Commonly Value Engineering studies focus closely on project design looking for ideas that improve the essential function over cost. As design advances, value can be added by looking at the design in context with how the project will be constructed. Early decisions related to the ultimate construction procurement method can enhance that value add by ensuring that agreements and decisions made throughout the design process are supportive of the ultimate delivery method. Further, the predesign and Preliminary Engineering scopes can be written to ensure that the materials and decisions needed to support each delivery method are in fact built into the scope allowing the project to move rapidly into procurement. Factors that play into the decision include the Organizational Context, including the owners experience with, and readiness to advance any of the optional procurement methods, and the specific Project Characteristics - size, complexity, schedule, risk and budget. Building a common understanding of these elements is key to selecting the best fit procurement method. Procurement methods include Design-Bid-Build (DBB), Construction Management/General Contractor (CMGC) or Construction Management at Risk (CMAR), Design Build (DB), Public-Private Partnerships (P3) and increasingly Progressive Design Build (PDB). Each method has advantages and disadvantage that can provide enhanced function/cost in delivery. This paper demonstrates the theoretical application of the six-phase job plan to the selection of procurement methods for transit infrastructure projects. A recent actual procurement method selection process for a large LRT infrastructure project - South LRT Extension - is discussed in context to the theoretical application of the Six Step Job Process to highlight the advantages of rigorous application of function analysis to enhance creativity and evaluation. That discussion is shown in blue text.
展开▼
