Arizona Automotive Institute Oneglia Construction Company Project Collaboration Case Report

CASE STUDY
Pre-Construction
Planning: Leading a
Collaborative Team
Developed by Central
Connecticut University
in partnership with O&G
Industries, 2015
2 | CASE STUDY
Preface
This is one in a series of case studies to be used by faculty members in college and university
construction education programs and construction contractors in professional education
programs. These case studies are intended to supplement primary instructional materials to
provide students with opportunities to engage in critical thinking, analysis, and decision-making
related to issues associated with the planning and management of construction operations.
This case study was developed by a team from Central Connecticut University in partnership
with O&G Industries.
Case Study Overview
This case focuses on Oneglia Construction Company?s pre-construction management
processes and project team collaboration. The featured project is a continuously-occupied
renovation of the Naugatuck Valley High School in Connecticut. The renovation is so thorough
as to be comparable to new construction. Representatives from the Owner, Architect, and
Construction Manager describe their priorities and perspectives on the project. The primary
teaching objective is the role of collaboration?and the factors that contribute to the success of
collaboration?in a project. A secondary objective is practicing typical preconstruction activities
which are performed collaboratively.
Project Description
Without disrupting the operation of the 1,200-student school, the Naugatuck Valley High School
project team must renovate-as-new the existing building, complete extensive site work, and
build several small additions. The $80 million project ($69 million construction cost) must be
completed in phases while the school is continuously occupied. The 30-month construction
schedule is aggressive.
The work on Naugatuck Valley High School is described as ?renovate-as-new.? State statutes
define this condition as ?… totally refurbish an existing building and which results in the
renovated facility taking on a useful life comparable to that of a new facility.? Renovate-as-new
work is more complex than a typical school renovation or alteration project.
The renovation must take part in phases, with part of the building occupied and part a
construction zone fully separated from the users. The occupied part must continue to operate
safely with adequate means of egress, fire lanes, and other code-required features including full
MEP services. The construction zone must also operate safely. It should not interfere with
student health or learning, or with the well-being of neighboring homeowners owing to noise,
dust, construction traffic, or other factors.
3 | CASE STUDY
Scope
The 280,000 square feet of building renovations include new mechanical, electrical, and
plumbing (MEP) systems. The 30,000 square feet of additions will accommodate new locker
rooms, a natatorium, and a stair tower. On the site, all of the existing high school athletic fields
must be completely reconstructed with artificial turf and an extensive underground drainage
system.
Project Team
Owner:
Naugatuck Valley High School Building Committee
Janet Simms, Principal, Naugatuck High School
Architect:
David Crown, Vice President, Castle Booth Associates (CBA)
CM/GC:
Oneglia Construction Company
Although collaboration is an important factor in any project, the Owner, Architect, and
Constructor must work together particularly closely on phased, occupied projects. The parties
share a common goal: completing the required work as efficiently as possible with minimal
disruption to the building occupants while meeting the owner?s schedule and budget. However,
within this shared goal, each party has additional objectives and responsibilities.
Exhibit 1: Organizational Chart
4 | CASE STUDY
PROJECT PERSPECTIVE: Owner
Robert Needles, Chair, Naugatuck Valley High School Building Committee
My priorities were to make sure the project went smoothly and came in on time and on budget.
[The architecture firm] CBA and [Construction Managers] Oneglia Construction Company did a
really good job, and I think it was a good time in the market for the project to be out to bid. The
challenges were all on additional stuff. Things came up because it was a renovate-as-new
project, it wasn?t a new building. The fourteen-year old heating system was just starting to have
problems, so we decided to replace it, which was $400,000 or $500,000 additional. Also only
part of the building was air conditioned, and we decided to add air conditioning in the cafeteria
and other parts.
CBA did a fantastic job analyzing the project, and their numbers were right on. CBA was on site
two to three times a week and stayed on top of all the numbers on the project. I probably talked
to CBA on the phone four times a week. At the beginning of the project the Building Committee
had weekly meetings with CBA. They?d also contact me at work if they had questions.
In Naugatuck, our high school renovation committee included some Board of Education
members, but the majority of the committee is on the five-year capital planning committee for
the whole borough of Naugatuck. Most of us have been together since 1999, and CBA has done
a lot of projects with the town. It?s a good group, and we all stayed on top of things.
