2010 ATC SCOD presentation
Download
Report
Transcript 2010 ATC SCOD presentation
Alternate Technical
Concepts
KATHY HARVEY
State Design Engineer
Missouri Department of Transportation
AASHTO Subcommittee on Design
July 28, 2010
Columbia, S.C.
TODAY’S PRESENTATION
Why
What
How
Challenges
Future
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
Construction Program Cliff
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC WHY? – Best Value for Every $
Dwindling financial resources
Many ways to accomplish goals
49 other DOTs –
municipalities - FHWA
Contractor’s experience
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC WHY?
MoDOT + Industry = 1 Team = Best Value
D/B job experience
Encourage $ Savings
Contract administration
Contractor risk
VE vs. ATC
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATCs …
are proposed changes to agency-supplied basic
configurations, project scope, design or
construction criteria.
provide a solution that is equal or better to the
requirements in the RFP.
are similar to value engineering, but are made as
a part of the proposal before contract award.
provide flexibility to the proposers in order to
enhance innovation and achieve efficiency.
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC WHAT? - Legality
“ … likelihood of a protest reduced because of the
reluctance of the courts to overturn agency
decisions regarding advantages of one proposal
over another, unless it is apparent that the decision
was arbitrary or capricious, or agency failed to
follow its own procurement practices.”
-- NCHRP 561 p S-9
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC WHAT? – Different than D-B
Extension of design process - VE
Contractor is VE partner
Evaluate design effort vs. benefit
Design is funded as preliminary engineering
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC How? – Where we started
Rock – the deal maker
Profiles – can we roll?
Medians – width or protection?
Removals – if it ain’t broke don’t fix it
Retaining Walls – CIP vs. MSE vs. elimination
Materials – optional if we can
Traffic Control
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC How? – Recent additions
Bridge Designs
Interchange Configurations
New use for what’s already there
Bottom Line – VE up front – Competitively Bid
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC HOW? – Grading and Drainage
Rock at
2:1
4:1
PIPE
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC HOW? – Pavement
Pavement 10” PCCP/13.5” AC
4” Aggregate Base
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC HOW? – Pavement
Pavement 8.5” PCCP/9.5” AC
Thick Rock Base
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC HOW? – Bridges
Concrete Box vs. Arch Structures
Steel Girder vs. Concrete Girder
Box Girder vs. NU Girder
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC HOW? - General
Currently
Job Special Provision
May include sketches
Pre-approved design changes
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC HOW? – Pay Items
Plan Quantity of Initial Design
Lump Sum Sections
Lump Sum Savings
Change Order
Change to revised quantity
New plans for ATC effects
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC HOW? - Pre-Approved
Timelines – submittal & approval
Technical Parameters
Detailed Submittal Process
Evaluation
Project Team review
Confidential
Pass/Fail
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC How? – Design
Base set of plans always provided
MoDOT/Consultant re-design
Collaborative Plan Development
Re-design completion after award
Evolving Process
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC Challenges? – Design
Design effort for ATC submittal
Who leads ATC re-design
No cost change order
VE of ATC’s
Contractor incentive
ATC team w/AGC
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC Future? – Development
MoDOT
FWHA
Contractors
Suppliers
Consultant
ATCs and VECPs
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC Example – One that worked
Route H bridge over I-44, Springfield
Reduced 4-span bridge over I-44 to 2span with use of MSE walls
Project Development Process – New and Improved!
ATC Example – One that didn’t
I-70/I-435 Interchange, Kansas City
ATC eliminated 1 bridge, 3 MSE walls, reduced
grading and lowered road-user costs.
Saved
$2.4 million.
Not approved by FHWA.
Now a VE proposal.
Project Development Process – New and Improved!