Rethinking the Cost of Time

Building design and construction have been governed in modern history by our modern perception of time as a cost based commodity. Both design and construction are assumed to have greater competitive value if production time is minimized. The first cost is generally lower if it takes less time to design and build a project. We can generally recognize a disconnect between first cost and long term cost when we consider building products (e.g., cheap windows vs. expensive windows), where lowest first cost may lead to higher long term costs in energy usage, maintenance, and replacement. Yet, as a profession and an industry, we have not been able or willing to pursue the long term value of time invested in design and construction, such that more available time (if well managed) results in more integrated attention to systems and details that enhance long term building performance and optimize long term operating costs. This issue is most notable in our continuing willingness to commit to abbreviated time periods for design and construction. We talk about the value of high performance buildings in terms of energy efficiency and healthful environments, yet the market continues to demand speed over performance due largely to the long established premise that "time is money" - a premise that is reinforced by the owner who wants the building quicker and by the designer and contractor who must bid low to get the job and then minimize time in order to avoid loss. When minimizing time is the highest priority, long term performance does not enjoy equal consideration. Owners, designers, and contractors need to rethink the cost (and focus) of design and construction time as they relate to long term building performance. We have come to recognize long term risks associated with fast food; fast construction deserves similar consideration.

Planning a Phased School Renovation and Expansion

School renovation and expansion projects are commonly related to overcrowding and/or obsolete facilities. Construction in phases may be the only choice when school operations must continue in the same building or on the same site during renovations and expansion. Phasing needs and requirements should be considered during the design of such a project in order to ensure that provisions are adequate for ongoing school operations during each phase of the project.

Phasing plans and specifications should be based on at least the following considerations:

1. Each phase should provide sufficient classroom space for the enrollment. It may be necessary or advisable to rent or purchase relocatable modular classroom units for use during one or more phases of the project. The actual determination of necessary classroom count should be made by the school authority.

2. Construction areas must be adequately separated from occupied areas.

a. Separation walls may include a combination of existing walls or partitions and temporary or permanent new construction that affords the required fire separation and minimizes dust, fumes, and noise transfer from construction areas to occupied areas[1]. It also, of course, must adequately separate construction personnel from building occupants.

b. Construction fencing should be planned to separate contractor staging and construction areas from owner/user areas, neighboring properties, and public areas (e.g., streets and sidewalks). The fencing layout may need to change from phase to phase.

3. Utilities should be adequate and uninterrupted[2] in the occupied areas of the building. These utilities would typically include heat, lights, power (normal and emergency systems), telecommunications, water, sewer, fire protection and alarm systems.

a. Replacing boilers in a school can take as long as six months, especially if hazardous materials removal is part of the process, so the heating season should be considered when determining project phasing and the feasibility of replacing a heating plant in the existing location. It may be more practical to construct a new boiler room in order to minimize downtime and the risk of delays.

b. In order to maintain existing electrical services, it may be necessary to build a new electrical service entrance and backfeed the existing systems that will continue to serve existing occupied areas[3]. These backfeeds may be different for each phase of a project.

c. Any of the utilities may need temporary connections, extensions, routes, “jumpers”, supports, and/or temporary equipment in order to satisfy the need for adequate and uninterrupted utilities in occupied areas[4].

4. Adequate exits (i.e., egress facilities) must be provided. Exits must be adequate in width and arrangement to meet applicable code requirements. Exit calculations should be performed to determine code compliance. If any existing exits will be blocked by a phase of construction, the remaining exits must be sufficient in arrangement and width to meet code requirements[5], or additional permanent or temporary exits must be provided. Exit signage and lighting must also be coordinated with the exit arrangement for a given phase. Temporary[6] corridors may be necessary to link occupied parts of a building that are separated by construction areas. Protected exit walkways may be necessary to link building exits to the public way and maintain separation from construction areas.

5. Toilet facilities must be adequate to serve the occupied areas of the building. In some cases, this may influence the delineation of phases or the location of new toilets.

