1.0 Purpose

This Preliminary Project Plan is to be used to support the West Shore Project owners in understanding how to proceed with the selected IPD delivery method for the West Shore Project. This document describes:

• Project background, objectives, base program, budget, and funding strategy
• The intention and structure of IPD and the associated processes critical to execution of this contract type
• The owners’ organizational readiness work involved in IPD
• Insights into what the project owners can expect for their IPD project.

Please note that this document is described as a Preliminary Project plan, as the IPD phases of Pre-Validation and Validation (described later) are where project planning is iteratively developed and contractually aligned by the IPD team. This specifically means that:

• The first fully completed project plan (as it is conventionally known), is typically generated by the IPD team within the Validation phase for owners approval at the ‘Go/No-go’ milestone.
• Owners are often refining objectives, requirements, goals, and constraints as part of the Pre-Validation preparation and readiness steps.
• The project related information provided in this report may change in these early IPD phases.

Guidance for all processes and phases described within this document will be provided by an IPD Advisor for both the owners and their IPD team.

2.0 Project Details

2.1 Background

Jointly owned by The Town of View Royal and the Cities of Langford and Colwood (“the Communities”), the West Shore RCMP Detachment is centrally located at 698 Atkins Avenue in Langford. The existing detachment is approximately 37,000 ft², comprised of two largely separate facilities: one built in the 1960s (approx. 10,600 ft²), and a newer structure built in 1999 (approx. 26,400 ft²).

Investments have been made in the current detachment, but the facility is nearing capacity. Projections by the RCMP show the need for increased space in the next one to four years. As each of the communities continue to grow, so too does the need for specialized and diversified policing services, increased use of technology, modern facilities, and a larger staff contingent to maintain the current level of service in the region.

Preliminary work to define an option for redevelopment of the existing site was completed by WA Architects in November 2020, in the form of a concept site and building plan, based on a preliminary site survey completed in June 2020. An updated version of WA Architect’s conceptual design, entitled Feasibility Study 9, was completed in November 2021. A preliminary space needs analysis was also completed by the RCMP in July 2019 and updated in December 2020.

In early 2021, Colliers Project Leaders was engaged to prepare an options analysis report that explored redevelopment of the existing site versus options to relocate elsewhere within the communities. A recommendation was returned to remain at, and redevelop, the existing location on Atkins Avenue, as it was deemed to be more economical than relocating and building new. Additionally, it was noted to be the preferred site over alternative options due to its central location and ease of access to major transportation routes. The feasibility study also returned a recommendation to redevelop to a 20-year planning horizon that would meet West Shore RCMP staffing and space needs to 2045.

2.2 Project Requirements, Goals & Constraints

The objectives of the Project are to:

• Redevelop the existing site at 698 Atkins Avenue to incorporate four adjacent residential properties owned by the Communities.
• Provide a detachment that will meet RCMP accommodation needs to effectively service current and future growth of the communities to the year 2045.
• Enable demolition and new construction to take place in such a way as to allow the West Shore RCMP Detachment to remain fully operational for the duration of construction.
• Renovate and seismically upgrade the existing 1999 structure to meet the need for increased use of technology, up-to-date facilities, and a larger staff contingent.
• Replace an obsolete 1960s structure with net-new space, integrated with the existing 1999 structure, to provide efficient, flexible, and modern facilities that meet the demands of 21st century policing.

The project’s requirements, goals, and constraints are:

• To achieve project completion an owners’ budget of $82.4M which has been identified as a result of the Class D cost estimate against the base program described below. (While it is understood that Class D estimates typically have a +-25% accuracy, this could be used as the entry point for the IPD team to evaluate and validate as part of the IPD process.)
• To achieve occupancy in 2025.
• To minimize disruption to neighboring residents throughout construction.
• To minimize future operating costs through construction of energy efficient, durable, and sustainable spaces.
• Phasing of demolition and construction work on site allows for uninterrupted operation of the RCMP Detachment for the duration of construction, including secure parking for police vehicles with two means of vehicular egress.
• New detachment meets the accommodation needs of the RCMP to effectively service current and future growth of the communities to the year 2045.
• RCMP are successfully moved into the renovated and new buildings by no later than end of Q4 2025.

