Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Moc Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Redmond staff outline progressive design–build plan, timeline and risks for Maintenance & Operations Center rebuild
Summary
City staff and OAC, the selected owner's representative, briefed council on using progressive design–build for the Maintenance and Operations Center redevelopment, describing procurement steps, risk-transfer and budget planning; a contract with OAC and design‑build next steps are scheduled for March and April.
City public-works officials told the Redmond City Council on March 11 that the city intends to use a progressive design–build delivery model for the Maintenance and Operations Center (MOC) campus redevelopment and described the procurement steps, risk management and timing for the roughly four-year project.
Public Works Director Aaron Burt said the project moved into active development after council-approved budget funding last year and that the city has selected OAC to serve as the owner’s representative. Diana Brown, vice president at OAC, told the council the city must secure state approval to use alternative contracting and then solicit a design–build team through a two-step qualifications and proposal process.
Brown summarized how alternative delivery changes risk and schedule: under the progressive design–build approach the owner contracts with an integrated contractor–designer team that shares responsibility for design errors and cost control, and that contractor will set the guaranteed maximum price (GMP) after the team reaches about 85–90% design. “Progressive design build provides us with better outcome and more involvement from an owner,” Brown said. City staff said that using the model should allow earlier cost certainty and earlier identification of complex phasing challenges for an operational site that must remain in service while work proceeds.
Burt and Brown walked council through procurement steps and oversight requirements they will follow. Staff said the city must apply to the state’s Capital Projects Advisory Review Board (CPARB) for approval to use alternative delivery under state law (RCW 39.10) and described a typical solicitation sequence: an RFQ to shortlist by qualifications, interactive “management‑plan” meetings with shortlisted teams, and then an RFP that includes a fee component. The initial contract will enter a validation phase (sometimes called Phase 1A) that enables the team to develop schedule and preliminary budgets; council will see contract amendments for each phase until the council considers the final GMP and total contract value.
Burt said the MOC master-plan range considered during earlier work was roughly $220 million to $245 million and that the adopted budget target for the project is about $225,000,000. He said the city expects to bring an agreement with OAC to a council committee in late March and indicated staff hope to finalize contracting in early April. (Staff language at the meeting referenced March 25 as a committee agenda date and a planned April 1 signature; the council president also referenced a Committee of the Whole item on March 28.)
Council members asked about dispute resolution, risk transfer and market uncertainty. Brown and Burt said the progressive design–build structure transfers construction and many design risks to the design–build team and incentivizes early problem-solving because the contractor’s profit is tied to the fixed price. Burt said material-price volatility — particularly steel and lumber — is a primary risk the city has identified and that staff are developing a risk register and mitigation measures with the selected team when it is on board.
Staff described other features the delivery method enables: earlier procurement of long‑lead items where appropriate, tighter cost controls by designing to a target budget, and a contracting structure that uses contract amendments to add design and construction work until the GMP is set. Burt said city project staff are participating in a 32‑hour Design‑Build Institute of America training and that Amy Kim will be the city’s lead project manager. Steve Gibbs, the capital construction manager, reported strong interest from the design‑build market and that multiple teams have indicated they intend to respond.
No procurement action or final contract vote occurred at the study session; staff said they will return with the OAC agreement and subsequent amendment requests for council approval as the project advances.
