Office of Financial Management
Washington State Major Project Status Report
June 22, 2015
FINAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT
Agency Number: 699
Agency: SBCTC
Project Number: 08-1-321
GA State Project# 2008-017
School/Campus: Pierce College Fort Steilacoom
Project Title:
Cascade Building Core Renovation Phase II
Bill Reference(s): Chapter 36, Laws of 2010, Section 5070
Chapter 497, Laws of 2009, Section 1023
Chapter 520, Laws of 2007, Section 5258
Contact:
Jim Taylor
Director of Facilities
Pierce College District
(253) 964-6588
jtaylor@pierce.ctc.edu
Project Description: This project is located in the City of Lakewood, Pierce County. The
project encompassed the second renovation phase of core areas of the Cascade Building. This
building, completed in 1973, is, at 247,595 square feet, the largest and oldest structure on the
College campus. Specifically, this project completed the Library renovation that was started in
the Phase I renovation, redeveloped the building’s north entrance, renovated a portion of the
second level, and reconfigured administrative and student support functions on the third and
fourth levels. Additionally, the project encompassed continued replacement of exterior wall
sections that were identified as having extensive moisture damage and mold contamination
during the Phase I renovation project. The project renovated approximately 72,400 square feet
and added new space of approximately 2,882 square feet.
This renovation project was funded over two biennia. The design phase was conducted in the
2007-09 biennium and the construction phase was initiated in the 2009-11 biennium.
Construction continued into the 2013-15 biennium.
Although this renovation project did not achieve an overall LEED Silver Certification for the entire
building, the project included sustainable design features and, to the greatest extent possible, set
LEED Silver as a design standard.
Square feet: 75,282 GSF
1
Scope changes: Replacement of exterior wall sections due to extensive moisture damage and
mold contamination was an emergent condition identified during the Phase I Renovation project
and was continued during the Phase II project. This scope of work was not included in the
original project. A portion of this work was funded as an emergency appropriation.
Project Total Cost:
Phase
Predesign
Design
Construction
Other (Approp/Non Approp)
Other (Local Funds)
Other (Mold Abatement)
Other (Emergency Hazmat)
Other (Emergency Hazmat)
Biennium
NA
2007-09
2009-11
2009-11
2009-11
2011-13
2011-13
2011-13
Appropriation
NA
I38 Fund 057 AP7H
J14 Fund 057 AP9G
J46 Fund 060 AP9K
R10 Fund 147 AP9N
J47 Fund 060 K302
J47 Fund 060 K341
K06 Fund 060 K342
Amount
NA
$ 2,242,000
$13,099,000
$ 8,500,000
$ 500,000
$ 500,000
$ 975,030
$
24,970
$25,841,000
Total
MACC (original) = $11,300,000
MACC (added approx.) = $7,800,000
NOTE: The final legislative budget in the 2009 session reduced construction funding from
$23,508,401 to $15,000,000. Base bid scope was reduced accordingly. Additive Alternates were
selected in order to take maximum advantage of the current bid environment and to partially
mitigate the impacts of reduction in funding. During the 2010 session, the Legislature added
$8,500,000 to the project to restore the previous year’s reduction. However, the Legislature also
removed $1,901,000 in presumed bid savings from the project that was intended to be used for
additional replacement of building exterior wall sections to mitigate mold and moisture damage
as well as to repair additional moisture damage in interior building structural columns. In 2012,
$1,200,000 was funded through an emergency appropriation to replace moisture damaged and
mold contaminated exterior wall sections. The emergency repair was completed and $200,000 of
the appropriation (K342) remained unexpended. The final scope of work conducted under this
renovation phase during 2014 expended all remaining project funding.
