Agenda 06/28/2011 Item #10C
6/28/2011 Item 10.C.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation that the Board adopt criteria for review of conceptual plans and
designs for major capital projects.
OBJECTIVE: To establish thresholds and criteria under which the Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) will review conceptual plans and designs of major capital projects.
CONSIDERATIONS: At its May 10, 2011 regular meeting, the BCC directed the County
Manager to draft a set of criteria for staff to present design plans and/or concepts to the Board
for review and input.
Within our current processes, there are a number of times at which design plans and conceptual
drawings are presented to the Board. Such instances include requests for re-zoning,
conditional use, .or variances. The County uses standard scopes of service within our design
contracts, with deliverables in stages - usually conceptual design with a selection of 3 to 6
potential designs, then 30%, 60%, 90% and 100% plans. There is usually a presentation of the
conceptual plans in one or several publicly advertised meetings to solicit community input,
followed by a final design selection. There are deliverables at each stage.
At the end of the June 15, 2011 continuation of the Board's regular meeting, a conversation
ensued regarding peer review of design plans. Staff occasionally uses peer review on a case
by case basis, as was the case with the design of the North Collier Regional Park and there are
certain Transportation projects that require peer review.
Transportation Engineering utilizes peer review extensively. The County employs licensed
professional engineers in all disciplines as well as registered landscape architects. Consultants
are utilized to perform structural peer review of bridges with the exception of pre-engineered
structures such as pedestrian bridges or box culverts. All projects, most of which are designed
by external consultants, are distributed for peer review by Traffic Operations, Road & Bridge,
Right of Way, Stormwater and Public Utilities at the 30%, 60% and 90% design stages. When
smaller projects are designed in-house, the peer review is conducted by staff from another
department to ensure objectivity and independent review.
All bridge designs require a Bridge Development Report in accordance with the FOOT Plans
Preparation Manual. This report is subjected to peer review by an independent structural
engineering consultant. Peer review is performed at the 60% Design Stage by the Construction
Engineering and Inspection (CEI) firm assigned to the project in what is referred to as a
"Constructability Review." Additionally, FOOT Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction
provides a Value Engineering Cost Proposal (VECP) process whereby a contractor can propose
cost saving changes to the plans and the savings are split between the owner and the
contractor.
The County has also established a procedure for Value Engineering of certain projects. Value
Engineering incorporates the elements of peer review but adds additional review criteria that
evaluate means, methods, and specifications with an eye on best value and potential cost
reductions.
.--
FISCAL IMPACT: Additional presentations to the Board and any changes or alternates
requested would likely result in additional design fees or potentially increase construction costs.
Packet Page -250-
6/28/2011 Item 10.C.
This could also impact project schedules, permitting, and grant compliance. The cost of such
changes, which would be effected via change orders, cannot be accurately estimated and would
be highly dependent upon the scope of the change and the type of project. Historically, the
additional cost of redesign represents approximately1 0% to 30% of the design cost. The cost of
outside peer review/value engineering is estimated at approximately 25% of the original design
cost. Cost for consultant presentations are generally between $1,000 and $2,500.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is legally sufficient for Board action, and requires
majority support for approval. -JAK
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with
the Executive Summary.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board direct the following actions:
1. The Board shall review design plans at the 30% completion stage for all vertical
construction projects with an estimated project cost in excess of $5 million, subsequent
to any public information meetings that may have been held.
2. Vertical construction projects in excess of $10 million will require a value engineering
review as referenced in the attached Appendix 4 to the Procurement Administrative
Procedures.
PREPARED BY:
Len Golden Price, ASD Administrator
Packet Page -251-
6/28/2011 Item 10.C.
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 10.C.
Item Summary: Recommendation that the Board adopt criteria for review of conceptual
plans and designs for major capital projects.
Meeting Date: 6/28/2011
Prepared By
Name: PriceLen
Title: Administrator - Administrative Services,
6117/20]] 10:07:45 AM
Approved By
Name: SmithKristen
Title: Administrative Secretary,Risk Management
Date: 6/20/2011 1:5] :30 PM
Name: StanleyTherese
Title: Management/Budget Analyst, Senior,Oftice of Management & Budget
Date: 6/20/2011 3 :21 :34 PM
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Title: County Attorney,
Date: 6/20/2011 3:30:38 PM
Name: OchsLeo
Title: County Manager
Date: 6/20/2011 9:25:04 PM
Packet Page -252-
6/28/2011 Item 10.C.
Appendix 4
VALUE ENGINEERING PROCEDURE
I. Purpose:
To provide a consistent and uniform process for executing a Value Engineering (VE) Program during the
development of a project.
