NEWH - May 2003 - (Page 49)

working with team players... methods of project delivery by: Mark Linch, Linch Development Services THE STRUCTURING AND HIRING of a project team is critical to the success of any project. In the building industry today, there are several methods available to owners and developers. Conventional methods of project delivery have given way to more creative methods in an effort to save time, save money, and to provide a more coordinated team approach in order to reduce litigation. Each project delivery method has benefits as well as its own limitations. The advantages and disadvantages of each method must be evaluated relative to the objectives of each project. This implies that first and foremost, the objectives of a project must be established prior to the evaluation of the available project delivery methods. These project objectives must prioritize quality, schedule, cost, and risk which are then balanced with the owner/developer’s in-house capability for managing the project delivery process. Once the project objectives are established and the owner/developer’s capabilities are defined, then the characteristics of the project can lead to the appropriate project delivery decision. This summary outlines the characteristics of each project delivery method. Traditional Method 1: Design-Bid-Build This is the most common form of project delivery method and is characterized by the owner having separate contracts with the design team and the construction team. The phasing of the work is sequential. First is the design phase, second is the bidding phase and lastly, the construction phase. Advantages: Higher quality, competitive pricing Disadvantages: Slower schedule, more claims for delay, pricing is less predictable. Traditional Method 2: Negotiated This method evolved from design/bid/build and has become very common. There are still separate contracts for design and construction. However, the contractor is selected during the design process to assist with controlling the costs of the design and to advise on various value engineering alternatives. (Value engineering involves exploring less expensive construction methods to deliver the same quality result.) Similarly, various aspects of the work might benefit from the “designassist” variation which means that a subcontractor of the contractor is hired to assist the architect’s engineer in the design of a building system. This method is common among owners, architects and contractors who work together repeatedly. It is also the most common among “fast-tracked” projects. “Fast-track” simply means that construction is started before the design is complete. The benefits of delivering the project early must be weighed against the additional cost of starting construction before the design is complete. Advantages: Highest quality, faster schedule, better cost control, reduced claims Disadvantages: Must insure competitive subcontractor bidding. Alternate Method 1: Developer At Risk aka Turn-Key or Pre-Sale This method is characterized by the hiring of one entity, a developer, to deliver the project for a designated price. Since Developers At Risk assume financial responsibility for the project, they must have experience in that area. Once on board, the Developer At Risk hires the design and construction teams. A cost commitment is usually made early in the design process. Then, a Negotiated Method is used to carry out the work. Advantages: Better cost control, faster schedule, and least amount of owner claims. Disadvantages: Cost pressure and value engineering can erode quality. Alternate Method 2: Construction Manager Not-At-Risk This method involves the hiring of a construction manager who then serves as a broker for the hiring of subcontractors under direct contract with the owner. The roles of owner, architect and construction manager are similar to those of owner, architect and contractor. However, in order to reduce the construction cost, the owner takes on the risk ordinarily assumed by the contractor. Advantages: Less cost. Disadvantages: Increased claims, most complex to administer. Alternate Method 3: Design-Build This method involves the owner hiring one entity, a design-builder, to provide both design and construction services. Financing of the project is the responsibility of the owner. This method requires a clearly defined scope of work such as an existing prototype design. A cost commitment is made early in the design process. Additionally, design-build may be used for a portion of the work. Typically, design-build is employed for fire protection systems and swimming pool systems due to their 49

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of NEWH - May 2003

NEWH - May 2003
Contents
Letter From the Editor
Hospitality News
Spotlight on NEWH
Tips on Specs....Chandeliers
On the Road Again
Did You Know?
Ancient Storytelling Comes to Life
Indian Gaming: Developing the Latest Gaming Trend
You Can’t Sue an Indian Tribe, Can You?
Putting the Pieces Together: The Steps It Takes to Develop a Casino
Building the Fantasy
The Icing on the Cake: The Importance of Architectural Millwork in Casino Design
Designing Today’s Casino Resort: How to Make Entertainment Memorable and Distinctive
Casino Advertising: A Sure Bet!
Understanding Code Issues Related to Riverboat Casinos
Purchasing on a Dime
Under Wraps
Small Business Advice
Working With Team Players...
In My Opinion...
Taking the Gambling Out of Specifying Gaming Furniture
Industry Partner Education
Bios

NEWH - May 2003