<%BANNER%>

Can Design-Build Project Delivery Facilitate Green Construction Practices?

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024444/00001

Material Information

Title: Can Design-Build Project Delivery Facilitate Green Construction Practices?
Physical Description: 1 online resource (51 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Surprenant, Andrew
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: build, construction, contractor, delivery, design, environmental, green, leed, project, sustainability, sustainable
Building Construction -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Building Construction thesis, M.S.B.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Building Construction CAN DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT DELIVERY FACILITATE GREEN CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES? By Andrew Surprenant May 2009 Chairman: Dr. Robert Ries Cochair: Dr. Raymond Issa Major: Building Construction Our planet and its population are amidst a serious dilemma concerning natural resources, energy consumption, and pollution. The construction industry is responsible for a very large portion of the negative changes to our environment in recent centuries. It is the responsibility of current and future construction professionals to convert the trade to a more sustainable industry. The intention of this research was to determine if design-build is a superior project delivery method to persuade this transition. The first step was to create a list of perceived advantages of design-build project delivery over conventional project delivery methods. A survey was then developed and distributed to fifty construction professionals who have experience in building sustainable projects. Their insight, opinions, suggestions, and experiences were used to determine if design-build is indeed a superior project delivery method. The low response percentage made the results inconclusive. However, most of the responses were very supportive of design-build facilitating the transition to a greener construction practice.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Andrew Surprenant.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.B.C.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Ries, Robert J.
Local: Co-adviser: Issa, R. Raymond.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0024444:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024444/00001

Material Information

Title: Can Design-Build Project Delivery Facilitate Green Construction Practices?
Physical Description: 1 online resource (51 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Surprenant, Andrew
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: build, construction, contractor, delivery, design, environmental, green, leed, project, sustainability, sustainable
Building Construction -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Building Construction thesis, M.S.B.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Building Construction CAN DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT DELIVERY FACILITATE GREEN CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES? By Andrew Surprenant May 2009 Chairman: Dr. Robert Ries Cochair: Dr. Raymond Issa Major: Building Construction Our planet and its population are amidst a serious dilemma concerning natural resources, energy consumption, and pollution. The construction industry is responsible for a very large portion of the negative changes to our environment in recent centuries. It is the responsibility of current and future construction professionals to convert the trade to a more sustainable industry. The intention of this research was to determine if design-build is a superior project delivery method to persuade this transition. The first step was to create a list of perceived advantages of design-build project delivery over conventional project delivery methods. A survey was then developed and distributed to fifty construction professionals who have experience in building sustainable projects. Their insight, opinions, suggestions, and experiences were used to determine if design-build is indeed a superior project delivery method. The low response percentage made the results inconclusive. However, most of the responses were very supportive of design-build facilitating the transition to a greener construction practice.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Andrew Surprenant.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.B.C.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Ries, Robert J.
Local: Co-adviser: Issa, R. Raymond.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0024444:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 CAN DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT DELIVERY FACILITATE GREE N CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES? By ANDREW SURPRENANT A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN BUILDING CONSTRUCTION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2009

PAGE 2

2 2009 Andrew Surprenant

PAGE 3

3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank m y parents and grandparents, who have been extremely supportive throughout my college career. I am also greatly appreciative of all of my professors, from both architecture and building construction, throughout my time at the University of Florida.

PAGE 4

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................3LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........6LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................................................7ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................................8 CHAP TER 1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................92 LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................................123 METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................. 17Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........17Survey Questionnaires............................................................................................................17Sample Selection....................................................................................................................18Surveys Conducted.................................................................................................................18Expected Results............................................................................................................... ......18Limitations.................................................................................................................... ..........194 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS.................................................................................................... 20Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........20Item 1......................................................................................................................... .............20Item 2......................................................................................................................... .............20Item 3......................................................................................................................... .............22Item 4......................................................................................................................... .............25Item 5......................................................................................................................... .............27Item 6......................................................................................................................... .............29Item 7......................................................................................................................... .............31Item 8......................................................................................................................... .............335 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................................... 37APPENDIX SURVEY MATERIALS....................................................................................... 39Survey Introduction Letter......................................................................................................39Informed C onsent Form.......................................................................................................... 40Survey.....................................................................................................................................41Survey Item 9.................................................................................................................. ........42Survey Item 10................................................................................................................. .......44

PAGE 5

5 Survey Item 11................................................................................................................. .......46Survey Item 12................................................................................................................. .......48LIST OF REFERENCES...............................................................................................................50BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.........................................................................................................51

PAGE 6

6 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4-1 Survey respondents green construc tion experience (num ber of projects)........................ 204-2 Survey Item 3 statistical analysis....................................................................................... 234-3 Survey Item 4 statistical analysis....................................................................................... 264-4 Survey Item 5 statistical analysis....................................................................................... 284-5 Survey Item 6 statistical analysis....................................................................................... 304-6 Survey Item 7 statistical analysis....................................................................................... 324-7 Survey Item 8 statistical analysis....................................................................................... 34

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 4-1 Survey respondents green construc tion experience (num ber of projects)........................ 224-2 Respondents answers to Survey Item 3............................................................................ 234-3 Respondents answers to Survey Item 4............................................................................ 264-4 Respondents answers to Survey Item 5............................................................................ 274-5 Respondents answers to Survey Item 6............................................................................ 294-6 Respondents answers to Survey Item 7............................................................................ 314-7 Respondents answers to Survey Item 8............................................................................ 34

PAGE 8

8 Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Building Construction CAN DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT DELIVERY FACILITATE GREE N CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES? By Andrew Surprenant May 2009 Chairman: Robert Ries Cochair: Raymond Issa Major: Building Construction Our planet and its population are in a se rious dilemma concerning natural resources, energy consumption, and pollution. The constructi on industry is responsible for a very large portion of the negative effect on our environment in recent centuries. It is the responsibility of current and future construction professionals to c onvert the trade to a more sustainable industry. The objective of this research was to determine if design-build is a supe rior project delivery method to facilitate this transition. The first step was to create a list of percei ved advantages of desi gn-build project delivery over conventional project delivery methods. A su rvey was then developed and distributed to fifty construction professionals who have experience in build ing sustainable projects. Their insight, opinions, sugge stions, and experiences were us ed to determine if designbuild is indeed a superior project delivery method. The low response percentage made the results inconclusive. However, most of the responses were very supportive of design-build facilitating the transition to a greener construction practice.

