Foothill Gold Line CMAR: Cost Control for Southern California Rail

Foothill Gold Line Seeks New Path for Final Light-Rail Segment

The Foothill Gold Line Construction Authority, in a move signaling a strategic shift, has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the design and engineering services for the final 3.3-mile light-rail segment, connecting Pomona to Montclair in Southern California. This critical step, announced yesterday via the Authority’s newsletter, marks the commencement of a new delivery method for the project. The initiative aims to reinvigorate the project following significant cost overruns with its previous design-build approach. The Authority, led by CEO Habib Balian, seeks to advance this crucial infrastructure project, which includes the Claremont and Montclair stations, following a decision by the Board of Directors in late March. The switch from the design-build approach to a construction manager at risk (CMAR) model reflects a focused effort to manage costs effectively and accelerate the project’s completion. This article delves into the rationale behind this strategic adjustment and its implications for the future of the project.

Shifting Strategies: The CMAR Approach

The genesis of this recent RFP issuance stems directly from an earlier setback. A single design-build bid, submitted by the engineering firm Kiewit, was found to be a staggering 54% higher than the Authority’s most conservative cost estimates. Despite extensive efforts to reduce expenses, the final bid remained excessively expensive, highlighting the need for a revised project delivery strategy. The chosen CMAR approach, a departure from the previous design-build model, separates the design/engineering phase from the construction management phase. In essence, the Authority will now hire a design/engineering team first, before bringing on a separate construction manager team. This is envisioned to provide greater control over the project’s trajectory and costs, and allow for potentially more competitive bidding in the construction phase.

Addressing Budgetary Constraints: Cost Overruns and Solutions

The primary catalyst for this strategic shift was the significant discrepancy between the Authority’s budget and the bids received. The initial cost estimates, developed internally, significantly diverged from the market realities represented by the design-build bid. This triggered an extensive review of the project’s financial projections and delivery strategy. The CMAR model is implemented to give the Authority tighter control over cost through the design and engineering phase. The intent is to potentially identify value engineering opportunities and ensure better alignment between design and construction costs from the beginning.

Design and Engineering RFP Details: Scope and Timeline

The RFP specifically targets design and engineering services for the 3.3-mile segment, including the critical design of the Claremont and Montclair stations. The selected design/engineering team will be responsible for producing the construction documents and specifications necessary for the construction phase. The Authority has not released timelines for the project’s overall completion or construction phases at the date of this publication, although the issuance of this RFP is the first step. The new strategy is seen as crucial in getting the project back on track and moving towards its ultimate goals.

Implications for the Future of the Gold Line Expansion

The decision to adopt the CMAR delivery model underscores the dynamic nature of large-scale infrastructure projects and the importance of adapting to unforeseen challenges. The experience with the previous bid served as a crucial lesson, driving the Authority to take proactive steps to mitigate financial risks and ensure project viability. The success of the CMAR approach hinges on the quality and expertise of the design/engineering team selected, as well as the efficient integration of their work with the construction manager. This project will give insights into how to efficiently manage rail-related projects, and allow other agencies to get the most return.

Conclusion

The Foothill Gold Line Construction Authority’s shift to the CMAR delivery model for its final light-rail segment represents a pragmatic response to budgetary constraints and an effort to bring the project to fruition. This transition underscores the complex challenges inherent in large infrastructure endeavors and the necessity for agencies to be flexible and adaptable. The successful implementation of the CMAR model could set a precedent for other rail projects facing similar challenges, providing a framework for effective cost control and project management. Industry analysts will be watching closely to assess the impact of this strategic change and its potential implications for the future of light-rail expansion in Southern California and beyond. The ability of the Foothill Gold Line Construction Authority to deliver the final segment on budget and on schedule will provide important insights into best practices and future considerations in the rail sector, ultimately improving rail services for users and transit authorities.