Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods, Volume 3: Research Overview (2020)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

64 Case Study Summaries Case Study 1. I-70 Vail Underpass (CM-GC), Colorado Project Name: I-70 Vail Underpass Name of Agency: Colorado Department of Transportation (Colorado DOT) and Town of Vail (TOV) Location: Near mile marker 175 on I-70 between Main Vail and West Vail interchanges Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Qualification-Based Selection–Construction Agreed Price Total Project Cost: $31 million Construction Schedule: October 2015–October 2017 Project Description: A joint effort between CDOT and TOV that utilized CDOT’s RAMP program. This project constructed a two-lane underpass with two new bridges under I-70 that connect to the north and south frontage roads (Figure B1.1). Two single-lane roundabouts alleviated traffic congestion resulting from major development in the TOV. The project did not add additional I-70 exits/interchanges into the TOV. Sidewalks and retaining walls up to 18 ft. were constructed to help accommodate the lowering of the roadway. This project relieved congestion at the interchanges and prevented vehicles from queuing at the I-70 exits at Main and West Vail. Additionally, the work reduced repetitive local traffic movements by provid- ing a direct connection between the core resort village areas and the West Vail mall area and residences that would otherwise use the interchanges. Furthermore, improvements enhanced multimodal transportation options within the TOV, including bus, pedestrian, and bicycle mobility. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B1.1. A P P E N D I X B

Case Study Summaries 65 Case Study 2. US 6 and 19th Street Interchange (CM-GC), Colorado Project Name: US 6 and 19th Street Interchange Name of Agency: City of Golden and Colorado Department of Transportation (Colorado DOT) Location: US Highway 6 and 19th Street in Golden, Colorado Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Qualification-Based Selection–Guaranteed Maximum Price with 11 competitively bid work packages Total Project Cost: $25 million Construction Schedule: February 2016–September 2017 Project Description: This project constructed a two-lane 19th Street overpass over US 6 with on and off ramps (Figure B2.1). US 6 was widened to four lanes with pavement capacity to expand to six lanes in the future if traffic volumes warrant. Improvements included a mul- tiuse paved trail and small park on top of the bridge with berms for noise barriers. An IGA has Golden maintaining the landscape and Colorado DOT maintaining the bridge. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B2.1. Figure B1.1. Vail underpass construction (Source: Colorado Department of Transportation). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • ACM roles and responsibilities • Partnering 2. Administer CM-GC Design • None 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • Innovation matrix • Risk pools • Cost approach • Cost-comparison spreadsheet • Interim pricing milestone and bid validation • ICE • Construction general conditions table for determining fee (in Colorado DOT manual) 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • None 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B1.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