II. Application
When deemed necessary by the County, to provide an analysis of the functions of a program, project,
system, product, item of equipment, building, facility, service, or supply, perfonned by qualified agency
or contractor personnel, directed at improving performance, reliability, quality, safety, and life cycle
costs.
A. Methodology
1. General
VE shall be the systematic application of recognized techniques by a multi-disciplined team
which identifies the function of a product or service; establishes a worth for that function;
generates alternatives through the use of creative thinking; and provides the needed functions to
accomplish the original intent of the project, reliably and at the lowest life-cycle cost without
sacrificing project requirements for safety, quality, operations, maintenance, and environment.
2. Process
The administration of the VE Program can be broken into the following key processes:
1. Project Selection
2. Team Selection
3. Value Engineering Study
4. Resolution
5. Reporting
3. Project Selection
The Department Director and Project Manager shall determine the need for, and timing of, all VE
studies, in accordance with these procedures
3.1 Required projects
All projects with an estimated cost of $] 0 mill ion or more shall be reviewed for consideration of
a VE study conducted during project development. A "project" shall be defined as the collective
contracts, which may include but not be limited to: design, construction, and construction,
engineering and inspection (CEI) services. The estimated cost shall include all costs associated
with the project, including but not limited to, design, right of way, construction, and
administrative costs. The VE study shall be conducted during one of the following phases of
project development: 30% plans, 60% plans, or Final Design. For Design-Build and Construction
Manager at Risk projects, the VE study shall be conducted prior to the release of the Request for
Packet Page -253-
6/28/2011 Item 10.C.
Proposal (RFP). The greatest potential for improvement is during the initial pian review periods;
therefore it is the County's objective to schedule studies during these phases of project
development.
3.2 Additional Projects
The County Divisions and Departments have the flexibility to study additional projects below the
mandatory $10 million cost threshold. Those projects considered should include:
1. Projects that substantially exceed initial cost estimates.
2. Complex projects.
3. Projects requested for VE by a Department Project Manager.
4. Projects and processes with unusual or potential problems.
4. Team Selection
The Department Director shall dctermine whether to utilize Department personnel, consultant
personnel, or a mixture of both to form the team. Anyone directly involved in the design ofthe
project should not be a team member. but is expected to participate as an information source. The
VE study shall be independent of other design reviews.
4.1 Method I - County Team
4.].1 The Department Director shall review potential team members and coordinate the selection
of team member disciplines with the Project Manager. Teams should be structured to include
appropriate expertise to evaluate the major areas anticipated within the project. At a minimum, if
directly relevant to the project. design, construction, operation and maintenance shall be
represented on the team. In the event of specialized projects. individuals with specific expertise
necessary to perform a proficient VE study should bc included in the team makeup. Department
employees serving as team leaders shall have the responsibility for conducting the assigned
project review in accordance with these procedures.
(ldcally. prior to leading a team (team leader). employees must have served as a team member on
at least two VE studies. must have attended a forty-hour VE workshop, and must have attended a
team leader training course. Team members who have not received formal VE training or
participated on a previous VE study may participate on a team: however. there should be no more
than two untrained members participating on anyone team.)
4.2 Method 2 - Outside Team
The Department Director and Project Manager shall approve a recommended Consultant team
from qualified finl1S under contract for Fixed Term Vaiue Engineering Services in accordance
with contractual conditions.
III. Process
A. Value Engineering Study Process
The VE study process shall be conducted in accordance with the following 5 phases of the
intel11ationally recognized Value Engineering Job Plan:
(1) Investigation: The team gathers information ahout the present design and determines the
needs. requirements, and constraints of the owners/users/stakeholders, as well as the design
Packet Page -254-
6/28/2011 Item 10.C.
criteria. The team develops a cost model, breaks the project down into functions, and performs
functional analysis.
(2) Speculation: The team uses a variety of creative techniques, such as
brainstorming, to generate alternative solutions without consideration of feasibility.
(3) Evaluation: The team refines and combines ideas, develops functional alternatives, and
evaluates by comparison. Appropriate tools of comparison include advantage and disadvantage
comparison and an evaluation matrix with weighted criteria.
(4) Development: Based on the evaluation phase, the team begins to develop in detail the
alternatives with the greatest potential value. During this phase it is essential to establish costs
and backup documentation needed to individually convey the alternative solutions.
(5) Presentation: The final phase of the VE study in which the VE team presents to management
the findings ofthe study in a written report. This phase may include a verbal presentation.
Once the team has completed phases (1) through (3), the team may determine that no value
improvements can be identified for the project, then the team leader shall document the study
results and notifY the Project Manager and Department Director.
