Page 11 of 12
Re: IPF
Posted:
Fri Aug 26, 2016 8:45 amby whitwiki
Trust me, construction projects never end three months early
Re: IPF
Posted:
Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:00 amby mrydel
In September they are blowing up a main artery bridge in Little Rock to rebuild. Contract says it will be complete in 180 days. Contractor is penalized $80,000/day for every day over 180. Contractor gets $80,000 for every day under 180. Weather is not an excuse for delay.
I would like all construction contracts written this way.
Re: IPF
Posted:
Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:04 amby whitwiki
Incentives like that can work well or could really backfire. For example, I bet that contractor works a [deleted] ton of overtime and loads a ton of crews on it to achieve schedule. They'll probably spend 30% more to achieve that schedule and meet their incentive.
Re: IPF
Posted:
Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:04 amby whitwiki
And unless it's lump sum then the state ends up paying that extra cost
Re: IPF
Posted:
Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:07 amby NTXCoog
whitwiki wrote:Trust me, construction projects never end three months early
The project hasn't been set to end in December. Herman's contract allows for a lower buyout if not finished by December.
So I'm guessing the project is set to be completed in September, giving them 3 months leeway to finish before Herman's contract clauses kick in.
Re: IPF
Posted:
Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:11 amby PerunasHoof
whitwiki wrote:Incentives like that can work well or could really backfire. For example, I bet that contractor works a [deleted] ton of overtime and loads a ton of crews on it to achieve schedule. They'll probably spend 30% more to achieve that schedule and meet their incentive.
"Yeah, incentives are important. I learned that in rehab."
Re: IPF
Posted:
Fri Aug 26, 2016 1:27 pmby ericdickerson4life
whitwiki wrote:Incentives like that can work well or could really backfire. For example, I bet that contractor works a [deleted] ton of overtime and loads a ton of crews on it to achieve schedule. They'll probably spend 30% more to achieve that schedule and meet their incentive.
Or the contractor walks when it is apparent they have no shot at completing the contract.
Re: IPF
Posted:
Fri Aug 26, 2016 3:59 pmby whitwiki
That too. Declare bankruptcy and reform under a new name.
Re: IPF
Posted:
Sat Aug 27, 2016 4:30 amby Puckhead48E
Construction is often cost plus... Deadline invectives are effective only if tied to cost ceilings.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: IPF
Posted:
Wed Nov 16, 2016 1:42 pmby NTXCoog
mtrout wrote:NTXCoog wrote:Stallion wrote:The last I heard the UH regents had only approved a design process-which SMU has already done-but they didn't have the funding yet. Coaches lie all the time in recruiting season. I don't think they have given final OK and haven't started building yet
Follow up:
UH to begin construction on indoor facility"The Houston board of regents gave the OK to move ahead with the $20 million project with completion expected before the 2017 season."
"Construction on an indoor football practice facility will begin after the upcoming season, Houston athletic director Hunter Yurachek said Thursday."
"Funding for the indoor facility will come from private donations."
Called it. Cue SMU reactionary activities.
""It will be done much sooner than December 2017," Yurachek said. "Our hope is that this facility is available for our team to use in September 2017 as they prepare for next year.""
"We're going to give our athletic department all the tools it needs," UH board of regents chairman Tilman Fertitta said. "We're going to be competitive with anybody in this country. That's just the next step. There's more to come."
Another follow up:
UH to begin construction of indoor football facility FridayI know SMU won this year handily. It's noted here so we can skip about 10 posts saying that UH may be building their facility first, but we won the game.
Signs going up about the construction:
Re: IPF
Posted:
Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:03 pmby smusic 00
I'll miss that parking lot. Enjoy your shed.
Re: IPF
Posted:
Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:17 pmby Bergermeister
I think we've run out of donors. Better keep HPHS on speed dial.
Re: IPF
Posted:
Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:21 pmby deucetz
I personally feel that SMU's IPF is also very ugly--not much imagination. In addition, if they wanted to reduce the price, they could have put it where our old practice football field,Petus, is located and dug down so it wouldn't be as tall, and we wouldn't have to spend funds for another soccer and track field.
All around its a waste of resources.
Re: IPF
Posted:
Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:50 pmby mtrout
From 2009 thru 2016, we got powerpoint slides of an IPF. Let's leave well enough alone. Oil is down. Next ETA is Trump's 2nd term.
Re: IPF
Posted:
Wed Nov 16, 2016 3:57 pmby Top Twenty
Fear not.