Delivery of this project using IPD requires that:

• Owners and RCMP create, refine, and finalize work in Pre-Validation phase to ensure that their owners’-team has achieved IPD readiness, which includes all internal governance preparation as well as the IPD team procurement and selection detailed execution.
• Owners and RCMP jointly participate, review, and approve the work completed in Validation phase as an integrated part of the IPD Team making timely decisions as appropriate. This will involve refinement of project needs in the context of design and construction options, development of the project target cost, corresponding delivery schedule and the integrated risk/opportunities registry. This will be measured by completion of a comprehensive validation report and written notice from the owners and RCMP to either accept its contents and proceed (with execution of remaining IPD phases) or choose to terminate the IPD process.
• Assuming acceptance of the IPD team plan in the Validation Report: The owners and RCMP jointly participate within the IPD team governance structure, IPD operating systems and collaborative processes to execute the Design, Construction & Commissioning Phases, making timely decisions as appropriate. This will be measured by the collective team success in meeting or exceeding both the Target Cost and project delivery timing in a manner that meets all requirements outlined from the project’s base program.

2.3 Base Program

In Program

The Validation phase is focused on identifying and detailing all functional requirements. The program for this project includes three key elements:

• Site redevelopment of 698 Atkins Avenue and adjacent properties
• Renovation of existing 1999 structure
• Demolition and replacement of existing 1960s structure

In November 2021, the West Shore RCMP engaged WA Architects to provide an updated architectural feasibility study and design concept for 698 Atkins Avenue. The conceptual plan along with the updated functional program, and detailed user requirements will be an excellent starting point for the IPD team to engage in IPD Validation phase work.

Total gross space required for a redeveloped West Shore RCMP Detachment is approximately 92,417 ft², to accommodate an anticipated staffing contingent of 281 FTEs (210 RCMP members, 70 administrative support positions) by 2045. It is estimated, however, that 15-20% of the space could be leased to complementary tenants for 10- to 15-year terms, until such time as the full staffing contingent is reached and the space is required by the RCMP. Revenue from leased space is anticipated to help defray the upfront construction costs.

Scope of work associated with the redevelopment of the Atkins Avenue site includes purchase and amalgamation of the following four adjacent, residential properties to provide sufficient land for increased surface parking requirements:

• 678 Atkins Avenue
• 674 Atkins Avenue
• 2788 Winster Road
• 2792 Winster Road

Re-zoning from an R2 zone (One- and Two-Family Residential) to a P2 zone (Community Institutional) will be required for these four properties, along with demolition of up to five (5) residential structures and several smaller outbuildings. Some hazardous materials abatement should be assumed, given the relative ages of the residential buildings, and a hazardous materials assessment should be conducted. Site separation between the residential demolition work and the fully operational RCMP Detachment will be necessary. Site preparation and some upgrading of site services will also be required to allow for elements such as parking lot lighting, irrigation, and motorized, secured gates and fencing, dependent upon final design. A topographical survey, geotechnical report, and environmental assessment will be required.

Future parking requirements include a total of 297 surface parking stalls, with an allowance of 370 ft² per stall, inclusive of drive aisles and entries/exits. Stalls reserved for police vehicles are expected to be larger than typically allowed for due to the specialized nature of these vehicles. Consideration should also be given for provision of accessible stalls and allowing for two means of vehicular egress from the secured police vehicle parking at all times. The parking lot surface is assumed to be standard asphalt with line painting and complementary landscaping features.

Anticipated breakdown of parking stalls is as follows:

• 285 general purpose parking stalls
• 17 visitor parking stalls
• 91 police vehicle parking stalls

WA Architect’s updated Feasibility Study 9 shows the potential for up to 125 stalls on the merged properties, which, along with approximately 120 leased stalls beside the adjacent railway line, provides for 245 of the required 297 stalls. The shortfall of 52 stalls will need to be addressed through revisions to site design, additional leased land along the rail line, or additional land acquisition on the east side of Winster Road. A combination of the above three options may also satisfy the shortfall issues, along with consideration for future transport modal shifts which may reduce the total number of required stalls.

Scope of work associated with the existing 1999 RCMP building assumes a reconfiguration and retrofit of approximately 25% of the facility to meet future program requirements. The existing structure consists of three (3) levels, roughly 8,800 ft² each, for a total of approximately 26,400 ft². Exact measurements should be verified through a combination of site visits and a careful evaluation of existing floor plans. Retrofitting should be to a Class A Office standard with an allowance for some new furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E). It is anticipated that some hazardous materials may be encountered during the renovation of this building and a hazardous materials assessment should be conducted.