Near the end of a project, we had a smell at the school, and it took a while to find the source.
There were old sewage pipes failing after 50 years underground. It took a good month to rectify
the problem. Oneglia did a fantastic job in settling this issue, bringing in experts and monitoring
the situation.
I can?t say enough about Oneglia?they were top notch, especially [Project Manager] Joe
Vecchio and [Project Superintendent] Roger Jasper. They were fantastic to work with. They told
us issues straight up and made suggestions about how to rectify them. The Building Committee
gave me discretion to make decisions with an impact up to $25,000 which helped keep things
on track. We did a lot of extras?I?d guess we added about $1.5 million to the project?and we
still came in on time and on budget.
Janet Simms, Principal, Naugatuck High School
My priority was to make sure that students had an awesome learning environment?that the
building said we value learning, we value you as learners. I cared that the faculty and staff came
into a building that says the same thing to them?that they were valued, and that the building
was working to help everyone meet their highest potential.
The design team came down and listened to my ideas for the building. I invited every
department head, who had each talked to their staff, to share what they would wish for. We
knew there would be some limitations since it was a renovation?we knew we had to live within
the exterior walls. We spent so much time with furniture?we had rooms full of different student
5 | CASE STUDY
desks, student chairs, teacher desks, teacher chairs, office furniture. People tried out the
furniture and then we had voting. There were a million decisions?it sometimes got
overwhelming. I tried to bring as many voices into it as I could, because they would be living
with the decisions. Everyone is very happy with how the building turned out.
I cannot say enough good things about Oneglia Construction Company. Laurel [Pleasant, PreConstruction Manager] held my hand throughout planning the first phase, while I learned about
the process. You always need to be two steps ahead, because as soon as you finish one
phase, you need to be ready to go on to the next. Ninety-five percent of my staff only had to
move once?into temporary classrooms for six months, and then into their finished space.
Sometimes we?d come in to find a hallway reconfigured or a door closed off. We?d joke, ?You
can?t get there from here.? I learned a lot about traffic congestion, with 1200 students learning
new routes. Oneglia Construction Company staff were at my beck and call, I just had to pick up
the phone if I needed anything. It was always a school first, and construction site second. I can?t
say there weren?t days where it was exceptionally noisy, or days when it was dusty or smelly?
but considering the magnitude of the project, it was amazing.
I knew the email and cell phone numbers of the Oneglia Construction Company project team by
heart. We also had a standing meeting every Friday at 8:30, whether there were any
outstanding issues or not. Sometimes there were four or five people there, sometimes 15.
Whoever I felt was needed, Oneglia Construction Company brought to the meeting. We would
also walk through the spaces and Oneglia Construction Company would explain how things
were going to be. It was much easier for me to visualize things in the walk-through than on the
drawings. This way we could catch things before they were finished, and make changes if
needed.
The Building Committee met every month, and I served on the Building Committee. That helped
keep everyone on the same page. If I saw something on the walk-through I thought should
change, I?d bring it to the Building Committee. For example, I saw water fountains going in on
sheetrock walls. I thought tiled walls would look better and be easier to clean, and would protect
the walls from splashing water. The Building Committee agreed to this change.
I give a lot of credit to Oneglia Construction Company. Their model, and they live it, is the
customer is always right, and the customer should be happy. They never made me feel bad for
asking for anything?they just wanted me to be happy.
I do think collaboration is sometimes dependent on the right people?but if you have the right
processes, that can help.
6 | CASE STUDY
PROJECT PERSPECTIVE: Architect
David Crown, Vice President, Castle Booth Associates (CBA)
Our priority is to satisfy the program?the educational specifications?with the funds available.
This school had a lot of integrated technology. For example, we had a glass fiber network
instead of copper because it can carry more information. As more course offerings are carried
through video, more bandwidth will be required. During the programming phase, we went
to a school technology convention with the Superintendent of Schools, their IT director, and
others from the school, so everyone understood what technology was available and how it could
be integrated.