6. The need for food service must be addressed throughout phased school construction. Food preparation, service, and dining areas may need to be relocated to accommodate renovation and/or new construction. The challenge is reduced if food is typically prepared in a remote facility and delivered to the school undergoing renovation, but the challenge may be greater if the school undergoing renovation houses the main kitchen for several schools in a district. Can a temporary source or provider be arranged to prepare and deliver adequate meals? And, if the cafeteria itself must be offline for renovation, can an alternative space be used?

7. Athletic facilities use tends to vary seasonally. It may be practical to take a gymnasium offline during the months when physical education and other athletic programs can be accommodated outside. This consideration may influence the phasing schedule such that gymnasium renovations occur during warmer months; and field improvements may need to be completed during summer vacations or planned such that new fields are completed before existing fields are improved or taken offline.

8. Parking must be maintained or provided in sufficient quantity and condition to serve the building occupants. The parking arrangement may need to be changed from phase to phase to satisfy the requirement. Walkways must be included to connect parking areas to building entrances. Parking areas for building users should be separate from construction parking areas.

9. Separate driveways should be planned for building users, school buses, and construction. The typically desirable separation of school buses from cars should be part of each phase, and a separate vehicle entrance to the site should be planned for construction personnel and deliveries.

10. Air intakes must be protected from dust and fumes. Temporary air intake “stacks” may be necessary at building air intakes adjacent to construction areas to avoid contaminants related to construction.

11. Accessibility features that are required for the school facilities must be maintained as part of each phase[7]. These would include, for example, ramps and elevators to the extent required.

Timely phasing considerations are likely to influence a project design in ways that will make construction less disruptive for building occupants.

The requirements related to phased construction should be clearly established on the drawings and in the specifications that will be used for bidding and constructing the project.

---

[1] Special requirements applicable to hazardous material removal may be more stringent and take precedence over general criteria based on desirable separation. Also, the EPA has published indoor air quality (IAQ) guidelines for school renovation (see http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schooldesign/renovation.html), and states and other authorities have established similar criteria.

[2] Contract documents may provide for necessary, brief or momentary interruptions to occur during power switchovers and similar changes. If they are necessary during occupied hours, they should be scheduled in advance with the building owner.

[3] Local fire authorities typically want to limit electrical services to a single location where power to an entire facility can be shut off in order, at least in part, to minimize risk to fire fighters.

[4] Special attention is warranted where partial building demolition will sever the services or structural support of services between occupied building areas. The bid documents should be clear in requiring temporary support or temporary rerouting of utilities and/or temporary equipment to serve the remote areas.

[5] The applicable code should be studied to determine whether any reduction in egress capacity is allowed, even in the case where existing exits exceed code requirements.

[6] The applicable code should be studied for requirements and limitations related to “temporary” construction. The duration of such construction may be limited by code to less than the anticipated duration of use during phased construction. For example, Section 108 of the 2009 IBC limits a permit for temporary structures and uses to 180 days; yet some requirements for temporary structures are not less than what is required for permanent construction. Chapter 31 of the 2009 IBC also includes requirements for temporary structures and for special construction that may be considered applicable to temporary facilities for phased school construction.

[7] Accessibility requirements would typically apply also to temporary modular classroom units.

Planning for Concealed Site Conditions

Discovery of concealed site conditions can raise havoc with a project, possibly disrupting the construction schedule and adversely impacting the project budget. Here's a link to an article I wrote a few years ago to share some of my experience with concealed site conditions: Planning for Concealed Site Conditions

Value Engineering

Any discussion of value engineering (V.E.) is likely to produce a rush of criticisms of the process if you work in an architecture or engineering practice. The architects and engineers are likely to recall bad experiences when V.E. was started late, approaching or following the completion of construction documents, at a time when the project schedule did not allow sufficient time to fully consider consequences and implement V.E. changes in a comprehensive and well coordinated manner. They are likely to complain that "V.E. stripped the value out of the project."