PAGE 9

9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION There is a major predicament in the worl d today and it is a di rect result of our uncontrolled and thoughtless expansion, constructi on, resource depletion, and pollution. Our Earth can not support our current trends of re source consumption, contamination, or population growth. The construction industry and our buildi ngs are responsible for forty percent of our landfill mass and energy consumption. The situation is already beyond repair, but we need to act quickly and effectively to minimize the negative permanent effects of our previous actions. Because the construction industry is such a major c ontributor to the problem, it needs to be at the forefront of the solution. To be a part of the solution, designers and builders need to be pr oducing structures that do not deplete resources, do not produce larg e amounts of carbon dioxide or other dangerous gases and do not consume large amounts of en ergy. This evolution of building design and technique is known as green or environmenta lly-friendly and is an absolutely necessary progression. It needs to happen and it needs to happen very quic kly. Many groups, design firms, and owners are making green buildings a priority. However, there are still a great majority of buildings that are being cons tructed in a traditional manne r with no extra concern for environmental factors or effects. Some are evolvi ng and some are reluctant to make the change. Expediting the change to green construction is the major concern of this research. Design-build firms may be a portion of the an swer. Under the traditional design-bid-build project delivery method, an owner hires an archit ect to design the building. The owner then puts the project drawings out for bid. It is usually the lowest bidd ing contractor who is hired to construct the building acco rding to the plans. There is litt le or no collaboration between the

PAGE 10

10 designer and builder before the construction be gins. This traditional method is not very conducive to communication or progre ss toward a new building language. An architect can design a very green and efficient building but he/she may not fully understand the effects of his design in the field. The feedback from the contractor is limited and usually limited to major problems or conflicts in the design documents. The architects learning curve is extended as a result of this limited communication. De sign-build firms bring the design and construction entities under one roof. This greatly opens th e line of communication. Design details and construction methods are discussed in great length before anything leaves the drawing board. This should effectively make progress toward a new building method much quicker and simpler. A designe r can learn from successes and fa ilures more directly. Some mistakes or bad designs may be caught and correc ted before construction ev er begins. They can also see what parts of the design are truly successf ul and should be considered in future projects. The library of successful green building practices should grow more quickly at design-build firms than traditional companies. Green construction is generally categorized as those projects which attain a LEED certification rating. It is certainly possible to build su stainable without going through LEED certification, but this is current ly the most popular means of bei ng recognized as having a green building. There is an involved process of pa perwork and documentation of building process details that is involved in atta ining a LEED rating. Firms that ha ve previous experience with the process will have an advantage over ot hers, no matter what type of firm. There are designers and construction manage rs of traditional firms that have great relationships and communicate extremely well. Especially after working together on a number of successful projects, a great sens e of team and desire to work t ogether is established. Great

PAGE 11

11 teams who communicate efficiently can result from any project delivery method. However, a design-build method is more likely to build this team chemistry in a consistent manner. There are fewer variables involved in the rela tionships of design-build team members. An owner who uses a design-build firm will have the advantage of using a single point-of contact and simplify the process for himself in th at manner. Having a qualified team, whether it is design-build or another type, will always weigh more heavily th an the general project delivery method. There are such things as poor design-build firms, and in that scenario, the owner may not have a good experience. However, when comparing equally qualified teams, the designbuild firm still has the advantage of a single point of contact for the owner and having all involved team members under one roof. This study looks at if and how design-build firms are facilitating th e transition to green building practices. Are they actually evolving mo re quickly? How much collaboration actually takes place between the designers and builders? What are the specific differences that lend to an easier changeover? How can they be adapted to help traditional firms build green quickly? Are there any drawbacks to design-build firms regarding green buildings? A survey of design firms, construction fi rms, design-build firms, and owners was conducted in order to investigat e whether or not design-build pr oject delivery facilitates green building. The findings may give some answers as to what practices can be adapted to help other firms move into green buildi ng quickly and efficiently.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Since there has been no fundamental reinvent ion of design practice in order to play an active roll in the culture of sustainability, clea r paths to new forms of practice do not exist (Margolin 1998). This statement, made in re gards to the relatively recent shift toward sustainable design, expresses the general uncertainty on exactly how to build green. Everyone agrees that there is a dire need to consider our planets condition and resource supply while designing and constructing buildings today and into the future. However, there is not such agreement on the best or most efficient method of accomplishing this goal. The practice of archit ecture is not a static endeavor that can be easily defined by fixed and precise characteristics; it evolves with th e demands and developments of society (Brady 1996). It is true that the practi ce of building design is a constantly changing one. The problem is that in our current environmental state, we need a transition from traditional building design to a much more eco-friendly era of construction, and we need it fast. We can not afford to wait around and let these changes happen at a leisurely pace. We need to be very active in making this metamorphosis of the design and construction industry happen. There has been much research done in the arena of our changing environment and the negative effects humans have had. From resource de pletion to water and air pollution to loss of natural habitat and wildlife, humans have been abusing the Earth si nce their earliest days. There are differing views as to how much damage we ha ve caused and exactly what the effects will be. The truth is that the damage is extensive and that we must act quickly and efficiently to give our grandchildren and our planet a fair chance. The construction of buildings and the energy used in building operations is a major c ontributor to environmental degrad ation. We must act to lessen and eventually eliminate the negative effects of our struct ures. Though the concept of

PAGE 13

13 sustainability may seem relatively new, the substance of its princi ples is already embedded in our national character. What is respect for life but our appreciation for the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community upon which we al l depend? Living within limits embodies the traditional values of frugality and thrift (Potera 2005). It is commonly understood that designing a nd creating environmentally friendly buildings is a necessity. There is, however, not a common belief as to how to make the change happen. The most common method of constr uction project delivery is currently the design-bid-build approach. This process involves an owner hiring an architect to design the building. The owner then puts the project drawings out for bids from contractors. The projec t is usually awarded to the lowest bidding contractor with little or no regard to the relationship between the architect and contractor. There is also ge nerally a minimal amount of desi gn collaboration be tween the two parties. This common practice is not very conduc ive to change or progress. The designer continues to design how they are used to designing a nd the contractor continues to build how they are used to building. Building more e ffective knowledge systems for sustainability takes time and patience. Strategies to promote such systems require a sufficiently long-term perspective that takes account of the generally slow impact of ideas on practice, the need to learn from field experience, and the time scales i nvolved in enhancing human and institu tional capital necessary for doing all these things (Cash 1998). We need to find a means of quicker change. The slow progression of the traditional design-bid-build approach will allow many more buildings to be constructe d without the due concern for environmental effect. The concept of feedback is very important in the world of design. A designer needs to know if his concepts have worked perfectly, ha ve failed, need improvements, or whatever the

