geotechnical engineering practices in canada - the Office of ...

48
CHAPTER 6
errors and funding corrections as for conventional method-based, low bid award
contracts.
• The persons interviewed had the general attitude that quality should not be a
variable in the bid process. Detailed geotechnical investigations are often performed
by the owner, prior to bidding (for design-build as well as most other innovative
contracting practices).
• Generally, design-build is endorsed for large projects of significant engineering
content or project complexity. Design-build was not viewed to be advantageous for
simple projects.
• Consultants and contractors do not entirely support of the design-build approach
because many early implementation efforts have placed the burden of unwarranted
and unacceptable development costs and long-term performance risks on
contractors.
• For the most part, the countries visited used a staged approach for design-build
contracts that included prequalification, prior to the bidding process, and
compensation for proposals by the qualified bidders to reduce the concerns from
contractors.
• Quality control and assurance processes for geotechnical work appear to be well
documented, at least in several countries that the team visited. Performance-based
specification and performance measures for geotechnical features do not appear to
have been comprehensively established.
One of the key areas of focus regarding innovative contracting methods was the amount of
project information, design detail, and performance requirements provided by the owner to
the contractor, prior to bidding on public works contracts. The team found that the extent
and detail varied among the countries visited, but, in most cases, these countries provided a
more complete design package and explicit performance requirements to prequalified
bidders than has been typical in the United States. In both Canada and Europe, a
geotechnical baseline report was provided by the owner in design-build contracts that,
except in Canada, included preliminary geotechnical design and constructability
recommendations. All of the individuals contacted felt that doing this was necessary to
provide an adequate and fair basis for bidding and to avoid conflicts, disputes, and claims.
In Canada, a representative from the Deep Foundations Institute and the Canadian
consultants indicated that the amount of geotechnical information provided for design-build
contracts by the MTO was too sparse to provide an adequate basis for bidding. Based on the
discussions, the MTO had provided only enough information to define the basic soil
stratification, which did not include design properties or support values for the soil. This
frequently placed too great a burden of risk on the contractor. The design of other project
elements in Canadian design-build projects was carried out, prior to bid, by the owner (or
consultant) to what would be considered the 30 percent PS&E level in the United States. At
Øresund (Denmark/Sweden) an 80 to 90 percent complete design is provided—for guidance
only—in the contract documents (geotechnical, structural, and general civil), but the
contract specifications were more performance oriented than is typical in the United States.
Geotechnical information was found to be a key element in obtaining designs of consistent
quality among bidders. Based on experiences in the countries visited, generally, the more