A better approach to V.E. is to start it earlier, when material and system decisions are being formulated and before a lot of time is invested in developing applicable details and specifications.

The Whole Building Design Guide (http://www.wbdg.org/resources/value_engineering.php) offers an excellent synopsis of V.E. and a clear picture of the advantages of doing it earlier in the life of a project.

Manage Design Costs with Early Project Overtime

One of Mike's PM tips for managing design costs on a project: "If you know you are going to have to work overtime on a project," he said, "do it in the beginning. It costs less to do overtime when there are only one or two people working on a project." (See Purposeful chaos (the 2-minute design offense))

This makes a lot of sense when considering a project on a compressed time line. If you're trying to figure out how to get all the work done in a short period of time, the least attractive alternative is having an army of designers and drafters burning the midnight oil and generating design questions as the completion deadline approaches. Eleventh hour overtime can quickly burn through budgeted hours and fee dollars, and too many new or unanswered questions at that stage can lead to unplanned chaos.

It's also interesting to consider how this principle of early overtime might benefit progress and labor costs on a construction site. Early trades - like earthwork, concrete, and steel - set the stage for a larger work force, and trades can multiply as the project becomes ready for their work.

Construction Documents Coordination Matrix

It may look a little "geeky", but this matrix can be an effective tool for considering interdisciplinary coordination needs. The design disciplines for a project are listed across the top and down one side. The intersection points represent coordination between disciplines (e.g., between Civil/Site and Electrical). Seeing the possibilities in this format can help to minimize coordination gaps. On a given project, the extent and specifics of coordination will differ from point to point, and the design displines may also differ. Still, seeing an intersection point can prompt thoughts about needed coordination between any two disciplines. For example, where Civil/Site meets Foodservice, it may bring to mind the need to coordinate the locations of exterior condensing units with site work. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Looking at this coordination matrix, it is also easy to see how extensive coordination really is (and must be) on an architectural project. On some complex projects, coordination can be seen as a full time job in itself, from the coordination of consulting agreement scopes of work to the coordination of sub-trade scopes of work and the dotting of i's and crossing of t's in construction documents.

Value Engineering can add value

Architects and engineers may be used to thinking of Value Engineering as a form of design torture, where value is stripped out of a project design in order to save money. But Value Engineering can also provide an opportunity to consider values that may enhance the performance of a building over time. It is a good time to consider or revisit questions of maintainability, access for maintenance, and flexibility for changing uses over time. One use change that is common but rarely considered is the conversion of non-storage spaces to storage use; this is often done informally by building users and without consideration for the capacity of the floor or other supporting structure that is being loaded. In some cases the structural capacity of a floor can be increased by including additional floor joists and reducing the spacing between them, and the initial additional cost may be minimal for a substantial gain in flexibility. (Storage uses may also bring other requirements that should be considered in making the decision.)

It takes timely money to make a project go

A project owner was feeling frustrated that the contractor, who was doing work of good quality, was not going fast enough. Considering the contractor's monthly application for payment, the owner decided to not pay the contractor for the previous month's work in the hopes that the decision would cause the contractor to work faster. Instead, the contractor's work slowed to a crawl as the contractor's employees and subcontractors stayed away from the project. Subsequently, the contractor submitted a delay claim against the owner. The owner also heard that work on another project in the area had sped up during the same period of time.

A different owner on a different project was not satisfied with the quality of part of the work done by the project's contractor, but chose to pay the contractor for that work anyway, hoping the contractor would correct it. Instead, the contractor proceeded with other work, making correction of the unsatisfactory work less practical and more costly. When the owner complained to the contractor about the contractor's failure to correct the unsatisfactory work, the contractor pointed out that the owner had paid for it, so the contractor considered it complete and thought the owner did, too. The following month, the owner withheld part of the contractor's payment to cover the cost of correcting the previous unsatisfactory work. Then construction progress was slowed by a delay in delivery of materials of approximately the same value as the payment amount withheld by the owner. The material supplier had furnished similar materials for several other projects done by the same contractor, and delivery for this project was contingent on the supplier's receipt of payment for a previous project.

