Alternative delivery projects are complex undertakings, demanding thorough planning, design, and implementation. Alternative delivery methods, such as design-build or public-private partnerships (P3) offer owners numerous advantages, including accelerated delivery, cost savings, and enhanced quality. However, they also introduce significant challenges, such as risk ownership, reduced control, and complicated contracts.

To successfully deliver major transportation and infrastructure programs via alternative delivery approaches, project owners require a reliable partner with sufficient professional resources to advocate for their interests and guide them throughout the project. This is where Owner’s Engineers can assist.

Associated Engineering has acted as Owner’s Engineer for several high-profile transportation projects, including the Regina Bypass, West Calgary Ring Road, Edmonton’s Capital Line South LRT Extension, and the Deerfoot Trail Improvements in Calgary. We served a pivotal role in steering these projects to successful planning, design, construction, and commissioning. Our expertise and guidance have contributed to developing safe, efficient, and sustainable transportation systems benefitting society.

The Crucial Role of Owner’s Engineers

As Owner’s Engineers, our role is to work directly for the project owner, acting as their representative and advocate. We are deeply integrated into the project team and actively participate in the decision-making process. We bring our extensive knowledge, experience, and industry best practices to offer professional advice and guidance to the project owners, stakeholders, and contractors. Our primary responsibility is to assist owners to successfully deliver projects with the highest levels of efficiency, safety, and quality, while adhering to established technical standards and regulations.

Our key responsibilities include the following:

Strategic Planning: We assist in defining project objectives, scope, and key performance indicators, creating a comprehensive project plan that specifies technical requirements and budget constraints. We also aid in selecting the most suitable delivery method and contractor for the project, considering project goals and risks.

Quality Assurance: We oversee project design and implementation for compliance with technical requirements, industry standards, local regulations, and best practices. We conduct site inspections, audits, and tests to verify the quality of work and materials, providing an early warning of potential issues. Our vigilance helps identify and address potential issues early, reducing the risk of costly revisions or delays.

Risk Mitigation: We identify and manage risks, conducting comprehensive risk assessments and proposing mitigation strategies. We monitor the project schedule, scope, and budget, ensuring that any changes are properly documented and approved. This minimizes the likelihood of unexpected challenges derailing the project and helps protect the project owner from any claims, disputes, or liabilities that may arise.

Contract Management: We play a vital role in administration, reviewing the Alternative Delivery Team’s work for adherence with the project’s terms and conditions, and overseeing the contractor’s performance. This includes reviewing and approving the detailed design, invoices, change orders, and claims resolution; certifying construction completion; and evaluating items for traffic availability. We also help resolve any issues or conflicts that may occur between the owner, contractor, and other stakeholders by championing partnering principles.

Project Monitoring: Throughout the project’s lifecycle, we provide continuous monitoring and reporting services to keep the project owner informed of progress and promptly address any deviations from the plan. We use various tools and methods, such as dashboards, reports, and feedback loops, to track and measure the project’s performance against the established objectives and indicators. We also provide recommendations and suggestions for improvement and optimization.

Communication: We facilitate effective communication between the owner, contractor, and other stakeholders to keep everyone informed and aligned throughout the project, applying partnering principles and holding alignment sessions. We use various platforms, such as meetings, websites, and online project management systems to share information and updates. Our approach employs clear, concise, and consistent communication.

Problem Solving: In the face of unforeseen issues, we leverage our expertise to propose effective solutions using techniques such as root cause analysis, collaboration, and brainstorming to analyze and resolve problems. We also implement corrective and preventive actions to avoid recurrence and improve performance.

Selecting the right Owner’s Engineer team is critical to the success of alternative delivery projects. Associated Engineering’s leadership, expertise, and guidance has made the difference on the successful delivery of many major projects.

As we work closely with project owners, we make significant contributions to create safe, efficient, and sustainable transportation systems. These systems not only facilitate smoother commutes, but also stimulate economic growth by improving access to jobs and services, and the movement of goods.

