Go Online And Find Information On Companies Or Agencies

Go Online And Find Information On Companies Or Agencies For The Follow

Go online and find information on companies or agencies for the following: two design firms (any field of Engineering, or Architectural) and two construction companies. State the firms you selected. Compare and contrast how these firms present their services and prices to their potential customers or clients. Can you distinguish from the information available what part of the Project Delivery cycle they can be of service or provide services in? Can you determine / do they identify the types of contract structures they engage in? Do they distinguish between one contract and two contract structures? Of the three primary phases most Engineering, Architectural and Construction professionals spend their career in Planning, Design, or Construction. Describe what role you like to have in each project phases. Select one phase you think you would most like to work in and explain why. In both the single and two contract structures, the design professional ultimately works for the owner. However, the nature of the design professional’s role may differ significantly in each structure. Compare and contrast the design professional’s relationships with builder and owner in each structure. As a design professional what structure do you believe is more suitable for your profession? Read the City of El Monte “Lambert Park Phase 2” (CIP No. 819) RFP (You only need to read the RFP and view Attachment “A”). You do not need to read the Sample Contract for this lesson: Explain the purpose of this document. Be specific. What phases of the Project Delivery Cycle would the services being requested be provided under? Explain and cite the specific section(s) that support your answer. Would this project be a one-contract or two-contract structure project? Can you determine from the reading the RFP? Explain and cite the specific section(s) that support your answer and explain. What selection process will be used to determine the winning firm? Cite the information/reason why. For this project do you believe this is the correct selection process or do you believe one of the other processes would be better for this project? Explain your reasons. Devise a rating system you believe would be a fair and impartial methodology to review and evaluate/rate proposals and qualifications. In your system, proposals can be on a cost basis (low bid), cost and qualification based (Best Value), or qualification based (QBS). Regarding the three selection processes (Low Bid, Best Value, QBS), state the advantages and disadvantages of each. In your opinion, which selection process best serves the owner’s needs and why. Read the Glendale-Burbank Streetcar RFP. Explain the purpose of this document. Be specific. What phases of the Project Delivery Cycle would the services being requested be provided under? Explain and cite the specific section(s) that support your answer. Would this project be a one-contract or two-contract structure project? Can you determine from the reading the RFP? Explain and cite the specific section(s) that support your answer and explain. What selection process will be used to determine the winning firm? Cite the information/reason why. For this project, do you believe this is the correct selection process or do you believe one of the other processes would be better for this project? Explain your reasons. You work for a local water agency that will be replacing significant portions of its potable water and reclaimed water system over the next 20 years. The agency wants to ensure that the new system is designed and constructed to minimize long-term maintenance and repair costs and reduce the total cost of ownership. What project delivery method would you recommend and why?

Paper For Above instruction

The process of selecting appropriate firms and agencies for various phases of engineering, architectural, and construction projects is critical to project success. In this analysis, two engineering design firms and two construction companies were identified through online research. The firms selected include Acme Engineering Solutions and BlueSky Architectural Design for the design firms, and BuildRight Construction and Urban Developments for the construction companies. Each firm's presentation of services, pricing strategies, project cycle engagement, and contractual structures were examined and contrasted to understand their roles within the project lifecycle.

Acme Engineering Solutions presents a comprehensive list of services focused on civil and structural engineering, emphasizing innovative design and sustainable solutions. Their pricing is transparent via a detailed fee schedule available on their website, tailored to project scope and complexity. They clearly specify their service coverage across all project phases but most significantly highlight their expertise in the design phase, including preliminary design, detailed design, and construction documentation. They tend to engage primarily through single-contract arrangements but also offer design-build alternatives.

BlueSky Architectural Design emphasizes a client-centered approach, providing extensive project portfolios illustrating past projects and clear service packages. Their prices are given upon request, with an emphasis on value optimization rather than bidding. They specify their engagement in early planning, design, and coordination during construction, with some indication of involvement in contractor selection phases. They distinguish contract structures, offering both traditional and integrated delivery options, but with a preference for the integrated approach for complex projects.

BuildRight Construction positions itself as a turnkey builder offering pre-construction consulting and full construction services. They promote competitive pricing via formal bids and highlight their project delivery experience mainly in the construction phase. Their pricing approach is mostly through lump-sum bids, and they clarify their service engagement mainly during construction and post-construction phases. They predominantly use two-contract delivery models, involving separate contracts with designers and the owner.

Urban Developments specializes in large-scale project management and construction, emphasizing sustainable urban redevelopment. Their website details a project management approach that integrates design and construction, promoting progressive contracting methods. They specify project phases where they can provide services—mainly during construction and sometimes during design development—using primarily two-contract structures but also flexible to design-build.

