Teamwork Tames Risk On Critical Utah State Capitol Projects

By Tony Illia

	(Photo courtesy of Kepco Plus by Martin Van Hemert)

Utah’s elegant capitol building, resting atop a grassy knoll overlooking downtown Salt Lake City, is called the "People’s House" and serves as a cherished civic symbol and state historic landmark. But the neoclassical revival-style structure, designed by architect Richard K. A. Kletting with landscaped grounds by Frederick Law Olmsted, was in bad shape. Dedicated in 1916, the building was showing its age and needed a quick fix so state officials turned to design-build and design-assist teaming methods for a timely cure.

One of the first steps the state took towards revitalization was to create a Capitol Preservation Board in 1998 to oversee the 90-year-old building’s renaissance. The following year, Salt Lake City-based Cooper Roberts Simonsen Architects (CRSA) was tapped to prepare a report that assessed the condition of the 320,000-sq-ft capitol, including its soaring 165-ft-high rotunda and marble Corinthian and Ionic columns. The results led to an ambitious $200-million multi-year undertaking of seismic improvements, structural enhancements, system upgrades and interior and exterior restoration that would become the state’s single largest building project.

Utah’s Neoclassical “People’s House” needed a renovation and seismic upgrade, made possible by the design-build East/West project. (Photo courtesy of FFKR, by Paul Richer)

Before the upgrades could commence, the newly formed board first had to prove its mettle. It needed to complete two new steel-framed, granite-clad buildings totaling 185,000-sq-ft located just behind the capitol to the east and west. The $36.6-million expansion originally was outlined under Kletting’s master plan for the 40-acre site. The four-level East/West buildings would house the state’s legislature while restoration and repair work took place at the capitol. Much was riding on the project’s success. It would be scrutinized as an example of the board’s ability to deliver a job on schedule and within budget. If it fumbled, state legislators might have second thoughts about funding a massive overhaul of their beloved capitol building. "It was our first major project and it had to be perfect," says David H. Hart, the board’s executive director. "So we turned to design-build to limit our risk."

The board hired Houston-based 3D/I to help it navigate the selection process. With the firm’s assistance, it implemented several unique design-build measures. For instance, instead of selecting a design-build joint venture or integrated firm, the board provided input into both contractor and designer selection to ensure a good fit.

The board issued a request for proposals for a design-build construction manager in April 2001 and narrowed the seven respondents down to a qualifications-based shortlist of three firms. The finalists were asked to prepare a detailed management plan, including budget, schedule, methodology, general conditions and owner interface.

The plans focused on a 100-page-plus book of text and images created by 3D/I over a 12-month period that outlined the board’s design priorities. Much of the document was based on Kletting’s original architectural drawings, which were on loan from the state archives. Unlike bridging documents, the book described the building’s elaborate facade and aesthetic needs, while leaving structural, mechanical and hardware decisions open to the team.

The board selected Jacobsen Construction Co. Inc., Salt Lake City, under a guaranteed-maximum-price contract. Jacobsen and the board then selected the architect. While the board participated in the interviews, the contractor had the final say for its design partner, Capitol Design Team.

The winning team is a consortium of FFKR Architects; Gillies, Stransky, Brems & Smith (GSBS); and CRSA. The design team was hired as a Jacobsen subcontractor under a fixed-fee contract. The three Salt Lake City-based firms divided duties for design, management and historical accuracy among themselves to better handle the project scope while leveraging strengths.

Stone Hunt

The newly established design-build team immediately identified the biggest challenge as being the stone facade fabrication and installation, accounting for nearly 30% of the budget. The team issued subcontractor design-assist RFP’s in July 2001, but all of the submissions were over budget. Jacobsen then hired KEPCO+, Salt Lake City, as a consultant for $250,000 to oversee design and planning for the stonework. KEPCO+ also could perform the work if it could find 102,000-sq-ft of matching granite and install it for $8.4-million.

	The East/West buildings’ 102,000 sq ft of stone facade presented fabrication and installation challenges and was nearly 30% of the budget. (Photo courtesy of FFKR, by Paul Richer)

The East/West project called for simple box buildings with classical exteriors similar in style to the capitol. Details included balustrades, pilasters, freestanding columns, and entablatures.

KEPCO+ solicited fabricators worldwide for matching granite samples. The Kletting building was constructed from stone drawn from nearby Little Cottonwood Canyon at the turn of the 20th century. But that quarry now is largely exhausted and no longer can provide the large high-strength slabs needed.

KEPCO+ selected Campolonghi Italia, Massa, Italy, as stone fabricator, then partnered with Dee Brown Inc. (DBI), a frequent Garland, Texas-based collaborator, to form KEPCO+DBI LLC. The Jacobsen design-assist sub installed two thirds of the project’s granite panels using galvanized steel strongback and truss frames. The remaining stone was handset onsite utilizing either cast-in-place concrete or metal-stud framing. The project’s other sub packages used a traditional design-bid-build method.

To ensure project success, the Jacobsen team created a comfortable communal environment for promoting ideas and dialogue. That included roundtable discussions open to all subs and suppliers plus regular weekly, monthly and sometimes daily meetings among key players. The owner installed a cluster of jobsite trailers, which further enhanced decisionmaking.