PAGE 14

14 case may be. The discipline of Green Constructi on is on the forefront of design, materials, and construction technique developments. Green build ings are constantly incorporating new ideas and new materials. The designers of these green buildings need as much real world feedback about them as is possible in order to make informed future decisions. Design-build firms offer a direct line of feedback between the c onstruction personnel and the buildings designers. The fi eld administrators can give dir ect feedback on such details as ease of construction, materials durab ility and usability, and the eff ectiveness of design concepts. The progression of green constructi on hinges on the ability of desi gners to learn from mistakes and perpetuate effective design concepts. The ab ility to receive feedb ack on these subjects is heightened in the design-build project delivery format. Of course, a major design failure will make its way back to the designer as mistakes cost someone money. Whoever is out money due to a design mistake will come looking for the designer to recoup losses or place responsibility. It is the smalle r design failures, successes, and details that may go overlooked in a traditional project delivery. Often times, after a set of drawings leaves the desk of a designer, communication with the construction firm is limited to clarifications and problems with the design. The architect may not get feedback on every aspect of the job and minor flaws can be perpetuate d through the design of later buildings. When dealing with new materials and methods associat ed with green construction, this can slow the process and keep sustainable c onstruction practices from progre ssing at their maximum potential. Design-build is a relatively new approach to building construction that allows for much greater cooperation between the bu ilding designer and contractor. Design-build puts both parties under one entity and one roof, where communication is greatly simplified. In some smaller scale scenarios, the designer and contra ctor is even the same person. I find a fundamentally different

PAGE 15

15 image in innovative organizations that is center ed on hands-on practice. People understand value creation as a long-term working relationship with customers, in which they apply the firms skills to anticipate and solve customer problems (Dougherty 2001). The design-build approach gives designers hands-on experience with the construction process and frequent direct communication with the field management. This lets the designers become familiar with the construction practices and lets them understand wh at design practices are successful and efficient in the field. A 2007 Article by Melissa Bilec and Robert Ries suggests that, Project team collaboration early in the design and construction process is an important aspect of green projects. Several of their inte rviewees strongly sugge sted that a key to project success for green projects was collaboration. Co llaboration is cooperation among th e owner, contractor, designer, or design-builder (Bilec 2007). Their study sh owed a strong relationship between successful green construction projects and an integrated team approach a nd collaboration. These qualities are inherently present in the de sign-build project delivery method. Design-build construction administration streamlines the design and construction practice. It eliminates conf licts between the designing and contracting parties. How does it affect the ability to build green? There has been little, if a ny, research into this question. It seems feasible that if design-build simplifies traditional construction practices, it should do the same for green construction. Desi gners should be able to see the effects of their green designs more directly and have more feedback regarding the construction procedures. There is a common conception that building green costs more money for the owner. In many cases, green construction is not more expensive than traditional practices. Planning and forethought are key ingredients to bringing a green construction project to fruition within a

PAGE 16

16 reasonable budget. The life-cycle costs are also greatly reduced in an efficient building and result in an overall net savings. There is significant research to show th at sustainable design and construction is a necessity for our society. There are also plenty of examples as to why design-build construction practices are more efficient in making changes an d progress in constructi on practice. However, little research has been done to establish a correlation between design-build firms and sustainable construction. Some of the overall advantages of design-build project delivery have been identified through this literature review. Thes e strong points will become areas of focus in the survey of construction professiona ls. The goal will be to see if the identified advantages are a factor in the practice of green construction.

PAGE 17

17 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Introduction This thesis seeks to determine the characteris tics of design-build fi rms that contribute to their ability to more effectively transition to green building practices. Research will be conducted by contacting people from many areas of the construction industry and process. Project owners, design-build firm managers, tradi tional construction firm owners, architects, and other parties involved in the i ndustry will be surveyed to see what the opinions are on the subject. Views from all areas of the subject w ill be gathered in an attempt to arrive at an unbiased conclusion. The methodology followed in this research was determined by the objective of the study and the hypotheses statements listed in Chapter 1. The steps were as follows: 1. A literature search was performed on material related to the design-build industry and its relationship with the sustai nable construction industry. 2. The data needed for the analysis was identified. 3. The sources of data were identified. 4. Survey questionnaires were designed to coll ect the necessary data and opinions from industry and project owners. 5. The questionnaires were administered to obtain the data. 6. The questionnaires were analyzed to determ ine the important feat ures of design-build project delivery that help or hurt th e ability to efficiently build green Survey Questionnaires The survey was designed to obtain qualitativ e inf ormation on the subject of design-build firms and building green. There are some ch aracteristics that may seem to be obvious advantages, and these will be explored through the questions. The questions were also designed

PAGE 18

18 to uncover other factors that may not be so clea r as well as factors that act against the designbuild firms ability to adapt quickly. Sample Selection The attendees of the UF Building Construction Career Fair were targeted for the survey. Project Managers, Operations Managers, and Directors of Pre-Construction were contacted among others. Some respondents wished to remain anonymous. Construction professionals who have had experience with sustainable constr uction projects, through both design-build and traditional project delivery methods were targeted. Surveys Conducted The surveys were conducted by m ail between the dates of January 2008 and February 2008. The survey was approved by the University of Florida IRB02 committee. The survey was exempt from approval based on 45 CFR 46.101 (b(2) that states Research involving the use of educational tests (cognitive, di agnostic, aptitude, achievement), survey procedures, interview procedures or observation of public behavior. After receiving th at information, the survey was mailed to fifty individuals with extensive cons truction experience. Self addressed stamped envelopes were included to make responding easier for the survey subjects. Fourteen responses were received with widely varying degrees of insight. Expected Results The hypothesis is that designbuild project delivery is effective in m aking green construction simpler for the owner. This is ul timately what will advance the green construction practice. Making it easier and cheaper for the owners will create more opportunities. A secondary hypothesis is that th e ease of communication between the designers and construction administrators allows both partie s to learn from the process more quickly. Building a library of effective green construction practices is another key aspect to increasing the use of sustainable

PAGE 19

19 design and construction. Advantages of design-build project delivery are expected to be found in these areas. Limitations Contacts for the surveys were limited to c onstruction companies who attended the 2009 University of Florida Building Construction Ca reer Fair. A broader group of construction professionals would have given more insight into the question. The major limitation to the study, however, was receiving only fourteen responses from fifty surveys for a response rate of 28%. The written responses were analyzed to gain some ideas about the correlation between design-build project delivery and green construction practices. However there are no definite conclusions that can be formulated.

PAGE 20

20 CHAPTER 4 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS Introduction Analysis of the survey responses was done by grouping the respondents into two categories. Survey item number two asked the respondents about their green building experience. The responses to th is question were used to create the two groups. Those with four or more green projects experience were put into the group of high experience. Those respondents with three or fewer green projects experience we re put into the group of low experience. These two groups were statistically an alyzed, using t-tests, to find if a significant difference exists between their mean responses Some of the respondents also gave more detailed written responses, but all were help ful in gathering information for the project. Item 1 (Optional) What is you r name and position and what company do you work with? A) N/A B) Director of Business Development C) Sustainable Construction Manager D) Vice President A/E Project Principal E) Project Manager, LEED AP F) Chair of National Green Task Team G) Assistant Project Manager H) Operations Manager I) V.P. of Design-Build J) Project Manager K) Director of Pre-Construction Services L) N/A M) N/A N) N/A Item 2 How many green projects have you been involved in? Table 4-1. Survey respondents green constructi on experience (number of projects) Respondent A BC D EFGHIJKL M N Answer 4 19 20 26133063 1 2

PAGE 21

21 A. Four. I have been involved in the construc tion of two LEED Certif ied Projects in the LEED for Retail pilot program. I have been involved in the budgeting / preconstruction process for two others. B. One. C. Nine green projects, seve n with LEED certification. D. More than twenty projects, including ten which have been LEED certified. E. Two, both LEED silver. F. Six, prior to joining Balfour Beatty, I was Design Production Manager on the largest Design-Build, LEED project in the country McCormick Plaza West Expansion, 20032005. G. One. H. Three. I. Three. One LEED certified, one LEED s ilver, and one LEED silver (pending). J. None. K. I have been involved in six gr een projects in various delivery methods (one certified, one silver, and one gold). L. Three. M. One. N. Two LEED projects are in the preconstruction phase.

