📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
San Francisco County Grand Jury
• 2020-2021
Contracting and Preconstruction
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 14 findings
F1
Page 19
The delays in completion of the Van Ness BRT Project were caused primarily by avoidable setbacks in replacement of the water and sewer infrastructure.
F2
Page 19
The potential impact of utility replacement on the cost and duration of the overall project was given insufficient consideration in the initial planning process.
F3
Page 19
The potential impact of utility replacement was known to City engineers to be a major risk but was only considered a moderate risk and assigned no mitigation strategy in the official risk register.
F4
Page 19
Project timelines could not be estimated accurately because documents did not reflect the extent and location of underground utilities accurately.
F5
Page 19
The evaluation rubric for preconstruction contract bids weighted cost too heavily, as compared to technical expertise, even after project-specific legislation allowed for a lower weight to be assigned to cost.
F6
Page 19
Practical work during preconstruction that could have derisked the subsequent construction phase of the project was insufficient.
F7
Page 19
Review of preconstruction deliverables did not sufficiently measure the contractor’s preparedness for construction, which resulted in both inaccurate cost estimates and timelines.
F8
Page 19
The effectiveness of the CMGC contract was greatly reduced because the general contractor was brought into the design process too late.
F9
Page 19
Underspecification in technical requirements led to additional costs for work that could have been predicted and included in the original contract.
F10
Page 19
Contention over underspecified or unclear contract terms and technical requirements led to a deterioration in the relationship between the City and Walsh, the general contractor.
F11
Page 19
The removal of Synergy, the underground subcontractor, from the project, partially as a result of poor cost estimates, contributed to the deterioration of the relationship between Walsh, the general contractor, and the City.
F12
Page 19
The contentious relationship between Walsh, the general contractor, and the City made it difficult to resolve problems as they arose, despite close collaboration being one of the potential advantages of the CMGC contract.
F13
Page 19
Lack of an in-the-field point of contact between Walsh and the City during early stages of construction led to delays and increased costs on the project. 19
F14
Page 20
Confusion related to the contractual requirements for pedestrian monitoring contributed to the deterioration of the relationship between Walsh, the general contractor, and the City.
Recommendations 12
-
R1Page 20By June 2022, the City should adopt a policy that all capital project feasibility plans include an itemized assessment of risks to project timelines and costs, which must be accompanied with specific procedures that will be undertaken to mitigate those risks early in the project.
-
R2Page 20By June 2022, the City should adopt a policy that all capital project sponsors publish, before proceeding to the construction phase, an itemized assessment of derisking activities actually performed.
-
R3Page 20By June 2022, the Board of Supervisors and SFPUC should review and update policies and regulations to ensure that detailed as-built documentation of both private and public utilities is filed after all underground projects (whether undertaken by SFPUC, another City agency, or a private enterprise), with sufficient resolution and precision to allow accurate design of any future work.
-
R4Page 20The Board of Supervisors should direct all City departments to adopt a policy that all projects that involve underground work in the City’s main corridors include, as part of the design process, the use of exploratory potholing, or another equivalent industry best-practice to identify unknown underground obstructions adhering to CI/ASCE 38-02 (“Standard Guideline for the Collection and Depiction of Existing Subsurface Utility Data“) Quality Level A. This policy should take effect for all contracts signed after January 1, 2022, and the work should be required to be performed before final construction terms or prices are agreed to.
-
R5Page 20By June 2022, and before entering into future CMGC relationships, the Board of Supervisors should direct all City departments to adopt, publish, and enforce in all future contracts industry-standard best practices for management of CMGC projects.
-
R6Page 20The adopted CMGC management policy should specifically include the industry best practice of awarding the contract before project design continues past 30% completion. 20
-
R7Page 21By June 2022, the Board of Supervisors should amend Section 6.68 of the Administrative Code to remove the mandatory cost criterion in awarding CMGC contracts.
-
R8Page 21SFMTA should establish a policy for review of technical quality of preconstruction and design deliverables, to be used in all CMGC or design contracts signed after January 2022, including in-the-field validation of key assumptions of site conditions by City engineers.
-
R9Page 21Beginning January 1, 2022, SFMTA should assign to every CMGC project a dedicated in-the-field contractor liaison to facilitate collaborative problem resolution, and sufficient support staff to monitor actual progress and site conditions.
-
R10Page 21By June 2022, the City should adopt a policy that any public communication about a planned or in-progress capital project that includes disruption of public services or right-of-way should include itemized assessments of risk to projected costs and duration.
-
R11Page 21Beginning immediately, and in all future capital or maintenance projects that require pedestrian monitors, the City should ensure that associated costs are either specifically included in the primary construction contract, or explicitly planned for and funded by the City, before construction begins. 21
-
R38-02Page 20(“Standard Guideline for the Collection and Depiction of Existing Subsurface Utility Data“) Quality Level A. This policy should take effect for all contracts signed after January 1, 2022, and the work should be required to be performed before final construction terms or prices are agreed to. R5. By June 2022, and before entering into future CMGC relationships, the Board of Supervisors should direct all City departments to adopt, publish, and enforce in all future contracts industry-standard best practices for management of CMGC projects. R6. The adopted CMGC management policy should specifically include the industry best practice of awarding the contract before project design continues past 30% completion. 20