This existing structure will also require some seismic upgrading, not only to enable useful life up to and beyond 2045, but to allow for a physical connection to the proposed new building, as well as the desire for this RCMP complex to act as a post-disaster facility.

Scope of work associated with the existing 1960s facility includes demolition of the structure in its entirety. The facility is assumed to be approximately 10,667 ft², over one and a half floors. Exact sizing and dimensions should be verified by site visits and detailed review of existing floor plans. Given its age, hazardous materials are anticipated, and a hazardous materials assessment should be conducted prior to the start of any work. An updated topographical survey (following rezoning of the adjacent properties) is recommended, and a geotechnical report and environmental assessment will also be required.

New construction to replace this facility is anticipated to be approximately 66,000 ft² over multiple floor levels. When combined with the existing 1999 structure of approximately 26,400 ft², a total of 92,400 ft² will be provided on the newly redeveloped Atkins Avenue site. WA Architect’s updated Feasibility Study 9 indicates conceptual design of a basement with four stories above; however, this requires review and possible redesign to align with the proposed square footage and to fit within the Class D estimate of $82.4M.

It is assumed that some furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E) can be re-used and/or re-purposed from this facility; however, allowance for some new FF&E will also be required.

An outline functional program for the newly constructed and newly renovated facilities includes general spaces for public access, vehicle bays, general duty offices, administrative and operational support, mail room, prisoner security, and volunteers and auxiliary staff. More specialized spaces include a Major/Serious Crimes unit (homicide, traffic, drugs, police dogs, Emergency Response Team/Gangs, crime prevention and reduction) and Special Unit (forensic identification suite, internet/cyber/tech crimes, sex crimes, enhanced exhibit suite). A detailed review and update of the functional program and space allocations should be undertaken prior to any re-design.

The redeveloped RCMP complex on Atkins Avenue will be designated as a post-disaster facility and will require specialized design and/or modifications to accommodate this requirement. Consideration should also be given to achieving net zero design, and options to reach this goal will need to be explored in greater detail.

Due to the need for the West Shore RCMP Detachment to remain fully operational throughout demolition and construction, phasing of work will be required. Secure police vehicle parking, complete with two means of vehicular egress, will need to be maintained at all times. Site safety for all RCMP and support personnel, as well as the public, will be of paramount importance.

Not in Program

The following items are considered not part of the base program of this project:

• Underground parking
• Site works above and beyond what has been identified above
• Outbuilding storage facilities on the site
• Mechanical or electrical upgrades to the 1999 building, other than re-design due to reconfiguration of spaces or designation as a post-disaster facility
• Owner-supplied items
• AV/IT equipment
• RCMP internal administrative costs
• Langford, Colwood and View Royal administrative costs

2.4 Project Budget

A Class D cost estimate of $82.4M has been prepared for the base program which often serves as a starting point for IPD. This can be termed the owners’ initial ‘Maximum Allowable Budget’ for the IPD team to work within as they engage together in Validation phase work. The IPD team works towards collectively developing and a project budget and corresponding execution strategy working within the owner’s maximum allowable budget to achieve all requirements of the program. This is done by understanding both the market-typical estimated or expected costs and refining this to a base target cost. Once the team does this, it is captured in the Validation report. If the team is not able to validate this (including all variables), their results are also captured accordingly.

The base target cost breakdown and the corresponding execution plan is what provides certainty for the owner (given that IPD does not engage the typical change order processes unless the overarching functional, base project program is changed or pre-identified significant unforeseen events occur). This output can be used to finalize remaining funding strategies including using the Alternative Approvals Process (AAP) if required.

The base target cost, established from early collaboration (which may include additional conceptual design work), will include both hard and soft costs as well as contingency. Hard costs are the construction costs associated with both the site and the building, while soft costs include consulting fees (e.g., IPD advisor, architect, engineers, cost consultant, geotechnical reports, hazardous materials reports, land surveyor), as well as permitting fees, insurance, temporary owners relocation costs and administrative costs. These costs are organized for IPD team execution to support collaborative cluster working groups that are set up to further innovate, breakdown internal barriers between roles and remove wasteful activity for the project.