PAGE 22

22 Figure 4-1. Survey respondents green constructi on experience (number of projects) The responses to item 2 are shown in Table 4-1 and Figure 4-1. The range of responses for green construction experience is from zero to twenty projects. It would be surprising to find many people who have been involved with more than twenty green projects at this point because it is a relatively new field. The answers to this question were used to group the respondents for analysis of the following survey questions based on their level of experience. Item 3 Please respond to the follow ing statement with a number 1-10 (1 = strongly disagree, 10 = strongly agree): Expanding green construction practices is a major concern.

PAGE 23

23 Figure 4-2. Respondents answers to survey item 3. Table 4-2. Survey item 3 statistical analysis. Respondent Answer High Experience Low Experience A 10 10 B 7 7 C 9 9 D 10 10 E 7 7 F 10 10 G 8 8 H 9 9 I 10 10 J 8 8 K 10 10 L 7 7 M 5 5 N 4 4 Avg 8.14 9.33 7.25 T-Value Probability 0.032

PAGE 24

24 For survey item 3, the null hypothesis (H0) is that the mean response of the high experienced group = the mean response of th e low experienced group. The alternative hypothesis (Ha) is that the mean response of the high experienced group the mean response of the low experienced group. Test of the null hypo thesis finds that it is rejected with 95% confidence. Therefore, it can be concluded that in general, expanding green construction practices is a greater concern for individuals who have more e xperience with green projects compared to those that have less experience. The responses to this survey question show a generally high interest in expa nding green construction practi ces, as indicated by the mean response of 8. Shown in Table 4-2, those respondents who have had more experience with building green gave a mean response of 9.3 compared to a mean of 7.3 for those who have been involved in 3 or fewer green projects. However, both groups agree with the statement, and it is hard to say why there is a difference. Possibly the greate r experience in the field lends to a greater understanding of the problem. The following written responses were also received: Our population growth and its subsequent imp act on dwindling natural resources and our environmental footprint can only be managed responsibly by the use of green construction practices. With the economy the way it is a 4, from a 10 two years ago. One respondent stated that tw o years ago, his response would be a 10, or that he strongly agreed that expanding green construction was a ma jor concern. Now, in the current economic situation, his response is only a 4. This shows that in some cases, building green is tied strongly to the economic conditions.

PAGE 25

25 Item 4 Please respond to the follow ing statement with a number 1-10 (1 = strongly disagree, 10 = strongly agree): The use design-build project delivery makes g reen construction less complicated for the owner and team involved in the project. For survey item 4, the null hypothesis (H0) is that the mean response of the high experienced group = the mean response of th e low experienced group. The alternative hypothesis (Ha) is that the mean response of the high experienced group the mean response of the low experienced group. Test of the null hypothesis finds that it is accepted with 95% confidence, and there is no signifi cant difference between the groups with high or low levels of experience, shown in Table 4-3. Figure 4-3 illustrates a mean response of 6.71 out of 10. There is a fair level of agreement with the statement that The use of design-build project delivery makes green construction less complicated for the owner and team involved in the project. Although most of the respondents agree here, there is some diff erence between those professionals with more experience and those with less. However, the difference in the means is not statistically significant. The following written res ponse was also received: I believe that the right constr uction team makes green construction less complicated for the ownership entity. I believe that the one-s top shopping angle offered by design-build firms does not necessarily make the green c onstruction process less complicated for the owner.

PAGE 26

26 Figure 4-3. Respondents an swers to survey item 4. Table 4-3. Survey item 4 statistical analysis. Respondent Answer High Experience Low Experience A 2 2 B 3 3 C 9 9 D 10 10 E 3 3 F 9 9 G 8 8 H 7 7 I 5 5 J 6 6 K 10 10 L 7 7 M 7 7 N 8 8 Avg 6.71 7.83 5.88 T-Value Probability 0.210

PAGE 27

27 Item 5 Please respond to the follow ing statement with a number 1-10 (1 = strongly disagree, 10 = strongly agree): Traditional project delivery methods work just as efficiently and are no more complicated than design-build for green projects. Figure 4-4. Respondents an swers to survey item 5. The mean response of 4.71, shown in Figure 4-4, is just below the agree level of 5. This shows that the respondents do not feel th at traditional project delivery methods work as efficiently as design-build for green projects. Those respond ers with more green building experience agree even less with the statement (a mean of 4). This shows that the more experienced green builders somewhat prefer desi gn-build over traditional methods for building successful green projects. However, this di fference is not statistically significant. For survey item 5, the null hypothesis (H0) is that the mean response of the high experienced group = the mean response of th e low experienced group. The alternative

PAGE 28

28 hypothesis (Ha) is that the mean response of the high experienced group the mean response of the low experienced group. Test of the null hypothesis finds that it is accepted with 95% confidence, and there is no signifi cant difference between the groups with high or low levels of experience. This is i llustrated in Table 4-4. Although other project delivery methods may have the ability to achieve the same exceptional green building results as design-build, they are not necessarily as simplified. The low mean response of 4.71 indicate s that the surveyed professiona ls agree. However, the low number of responses does not allow any definite conclusions. Table 4-4. Survey item 5 statistical analysis. Respondent Answer High Experience Low Experience A 10 10 B 4 4 C 2 2 D 1 1 E 7 7 F 5 5 G 4 4 H 6 6 I 7 7 J 3 3 K 1 1 L 5 5 M 3 3 N 8 8 Avg 4.71 4.00 5.25 T-Value Probability 0.453 The following written responses were also received: I especially agree if the Cont ractor has a LEED Accredited Professional involved with the project in some capacity. It becomes the risk management respons ibility of the D/B, not the owner.

