begun early in the design process, and is refined as the design progresses with a final guaranteed maximum price (GMP) provided to the owner prior to beginning of construction. The GMP is typically comprised of a cost-plus-fixed-fee structure, where the actual project costs for labor and materials are passed through to the owner, and the CM charges a fixed fee on top of that amount. Though owners typically work with trusted contractors in this type of delivery method, it can be difficult to determine if the established maximum price is reasonable for the type of project constructed.

The CMAR process is most successful in projects that have a large undefined scope and are under pressure to finish in a limited time. This process may also be applicable to some projects that involve complex integration between disciplines or multiple phases of construction, where the oversight and coordination delivered by a construction manager is extremely beneficial.

The CM@R approach has several characteristics and benefits:

• Overlapping phases: design and build occur at the same time (fast track)
• Construction manager hired early, during the design phase, to provide advice
• Pre-construction services offered by the constructor (such as constructibility review and bid management)
• Specific contractual arrangement determines the roles of players
• Clear quality controls from the use of prescriptive specifications in the contract.

Design-Build Contractual Relationship

In the Design/Build approach to project delivery, the Owner contracts with a single entity – a “designer/builder” – for both design and construction. The design/build entity can be led by either an Architect or a General Contractor, or both, and can consist of any number of people.

The DB method provides the ability to deliver a project on a tight schedule, as projects can be split up and delivered in a package approach, where individual components are designed and built as needed to achieve the final completion date. This allows for a quick schedule but could produce a lot of change orders during construction. Generally, the owner can establish a firm maximum price of the project early on, and has a significant amount of cost control. Conflict between the Architect and that Contractor are typically minimized.

Design build is typically used for construction projects where the owner has clearly established the requirements prior to design. It can also be an appropriate method when schedule is a concern, as it removes the components of the schedule that would typically be consumed by the bidding and procurement process.

Design/Build approach has several characteristics and benefits:

• Project-by-project basis for establishing and documenting roles
• Continuous execution of design and construction
• Overlapping phases: design and build occur at the same time (fast track)
• Two prime players: Owner & design-build entity
• Carefully crafted legal and procedural guidelines for public owners
• Some construction-related decisions can be made after the start of the project
• Construction planning and scheduling is done with the design process.

Fast Track Process

A “fast track” process is an approach to speeding up construction by starting to build one part of the project while the remaining parts are still being designed or drawn up. The most common example of this is on a mixed-use project with four floors of apartments over a concrete podium of parking or retail stores. In a fast track approach, the concrete podium would be drawn up, submitted for permit, and would start construction. While this “phase one” is being built, the Architects are finishing the bidding and permitting drawings for the apartments above.

This method is referred to as an accelerated or telescoped project. The construction documents are issued in phases so the Contractor may get an early start on building a portion of the project while the Architect finishes the remaining drawings. Instead of waiting for all of the design and documentation to be complete, the design phase overlaps with the construction phase. While this method does shorten the time it takes to build, it requires much more coordination. It also makes revisions and changes much more difficult as certain portions of the project may already been built.

The biggest (highest-cost) decisions are made first, the smallest (lowest-cost) decisions are made last. The risk in fast tracking is once you issue drawings, you are somewhat locked in and changes are much more difficult and expensive to make. Knowing the issues of fast tracking and while implementing with IPD system can however significantly reduce the cost implications.