It is anticipated that approximately $855,000-$1,200,000 (1-1.5% of the cost estimate) will be required to complete the validation phase. This involves only the work is necessary to validate the project from the owners’ perspective which often includes any early release of work plans, early construction operational execution planning, early logistical and supply chain planning as well as the early design concepts that encompass base program and support these other aspects holistically.

After approval, and during the remaining detailed design and construction documentation phase, the team focus on collaborative cluster group delivery that innovatively focused on meeting program requirements and getting below the base target cost within the schedule expectations. A final target cost is typically confirmed (below base target cost) at the conclusion final procurement activities (when the contingency from these risk items is recovered).

IPD reporting structures are very transparent, open, and helpful to meet funding reporting requirements. For this project with multiple funding partners, these expectations should be developed and aligned in Pre-Validation as part of the owners Readiness for IPD preparation.

3.0 IPD Project Intention & Phase Structure

IPD is a shared risk/reward contract model and innovative project delivery approach. IPD brings all parties onto the project at the start in a single relational contractual agreement which has joint and transparent operating systems such as cost, planning and risk management.

It is also important to note that IPD teams waive liability amongst the IPD signatories to avoid finger pointing and blame, which allows designer/consultants to talk about means and methods and allows constructors to provide detailed input to design. Throughout project execution, the owners and other IPD signatories agree to share all aspects of the project the risk and reward including design liability, design/construction interface, cost escalations and schedule delays.

The project has a single joint project management and governance structure for IPD that integrates all members of the signatory group including the owner. This includes a Senior Management Team (SMT), a Project Management Team (PMT) and multi-disciplinary work clusters called Project Implementation Teams (PITs).

This IPD team collective manages the contractual process and unique operating systems using the ‘Lean’ business approach that is focused on maximizing value, creating improved flows of value-adding work, and minimizing waste. This means that the team uses all collective talents to innovate from beginning to completion and achieve what is ‘Best for Project’.

There are multiple standard IPD contracts in use in Canada, the most popularly used are CCDC 30-2018 and Hanson Bridgett.

3.1 Managing scope, cost, risk, and schedule

Scope Management

IPD signatories (Who sign the single contract with the owner) are not focused on individual scopes of work, individual profits, claims or liability between themselves. Their focus is on ‘Best for Project’, with absolute alignment with the owners’ values. Their motivation is on creating the most effective and optimized overall project design and delivery so that they meet owners value proposition, and everyone (including the owner) can mutually benefit from the shared profit pool.

The IPD team manages scope holistically by first focusing on the overarching project base program which is developed by the owner either before or during Pre-Validation. In Validation, the team uses this base project program (project scope) to jointly develop the design, construction practices, schedule, costs, and risks as a holistic picture. This allows the team to innovate throughout the project and have flexibility to adapt the design-plan-construction work (including material supply chain availability) in an optimal way to address all challenges. Responsibilities for all work is clearly identified and assigned for execution.

Again, the IPD singular contract is an intentional departure from today’s methods that have bilateral and linear contracts and individual party scope tendering. In IPD, there are no typical change orders (unless base scope changes or contractually articulated unforeseen event). There is only a smaller percentage of the project costs that are managed through stipulated sum contracts (5-25%) by selected IPD Team members.

Cost Management

When IPD teams join the contract, they provide negotiated pricing terms that break out ‘true’ labor costs (salary and labor burden only), and calculated company overheads and profit expectations (as a percentage).

This pricing method is key to IPD, as all parties are expected to honestly put their profit at risk (no mark-ups or pricing buffers). IPD participants pricing is often audited by a 3rd party (recommended) at the start of the project. This pricing is then carried into the cost modelling and iterative estimation process to determine the base Target Cost during Validation.

After Validation, the IPD team jointly manages budget and cost in a real-time and truly transparent manner to ensure the team is on track to meet or exceed the base Target cost using a Target Value Design and Delivery process. This is occurring in concert with continual risk mitigation activities to protect the project and manage contingency (profit pool) wisely. Budget allocations are manipulated fluidly to optimize the whole and deliver against what was committed in the Validation report. The PMT manages this process in entirety with support from the SMT who get regular updates on forecasted costs.