PAGE 29

29 If a true green project is the desired end result, as defined by the USGBC and the LEED rating system, then you must have all project team members involve d at the onset of planning and design. Even when you atte nd a USGBC LEED training seminar, the training test projects (which are real, built example projects) are DB projects where all parties were involved from the onset. With that said, let me go on to counter that if budget and schedule truly are of no consequence, which is rarely if never the case in the real world, then the DB/CM Contractor may not need to be involved during design to monitor cost and constructability issues during the pr ocess. In that sense, my answer to this statement may be different. Item 6 Please respond to the follow ing statement with a number 1-10 (1 = strongly disagree, 10 = strongly agree): Communication between Designers and Cons truction Managers is improved and more effective in design-build firms th an in traditional project delivery. Figure 4-5. Respondents an swers to survey item 6. The mean response of 7.5, shown in Figure 45, indicates that surveyed professionals agree. Communication is improved in desi gn-build firms over trad itional designer and contractor relationships. The ge neral nature of a design-build firm lends it to promote better

PAGE 30

30 communication between the designers and construction managers. Having both parties working under one name, under one roof, and for the same entity naturally creates a team scenario. Table 4-5. Survey item 6 statistical analysis. Respondent Answer High Experience Low Experience A 2 2 B 7 7 C 8 8 D 10 10 E 6 6 F 7 7 G 7 7 H 8 8 I 10 10 J 9 9 K 8 8 L 8 8 M 7 7 N 8 8 Avg 7.50 7.17 7.75 T-Value Probability 0.642 For survey item 6, the null hypothesis (H0) is that the mean response of the high experienced group = the mean response of th e low experienced group. The alternative hypothesis (Ha) is that the mean response of the high experienced group the mean response of the low experienced group. Test of the null hypothesis finds that it is accepted with 95% confidence, and there is no stat istically significant difference be tween the groups with high or low levels of experience. One of the respondents, a Director of Pre-C onstruction Services goes so far as to say, It has been my experience that the design-build delivery, no matter the relationship between the designers and the CM, always finishes with a be tter end product in all measurable parameters

PAGE 31

31 (quality construction, budget, and schedule). This is certainly an indication of improved communication. Although, most of the respondents agree, the response level is too low to make any conclusions. The following written responses were also received: My experience has shown me that the same disconnects between Design and Construction can exist whether the project is Traditional or Design-Build. I agree. Im not sure that communication be tween designers and CMs in the design-build process is always improved and more effective, but it certainly is the desired end result for a better project delivery. It has been my experience that the design-build delivery, no matter the relationship between the designers an d the CM, always finishes with a better end product in all measurable parameters (quality construction, budget, and schedule). Item 7 Please respond to the follow ing statement with a number 1-10 (1 = strongly disagree, 10 = strongly agree): Designers more frequently and constructively ge t feedback on successful /failed design ideas in a design-build firm than a conventional design firm. Figure 4-6. Respondents an swers to survey item 7.

PAGE 32

32 Table 4-6. Survey item 7 statistical analysis. Respondent Answer High Experience Low Experience A 4 4 B 8 8 C 8 8 D 10 10 E 6 6 F 7 7 G 8 8 H 8 8 I 10 10 J 9 9 K 5 5 L 8 8 M 7 7 N 8 8 Avg 7.57 7.00 8.00 T-Value Probability 0.345 Figure 4-6 shows a mean response of 7.6. This indicates that the surveyed construction professionals agree. Receiving more feedb ack on building design can do nothing but improve future designs. In a design-build firm, the abilit y to receive input from the construction team is greatly improved over a conventional c onstruction project delivery method. For survey item 7, the null hypothesis (H0) is that the mean response of the high experienced group = the mean response of th e low experienced group. The alternative hypothesis (Ha) is that the mean response of the high experienced group the mean response of the low experienced group. Test of the null hypothesis finds that it is accepted with 95% confidence, and there is no stat istically significant difference be tween the groups with high or low levels of experience. This is indicated in Table 4-6.

PAGE 33

33 The more experienced green builders had a slightly lower mean response to this statement. This may be more of a reflection on their design-build expe rience than their green construction experience as the statement does not di rectly include green c onstruction. However, both groups more than agree that designers are more able to receive feedback on design ideas in a design-build firm than a conventional design fi rm. There are not enough responses to reach a valid conclusion. The following written responses were also received: Design failures most certainly are communicated equally frequently in both Design-Build and Traditional construction due to the fact that failures cost someone money. Design successes I suspect are probably conveyed bett er in a Design-Build project than in a Traditional project. They are more acutely aware of their performance because of the contractual relationship with the contractor. I have to land in the middle on this one. In true design-build, the CM is afforded the time to properly and effectively perform valuable constructability studies thus providing the designers time to provide corrective measures to the documents before bidding and construction. Problems in the field are thus avoided, averting any possible opportunity for any failed-design feedback. Conversely, in the conventional designbid-build scenario, most design flaws are discovered along the way providing more opportunity for so-called feedback, good or bad. Item 8 Please respond to the follow ing statement with a number 1-10 (1 = strongly disagree, 10 = strongly agree): A contractor who isnt involved in the buildin gs design through the design-build project delivery method may get frustrated by specifi ed construction techniques used in green construction projects.

PAGE 34

34 Figure 4-7. Respondents an swers to survey item 8. Table 4-7. Survey item 8 statistical analysis. Respondent Answer High Experience Low Experience A 5 5 B 3 3 C 10 10 D 8 8 E 4 4 F 5 5 G 7 7 H 5 5 I 10 10 J 7 7 K 5 5 L 2 2 M 5 5 N 1 1 Avg 5.50 5.83 5.25 T-Value Probability 0.705

PAGE 35

35 Figure 4-7 shows a mean response of 5.5. This indicates that the re spondents agree that contractor involvement from the buildings c onception may reduce frustration with green building construction techniques. There is a polarization of the re sponses to this survey item. The respondents tended to agree or disagree rela tively strongly. This could be a result of differing personal experiences in dealing with inexperienced green contractors. The written responses indicate a stronge r relationship between a contractors level of frustration and his/her experience with green constructi on or his acceptance of the con cept of sustainable design. For survey item 8, the null hypothesis (H0) is that the mean response of the high experienced group = the mean response of th e low experienced group. The alternative hypothesis (Ha) is that the mean response of the high experienced group the mean response of the low experienced group. Test of the null hypothesis finds that it is accepted with 95% confidence, and there is no stat istically significant difference be tween the groups with high or low levels of experience. This is shown in Table 4-7. The following written responses were also received: If the Contractor has no prior experience with green construction methods then yes, he could become frustrated. I dont believe th is is an advantage of Design-Build over Traditional construction but rather a function of familiarity with green construction methods. This depends solely on the contractors e xperience to date with green projects, his willingness to participate in the green buildi ng process, and ultimately in his level of commitment to the cause of environmentally conscious construction. Many of the green building pract ices create more work for th e contractor or deviate from the traditional practices to which they are accu stomed. A contractor who has experienced these differences already or who is willing to accept them based on our need to lessen the environmental impact will likely be less frustrated.