Schedule:
Original Phase 2 Renovation Project Appropriation – 2009
Predesign Complete
Start Design
Bid Date
Notice to Proceed
50% Complete
Substantial Completion
Final Acceptance
Budget Schedule
06/30/06
07/01/07
04/22/09
06/17/09
01/31/10
08/11/10
10/15/10
2
Actual/Forecast
06/30/06
07/15/07
07/14/09
08/17/09
08/15/10
02/28/11
04/30/11
Variance (wks)
0
2
10
9
26
26
26
Supplemental Appropriation – 2010 - Building Envelope Repair (Phase 2.1)
Predesign Complete
Start Design
Bid Date
Notice to Proceed
50% Complete
Substantial Completion
Final Acceptance
Budget Schedule
NA
07/01/08
10/15/10
11/07/10
05/01/11
08/31/11
11/15/11
Actual/Forecast
NA
07/01/08
11/02/10
11/22/10
05/15/11
01/15/12
03/15/12
Variance (wks)
0
0
2
2
2
18
16
Supplemental Appropriation – 2010 - Remaining Interior Renovation (Phase 2.5)
Predesign Complete
Start Design
Bid Date
Notice to Proceed
50% Complete
Substantial Completion
Final Acceptance
Budget Schedule
06/30/06
07/01/07
04/15/11
05/30/11
10/30/12
03/31/12
05/31/12
Actual/Forecast
06/30/06
07/15/07
06/30/11
08/09/11
1/15/12
10/01/12
01/15/13
Variance (wks)
0
2
10
9
10
24
26
Emergency Appropriation – 2012 – Exterior Wall Replacement
Predesign Complete
Start Design
Bid Date
Notice to Proceed
50% Complete
Substantial Completion
Final Acceptance
Budget Schedule
N/A
01/30/12
N/A
03/26/12
07/01/12
10/15/12
11/30/12
Actual/Forecast
N/A
01/30/12
N/A
03/26/12
07/01/12
11/01/12
01/15/13
Budget Schedule
N/A
01/30/12
06/01/14
06/25/14
07/30/14
9/15/14
11/15/14
Actual/Forecast
N/A
01/30/12
05/06/14
05/29/14
07/30/14
12/17/14
5/6/15
Variance (wks)
0
0
0
0
2
8
HVAC Replacement – 2014
Predesign Complete
Start Design
Bid Date
Notice to Proceed
50% Complete
Substantial Completion
Final Acceptance
3
Variance (wks)
0
(3)
(4)
0
12
22
NOTE: Due to the timing of funding allocations for this project, the overall construction and
completion timeline was considerably extended. Funding reductions in the 2009 legislative
session caused us to reduce planned project scope and resulted in a delay in bidding the project.
Supplemental funding restored in the 2010 legislative session required additional preparation in
order to prepare new bid documents and proceed with bidding and construction. The added scope
of work under an emergency appropriation to address further exterior wall replacement caused
additional delay as did dispute resolution negotiations with the general contractor on the original
Phase 2 project in 2009. We conducted additional HVAC systems replacement that was withheld
from earlier bid packages due to concerns about preserving funding in the event of potential
litigation with the original Phase 2 contractor and this further extended overall project
completion.
Project Status and discussion of Critical Path for Construction: With project funding
allocated in 2009, a scope of work was developed to meet the reduced budget. With the
supplemental appropriation in 2010, we developed two bid packages. The first package was for
the purpose of replacing exterior wall sections damaged by moisture penetration and
contaminated with mold. Funding was insufficient to complete replacement of remaining wall
sections around the entire building envelope but one additional wing of the building was
completed. The second bid package continued interior renovation on two levels of the building.
We also conducted additional exterior wall replacement, some under an emergency
appropriation.
The Cascade Building layout and condition presented challenges and the project was difficult to
accomplish, as a result. However, experience during the Phase I Renovation in the 2007-09
biennium led to improved design and construction efficiency during Phase II. The impact to
building occupants, programs and services was significant and required a methodical approach to
project design and construction administration. Critical path had to necessarily consider impacts
to programs and services in an occupied building. Additionally, sections of the Cascade Building
could not be renovated until the Science & Technology (Rainier) Building could be occupied.