The IPD Team will be reimbursed direct costs throughout the project (no profit), ideally using a streamlined invoicing and payment process that is integrate with the owners’ process. Since profits are not part of any of the regular progress payments, there is a rapid turnaround of payment with no traditional Payment Certifier process. The IPD team will also follow the IPD profit progress payment program that is discussed during initial contract negotiations and finalized during the Validation process. Guidance for this entire process is provided by an IPD Advisor.

Risk Management

In IPD, contingency is not integrated or buried, it is determined centrally and managed jointly. The IPD team determines their total project contingency that will be used for the project in Validation (this is a part of the base Target Cost calculation). It is derived from a collaborative and open risk identification process and aligned to realistic base Target Cost assumptions so that contingency is appropriately determined and not double counted (in costing or productivity assumptions).

Risk is a critical IPD team joint management process that is managed together from ‘day 1’ using risk & opportunity logs (replacing traditional contractor-only managed ‘Risk Registers’). These are detailed reports that outline the risk in a manner that is aligned to the project schedule so that they can be updated dynamically as detailed design, logistical planning, remaining procurement (for materials and remaining stipulated-sum labor) and final construction execution occurs. The PMT is directly responsible for managing this entire integrated cost/schedule and risk processes; together they develop and align on the tools and means for managing this during Validation.

Schedule Management

In IPD, schedule is developed iteratively by the team during Validation, alongside design and cost modelling. The team most often starts with creating high-level milestone hypothetical plans that are built ‘backwards’ (called pull planning) from the required or desired completion timing. The team then iterates the schedule at increasing levels of detail as the Target Value Design process evolves. Some IPD teams may still use a more detailed scheduling and planning processes, but what is important is that schedule is viewed as a flexible, connected, and integral part of the design choices and cost assumptions the team is making to build out the base Target Cost and finalize as a part of Validation

After Validation, there is not a rigid schedule change approval process in IPD. The IPD team still uses rigorous planning and scheduling, however, they are charged to improve the work continuously against the ultimate project delivery milestone end date. The team does not restrict or limit themselves with specific detailed milestones, instead they are charged with determining what is ‘best for project’ at every opportunity including navigating challenges and constraints such as supply chain and delivery upsets.

The planning system used is called the Last Planner™ System, which is a social-technical planning process that is central to successful Lean and IPD projects which is focused on efficient workflow and smooth hand-offs vs. scope management. Use of this system allows the team to adapt the overall project schedule including construction alongside decision making during design. As construction mobilizes on-site, this visual planning system will extend to the site execution with daily, weekly, biweekly, and other regular cadence updates for the team. Onsite, the focus is on reducing variation predominately through the direct engagement of the trade foreman (called Last Planners) to ensure reliable planning and alignment to crew and location is performed. In IPD, planning is a visual, engagement exercise that is constantly reconciled against reality and constraints.

IPD teams that plan in this manner consistently meet or exceed schedule requirements (Lean Construction Institute data gathered in North America illustrates up to 3X more likely to exceed schedule). In IPD, projects that demobilize sooner can reclaim the cost opportunity and profit pool increase which benefits the whole team.

3.2 Pre-validation Phase

Pre-validation includes gaining owners and interested party alignment on project values, goals, and aspirations for the project. This is very much underway for the Westshore project as of Q4 2022. Other key topics such as funding strategy and process as well as confirming Maximum Allowable Budget and base project program as described previously. There are owners’ preparatory governance works that are documented which includes this and other functional elements

Procurement and legal preparations and execution (selecting an IPD team) also occurs in this phase. The procurement strategy is crafted to capture the vision of the project and attract the right team based on quality rather than cost. This typically utilizes more of an RFQ or QBS structure vs. conventional RFP, and it may use parallel or sequential team member selection. This is all developed with IPD advisory guidance to ensure alignment with the IPD contract terms as this is issued to market at the same time. Once the IPD team is selected, there is a negotiation phase that is managed in stages and aligned with Validation phase activity.

3.3 Validation Phase

IPD team members are onboarded and trained on Lean and IPD operating systems. They begin to establish governance activities required by the owner, as indicated in the contract. The team then focuses on validating the project base program and develop the base Target Cost, contingency, the profit/risk pool, and milestone schedule. The team works to achieve ‘certainty or confidence’ that they can deliver this project together as a team within these constraints.