PAGE 36

36 Any contractor who is involved early in the design process is going to be more successful and experience fewer problems than one who joins th e project at the construction phase. In most green projects, the contractor is i nvolved early in the design phase. This lends to a higher rate of success. Design-build firms incorporate the c onstruction personne l early on every project and are less likely to experience the problems that come from having an uninformed contractor. When a green project uses a traditional proj ect delivery method, there is a chance that the contractor will not have been a part of the design process. Under these conditions, the contractor is more likely to run into problems that he is not familiar with and did not have any input with the design. This could lead to a frustrated contractor and a co mpromised final product. Using a contractor or a design-build firm who is familia r with green construction is the best method to avoid problems involving a contract or who is aggravated by new t echniques used in sustainable building construction. This idea is supported by the survey respondents, however the sample size is too insignificant to co me to a definite conclusion.

PAGE 37

37 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS The responses from the surveyed construc tion professionals gave some insight into whether design-build project delivery can facil itate green constructi on. However, the low number of responses renders the study inconc lusive. The hypothesis was that design-build project delivery was the method best suited to ad vance construction into a greener industry. The responses support this hypothesi s, but there are not enough responses to make a legitimate conclusion. Survey responders agree that designbuild project delivery simplifies the process for the owner and allows for grea ter communication betw een the designer and project manager. Future successes in sustainable construction ar e built upon past and present successes. There are a number of basic qualities th at are important to producing successful green projects today. Based on both the literature revi ew and written survey responses, the most important part of a successful green construction project is the very early development of a committed team format. The designer, contractor, owner, and all parties involved must be gin their relationship at the earliest stages of the project. In most design-build firms, th is team has been formed, tested, and perfected before the project has even been conceived. Design-build architects also have a better line of communication with the construction managers and generally get more feedback on their design efforts. The survey found that a very important aspe ct of advancing sustai nable construction is making the process easier for the owner. Since the owner is the one who provides funding for projects, they ultimately make the decision on wh ether or not the project will be green. Designbuild delivery gives owners a single point of c ontact for their venture as well as streamlines many aspects of the procedure, simplifies midproject changes, and pot entially reduces the construction time and completes the building sooner All of these details give design-build a

PAGE 38

38 distinct advantage over conven tional project delivery and ma ke green construction a more feasible option for the owner. Some of these inherent advantages of the design-build structure can be adapted over to conventional construction project delivery methods to make green projects more successful. The early development of a committed team was a recu rring answer in the research. If the building designer, contractor, owner, and other parties can work efficientl y together, the project will be successful. Having LEED experience d professionals on the project te am is very advantageous in dealing with the extensive documentation that is required for certification. The respondents gave some insightful fee dback, however the low number of survey responses renders the study inconc lusive. A much larger sample size is needed to make any valid conclusions. The fact remains that all of us need to make every effort to reduce our footprint. Converting the construction industry into a less environmentally-destructive practice is a necessity, and it must be done quickly. Recommendations for future research: The major obstacle of this research was receiving survey responses. In order to reach a valid conclusion, additional survey responses are needed. Future researchers need to develop a survey and distribute it to as many and diverse a group of construction professionals as possible. Owners would also be a great survey target. Especially those who have experience buildi ng green with both design-build and traditional project delivery methods.

PAGE 39

39 APPENDIX SURVEY MATERIALS Survey Introduction Letter January 21, 2009 Dear Mouji Linarez: My nam e is Andy Surprenant and I am a Graduate Student in the Build ing Construction program at the University of Florida. I am working on a thesis project about how design-build project delivery can potentially faci litate a transition to a greener construction industry. It would be greatly appreciated if you could take the time to fill out the included short survey and informed consent form. If you feel someone else within the company may be more qualified to answer the questions, please feel free to pass it along. I have included a self-addressed and stamped envelope to make responding easier. Thanks a lot for your time, Andy Surprenant 1236 SW 4th Ave, #12 Gainesville FL 32601 941-468-0398 Andrewjames440@comcast.net

PAGE 40

40 Informed Consent Form Protocol Title: How Can Design-Build Project D eliver y Facilitate Green Construction? Please read this consent document carefully before you decide to participate in this study. Purpose of the research study: The purpose of this study is to find what characte ristics of design-build pr oject delivery lend to a faster transition to green cons truction and ultimately how the transition can be made easier. What you will be asked to do in the study: Answer a short questionnaire about your c onstruction project experiences and thoughts. Time required: 10-25 minutes, depending on the level of detail in your answers. Risk and benefits: You will have to give up 10 to 25 minutes of your day. I do not anticipate that you will gain any direct benefit from participation. Confidentiality: Your identity can be kept confidential if you so wish. Voluntary Participation: Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating. Right to withdraw from the study: You have the right to withdraw from th e study at anytime without consequence. Whom to contact if you have questions about the study: Andy Surprenant, Graduate Student, School of Building Constr uction, phone: 468-0398 Dr. Ries, University of Florida School of Building Construction, 352-273-1150 Dr. Issa, University of Florida School of Building Construction, 352-273-1150 Whom to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study: IRB02 Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250; phone 392-0433. Agreement: I have read the procedure described above. I volunt arily agree to pa rticipate in the procedure and I have received a copy of this description. Participant: ___________________________________________ Date: Principal Investigator: ___________________________________ Date:

PAGE 41

41 Survey How Can Design-Build Project Delivery Facilita te Green Construction? A Master Thesis Project by Andrew Surprenant Definitions: Design-build: A project delivery method wh erein the design and construction of a project are handled by a single company. Design-bid-build: A traditional project delivery method wherein an architect is hired by the owner to design the project. The pl ans are then put out for bid and a contractor is hired based on qualifications and bid price. Green construction: A growing form of construction practice where extra care is taken to preserve the environment. Typical areas of concern are: reducing construction waste, using natural lighting, improving indoor environmental quality, and reduci ng energy and water consumption. LEED certification is often a priority in these projects. However, for this questionnaire, any project with si gnificant design efforts to reduce environmental impact will be considered green construction. Questionnaire 1. (Optional)What is your name and position and what company do you work with? Please respond to the following statements with a number 1-10 (1 = strongly disagree, 10 = strongly agree): 2. Expanding green construction pr actices is a major concern. 3. The use design-build project delivery makes gr een construction less comp licated for the owner and team involved in the project. 4. Traditional project delivery methods work just as efficiently and are no more complicated than design-build for green projects. 5. Communication between Designers and Construction Managers is improved and more effective in design-build firms than in traditional project delivery. 6. Designers more frequently and constructively get feedback on successful/failed design ideas in a design-build firm than a conventional design firm. 7. A contractor who isnt invol ved in the buildings design th rough the design-build project delivery method may get frustrated by specifi ed construction techniques used in green construction projects. Please answer the following questions as thoroughl y as possible: (use more paper if necessary)