To make sure our design stayed within the budget, Oneglia Construction Company checked our
design documents as several stages. Anytime we were considering a significant change, we?d
discuss it with them. This project was especially challenging because school had to stay in
session throughout the project. The team had to construct 20 temporary classrooms within the
school, and phase how classrooms were moved over the 30 months of construction. Often
when a school is occupied during construction, a significant addition is planned. You build the
addition, move the classrooms into it, and renovate the existing school. In the case of the
Naugatuck High School, there wasn?t a lot of addition?and you can?t use locker rooms as
classrooms. So the project team collaborated to see where the temporary classrooms would go,
and what classrooms would be moved at each phase.
We?ve collaborated with Oneglia Construction Company on any number of school projects
before this project. Everyone knows what their roles are, how to work together, and what to
expect from individual personalities. During the construction phase, Oneglia Construction
Company is very good at communicating with the school principal and everyone on that side.
When there were problems in the field, we?d get sent a photo of the issue, or a sketch of a
possible solution, so we can solve things on the fly. During construction, our job is to keep the
flow of information coming. We don?t want people to be standing around waiting for an answer
from us, or the job won?t get done in time.
7 | CASE STUDY
PROJECT PERSPECTIVE: Construction Manager
Oneglia Construction Company of Torrington, Connecticut, has operated as a general
contractor or construction manager since 1923. With more than 200 schools completed, they
are the largest builder of schools in Connecticut. Their experience with ?renovate-as-new?
schools includes 21 projects. Four of these were completed with the Naugatuck Valley High
School project?s architecture firm Castle Booth Associates.
Oneglia Construction Company has a dedicated Pre-Construction department which manages
the project until all trade contracts are awarded. During the Pre-Construction phase, the PreConstruction manager implements the Management Plan which includes Quality Control, Cost
Control, and Time Control. Once the trade contracts are awarded, the Project Manager takes
over management of the project, working with the Superintendent and other field staff. As
illustrated in the organizational chart, both the Pre-Construction Manager and the Project
Manager report to the Project Executive.
Michael R. Bluelock, Project Executive, Oneglia Construction
The number one priority of Oneglia Construction Company was meeting the Owner?s
expectations. Finding out what these expectations are is the first step?and probably the goal of
every construction manager. We had a wonderful working relationship with the school, the
school superintendents (there were two over the course of the project), the chair of the building
committee?it all worked very well. The project was not without challenges?it was over 300,000
square feet with multiple phases?but we worked to keep everyone happy.
Communication is number one, and number two is how you communicate. You need to
understand the needs of the Owner, and have them understand what we need to get out of their
hair faster. The Owner understood that well. I met with Joe (Project Manager) and Roger
(Superintendent) at the school every Friday morning to review issues, look at how we could
improve things, and how to meet upcoming challenges. We?ve been through the process over
100 times, but each community we work with is doing it only once. It?s hard sometimes for the
communities to see the outcome down the road two-and-a-half or three years. Naugatuck saw
this better than many. When we finished a phase and turned it over, they?d see how new and
great it was. We saw hope in their eyes.
The principal Janet Simms was easy to communicate with, along with the key facilities people
on her staff. We had two-way communication with her via radio throughout the day, so if
anything came up, she could get in touch with us anytime. We also distributed a list of
emergency numbers so we could be contacted 24-hours a day in an emergency.
There are no indoor air quality (IAQ) industry standards for schools, so we can?t measure the air
quality against a standard. On this project, there were some smells we didn?t know where they
were coming from. Some people thought it smelled like gas. People were concerned. The
Superintendent of Schools, the Fire Department, Connecticut OSHA, and third-party consultants
were all looking for the source of the problem. It probably took a month and-a-half or two
months to resolve the issue. There were no health issues. It was an errant smell, with some off-
8 | CASE STUDY
gassing of new materials. If you have good communication in the beginning, you can build trust
and confidence in each other which helps assuage issues when they do come up.
Building trust really comes down to personality. You have to find the right person, and find out
what their real concerns are. Naugatuck seemed to work well?we had like-personalities. This is
one of the most pleasurable projects I?ve done.
We knew what our exposure would be and accurately estimated staffing requirements. That way
you can stay on track, and meet the expectations of the bid. If you set up the project right in the
beginning, the rest of the project should be easily managed, rather than an issue becoming
contentious. This project was thoroughly enjoyable.
