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