During a very busy construction boom, a project owner decided to make advance payment to the project's contractor as an incentive to get construction started on his project. Then several weeks passed without any construction activity on the project. When the owner complained about the situation to a friend who had been a project owner during a previous recession, the friend told him he had done the same thing to help a contractor get that project started during the recession - and the result was the same.

It takes money to make a project go, but payment at the wrong time can be counterproductive.

The Schedule of Values deserves close attention

On public building construction projects (and, possibly, on most private building projects) the contractor develops a Schedule of Values that forms the basis for monthly applications for payment (also known as "requisitions") that will be submitted as construction proceeds. The Schedule of Values is typically submitted for architect and owner review at the beginning of the construction project and well before the first regular application for payment will be submitted. When reviewing the contractor's proposed Schedule of Values, it is important to consider the meaning of the specific line item descriptions on the schedule and to also consider the architect's and owner's ability to assess progress on those discrete parts of the project as applications for payment are submitted by the contractor.

The meanings of the line items may seem simple enough at first glance, but they have been known to be interpreted differently by subcontractors, contractors, architects, engineers, and owners as construction proceeds. Site work items seem to be uniquely subject to varying interpretation. The intent of terms like "Excavation", "Cuts and Fills", "Fill", and others are good agenda items for a meeting to discuss a proposed Schedule of Values. For the architect and owner who will be assessing the value of periodic progress on a given item, it is especially important to understand what is included in the line item and what is not included - in part to avoid a possible disagreement as construction proceeds. "I think the owner already paid for that in this item," says the architect. "Oh, no," says the contractor or the sub. "That was never in that item. It was in this other item."

The architect's and owner's ability to assess progress on the listed work items also depends on the monetary amount of the particular item. It is common to require a contractor to break down items that are too large (e.g., Site Work $2,000,000) into smaller items (e.g., Rough Grade south yard: $15,000, Fine Grade west field: $7,500, etc.) that are more easily assessed and add up to the total value of site work. For some, the rule has been to break down the schedule into items no greater than $20,000 in value. That may not be a practical rule to follow in every case, but it is important to consider the ability of the observer to assess progress that is claimed on a given application for payment while avoiding confusion with other work that may be similar or within the same trade. Contractors and subcontractors are usually quite interested in receiving prompt payment for completed work, so it follows that they should be willing to invest time in the beginning of a project to establish a common understanding of the items in the Schedule of Values.

Another rule, sometimes challenged, is that once the Schedule of Values is established, it should not be changed. That's a good rule (with a notable exception that sometimes a more detailed breakdown of an established item may become necessary in order to assess progress and determine appropriate payment). And there are other rules....

Monitoring construction progress

One effective way to monitor progress on a construction project is to consider cumulative payments to the contractor or claimed percent complete against an estimated payment schedule that should be established at the start of the project. In most cases the estimated schedule of cumulative payments or percent complete should look like an 'S' curve, similar to the one in the diagram above. It is likely to be relatively flat at start-up, due in part to the limited number of trades that can work on the project at first. As the project advances, progress allows the addition of trades (and workforce), indicated by the steeper line in the middle of the 'S' curve. The flatter tail end of the project represents a reduced workforce, fewer trades, finishing details, and punch-list work.

If actual progress looks much different than the 'S', the project may be headed for trouble. For example, a prolonged flat period at the beginning (or a shallower slope on the steeper part of the 'S' as shown by a dashed tangent line above) may forecast a late project completion. Alternatively, if requested payments suggest a steeper curve earlier in the project, the requested payments could be exaggerating actual progress, and one bad result could be releasing too much money too early and not holding enough funds to complete the project. The 'S' curve should not be considered an absolute measure of progress, but it can be an effective tool for comparison and forecasting.

[Note that a similar approach can be used for looking at design progress. See Staffing a design project.]