|
Toward Cost Control
The article "Mega
Projects Need More Study Up Front To Avoid Cost Overruns"
was interesting but nothing new (ENR 7/15 p. 11). It doesn't
take a brain surgeon to know that a definitive project scope
of work and competent cost estimate, taking into account all
variables and preferably performed by a cost engineer or quantity
surveyor, are part of the solution.
Another factor not mentioned
is the practice of owners predominantly awarding the contract(s)
to the lowest bidder and not the right bidder. A serious analysis
of all bids and a post-bid interview with all bidders to determine
if they have, in fact, included all items and considered all
variables should always be performed before an award.
A review of the project documents
for accuracy and a detailed cost estimate by an independent
firm before bids are solicited would go a long way to reduce
the occurrence of cost overruns. The old adage that an hour
in the engineering office can save 10+ hours in the field
applies. Don't wait until the contractor finds the problems
and subsequently files claims for extras. Also, freeze the
project scope of work. Owner representatives often do not
realize the cost impact of changes in the scope.
Trade Center Confusion
I couldn't disagree
more with the opinion expressed by Glenn Corbett in the viewpoint,
"Twin Towers Demanded More" (ENR 7/8 p. 71). Mr.
Corbett continues to confuse the purpose and scope of an engineering
building performance study with that of a fire investigation.
Such an investigation would surely be beyond the purview of
ASCE, and would likely fall under the jurisdiction of an agency
other than the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Still,
such unfounded comparisons should not obscure the value and
necessity of building performance assessments to the public
and engineering community.
Building performance assessments
have a long history of contributing to the design and construction
of buildings and other structures that can better withstand
extreme events. Typically used following natural disasters,
the BPAT procedure was first used to study performance of
buildings following a terrorist event at the Oklahoma City
Murrah Federal Office building in 1995. With teams deployed
to study the World Trade Center towers and the surrounding
buildings, and the Pentagon, we now have a thorough understanding
of unique obstacles encountered when the event is of a criminal
or terrorist nature, rather than a natural disaster. We have
shared our experience with the House Science Committee to
aid in the development of the National Construction Safety
Team Act, and have publicly supported its passage.
The ASCE/FEMA World Trade Center
Building Performance Study yielded a number of significant
findings, recommendations and data that will serve as the
basis for continuing investigations led by the National Institute
of Standards and Technology. This includes documenting more
than 100 samples of recovered steel that will undergo further
analysis. The ASCE/FEMA study is the first step in what will
eventually lead to safer buildings. This will be our legacy
to those whose lives were cut short on Sept. 11.
|