PAGE 42

42 8. How many green projects have you been involved in? 9. What are some ways that the project delivery methods helped or hur t the projects? Please provide any specific examples. 10. What are your opinions on design-build overa ll (when compared to traditional methods)? 11. In your opinion, can or cannot de sign-build project delivery help transition construction into a greener industry? 12. Please add anything that you thin k may be useful to my study: Survey Item 9 What are some w ays that the project delivery methods helped or hurt the projects? Please provide any specific examples. A) Both of the LEED Certified Projects that we were involved in were constructed traditionally. Our familiarity with LEED Construction practices as well as the documentation management helped us B) The project was a GC, but we were very involved in preconstruction. C) The earlier the construction manager is involved in the project, the better the outcome. Past experience in use of untried, so-called green materials has enabled the company to provide insight into material selection to make the project more sustainable. D) The Design-build project delivery approach gave the construction/project management team early insight and buy-in of the green construction strategi es, requirements, and materials, which made the procurement, s ub-contracting, and construction phases of the project run more smoothly. It also simplified the docum entation phase required for LEED certification since all involve d worked toward a common goal. E) In both cases, we (the general contractor) were on board during the design phase for budgeting and gathering LEED submittals. It wa s important to maintain close contact with the architect, as they were driving the LEED process. F) Design-build on the McCormick project was help ful as the contractor was the majority JV partner and thus could manage th e design process and green attributes. G) Bringing the GC in early allows for cost effective design changes which will improve schedule and budget

PAGE 43

43 H) I have worked on a design-build LEED project (UF Powell Structures Lab) and am now working on a LEED project as a CM (UF H ough Hall). As long as the project team (Architect, Owner, Builder) works together a nd fulfills their rolls, there should not be a big difference. The CM project we are curre ntly doing has just as much cooperation as the design-build project. I) The use of design-build allowed us to complete a state funded project for the Little White House Museum in a 12 month period, which w ould have been impossible with traditional methods. J) N/A K) Ill answer this question with a specific example. One LEED project I was involved in was actually a design-bid-build project wh ere the owner spelle d out all the green parameters and LEED specs and points to be adhered to for the project to reach LEED Certified rating. At the time, this was to be our first LEED project. We were so into the project and excited about the fact that it was our first LEED project, we actually identified and made a reality more LEED credits at no added cost to the owner so that the project could become LEED Silver instead of LEED Certified. We didnt have to do that. We were not contractually obligated to act in any capacity other than the GC that bid the job to build it per plans and specs, but we acted as a member of the team, acted responsibly, and made the team results all the better. L) In a design-build project, the contractor ha s control over the design and specifications. In the traditional design-bid-build method, the contra ctor is left the deci sions of the architect or owner who are many times at odds with each other. On a recent job, the architect and owner could not agree on the intent of the door finish, leaving th e contractor in the middle having to eat some cost. M) Increased communication N) The project delivery methods are design-bid-build. On one project, the LEED rating went up through the field teams proactive appr oach after award. On the other project, the LEED rating is being maintained by a team and owner who are more passive. Neither project is complete. Analysis of the responses i ndicates that traditional proj ect delivery methods certainly have the ability to deliver a successful green project. Having team members who are knowledgeable of LEED documentation will make any LEED certified project that much easier. Early involvement of the construction team in the design phase will improve results. A good

PAGE 44

44 construction team will join the team early a nd make use of their materials and methods knowledge and potentially shorten the schedule and reduce costs. Eric Hickox feels that, As long as the pr oject team (Architect, Owner, Builder) works together and fulfills their roles, there should not be a big difference (between design-build and traditional methods). Successful traditional co nstruction projects and successful design-build projects have many of the same characteristic s. They both involve people who work well together toward a common goal. The difference is that the odds of a deficient relationship affecting the project are greatly reduced when a single entity is used for both phases of a construction project. Survey Item 10 What are your opinions on design-build ov era ll (when compared to traditional methods)? A) I believe that Design-Build is capable of helping an ow ner avoid many of the design errors that occur in Traditional construction. In my experience however, the same failures occur in either method. B) It can be a very successful delivery method. The owner must understa nd the process, the risks and the benefits. C) Just as any delivery method, there are pluses and minuses. Hedrick Brothers primarily provides pre-construction serv ices, acting as the constructio n manager on the project. The earlier the C.M. is on the proj ect, the better the green project is. D) The Design-build approach to project delivery provides the customer with a single point of contact, which simplifies the project contra cting for them. It also contributes to a shorter overall schedule (Design-permitting-construction), by allowing full team involvement and collaboration on the early d ecisions that will ultimately affect the project cost and schedule. Thereby, avoiding costly rework and also allowing for an overlap of project phases. E) I am always for having a contractor on board be fore drawings are fina lized this is quazi design-build. I think pure designbuild has its benefits, but is be st utilized with very tight schedules. It is probably too project specific to make general assumptions. F) I prefer design-build G) It is effective with the proper team.

PAGE 45

45 H) I like them. The communication is very good and the Construction Managers can provide input early on cost, sc hedule, and constructability. I) I prefer this delivery method. A great deal of preparation is required for a successful execution, namely the culture compatibility of all the firms involved and their willingness and capability to function as a TEAM. J) Design-build provides a streamlined construc tion process for all parties involved and allows for one point of contact for clients. K) Once again, because of my position, my opini on here is a biased one, but I think all projects generally benefit from a deliver y method that involves having all parties involved as a team from the beginning. L) Design-build is the preferred method of c onstruction when you can get the owner to buy into the contract and relinquish control. Design-build brings a team atmosphere to the project and creates a worki ng relationship between the pa rties because the goals are aligned. M) Effective N) My opinion is a positive one. General Contractors can speak the architects language better than the owners. General Contractor s can also speak the owners language better than the architect. This allows the design-build GC to steer the desi gn in the direction of the budget, minimizing costs while maintaining style and quality. An analysis of the responses indicates th at design-build is a very capable delivery method. All responders had very positive things to say about the design-build project delivery method and most prefer it over traditional met hods. In ideal conditions, any project delivery method can produce a successful project. The primar y benefit of design-build project delivery is a simple reduction in the number of variables. Many other benefits that apply to green proj ects and everyday construction projects were mentioned by the survey subjects. These include early detection of design errors, a single point of contact for the owner, the potential for a shorter schedul e and quicker overall project completion, a full team concept from projec t inception, good communicati on, and alignment of goals for all parties involved.

