Formerly Water Design-Build Council
HDR and Garney recently conducted an interview with the UG project team to gain insight into some of the tangible benefits it has realized through its recent CMAR procurements.
Projects delivered under construction management at-risk (CMAR) and progressive design-build (PDB) contracts are becoming more common in the US water sector. Each method offers opportunities for an owner to accelerate schedule, collaborate more effectively with a project team, facilitate early consideration of construction issues, and receive insight into project cost. There are many similarities between these two delivery methods, but PDB offers one major differentiator: an opportunity for the owner to transfer additional risk.
One of my typical roles as an owner advisor is to review proposed construction management at-risk (CMAR) and design-build contracts from a commercial perspective—i.e., what’s the likely marketplace reaction to the contract and is the contract consistent with the philosophy behind collaborative delivery? I am continually amazed by what I see.
Perfluroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (commonly referred to as PFAS) are impacting drinking water supplies nationwide. These emerging contaminants are challenging municipalities, water districts, and all water providers. Unlike system capacity increases and aging facilities incorporated into long-term planning, PFAS levels spike, forcing owners to take immediate actions to maintain water quality and the need for regulations surrounding them to change quickly. Do you need a PFAS solution?
Most major construction projects in the water and wastewater industry have conventionally been delivered through a design-bid-build (DBB) method of delivery. However, collaborative project delivery (CPD) methods are being considered more frequently in the public sector because they can provide a variety of benefits over traditional delivery methods such as time and/or cost savings. It is important to recognize that these benefits sometimes come with trade-offs, such as reduced control or change in risk, so the pros and cons of each CPD method need to be weighed.
The construction management at-risk (CMAR) delivery model requires contractors, engineers, and owners to think differently about how, why, and when change orders are executed. For the sake of this topic, we will assume that the owner has a separate and autonomous contract with the contractor and the engineer and the project is a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) arrangement for a collaborative delivery.
Are you a “hands-on” owner who prefers to work collaboratively through the design and construction of your project? Do you like to maintain control over all project phases? If so, construction management at-risk (CMAR) may be the best delivery method to achieve your project goals.
Every team that starts a CMAR project wants the end result to be successful. So, why are some projects successful and others end with owners choosing to enact the off-ramp clause and terminate the contract? When an owner decides to pursue the off-ramp clause, it often means that a major disagreement with some aspect of the project has occurred—either the projected costs to construct the project are over the budget or the approach is not in alignment with the owner’s goals. Off-ramp provisions in contracts are essential to protecting owners, but when the off-ramp is enacted, the result is a delay in the overall project schedule and perhaps increased project costs.
Rice Lake Construction Group, in conjunction with AE2S Engineering and the City of Watford City, successfully completed the first construction management at-risk delivery of a municipal wastewater treatment facility project in North Dakota. Below are a few items that made the project a success and a few that could have made the process better.
Being on a CMAR project is like being part of an Olympic 4 x 100 relay team. Similar to the way the countries select the fastest runners for their Olympic relay teams; as an owner you select the best design and construction teams in the industry for your project. But having the fastest runners or the best CMAR and design teams isn’t enough.