Teachers have been coming into their classrooms for years and know how to make them
comfortable and workable. When you go in and totally change their environment, they don?t
know what to expect, in terms of lighting, temperature–everything. Imagine if someone came
into your house and changed everything without asking. So we did a dog-and-pony show after
we turned over a large portion of the building. We did a PowerPoint presentation explaining
what the CO2 sensors were, showing the occupancy sensors that control the lighting, explaining
how the heating and cooling was different, and why. We educated the end-user so everyone
understands the building. Every school we do, we learn a little more.
Laurel Pleasant, Pre-Construction Manager
I have four main priorities on every project. First, I work with the design team and our estimators
to ensure that the project stays within budget before it goes out to bid. Second,
I make sure the design stays on schedule. I back-up from move-in dates to determine the
schedule and ride herd on the design team to ensure the documents are ready to bid. I also
capture local approvals needed to move the project forward into construction. Third, I review the
quality of the construction documents as they develop. I give input on constructability and
review the documents for complete coordination to make sure we have a good biddable and
buildable set of documents. Fourth is the building program. Every project has a program of what
the owner expects to get. I check for all the program spaces to be accounted for. This is
especially important during phasing. Some spaces are difficult to temporarily relocate, for
instance a carpentry or metals shop. There may be some instances when a program will have to
be temporarily suspended, and I work with the school to determine when this needs to happen.
I collaborate with the owner and design team to plan the phasing. We go through the building,
area by area, and determine how we?re going to sequence the work. Our MEP Coordinator
reviews our proposed phasing against existing MEP systems that need to remain in place to
service other parts of the building. Any spatial concerns are investigated in the field. We pick a
time when school is not in session to look above ceilings where proposed congested areas are
indicated and try to resolve any issues during the design phase. I also attend the architect?s
team/coordination meetings weekly or biweekly, and follow up on outstanding issues or
concerns with emails.
9 | CASE STUDY
Bruce Gold, Senior Estimator
My priority and goal was to find out if the project is on budget at every phase?schematic
design, design development, and 90 percent construction documents. I have a staff of
estimators working with me. This project was under budget. It was one of the last projects
before the market changed in Connecticut. What happened was subcontractors had down-sized
or gone out of business during the recession. Around 2013, the MEP and Site contractors who
had secured state projects that would last two or three years added 15 or 20 percent to their
bids for the next job, which no one predicted. Naugatuck Valley High School was one of the last
jobs in 2012 before this market increase for schools.
With the budget, we try to protect the owner, and Oneglia Construction Company. The architect
did a great job of keeping the scope to a minimum?they didn?t have a lot of money for this size
of a project. They did a good job reusing interior partitions and exterior walls. It was a blessing
that the school was big enough that they could do this.
We all get along really well. We always work well with CBA. We know what to expect, and how
they think. Different teams think differently, but we know what the firm is like, and how their
drawings are.
Phased projects are complicated. Laurel and the MEP coordinator and their consultants worked
well together on the phasing part.
It?s always easier when there?s enough money. The owner should always bring a CM in early in
the process. If you bring them in too late, you?ve defeated the purpose of having a CM. It?s
easier to meet the budget during the early design phases instead of value engineering after the
bid.
Joe Vecchio, Project Manager
My priorities on any project are quality, schedule, and safety. I need all three. I explain that to
the trades?two isn?t going to do it.
Communication is key to the success of any project. Roger and I met with the principal on a
weekly basis to go over our schedules and make sure they mesh. We go over any of their
concerns, and make sure the school is aware of what we?re doing. Good communication builds
trust?the principal sees we do everything we say we?re doing. Face-to-face meetings are the
best. We also used phone, email, everything. I never want to have teachers communicating
directly to us?I like having one point of contact like the principal, and let her distribute
information to the staff. Otherwise you get 90 teachers emailing you, and it gets messy.
We had a variety of issues like on any project, and communication was key to our success. The
preconstruction staff figures out the phasing schedule, but a school?s plans do change. What we
initially agreed to and what we ended up doing was adjusted?maybe the principal couldn?t give
up a scheduled classroom. There were also some things we didn?t anticipate, like an electric
closet we didn?t know about?it was shown on the plans as a janitor?s closet.