B. Required Study Elements
At a minimum, the following items shall be required in conducting a VE study:
]. Define the original project objective.
2. ldentifY the design criteria for the project.
3. VerifY all valid project constraints.
4. ldentify specifically the components and elements of high cost.
5. Detennine basic and secondary functions.
6. Evaluate the alternatives by comparison.
7. Consider life cycle costs of alternatives.
8. Develop a detailed implementation plan.
9. Define which VE alternatives can be implemented together and which stand alone.
The team shall select which combination of developed solutions is being
specifically recommended.
C. Project Development Phases
The information required for the VE study should be the information already available andlor
prepared for the project. The information should not be generated for the sole purpose of the VE
study; it should be gathered together by the Project Manager and packaged appropriately for the
VE study team.
1. 30% or 60% Plans
A VE study may occur immediately following the submission to the County of 30% or 60%
design plans. This opportunity for VE gives the project an early review by design, construction,
and maintenance. The involvement of construction and maintenance could lead to significant life
cycle cost savings. The VE study shall occur prior to the public hearings in order to depict the
team's enhancements. This step is critical in huilding public credibility for the project function.
Packet Page -255-
6/28/2011 Item 10.C.
Alternatives compared at this stage will include those submitted by the consultant and/or engineer
and any additional concepts that were presented and approved by earlier VE studies.
2. Final Design
Although not optimal, a VE study may occur after completion of 30% and 60% design plans, but
less than final design
These opportunities for a VE study during project development are general in nature and close
coordination is needed between the Project Manager and Department Director to detennine the
proper timing for a value engineering study with the greatest potential for success. It is important
for project elements to be developed to enough detail for the VE team to comprehend the intent of
the design, but not developed to the extent that any proposed change would impact
implementation. Teams should focus on features that are being developed during that particular
phase of project design.
3. Design-Build and Construction Manager at Risk Projects
A VE Study perfonned on a Design-Build project shall be performed prior to the release of the
RfP. The VE team on these studies shall focus on the infonnation contained within the RFP.
D. VE Stud)' Summary Report
A draft Value Ellgilleerillg Study Sllllvllary Report, including all pertinent data (as proposed and
VE alternative concepts), shall be assembled. published. and made available to the team members
and management for their review and comments within two (2) weeks of the study conclusion.
The content. presentation, and professional engineering certification and seal of the final
published report are the responsibility of the VE team leader. The purpose of the certification is to
comply with the VE job plan and to ensure that the engineering solutions meet codes and
standards. The professional engineer certifying the report shall have been a team member and full
participant in the VE study that is the subject of the report.
The study summary report shall be organized in sections by areas of focus consistent \\lith the
value engineering job plan. The format of any repol1 should contain. as a minimum, the
follo\ving:
. Executive Summary
. Participant List
. Research Sources
. Project History (including project criteria, commitments, and constraints)
. Potential Study Areas
. Existing Design
. Performance Criteria
. Basic Functions
. Life Cycle Cost Estimate
. VE Alternative Description
. VE Alternative Cost Calculations
. Evaluation by Comparison
Packet Page -256-
6/28/2011 Item 10.C.
. Proposed Design
. Detail findings or Analysis
. Specific Recommendations and Costs
. Design Observations
. Implementation Plan
IV. Resolution
A. Final Review
1. The Department Director, Project Manager and VE team leader shall attempt to resolve any
issues that arise from the draft report. If the Department Director and Project Manager deem it
necessary, the VE team may be contacted or reassembled to enhance sketches, make editorial
changes, refine cost calculations, etc. This may be needed for complex projects.
2. The VE team leader shall sign and seal the final report (if professional engineering services are
required) and submit it with copies to the Department Director and Project Manager. The
Department Director and Project manager shall review the final report and decide which, if any,
of the recommendations made by the VE study team shall be approved for use in the project.
These approved changes shall be communicated in writing to the Division Administrator for
approval. Upon approval, the VE team leader will prepare an implementation plan for the
approved changes, and submit it to the Department Director and Project Manager.
B. Implementation
I. The implementation plan should address the impact on funds, letting date, manpower
requirements, consultant resources, design and construction schedules, and any other impact
resulting from team recommendations.
2. The Project Manager shall have the responsibility to monitor and report on all projects in the
implementation process. The Project Manager must be aware of the progress of time critical
implementations and report to management as problems arise or delays occur.
3. The Project Manager will be responsible for modification of the project reports, plans, and
documentation.
4. final project savings or cost avoidance shall be calculated based on actual team
recommendations or modified recommendations approved by management.
Packet Page -257-