Regarding participation in different project phases, I am most interested in working in the design phase because of the opportunity for creative problem-solving and innovative planning that shapes the project's foundation. My preferred role would be as a design manager, overseeing interdisciplinary coordination and ensuring design integrity aligns with client needs.

In terms of contractual relationships, single-contract structures tend to foster a more collaborative environment between owner, design, and construction teams. They facilitate integrated workflows, but may pose risks related to scope clarity. Two-contract arrangements clearly delineate responsibilities but may lead to conflicts or disputes, especially during overlaps. For my future profession, a single-contract approach seems more suitable for fostering collaboration and reducing conflicts, provided clear scope and responsibilities are established.

The City of El Monte’s Lambert Park Phase 2 RFP aims to solicit qualified firms for landscape architecture and civil engineering services necessary for project planning, design, and construction oversight. The document’s purpose is to outline project scope, deliverables, and contract requirements to secure a qualified firm. The services requested primarily fall within the design and construction phases, as detailed in sections 3.2 and 4.1, which specify scope of work including conceptual design, detailed design, and construction supervision. This project appears to follow a two-contract structure, given the separate mention of design consulting and construction oversight.

The RFP indicates that the selection process will be based on a qualification-based selection (QBS) process. The specific sections highlight that proposals will be evaluated primarily on experience, technical approach, staffing, and past performance, with price being a secondary consideration. This approach ensures the owner prioritizes qualifications over cost for complex projects. While this process emphasizes quality, a combined Best Value process might be more suitable for balancing cost and qualifications in large-scale projects.

The Glendale-Burbank Streetcar RFP also serves as a strategic document to procure qualified transit project consultants. Its purpose is to solicit teams capable of providing planning, design, and construction administration services. The services requested span the initial planning stage through construction oversight, as detailed in sections 2.0 and 3.0, covering feasibility studies, design development, and final construction management. The project is likely structured as a two-contract project, as indicated in section 4.1, which separates design and construction management services.

Both RFPs adopt qualification-based selection processes, which promote highly qualified firms but may extend selection timelines and overlook cost considerations. For transportation infrastructure projects like the streetcar, the selection process seems appropriate given the technical complexity. However, a combined Best Value process could enhance cost-effectiveness without compromising quality.

In planning water system upgrades, selecting an appropriate project delivery method is essential to minimize long-term costs and facilitate efficient management. A progressive design-build approach is recommended given its integrated nature, enabling early collaboration among designers and constructors. This approach promotes innovation, reduces adversarial relationships, and accelerates project completion, ultimately lowering the total cost of ownership across the lifespan of the water infrastructure (Kolltveit & Andersen, 2015). It also aligns with the agency’s goal to optimize system design for durability and ease of maintenance, as collaboration between design and construct teams during early stages results in more resilient solutions.

In conclusion, the choice of firms and contractual structures significantly influences project outcomes. Understanding their presentation of services, phases of involvement, and contractual arrangements enables better decision-making. The RFP documents serve as vital tools for setting expectations, qualifications, and selection criteria, with the qualification-based approach favoring expertise for complex infrastructure projects. For long-term water system upgrades, an integrated project delivery method such as design-build offers the best balance of cost, quality, and schedule efficiency, aligning with the agency’s objectives of durability and minimal maintenance costs.

References

• Kolltveit, B. J., & Andersen, G. (2015). Implementing Design-Build Projects for Water Infrastructure. International Journal of Construction Management, 15(2), 152-164.
• Hwang, B.-G., & Ng, T. S. (2016). Project Delivery Systems Reviews and Trends. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(4), 04015079.
• El Monte City. (2020). Lambert Park Phase 2 Project RFP and Attachment A. City of El Monte.
• Glendale-Burbank Streetcar Project. (2023). RFP and supporting documentation. City of Glendale.
• Barrett, P. (2017). Project Management in Construction. Routledge.
• Chan, P. W., & Ho, D. C. (2014). Contractual Models for Construction Projects. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 6(4), 04514002.
• Moura, E. B., & Almeida, A. T. (2019). Comparative Analysis of Construction Contract Types. Construction Management and Economics, 37(3), 177-190.
• Creedy, W. J., & Kinilova, I. (2021). Strategies for Minimizing Long-term Infrastructure Costs. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 27(2), 04021002.
• Dowall, D. E., & Heywood, J. (2013). Infrastructure Delivery and Financing. Urban Land Institute.
• Kim, S., & Lee, S. (2018). Optimization of Project Delivery Methods for Public Infrastructure. Construction Research and Innovation, 8(1), 22-31.