PAGE 46

46 All of these advantages can be applied to both green and traditional construction projects. Successful green projects today lead to a wider acceptance and desire to build green in the future. Ultimately the owner decides what project delivery method is used. When things can be simplified for him, he/she is more likely to take the step from conventio nal construction practices to more sustainable building designs. Survey Item 11 In your opinion, can or cannot design-build pr oject delivery help tran sition construction into a greener industry? A) Yes, but no more than Traditional C onstruction methods where the Design and Construction teams both have LEED educat ion, LEED experience a nd a clear line of communication between one another. B) Im not yet convinced it will help or hurt. The most important decisions still lie with the government standards and owner requirements. C) Yes, Design-build can help transition constr uction into a greener industry, but there are also constraints that need to be resolved, i.e. subcontractor and engineer work early in the project to resolve conflicts. But cost of construction can in crease based on the fact that typically an engineers design fee is based on the size of the system and a subcontractors fee is based on cost of ma terials and scope of work. D) The USGBC recognizes the importance of an in tegrated team approach to green design and construction and to the LEED certifica tion process. The design-build delivery system, including early consensus decision making, full team buy-in, and coordination and collaborative design and construction is perfectly suited to delivering cost effective and efficient green projects. E) This is dependent on the individual firm. Tr adition design-bid-build scenarios are just as effective in terms of transition if both th e architect and contra ctor embrace green practices. F) Yes, but design-bid-build is working also. G) Yes. H) I dont think there is a direct correlation. The team approach is the key. That can be accomplished with design-build or construc tion management. Design-bid-build makes it a bit tougher.

PAGE 47

47 I) I dont see a direct correlation here. The real difficulty is the finite documentation and credible audit trail of materi als and manufactured products that comprise the completed structure. Very few subcontractors and s uppliers are experienced in the level of documentation required and are either unable or unwilling to respond in a timely manner. J) If a project were to be designed with su stainability in mind from the beginning in a traditional delivery method, I do not feel th ere would be a great difference between traditional and design-build as relates to a greener project. Design-build would however allow for greener initiatives to be more easily implemented on the fly. K) Yes, I think the design-build delivery can he lp transition construction into a greener industry but only from the standpo int that it is a tool. The re sponsibility of taking care of our built environment lies with the individua l and the decisions we make as a team. L) Design-build can help transition into a greener in dustry as long as that is a stated goal of the design-build arrangement. M) Yes, however it is most affected by direction of client. N) IT CANNOT! The owners must accept the life cycle cost savings of the green process before we will have a greener industry. W ith the economy as tight as it is, owners are just trying to get things built without the up-front cost impacts of greening their buildings. Most of the responders agreed that designbuild project delivery can help progress the green building movement. Some had different reasoning than others and a few felt that the transition is entirely up to the ow ners. Many of the answers included traits of any type of firm that would lend to good green cons truction projects. These include d: LEED certified architects and contractors, an early commitment and team approach, and a full buy-in to the sustainable construction ideals. Although thes e characteristics could be found in conventional firms, designbuild firms have a leg up with th e inherent team structure. Some of the responses focused on the commit ment of owners and this is completely valid. The owners are responsible for the funding of any project. It is primarily up to them to make a commitment to this environmentally-frie ndly construction. In or der for the owners to turn this corner, they need to be confident in the abilities of their desi gners and contractors as

PAGE 48

48 well as the building performance and life-cycle savi ngs. Building this confidence in the owners is done through successful green projects and succe ssful green construction firms. The idea was summed up well by one of the anonymous survey re sponses, The design-build delivery system, including early consensus decision making, full team buy-in, and coordination and collaborative design and construction is perfect ly suited to delivering cost effective and efficient green projects. Survey Item 12 Please add anything that you th ink may be useful to my study: A) N/A B) N/A C) N/A D) A successful transition toward green constr uction requires a comm itment from owners, architects, engineers, contract ors, subcontractors, vendors an d material suppliers. Truly integrated design-build firms include in-house architects, engineers, and contractors and have well developed relationships with subcontractors, vendors, and material suppliers. Design-build firms therefore have the best opportunity to facilitat e an effective green project solution for an owner co mmitted to green construction. E) N/A F) Look into the IPD delivery method as this is the future way. Also, IPD, D/B, D/B/B can all benefit from BIM and the inte gration of green attributes. G) Bringing a GC into a project during the design phase is an all around good idea. It helps keep costs down and productivity up. H) N/A I) Review the LEED criteria to understand the va lue of a consultant or at least team members who are LEED accredited and the level of effort required for successful submittals to achieve desired certification. J) N/A K) N/A

PAGE 49

49 L) N/A M) N/A N) I think a survey of owners interest in g reening their projects in 2009 and 2010 vs. in 2005 and 2006 would be valuable. The survey responses consistently highlight an early team approach and LEED certified team members as well as a full team buy-in to gr een construction. Truly integrated design-build firms include in-house architects, engineers, and contractors and have well developed relationships with subcon tractors, vendors, and material supplie rs. Design-build firms therefore have the best opportunity to facilitate an eff ective green project solution for an owner committed to green construction. This statement by one of the surveyed construc tion professionals sums up the advantage of design-build firms well. Th e fact that the team a nd the relationships are established before the project even begins is a huge advantage over other project delivery methods.

PAGE 50

50 LIST OF REFERENCES Bilec, Melissa, Robert R ies. "Preliminary Study of Green Design and Project Delivery Methods in the Public Sector." Journal of Green Building 2(2007): 3-12. Brady, Darlene. "The Education of an Architect: Continuity and Change." Journal of Architectural Education Vol. 50, No. 109 1996 32-49. 15 Sep 2008 Cash, David, Clark, Alcock, Dickson, Eckle y, Guston, Jager, and Mitchell. "Knowledge Systems for Sustainable Development." National Academy of Sciences Vol. 100, No. 1408 07 1998 83-92. 15 Sep 2008 Dougherty, Deborah. "Reimagining the Differe ntiation and Integration of Work for Sustained Product Innovation." Organization Science Vol. 12, No. 508 2001 612631. 15 Sep 2008 Margolin, Victor. "Design for a Sustainable World." Design Issues Vol. 14, No. 2summer 1998 8086-8091. 15 Sep 2008 Mileti, Dennis and Peek-Gottschlich. "Hazards and Sustainable Development in the United States." Risk Management Vol. 3, No. 12001 61-70. 15 Sep 2008 Potera, Carol. "Sustainable Development: Growing Green Communities." The National Institute of Envi ronmnental Health Sciences Vol.113, No. 505 2005 A300. 15 Sep 2008 Uhl, Christopher and Anderson. "Green Des tiny: Universities Leading the Way to a Sustainable Future." BioScience Vol. 51, No. 101 2001 36-42. 15 Sep 2008

PAGE 51

51 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Andrew Surprenant is a student of the University of Flor ida Rinker School of Building Construction.. He was born in Jacksonville, FL and has lived in Florida his whole life. He moved to the west coas t of the state at a young age and has lived in Englewood, FL most of his life. He graduated from Lem on Bay High School and spent some time at Florida Gulf Coast University before entering the architecture program at UF in 2004. He received a Bachelor of Design in 2007 and entered the building construc tion masters program at the University of Florida the following fall semester He received his M.S.B.C. from the University of Florida in the spring of 2009.