About the Author:

Jim Zagas, RET, PL (Eng.) is Vice President, Transportation and has over 30 years of experience delivering highway infrastructure. He has effectively managed large teams of engineering and technical professionals on complex, multi-year transportation assignments. Jim has been a project leader on many large-scale transportation projects.

The post [ViewPoints] The Crucial Role of Owner’s Engineers in Alternative Delivery Projects first appeared on Associated Engineering.

Within the alternative delivery space, the debate rages on regarding the merits of Public-Private Partnerships (P3s). New findings continue to surface, like the Auditor General of Ontario’s report which found 86% of projects were under budget, saving taxpayers $12 billion dollars. Yet, the construction industry stands firm that better risk transfer needs to be considered.

What if the problem is not the model? What if it is the size of the project?  

Dr. Bent Flyvbjerg studies mega projects at Oxford University. He has captured some interesting statistics, such as, on urban light rail transit (LRT) projects, overruns closeout around 40% over budget, not adjusting for inflation or the cost of settling construction claims. The most shocking statistic is that only 2 out of 1,000 mega projects (valued over $1 billion) achieved the budget, schedule, and social benefit targets, regardless of the delivery model. Dr. Flyvbjerg summarizes the reason for such bad performance is due to highly “underestimating” risk which he links to several human biases, such as confidence, power, cognitive, and strategic misrepresentation bias. In broad stokes, it is human’s struggle to conceptualize really big things.  

To illustrate, let’s look at time. One million seconds works out to be 11.5 days, whereas one billion seconds is just shy of 32 years. With this order of magnitude established, it becomes safe to say, using the analogy of time, we understand and conceptualize what we will be doing in 11 days, but have no idea what we will be doing 32 years from now. Why would it be any different for a project with a billion dollar budget?

What is more interesting, the current trend is not to revert to a project scale that we can better conceptualize, but rather to make some tweaks to the standard delivery models, call them collaborative and continue to increase the size of the projects. The Progressive-Design-Build (PDB) model is a derivative of the Design-Build (DB) model incorporating collaboration. Engineers and contractors form teams which compete for projects. The collaboration component comes from the introduction of the development stage where the owner advances the procurement with only one of the teams, during which the design is fully developed as an integrated effort between the engineer, contractor, and owner. 

By contrast, in the traditional DB model, the owner selects a shortlist of qualified teams that proceed into the RFP stage. In the RFP stage, typically three teams each produce 30-60% design drawings, isolated from the owner, and at the end of the process submit a fixed-fee based on the partially completed designs. The team with the lowest price wins. 

As you can see, the DB model, puts emphasis on pay for performance, while the PDB model emphasizes establishing certainty. Creating certainty, removes risk, but the delivery team is still looking for opportunity, which is typically found at the other end of the spectrum from risk. Meaning, behaviours will need to change to support these collaborative models, which is likely something the entire industry desires to do. 

At the end of the day, all forms of delivery models will continue to be used. Associations like the Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships (CCP3) will continue to promote using private funding on major infrastructure projects, because they provide long-term stable returns which institutional investors like pension plans want to invest in. So, the demand is there for mega projects with private debt opportunity. How they are delivered – collaboratively or not – is yet to be seen. 

What is clear, collaboration is required on all projects, regardless of size or delivery model. 

Associated is excited about the various alternative delivery projects on which we are currently partnering, including the Buffalo Pound Water Treatment Plant serving Regina and Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan (PDB), and the Highway 1 Reinstatement Project at Tank Hill near Lytton, BC (Alliance). These projects, and those on the horizon, provide opportunities to apply our expertise and share our learnings on the services we provide to our partners and clients.

About the author:

David Nagy, MBA, P.Eng. is Associated Engineering’s National Practice Lead, Alternative & Major Projects. He has 18 years of experience as a Senior Project Manager and Bridge Engineer specializing in the delivery of transportation and bridge projects. His experience includes various delivery models, such as design-bid-build, design build, P3, program management, and construction management. 

The post [ViewPoints] P3 Project Delivery: Is size the problem? first appeared on Associated Engineering.