Once the nature of the facility was better understood, the October 2004 baseline schedule was amended and extended in June 2005 to allow for additional cost estimating and Owner review among the various design stages, as well as additional time in the construction schedule. Additionally, once it was understood that an authorization to proceed with the design of the new facility would not be forthcoming from the 2005 Legislature, but more likely the 2006 Legislature, the baseline schedule was further delayed by twelve months. These changes created a later construction start date, and therefore additional escalation cost, as well as a later hospital opening date. Specifically, the construction bid date for both options in the traditional delivery approach was forwarded twenty-two months to July 2009.
The design and construction schedules for pursuing either site option are almost identical, with the exception of the renovation of University Hospital, which falls exclusively in the South Option. It would be reasonable to expect that site acquisition may be more involved in the North Option. On the other hand, the pursuit of at least a limited renovation of University Hospital in the South Option extends the overall project schedule.
With respect to the traditional design-bid-build approach incorporating linear programming, the schedule revisions resulted in approximately $70.0M in additional escalation costs for both options. The opening date of the proposed inpatient facility in both options was moved to August 2013, and the final Owner move-in into the renovated University Hospital outpatient space (South Option) became November 2014.
At Facility Planning & Control’s (FP&C) request, the Team examined alternative construction delivery methods for potential time and cost savings. The Team analyzed the projected time and escalation savings between a traditional design-bid-build approach and a fast-track design and construction approach. The Team also scrutinized other potential time/cost savings factors, such as beginning the operational and space programming effort prior to the selection of a Project Architect.
With respect to the fast-track design with accelerated programming approach, the schedule revisions resulted in approximately $50.0M in additional escalation costs for both options (a $20.0M savings over the traditional delivery method). The opening date of the proposed inpatient facility in both options was moved to July 2012 (a time savings of over a year from the traditional approach), and the final Owner move-in into the renovated University Hospital outpatient space (South Option) became October 2013.
The Planning Team recommends that LSU HCSD/FP&C initiate operational and functional programming, along with IT planning, in July 2006 after the 2006 State Legislature session ends, concurrent with site acquisition activities and incorporate a fast-track construction delivery method. When compared with the traditional approach with a later programming start, this would avoid an additional $20.0M in escalation cost in both options and allow the new facility to open almost thirteen months earlier. Therefore, by employing this approach, the cost for the proposed facility would be approximately $800.0M - $825.0M, as opposed to $825.0M - $850.0M.
 |
(c) 2005 All Rights Reserved. |