Roger and I have now done five projects with the team from [architecture firm] CBA. We have a
good level of trust and a good working relationship. The owner doesn?t want to see any
10 | CASE STUDY
dissension between the CM and the design team. We got together on cost issues and design
issues. We had over 800 RFI?s on the project. We came up with solutions together. I try to look
ahead to give as much time as possible to get a good answer and to make sure everything
is thoroughly researched. We look at submittals closely, not only to make sure they meet the
specs, but also to make sure the item will work as shown on the drawings.
We all did a good job, but what made this project a success was the owner?s willingness to work
with us. Every school system handles these types of projects a little differently. We were
successful in Naugatuck because the principal was willing to meet with us weekly. I can?t speak
highly enough of Janet Simms and the way she handled the school staff.
David M. Cranberry, LEED AP BD+C, Pull-Planning Facilitator
Lean construction requires a greater amount of pre-planning on behalf of the trades. The
planning sessions are for three months of work broken into one week increments, looking at
sequencing and streamlining. The trades tell each other what their needs are.
At first when we introduced pull-planning, there was some apprehension and resistance from
some of the trades. The early meetings were longer, because there was some confusion about
what we needed to do and how to do it. After a while, it went more smoothly. We are deploying
lean construction into all of our projects, to help maintain the schedule and keep the projects
finishing on time in spite of things that arise. Lean construction helps with the whole process?
people are planning farther in advance, and avoiding last minute crises. The trades are looking
at details much earlier.
Our foreman?s meetings have had the most significant transformation. Previously, our
superintendent would do a two-week look-ahead with the foremen watching. Often people
wouldn?t really look at what was required before they were scheduled to do the work. This led to
problems and delays. Now there is discussion among the trade contractors. Before that kind of
collaboration was not taking place because people were not talking to each other.
Going forward, I?d set up the job trailer differently, with lots of open space to accommodate the
meetings and pull-planning boards. We?ve also tweaked the language about materials
management and on-site storage to institute just-in-time delivery, with any material on-site being
used within two weeks.
Roger Jasper, Superintendent
I manage the trades in the field during the construction process, but I was included in
scheduling and phasing decisions during preconstruction. We were able to have a very good
working relationship with the school principal in particular, but also with the facilities director, the
athletic director?everyone at the school. I think the key was hearing what their concerns were
and making sure we addressed them.
The football field was critical to the school. We took it the first week in April and gave it back in
late September so they could still have a football program that year. We left the baseball field
and track alone while we were working on the football field, so they always had an athletic field
to use.
11 | CASE STUDY
We plan the phasing two to three years in advance, and it did change somewhat during the
project. What falls apart on some projects is you can?t take the scheduled area, but you can?t
take another area, either. Science rooms are always difficult?you can?t take all the science
rooms at once, or the school won?t have a science program. But you can?t hold science classes
anywhere else, either. We were able to work with the school and make changes to make sure
everything stayed on track.
On some projects, the staff can run the school. Naugatuck was managed very well. The
principal was a strong personality and she ruled the school. We spoke with her and her group of
department heads, and they relayed information to and from the staff. We were in constant
communication with the school by radio, email, text, phone?every way you can communicate,
we did.
We had a very good client from preconstruction on. The key is to start early. The way the project
was phased was to some degree worked around the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing
(MEP) systems. MEP is crucial. It may not make for the easiest project, but you have to keep
the MEP systems up and running. Everything has to be in parallel. We did a good job
coordinating that on this project.
Andrew Delgado, MEP Coordinator
My responsibility was to make everything functional. I coordinate every piece of equipment with
the trades to get it online, and follow through to functional testing with the commissioning agent.
I get involved really, really early, doing constructability reviews and reviewing submittals. During
phasing, I get involved if an issue arises where we?re using an existing piece of equipment on a
new part of the building, or vice versa. I?m an intermediary between the trades and the
engineers. Trades contact me to resolve issues. I answer if I can, or contact the engineers. We
avoid a lot of RFIs this way and keep the process moving.
A big challenge on the Naugatuck project was a sizeable change related to the boilers.
