DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 9)

the 2005 BRAC Commission’s Recommendation No. 133 and is part of Fort Belvoir. tAkINg respoNsIBILIty HKS, in collaboration with Studios Architecture and Wisnewski Blair & Assoc., served as the architect on the project, with Clark Construction and Shirley Contracting as design-build contractors. The project was managed by Duke Realty Corp., which established a self-governance system at the outset of the project with an all-inclusive partner meeting. Called the Project Leadership Team (PLT), it featured a three-tiered hierarchy that gave ownership to, and required accountability from, all stakeholders on the project team. The team included multiple government agencies as well as the building’s tenants, developer, design-builder, subcontractors, government contractors, architect and consultants. Timely decision-making was critical to success and the PLT never wavered from its obligation. “The PLT created [its] own team charter and agreements that fostered commitment and cohesiveness to help us collectively align our goals across all organizations,” says John Van Vliet, Duke Realty’s vice president of government solutions. “Once a month, the stakeholders met to identify and review key issues and action items. Our goal was to remove all roadblocks to progress and anticipate potential pitfalls. This led to an early project delivery date.” To meet Congress’ mandated occupancy date and facilitate an aggressive construction schedule, the design-build team developed and approved a master deliverables schedule for issuance of all documents supporting construction. The schedule incorporated design packages required to facilitate early site work and materials purchasing, the development of critical decision and approval milestones, interim issue dates for governmental review and comment and final quality review. The schedule plugged into Clark Construction’s overall construction and commissioning schedule. Clark managed day-to-day activities for the project’s major components using six-week lookahead schedules. Four additional schedules were compiled into an integrated project schedule on top of Clark’s construction schedule: the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) schedule of furniture, fixtures and equipment installation; the DoD’s schedule of agency inspections; General Dynamics IT’s schedule of passive and active information technolog y installation; and Gilbane/ W HS’ schedule of expiring and pending lease dates and tenant move-in activities. Adding Congressional funding information in Oracle Primavera P6 software, the resulting “Super Schedule” contained more than 25,000 activities. INtegrAtINg DesIgN-BuILD strAtegIes Design-build trade contractors provided a foundation for the project’s success by purchasing just-in-time fire protection, mechanical, plumbing and electrical building components before any blueprints were drawn. More than 75 percent of the design-build contract’s value was performed by design-build trade contractors, including Southland Industries, M.C. Dean, Shockey Precast and Tidewater Glazing. Using design-build best practices, trade contractors were not just the design professionals of record, they were also the installing craftsmen. They offered knowledge of the tiniest assembly details and coordinated with engineers and architects during materials selection. Using building information modeling (BIM), all members of the design and construction team worked together to produce the most efficient and effective architectural drawings. Constructware, a web-based project management application, and the HKS Thru Site, a secure file transfer site, helped store, organize and communicate essential project information and updates to the drawings and specifications securely. Digital folders accessible from all workstations held current and older versions of the drawings, including RFI markups. Another web-based application, Latista, was used to manage the punch-list process, from issue generation and verification to automatic email updates. BIM technology provided the design team with a platform for collaboration, MEP clash dbia.org summer//2012 9 http://www.dbia.org

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of DBIA IQ Summer 2012

DBIA IQ Summer 2012

DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page Cover1)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page Cover2)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 1)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 2)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 3)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 4)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 5)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 6)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 7)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 8)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 9)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 10)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 11)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 12)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 13)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 14)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 15)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 16)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 17)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 18)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 19)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 20)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 21)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 22)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 23)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page 24)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page Cover3)
DBIA IQ Summer 2012 - (Page Cover4)
https://www.nxtbookmedia.com