Talking Freely

Jacobsen also allowed its subs, suppliers, and designers to speak with one another, provided it was updated by note or e-mail. Many projects have a formal channel for responding to questions and decisions that can alienate team members and slow progress. Jacobsen broke down those barriers and fostered involvement.

"We tried a non-traditional approach," says Douglas C. Welling, Jacobsen’s executive vice president. "We developed a circular organizational chart to have everybody working from the inside out."

The practice resulted in a shared sense of ownership that produced a genuine team atmosphere. Everyone felt invested in the project, striving for the same goals and same success. A further enhancement was the elimination of liquidated damages. "Whenever damages are attached, people begin positioning themselves for liability," says Bruce D. Knaphus, president of KEPCO+. "It waters down the collaborative team effort."

There were no added incentives for the job except the possibility of more work. Although Jacobsen’s two-year contract had a no shared savings clause, it could earn $15,000 quarterly bonuses for a total of $120,000. The owner and Jacobsen rated the firm’s performance using a point system based on safety, budget, quality and relationships. Jacobsen scored 100% each time, securing the full bonus amount. "It worked well because it brought us to the table to talk about the issues and take a long-view approach," says Welling. "It really fostered a teamwork atmosphere. We had no incentive to pad the numbers that we were giving them."

The board also liked the approach. The East/West expansion buildings opened in March 2004, nearly six months faster than a traditional design-bid-build project. The state subsequently funded the retrofit job, but chose not to use design-build because it felt that the project was too large for one entity. Jacobsen teamed with Hunt Construction Group Inc., Scottsdale, Ariz., to form a 50:50 joint venture as construction manager. Both contractors were familiar with each other and had historical renovation experience, financial resources and the ability to self-perform work.

The joint venture was hired in August 2002 under a $172-million guaranteed- maximum-price contract with opportunities to earn $380,000 in performance bonuses, or $27,142 per quarter. "We’ve been working with the owner for two years, so we had a running start," Welling says. "We weren’t wasting time getting to know each other. We already understood the other’s skill set and expectations."

Expansion buildings will be converted to offices after the capitol renovation is completed. (Photo courtesy of FFKR, by Paul Richer)

The state also hired the Capitol Renovation Team, a joint venture of Salt Lake City-based VCBO Architecture and Max J. Smith Architects (MSJA), with Schooley Caldwell Associates, Columbus, Ohio, as the project architect in the summer of 2002 under a fixed-fee contract. It has potential quarterly performance bonuses of $8,000 during the design phase and $2,500 in the construction phase. "We formed the joint venture due to the three needs required of this project—historical accuracy, design and management," says Robert N. Pett, principal with MJSA Architects. "There has been a good division of labor and everyone has been extremely cooperative. We’re not working out of three offices, but out of one office that we share in the trailer complex. We have since moved to one part of the trailer and the construction team has moved in enabling us to work hand-in-glove."

Although there were surprisingly detailed plans existing for the capitol, the design team did exhaustive preliminary destructive testing and analysis. It took nearly two years for it to thoroughly learn about the building and design the project before construction began in Sept. 2004.

The electrical, mechanical and plumbing systems are being modernized, while the building undergoes a seismic retrofit that involves stiffening structural components and adding base isolators. The 283-ft-high building must withstand a 1G horizontal force and .5G of vertical force, with no more than 2 ft of deflection. The work required placing 4-ft-dia. rubber isolators under 290 supporting columns, measuring 30-in. sq, in the capitol’s basement.

In order to install the base isolators, the loads carried by the individual columns must be transferred to temporary columns while the main column is cut and the isolator installed. Micropiles also are being placed around each column footing to increase capacity from 4,500 to 6,000 lb per sq ft. A new basement slab is being poured and a 4-ft-wide, 15-ft-deep retaining wall constructed around the building to provide for a 4-ft-wide covered perimeter excavation. It will allow the building to sway in the event of an earthquake.

"The building frame is concrete, the granite on the exterior is not attached to the structure and the dome rests on the building with nothing to tie it to the main facility. Balustrades around the roof are held in place only with gravity," Hart says. "These [are] significant safety issues."

The drum of the dome needs seismic enhancement. It must be strengthened with shotcrete, which means carefully removing and storing the rotunda’s 6,000-lb chandelier and 95-ft-long, 7,000-lb support chain. The copper dome’s exterior, which is partly covered in terracotta tiles, is one of seven design-assist sub packages under Jacobsen/Hunt. KEPCO+DBI LLC is removing, cataloging, cleaning, repairing and replacing the dome’s 10,000 tiles.

When the capitol restoration is completed, the state’s House of Representatives, Senate and Governor’s Office will move back and the East/West structures will be converted to office space. The undertaking, which will require nearly 900 people onsite during the height of construction, will finish by the summer of 2008.

The project is going well due to lessons learned from the design-build expansion. "We learned one of the first things to do was define the project’s most difficult elements at the outset, seeking input from the subs and designers," Welling says. "The subs and suppliers became really excited when we asked for their input [and this] has made for a great team atmosphere."