Completion of that building impacted critical path of the Cascade renovation project. Completion
of exterior wall replacement was also on the critical path for remaining interior renovation under
the Phase II project. For example, work to be conducted in one wing of Level 3 could not begin
until occupants in that area could be relocated to newly renovated space on Levels 2 and 3 of the
south wing of the building and this was dependent upon completion of wall replacement in that
phase of work. Critical path was further impacted by the necessity to replace damaged exterior
wall sections that we had hoped to defer to a future building renovation phase.
Due to anticipated delay claims and potential litigation involving the original Phase II contractor,
we withheld $750,000 of the project appropriation in order to cover potential financial risk to the
project. With a settlement reached, we prepared an additional bid package to conduct further
work that was within the project’s original design scope. We had intended to conduct this
remaining work during summer 2013. However, due to the late passage of the state capital
budget and resulting delay in appropriating capital reallocations, we had insufficient time to
complete work prior to the beginning of the 2013-14 academic year and had to defer this work
until mid- 2014.
4
Contract Award History:
A/E Agreement
Original Agreement
Amendments
Pending Changes
Total
Current Design
Contingency
Construction Contract (excl. sales tax)
Initial Bid Package
Bid Award Amount $ 8,924,500
Change Orders
$ 981,329
$1,293,604
$2,420,333
$ 0
$3,713,937
$
Building Envelope Replacement
Bid Award Amount $ 3,184,572
Change Orders
$ 388,340
0
Interior Renovation Completion
Bid Award Amount
$ 4,355,479
Change Orders
$ 501,697
Emergency Envelope Replacement
Bid Award Amount
$ 966,457
Change Orders
$ (99,018)
HVAC Replacement
Bid Award Amount
Change Orders
Pending Changes
Total
$ 720,658
$ 75,448
$
3,500
$19,999,462
Current Construction
Contingency
$
0
Potential for Project Cost Overruns/Claims: We encountered further exterior wall moisture and
mold contamination in the Phase 2.5 bid package beyond what we anticipated and this impacted the
project budget. The contractor on the original portion of the project begun in 2009 (Phase 2)
pursued a delay claim. We worked with the Department of Enterprise Services to resolve the delay
claim and this issue was settled. We also worked with the Department of Enterprise Services and
the Attorney General’s Office to negotiate and settle additional disputed issues with this contractor
and this has also been settled. We did not experience cost overruns or delay claims on the Building
Envelope Repair portion of the project (Phase 2.1). We remained within budget on the Phase 2.5
project and did not experience delay claims.
5
Discussion of Project Quality: The College’s leadership team and impacted departments were
engaged in planning throughout the pre-design and design process. Renovation of the Cascade
Building is one of the more complex efforts undertaken by the College. During construction phases,
a number of critical programs and services were displaced and relocated to temporary spaces.
Additionally, the building was occupied throughout construction. The firm of McGranahan
Architects was selected to design and oversee construction of this project. McGranahan Architects
is a highly capable firm with intimate knowledge of the college campus and has developed a close
working relationship with college personnel. Value engineering and constructability review were
incorporated early in the design phase to benefit quality control and project viability. Construction
planning and phasing considered impacts to college operations. The design phase included
involvement by the College’s Education and Facilities Planning Committee, comprised of
constituencies throughout the College as well as by the College’s infrastructure planning team,
composed of representatives from Facilities, Institutional Technology, AV/Media, Safety/Security,
Purchasing and our Access and Disability Services Office.
The quality of work on the part of the general contractor constructing the original portion of the
project beginning in 2009 (Phase 2) was uneven and we were forced to take an aggressive approach
in attempting to achieve satisfactory completion of the project. Maintaining good communication
and productive working relationships with the general contractor presented considerable challenges
through the course of the project and this was detrimental to timely project completion. The general
contractor conducting building envelope repairs in the 2010 portion of the project (Phase 2.1) as
well as on the final phase project (Phase 2.5) performed quite well and maintained a high quality of
work.
6
Project Photographs:
7
8