66 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 3. I-25–Arapahoe Interchange (CM-GC), Colorado Project Name: I-25–Arapahoe Interchange Name of Agency: Colorado Department of Transportation (Colorado DOT) Location: Greenwood Village, Colorado at I-25 and Arapahoe Interchange Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Qualifications-Based Selection–Guaranteed Maximum Price Total Project Cost: $84 million ($54 million construction services) Construction Schedule: May 2016–July 2018 Project Description: The project included replacing the I-25 Bridge over Arapahoe Road. The bridge was lengthened to increase capacity on the interchange by adding dedicated turn lanes to the I-25 on ramps (Figure B3.1). Other components of the project included improv- ing the intersections at Yosemite and Boston streets, adding a new frontage road to improve access to businesses in the northeast quadrant, and constructing a sound wall next to adjacent residences. The CM-GC contractor was Kraemer North America, the designer was David Evans and Associates/Hartwig & Associates, and the ICE was LS Gallegos. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B3.1. Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • None 2. Administer CM-GC Design • None 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • Innovation matrix • Risk pools • Cost-comparison spreadsheet • Construction general conditions table for determining fee (in Colorado DOT manual) 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • None 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B2.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Southbound US 6 Southbound off-ramp Northbound US 6 View to the south on US 6 looking at the 19th Street bridge. Northbound on-ramp Figure B2.1. Rendering of US 6 and 19th Street Bridge in Golden, Colorado (Source: Colorado Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 67 Case Study 4. I-215 Barton Road Interchange (CM-GC), California Project Name: I-215 Barton Road Interchange Reconstruction Project Name of Agency: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans, District 8) with San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) Location: I-215 at Barton Road in Grand Terrace Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Qualification-Based Selection–Guaranteed Maximum Price Total Project Cost: $47.5 million Construction Schedule: Preconstruction services started August 2014. Construction anti- cipated November 2017–Spring 2020. Project Description: This project proposes to demolish the existing Barton Road Over- crossing and construct a new Barton Road Overcrossing Box Girder Bridge and interchange (Figure B4.1). Work includes the realignment of existing on and off ramps, retaining walls, utility relocations, realignment of Commerce Way, new roundabout, and new road construc- tion. The CM-GC is Myers–Rados, A Joint Venture. Caltrans will perform the design. A sum- mary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B4.1. Figure B3.1. I-25–Arapahoe Interchange (Source: Colorado Department of Transportation). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM-GC, Designer, and DOT • ACM roles and responsibilities • Partnering 2. Administer CM-GC Design • None 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • Innovation matrix • Cost approach • Cost-comparison spreadsheet • ICE • Interim pricing milestone and bid validation 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • None 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B3.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • ACM roles and responsibilities (table) • Informal discussions with functional groups and team members to clarify roles and expectations in CM-GC • Cost approach (Initial Approach to Cost Meeting: contract scope, App. B, section 2.2, establish assumptions on: baseline production rates; input standards for cost and schedule estimates; construction means and methods; communication of changes in scope, quantity, and phasing.) • Glossary of Preconstruction Terms: in contract scope, App. B, section 5.0 (obtained from web site) • Kickoff–Partnering meeting 2. Administer CM-GC Design • Review response period: contract scope App. B, section 2.4, Table 2 (obtained from web site) • Co-location: contract scope section 3.0 (obtained from web site) 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • Innovation matrix • Open book estimating: contract scope, App. B, section 4.0 • Definitions of categorization and accounting, such as direct and indirect costs: contract scope, App. B, section 4.4 (obtained from web site) • Interim pricing milestone and bid validation • Cost-comparison spreadsheet • ICE 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • None 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B4.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Figure B4.1. Barton Road Interchange Project location (Source: California Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 69 Case Study 5. South Fork Smith River Road Bridge (CM-GC), California Project Name: South Fork Smith River Road Bridge (George E. Tyron Bridge) Name of Agency: Central Federal Lands Highway Division of FHWA in collaboration with Six Rivers National Forest, Del Norte County, FHWA California Division, Caltrans, California State Parks Location: On County Road 427, Forest Highway 112 (also known as South Fork Smith River Road) near Hiouchi in northwestern California Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Best Value–Guaranteed Maximum Price Total Project Cost: $15.3 million ($11.45 million construction) Construction Schedule: August 2013–March 2017 Project Description: This project replaced the historic steel arch bridge (1948) over the South Fork Smith River, part of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System and home to several threatened, endangered, and sensitive species. The new two-lane bridge has a concrete arch that spans 141 feet (Figure B5.1). Additional improvements included paving, drainage, and demolition of the existing bridge. The new bridge was built around the existing bridge, which allowed traffic to be maintained throughout the construction process. The bridge was designed by Central Federal Lands Highway Division and built by Flatiron. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B5.1. Figure B5.1. George E. Tyron Bridge (Source: Central Federal Lands Highway Division). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • ACM role and responsibilities (matrix) • List of steps in submittal review process that indicate CM-GC’s role. • Partnering meeting 2. Administer CM-GC Design • None 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • Cost-comparison spreadsheet • Negotiate profit and overhead for construction in preconstruction services contract 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • None 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B5.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

