Consultants recommend early contractor involvement for proposed Goochland courthouse amid site constraints

Consultants from MVP McDonough Bullard & Peck advised the Goochland County Board of Supervisors on Nov. 6 that the county should consider early contractor involvement for the proposed courthouse project because of a tight site, limited laydown areas and complex integration with existing historic buildings.

At a public briefing, Jim Yatsik, vice president with MVP, said the county's River Road campus presents "limited lay down for construction access" and "challenging topography" that increase logistical complexity. MVP's presentation compared the three common public delivery methods in Virginia''1design-bid-build, construction management at-risk (CMAR) and design-build''1and described the state's PPEA (Public-Private Educational and Infrastructure Act) approach for progressive design-build.

Why it matters: the delivery method determines when a contractor is brought into the design process and how cost and schedule risks are shared. Yatsik told the board that early contractor participation can reduce the likelihood of a late-stage "bid day surprise" (a completed design that exceeds budget) and can help the county plan phasing and logistics to avoid disrupting courthouse operations during construction.

MVP recommended two viable alternatives for this project: CMAR (contractor engaged early and later asked to provide a Guaranteed Maximum Price) or a PPEA progressive design-build (a qualified design-builder advances design and then finalizes price). Both approaches allow contractor input during design to inform constructability, sequencing and cost tradeoffs; MVP concluded those approaches matched the site complexity and multiple stakeholder requirements for a courthouse.

Board members raised questions about state procurement oversight and whether the state's rules apply when local funds are used. Yatsik and county staff explained procurement requirements flow from state code and noted an important practical consideration: if a CMAR is hired and the construction price is later judged too high, the county has an "off-ramp" to re-solicit under another method rather than finding itself locked into an unaffordable, fully designed project.

Next steps: staff told the board they will prepare a recommendation on procurement method and draft solicitation language for the board's consideration. No formal action was taken at the Nov. 6 meeting.

Sources and context: MVP cited Albemarle County's recent CMAR courthouse and PPEA examples in Williamsburg as comparable projects where early contractor involvement aided logistics and phasing on constrained sites. The state procurement code allows alternative delivery where a locality can show design-bid-build is not "fiscally advantageous or practical" for the project.

The board's choice of delivery method will affect schedule, risk allocation, how designers and contractors are selected, and the county's approach to scope and quality control as design advances.