Even with federal funding flow uncertain for infrastructure, the promise and potential pitfalls of collaborative project delivery continue to be a hot topic for industry professionals. Among the challenges of progressive design-build is whether to use a lump-sum or time-and-materials approach to the contract.   

“If you set a lump sum early, it can be constraining,” noted Monica Born, program manager at Valley Transportation Authority in California's Silicon Valley, which plans a $12.7-billion, six-mile extension of Bay Area Rapid Transit to San Jose. But by engaging contractors early on, “they might loosen up and explore other [ideas] with you.”

Speaking to attendees of the Western Winter Workshop in Carlsbad, Calif., held March 7-8, she said that the first, typically year-long phase consists of project stakeholders getting to know each other, followed by determining “what scope can we afford?” One risk for owners is the lack of cost and schedule certainty until that stage.

Pavan Hotha, principal consultant at Intueor Consulting, said contractor input on costs can help designers design for a set budget, so builders can bid with more certainty. Suresh Kataria, manager of risk and project controls at HNTB, added that such input allows potential bidders to identify potential risks and make them known to owners, while achieving “a clear understanding of what the owner is looking for.”

Born added that moving forward even with uncertainty is vital. “If decisions are not made, you have to escalate” the process, she said. “It’s ok to disagree, but move forward.”

Kataria suggested that some risks may warrant their own risk management process. “For some risks, the owner has a specific sensitivity,” he said. “As you get closer to final design, you have to price risks. You do not want last-minute surprises.”

Supply chain disruptions are another risk faced by big infrastructure projects. To ameliorate that risk, agencies must “build relationships with vendors that can then reach out to others” as needed for long-lead items, said Devang Dedhia, manager of project controls for the Port of Long Beach. For its $1.6-billion Pier B on-dock rail project, a core internal team was formed to address permitting, right-of-way, utilities and other risks.

“Disruptions are here to stay,” said Tim Buresh, chief of construction services for the California State University system, which is in a student housing building boom, including construction of a $1.6-billion project at its San Luis Obispo campus and a $600-million project for its San Diego school. “There’s always going to be something. Buy everything early. Pay for warehousing versus paying for disruption.”

Russ Vakharia, supervising engineer for the LA County Sanitation Districts, said that even when stakeholders are regularly communicated with, “expect the unexpected.” He cited an example of an external agency asking for a contingency plan regarding tunneling beneath a freeway structure with two days to spare. Noting that on the 7-mile Clearwater tunnel project being built under a $630-million contract, “one day of delay can equal up to $150,000,” he said, citing the need for project managers, schedulers and project controls to break down the silos. “The project manager has to own the schedule” he said. “Participate in its creation and supplement the big picture with details. One sinkhole can sink your job.”

Echoing this, Buresh added, “If you take an arm’s length attitude, you’re doomed to failure.”

A Potential New Model

The Contra Costa Transportation Authority is looking at a new form of collaboration for public transit. “We have a rare opportunity for a progressive public-private partnership,” said Tim Haile, its executive director. The agency is working with the Plenary Group, Flatiron Dragados and Glydways on a potential automated transit network for three rural communities in northern California.

The first segment, a 5-mile route from the BART station in Antioch to Brentwood, would carry passengers on demand along a dedicated guideway no more than 15 ft wide—reducing costs per mile— that could carry up to 10,000 passengers per hour, per direction. The autonomous 13-ft-long, 7-ft-high Glydway vehicles, a descendant of the pods used at London's Heathrow Airport, would carry up to six riders each.

Brian Gettinger, Glydway vice president of business development who previously worked for Flatiron Dragados, said the system could cost half of what a bus rapid transit system would, and one-third less than extending BART. It would use an existing highway right-of-way.

Hamid Rezaei, director of emerging technologies at Flatiron Dragados, noted that the contractor, developer and owner all jointly evaluate early design packages. Plenary, the developer, hired the design team, but the plan is for hiring to shift to the contractor at 30% design—in essence shifting from a construction manager-general contractor model to progressive design-build—“or not,” he added. The team can be flexible depending on the situation.

The idea is to try new business models for building transit, said Haile. “With bus rapid transit or light rail, it’s just the transit element. Here, we’re looking how to leverage the entire network.” Transit-oriented development, advertising in vehicles and other possibilities could offer new ways of funding that don’t depend on farebox revenue or public funding.

“We’re bringing in the developer super early,” he said. Later on, “we’ll negotiate the guaranteed maximum price, then the developer agreement—or, we could go with a hard bid developer agreement.”

Gettinger added, “We will walk through all the risks together, and do due diligence together.”