Brian Baker, Assistant County Manager, gave a brief presentation about the construction delivery methods for the courthouse renovation project. He reminded the Board that they had discussed this topic in recent meetings. Mr. Baker said that CRA Architects has worked with the county on this project for 5 years. He noted the county had approved a set dollar amount for this project and that the speed of construction was very important.
Design-Bid-Build
- Architect Designs Building
- County Solicits Bids Based on Completed Plans
- The lowest Responsible Bidder is chosen
Pros:
- Lowest initial construction cost
- Allows the County to choose the architect
Cons:
- Lack of tools to control price
- Builder chosen on price, not quality
- General Contractor not on board during the design phase
- More susceptible to change orders and disputes
Construction Manager at Risk
- Architect and CMR Selected at Outset
- Architect Designs Building with Cost and Feasibility Input from CMR
- CMR provides a Guaranteed Maximum Price before Bidding
- CMR bids project at Risk
Pros:
- Can choose CMR based on experience and quality
- Allows the County to choose the architect
- Improved cost control during the design process
- Maintains competitive bidding during subcontracting
- County could decide to reject the CMRs GMP and bid the project conventionally
Cons:
- Shifting the risk to the CMR may cause a slightly higher upfront cost
Design-Build
- General Contractor/Architect Team Selected at Outset Under a Single Contract
- General Contractor provides a (GMP) based on the feasibility study
- General Contractor/Architect Team designs building with County Input
- General Contractor constructs the project
Pros:
- Can choose a General Contractor based on experience and quality
- Overlapping design and construction phases allow faster completion
- Shifts the risk of cost overruns to the General Contractor
Cons:
- Does not allow the County to choose the architect, and the architect works for the General Contractor
- More suitable for simple projects where a GMP can be determined by a concept plan
- Lack of upfront competitive bidding may create higher upfront costs
Mr. Baker recommended that the Board adopt the construction manager at risk (CMR) method for the courthouse expansion project.
Commissioner Turner asked whether selecting an architect and a general contractor were separate bids. Mr. Baker explained that it was a selection process and that the architect and the general contractor would be chosen separately. Commissioner Turner had further questions for Andy Cruickshank, CRA Architect, about why general contractors may or may not decide to bid on the project using the CMR method. Mr. Cruickshank said this was a very attractive project, and there would not be a shortage of interest from talented contractors who had experience working on justice centers and courthouses.
Commissioner Thompson expressed her disagreement with the courthouse expansion project. Due to the land size, she did not think the expansion would be large enough to address the court system's growth needs. Commissioner Thompson thought spending that amount of money should have been placed on a ballot like the education bonds.
Chairman Paisley mentioned that the county went with the lowest bidders for the jail and JBA, and due to the workmanship done on those projects, the county had to go through litigation.
Commissioner Turner asked for a brief timeline of the project. Mr. Cruickshank said the design phase would take 12 months, and construction would take 18 months. He said they could provide more details once the team added the CMR.