A detailed validation report captures this output for ‘Go/No Go’ approval by the owners. The design and contents of validation report is developed by the IPD team (with the owners) at the outset and contains sufficient detail to validate this specific project to proceed. This report reflects at a minimum, the base target cost, contingency, risk, schedule, and all related details that reflects the team commitment to successfully meeting all targets identified. The validation report is a contractual document.

It is important to note that some IPD teams validate in a very short period of time as they have developed the confidence within the team including the owner that they know how to deliver the project successfully to meet the constraints. Other projects have different complexities and require more time. The estimated validation period for this project given its nature and factoring in the complexities with multiple owner party involvement is 3-4 months.

3.4 Detailed Design and Documentation Phase

Once the owner approves the validation report, the team executes on detailed design, logistical planning, and construction documentation development. This phase is guided by what is called “Target Value Design,” which is a philosophy of designing to a budget rather than budgeting a design. The target value design plan was captured in validation and the teamwork will be intense depending on how validation went and the maturity of owner requirements.

For the IPD team, this will feel like a more formalized continuation of the early design activities that took place in validation, however, the focus is on collectively completing detailed design work that integrates constructability and supply chain availability in a manner that supports the ideal path of construction. Overlap of this phase with the construction phase is typically significant and leveraged where possible to accelerate the project wisely.

3.5 Construction & Commissioning Phase

The Construction Phase often starts earlier, significantly overlapped with design phase if the IPD team agrees that it is ‘Best for Project’. The team also typically follows a location based, staged approach to construction which must be synchronized with the design and documentation outputs of the previous phase. This means that design activities are still ongoing, and planning is focused on ensuring the construction activities are ‘flowing smoothly’ without the wastes of waiting. Since the IPD team is using adaptive and agile planning, they would be constantly focused on removing constraints, improving construction workflows, and therefore accelerating schedule.

Commissioning activities are typically started earlier than traditional projects. This is planned proactively with a focus on end-user experience and ensuring all of the typical processes surrounding construction turnover are handled with excellence.

4.0 Organizational Readiness for IPD

4.1 Owners’ Involvement

Compared with the one-time investment mindset of a traditional project, owners’ involvement is an integral part of the IPD program as detailed below.

Procurement

The procurement process requires an adjustment to allow for selection of the best IPD team partners based on qualitative criteria vs. lowest price. After the IPD team signatory selection, there will still be 5-20% of the project cost remaining to procure as a stipulated sum (possibly lowest cost) after validation. There will need to be the corresponding processes to ensure proactive procurement can occur to meet the construction flow-based schedule and not hinder the timelines set out by the team. The owners’ procurement system(s) will need to be reviewed to identify and address any potential issues in this context.

Legal

The owners’ legal team will be involved and aligned early with the expectations of IPD contractual requirements. Key items like risk, insurance and bonding are handled differently than in traditional projects and will need to be communicated thoroughly with all parties involved. Fortunately, there are other municipalities in BC and other Canadian regions that have already navigated this so past lessons learned can be applied directly.

Decision Making

Timely and sustainable (meaning lasting and unaltered) decision making is at the heart of successful IPD execution. Decisions are ‘mapped’ to the project plan similar to design and construction activities, so that it is clear when decisions are needed in order to serve the ‘Best for Project’ schedule. Some of the challenge from the owner’s viewpoint, is that there are often multiple stakeholders who have critical input, most important is the input from the operators of the building. All of these parties are part of the broader Owners group who must productively participate within the IPD process. It would need to be decided who within the broader Owners group is best suited to reside directly within the IPD team governing structure to support the IPD team process, and who resides outside the team staying connected through pre-identified steering and/or stakeholder groups.

Owner’s Involvement

IPD projects have a different upfront investment for Owners that is part of the project costs. This investment ensures that an IPD process can be used which maximizes program value for the owner and ensures a focus on base program with no typical change orders and a team that is committed to deliver the project within base Target Cost.

Any typical capital project requires an Owner to be involved with Project Management (PM) experience, whether this experience is in house, or brought in from outside the organization for support. IPD has an additional requirement for Owners to consider that changes how these persons engage. This structure is relatively minor given the typical PM investment that is made. However, this may require different individuals to be involved in the project to ensure that owner, operators, and users’ input is deeply integrated within the process.

This is often determined in Pre-Validation in a manner that best supports the project and aligns with the owners’ structure.

5.0 Indicative Timeline & Next Steps