Case Study Rolling Plains New Medical Office Building

1. Michael Flores McKinstry mflores@mckinstry.com 469-789-9920 Funding for Efficient New Buildings through Integrated Project Delivery and High Performance Design-Build Case Study Rolling Plains New Medical Office Building

2. Agenda • Concept of Project – Challenging Metrics • HPDB / IPD – Accountability / Outcomes Focus • Energy Modeling = Total Cost of Ownership • GMAX = Predictable Costs / No Change Orders • Project Schedule = Fast Track / No Faster Way • Deal Structure = Mitigated Owner Risk • Value Engineering = Eliminated • Relationship = Collaborative / Comfortable

3. Objectives • Explain how High Performance Design Build / Integrated Project Delivery (HPDB/IPD) differs from alternative project delivery methods (and why it is usually better!) • Identify the key participantsin High Performance Design Build • Identify contractualmethods for High Performance Design Build • Understand how High Performance Design Build benefits the construction and turnover processes • Explain how High Performance Design Build provides more efficient operations and maintenance • Understand High Performance Design Build and the software tools that may be used to provide Integrated Project Delivery

4. High Performance Design-Build • Age Myth • Cost Myth • Complexity Myth • Time Advantage • Early Cost Confirmation • Lower Cost For Design Changes

5. What It Means … When To Use It • Larger / Complex Projects • Time of the Essence • Multiple Stakeholders • Owner Perceives High Risk • Ongoing Operating Costs Important • Good Public Perception Required • Constrained Budgets Single Point Accountability Increased Owner Control of Outcomes Lower Financial, Technical and Legal Risk High Performance Design Build Flexibility Adaptability Predictability Eliminate Relationship Tension Schedule Compression and Control

6. Facility Economics – Building Costs Over 40 yrs. Construction 11% 14% Financing 50% 25% Operations & Utility Costs Alterations

7. High Cost of “Traditional” Design Process Ability to impact cost and functional capabilities Cost of design change Preferred Design Process Traditional design process PD SD DD CD PR CA OP

8. HPDB Financials Design | Bid | Build High Performance D/B • Professional Fees 12% • Architect / Engineer / GC • Professional Fees 14% • Architect / Engineer (6%) • General Contractor (8%) Fees Fees • Trades Labor and Materials 86% • Mechanical • Electrical • Plumbing • Data • Etc. • Trades Labor and Materials 88% • Mechanical • Electrical • Plumbing • Data • Etc. Building Building Change Orders +5-15% • More Dollars Go To Building • No Change Orders • Better Operating Costs • Equipment Selection Control • No Finger Pointing • Expedient

9. Average Savings of Green Buildings WASTE COST SAVINGS 50-90% WATER USE SAVINGS 30-50% CARBON SAVINGS 35% ENERGY SAVINGS 30% Source: Capital E

10. SCHOOLS HOSPITALS 20% BETTER TESTPERFORMANCE EARLIER DISCHARGE OFFICES RETAIL FACTORIES 2-16% PRODUCTIVITYINCREASE INCREASE IN SALES PER SQUARE FOOT INCREASED PRODUCTION HPDB Results

11. Rolling Plains New Medical Office High Performance Design-Build

12. Integrated Design Process • Design & construction of a 20,000 S.F. 5 clinic doctors’ office building.

13. Objectives • Explain how High Performance Design Build / Integrated Project Delivery (HPDB/IPD) differs from alternative project delivery methods (and why it is usually better!) • Identify the key participantsin High Performance Design Build • Identify contractualmethods for High Performance Design Build • Understand how High Performance Design Build benefits the construction and turnover processes • Explain how High Performance Design Build provides more efficient operations and maintenance • Understand High Performance Design Build and the software tools that may be used to provide Integrated Project Delivery

14. Energy Modeling

15. Building Efficiency Measures • EUI Target – Design to the target! • Lighting Improvements – 0.72 watts/sq.ft. • HVAC Systems – Packaged VAV w/elec. Heat • Building Automation – with Occupant Comfort In Mind • Low Flow Plumbing Fixtures • Building Envelope • Increased Wall R-value (R13 to R20) • High reflective roofing membrane • Rain and Condensate Water Harvesting • Designed for addition of Solar PV

16. Energy Model - Baseline

17. Energy Model - Actual

18. Energy Model - Results • Annual Consumption • Baseline 255 kWh • Model 184 kWh • Summer Peak Demand • Baseline 110 kW • Model 61 kW • Winter Peak Demand • Baseline 232 kW • Model 206 kW

19. GMAX - Project Costs • Total Project Cost: $3,500,000 • Per Square Foot: $184.21/sq.ft. • Industry Benchmark: $185.07/sq.ft. • Guaranteed Maximum Cost Model • No Construction Change Orders to Owner

20. Project Schedule Design: 6.5 months Construction: 13.5 months

21. Summary - Benefits ofHigh Performance Design-Build • Long-term energy performance • Total Cost of Ownership model • Simplified procurement/contracting • Streamlined schedule • GMAX pricing • Full commissioning and first year M&V

22. Questions? Michael Flores mflores@mckinstry.com 469-789-9920