The Boll Family YMCA Alvaro Zumaran Construction Management
The Boll Family YMCA Alvaro Zumaran Construction Management April 10, 2006
Project Background • • • Building Name: The Boll Family YMCA Location: 1401 Broadway - Detroit, MI 48226 Size: 110, 000 SF Cost: $29 Million Occupancy: Recreational; IIA Construction Dates: December ’ 03 - December ‘ 05
Project Background • Primary Project Team - Owner: YMCA of Metropolitan Detroit - Architects/Engineers: Smith. Group - Construction Manager: Barton Malow Co.
Project Background • Project Highlights - First new YMCA to be built in Detroit in 90 years - Performing arts theatre, sports arena, childcare facility - Distinctive “stepped” shape - Staggered floor levels - High visibility
Interactive Website Virtual Tour Website
Agenda Analysis 1 – Foundation Analysis 2 – Handrails Analysis 3 – Mechanical Room Research Topic – Integrated Design Management
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Background • Proposed • Cost Comparison • Conclusion • Analyze the cost of materials – concrete and formwork, of 2 separate foundation types • Compare RS Means and ICE 2000 data to BMC budget data and schedule • Recommend best option
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Background • Strip footings ~25, 500 SF footprint ~765 Ft perimeter ~120 days • Proposed • Cost Comparison • Conclusion • Combined drilled and formed piers Approximately 70 drilled piers and 36 formed piers
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Background • Proposed • Cost Comparison • Conclusion • Mat slab foundation - > 3’ thick - Approximately 60 days - volumetric shrinkage = possible cracking - Conflicting RS Means and ICE 2000 pricing
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Background • Proposed • Cost Comparison • Conclusion
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Background • Proposed • Cost Comparison • Conclusion
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Background • Proposed • Cost Comparison • Conclusion • Price difference between ICE 2000 estimate and RS Means estimate: ~$165, 000
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Background • Proposed • Cost Comparison • Conclusion
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Background • Proposed • Cost Comparison • Conclusion
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Background • Proposed • Cost Comparison • Conclusion • Price according to BMC data: ~$846, 000 • Compared to ICE 2000: ~$199 K • Compared to RS Means: ~$34 K
Analysis 1 - Foundation • Goals • Cost for mat system is not practical compared to strip footings • Proposed • Material durability - potential for visible cracking in exposed floors and mechanical equipment vibrations • Cost Comparison • Insufficient soil stability - as stated in the geo-tech reports • Background • Conclusion
Analysis 2 - Handrails n Goals n Research cost for an alternate handrail system n Calculate and compare cost of maintenance for each system n Suggest most cost-effective system
Analysis 2 - Handrails n Goals n Woven wire mesh in-fill panels n Current system n 1, 130 linear feet - running track - ‘main’ areas n Aesthetic feel
Analysis 2 - Handrails n n Current system n Proposed solution Aluminum handrails - affordable - anodized ◦ durability ◦ aesthetic feel ◦ corrosion, stain, scratch resistance
Analysis 2 - Handrails n Proposed solution n Cost comparison
Analysis 2 - Handrails n Cost comparison
Analysis 2 - Handrails n Cost comparison
Analysis 2 - Handrails n Cost comparison n Conclusion n Aluminum handrail system is most economically feasible n Owner and architect decide - aesthetics - conformity
Analysis 3 – Mechanical Room • Goals • Explore current system - complications - possible long term effects • Suggest a less expensive alternative that is just as effective
Analysis 3 – Mechanical Room • Goals • Current system • Issue with vertical rise • Splashing at air gap connecting pool line to sanitary line • Expensive solution – bring in tank – indirectly tie 6” pool line to 8” sanitary line • Possible long term effects – decomposition of sanitary line (? ) – corrosion of steel decking (? )
Analysis 3 – Mechanical Room • Goals • Current system • Alternate solution • Add another line going to sump pump (proper vertical rise) • Install new sump pump – handle 430 GPM – break open floor – connect sump to pool trap line – already tied into sanitary line
Mechanical Room Schematic * ** *8” pool sump discharge
Mechanical Room Schematic
Analysis 3 – Mechanical Room • Current system information provided by PM and Mechanical • Current system contractor • Goals • Alternate solution • Cost comparison – 12’ polypropylene tank w/ 64” diameter – 1. 5 HP pump, infrared beams, and electric switches – labor and installation Total Price: ~$35, 000
Analysis 3 – Mechanical Room • Goals • Current system • Alternate solution • Cost comparison
Analysis 3 – Mechanical Room • Goals • Current system • Alternate solution • Cost comparison
Analysis 3 – Mechanical Room • Goals • Less expensive to install new sump and trap line (~$7, 500) • Current system • Alternate solution • Cost comparison • Conclusion • Proposed system takes up less space • Proposed system does not pose threats to structural decking
Research Analysis Integrated design management background Synergy amongst the entities Effective planning: possible reduction in budget and schedule Using the Design-Build delivery method
Research Analysis Problems Added costs to budget/days to schedule - trade conflicts - misinterpretation of drawings - lead times - any other unforeseen conditions
Research Analysis Research Online Reports Interviews with the ‘Heads’ of a project - Owner: Mrs. Lorie Uranga (YMCA) - Engineer: Mr. Benjamin Gerald (Holder Construction Co. ) - Architect: Mrs. Jana Hayford (Smith. Group)
Research Analysis Research Points made by reports - DB saves time, money and reduces conflict - Most helpful when project is driven by cost & schedule - Best suited for projects that are well defined - Management of ‘interfaces’ - Good managerial skills and experience
Research Analysis Research Data
Research Analysis Research Main Points From Interviews - Owner’s perspective - ‘cost effective’ systems need more maintenance - design aspects are sacrificed for time and schedule - some projects are better suited for it compared to others - sometimes hard to balance powers
Research Analysis Research Main Points From Interviews - Engineer’s perspective - performance specifications put most risk on contractor - value engineering: before the design is complete - design-Build creates synergy between aesthetic thinkers and logical thinkers - owner’s desired level of involvement determine the execution of a D-B or a DBB delivery method - D-B: overlap of phases. DBB: linear approach
Research Analysis Research Main Points From Interviews - Architect’s perspective - early budget and up-front cost - communication should be carefully handled - IDM is dependent on client and complexity of building - performance specifications and longevity of product - ‘cost cutting’ mode and no competition for contractor
Research Analysis Conclusion ◦ Chemistry and communication are top-priority ◦ Client must be specific and time & money are the most important factors ◦ Performance specifications handled carefully and are usually a one-sided risk ◦ Complexity of project ◦ PM with strong personality and high expertise and skill ◦ Examples from YMCA project
Acknowledgements • • Barton Malow Co. Smith. Group YMCA of Metro Detroit Architectural Engineering Faculty • My family and friends
Questions?
Analysis 1 -Foundation Schedule Comparison 3, 300 CY / 56. 4 (daily output) = ~60 days
- Slides: 45