Originally we were refurbishing the old steam boilers and converting them to hot water, but we
discovered they needed to be replaced. They were forty years old and had worked hard, and at
times might not have been maintained as well as they could have been. We had four months to
replace the boilers before the heating season began in October. It usually takes eight-and-a-half
to nine weeks just to get the equipment delivered. The engineers designed a new system, and I
worked with the electrical, plumbing, pipe fitting, sheet metal and controls contractors. Everyone
had an important hand in getting the system online in time.
The subs that we had are very invested in the project. Lots of the foremen were involved from
Day One. They treated it like they were building their own home?they took a personal stake in
the project. For a lot of them, that?s who they are. For others, I try to communicate that we need
to give the owner the very best product, and optimize efficiency. They see that I care, and I kind
of pull them along.
I like talking to people face-to-face, or on the phone. I?ll only email if I?m saying the same thing to
15 people. An email can be misinterpreted. I?ve found that almost ten out of ten times, some
12 | CASE STUDY
issue arises in a conversation that one of us didn?t think of. By talking, we can vet out problems
ahead of time.
It was a great project overall. It was a great team effort. The design team was very involved
during construction, which helped things go well.
Nicholas Klinger, BIM Manager
In preconstruction, my main duty is to receive models from the design team and do 3D BIM
clash-detection. I check the models using NavisWorks Manage. The idea is to identify as many
issues as possible during preconstruction to minimize schedule and cost impacts during
construction.
After a project is awarded, I use models created by the trades which have a greater level of
detail, and go through the same process. The design team will specify several options for
equipment, and the models from the trades show the specific equipment being used. The trades
use different modeling software?HydroCAD for fire protection, Revit or AutoCAD MEP for
plumbing and electric, FabCAD for ductwork?and NavisWorks Manage aggregates them all
into one model.
On the Naugatuck project, we did 3D BIM (clash-detection). We did not do 4D BIM (integrating
the schedule into the model and assigning tasks to elements) or 5D BIM (quantity takeoff/cost).
There were some buy-in issues at Naugatuck?people were still developing their skill sets. Now
it is basically the standard of care to do BIM coordination.
We don?t just run a clash-detection report and hand it out. During construction, the construction
manager, trade contractors, and design team sat in a trailer together and looked at issues, and
when something changed, others responded about any impacts on their work. When the
process drags out, it?s harder to keep people?s attention and attendance. We try to have isolated
meetings of just the people needed so we don?t waste people?s time. Now our weekly meetings
alternate between in?person and virtual meetings using a screen-sharing software. At
Naugatuck, phasing was considered in the design and we didn?t have to do much from a BIM
perspective. But in every project, BIM helps us identify issues early that should minimize or
eliminate schedule or cost impacts to the project. When you identify issues early, the cost for
correcting them is lower.
1 | CASE STUDY
Table of Contents: Project Documents
List of Exhibits
++ Organizational Chart (pg. 4)
++ Project Schedule (pg. 20)
++ Sitework Estimate (pg. 30)
++ Site Logistic Drawings (pg. 31)
++ Phasing Plans (pg. 33)
++ Electrical Panel Drawing (pg.41)
List of Drawings
++ L0.00 Overall Site Plan
++ L1.01 Site Demolition Plan
++ C1.01 Site Drainage Plan
++ EP 1.08 Electric Power Plan
14 | CASE STUDY
Exhibit 2: Project Schedule
15 | CASE STUDY
16 | CASE STUDY
17 | CASE STUDY
18 | CASE STUDY
19 | CASE STUDY
20 | CASE STUDY
211 | CASE STUDY
22 | CASE STUDY
23 | CASE STUDY
24 | CASE STUDY
Exhibit 3: Sitework Estimate
25 | CASE STUDY
Exhibit 4: Site Logistic Drawings
26 | CASE STUDY
Site Drainage Plan – Location of Detention Structures
27 | CASE STUDY
Exhibit 5: Phasing Plans
28 | CASE STUDY
29 | CASE STUDY
30 | CASE STUDY
311 | CASE STUDY
32 | CASE STUDY
33 | CASE STUDY
34 | CASE STUDY
35 | CASE STUDY
Ex