70 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 6. SR-108; SR-127 to SR-107 (CM-GC), Utah Project Name: SR-108; SR-127 to SR-107 (2000 West: Syracuse to West Point) Name of Agency: Utah Department of Transportation (Utah DOT) Location: Syracuse City and West Point City, Utah Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Qualifications-Based Selection–Unit Price Construction Cost: $50 million Construction Schedule: March 2017–November 2018 Project Description: This project will reconstruct and widen 2 miles of concrete pavement from three lanes to five lanes (Figure B6.1). Project challenges will include coordinating work with access to three schools along the corridor, extensive right-of-way acquisition, and util- ity relocations and upgrades. The contractor will be Granite Construction, and the designer will be Horrocks Engineers. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B6.1. Figure B6.1. SR-108 widening (Source: Utah Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 71 Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • Road Map goals card • RFP–CM-GC roles and responsibilities • RFP–continuity of staff through life of project • CM-GC general guidelines • Kickoff meeting agenda • Project Dashboard: website with vision, mission, goals, emphasis, and values • Agreement with FHWA regarding FHWA involvement in UDOT CM- GC projects 2. Administer CM-GC Design • Plan sheet with early work package item clouded 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • SR-108 Fair Pricing Strategy • Innovation matrix • Communicate regularly with CM-GC about their preconstruction role • Spreadsheet to compare blind bids 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • None 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • List of lessons learned Table B6.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Case Study 7. Winona Bridge (CM-GC), Minnesota Project Name: Winona Bridge Name of Agency: Minnesota Department of Transportation (Minnesota DOT) Location: Highway 43 Bridge over Mississippi River in Winona Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Best Value–Unit Price Total Project Cost: $147 million Construction Schedule: August 2014–December 2019. New bridge opened August 2016 Project Description: This project will rehabilitate the existing steel truss bridge over the Mississippi River in Winona. The existing bridge structure, which is on the national register of historic places, is a 2,281 ft. structure, which includes a 933 ft., three-span, continuous- steel, riveted high truss (Figure B7.1). There are also 21 approach spans consisting of 3 spans of steel girders, 12 spans of concrete girders, two spans of steel, riveted deck truss on the south end, and four spans of steel, riveted deck truss on the north end. The new 50 ft., 4-inch-wide concrete box girder bridge will carry two lanes of traffic with shoulders and a separated 12-feet pedestrian and bike lane. Roadway approaches for both bridge struc- tures will be constructed. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B7.1.

Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • ACM roles and responsibilities • Interim Pricing Milestone and bid evaluation • Minnesota DOT PM and Contractor meet with Minnesota DOT functional teams individually to explain the CM- GC process, rolls, and expectations 2. Administer CM-GC Design • CM-GC can recommend changes to the requirements and standards 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • Designer produced management plans with contractor input prior to construction contract letting, including Integrated Shop Drawing Plan for the Concrete Segmental Bridge, Environment. Management Plan, Safety Plan, etc. • ICE • Cost-comparison spreadsheet (For cost estimating, compare raw unit prices (material, labor, equipment). Later add or spread in indirect costs and markup. This allows for clear comparison.) • Innovation matrix • Negotiate CM-GC rates and markup before the first CM-GC precon invoice • Over-the-shoulder reviews • Interim pricing milestones and bid validation (ability to negotiate once after the contractor submits a bid on a work package) • Coordinate work packages (items needed throughout the project may appear in one package, instead of each package) 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • Witness and hold points identified in QMP, and the QMP was closely adhered to • Management-level support for CM- GC process • Continuity of team members • ACM public announcement 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B7.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Figure B7.1. Winona Bridge construction (Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 73 Case Study 8. SH 82 Grand Avenue Bridge (CM-GC), Colorado Project Name: Grand Avenue Bridge Name of Agency: Colorado Department of Transportation, with support from the Colorado Bridge Enterprise, utility companies, Glenwood Springs, Garfield County, and Eagle County Location: Highway 82 over the Colorado River in Glenwood Springs Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Qualification-Based Selection–Unit Price Total Project Cost: $125.6 million ($68.4 million construction and $7.5 million in long lead- time procurement items) Construction Schedule: January 2016–June 2018 Project Description: The existing traffic bridge (1953) and pedestrian bridge (1985) were each replaced (Figure B8.1). The bridges crossed over 7th Street, Union Pacific Railroad tracks, the Colorado River, I-70, North River Street, and the Glenwood Hot Springs parking lot. The project was planned with five phases. In phase four, bridge access to vehicles was closed and traf- fic detoured. The CM-GC was Granite–RL Wadsworth Joint Venture. Jacobs Engineering was the prime design consultant. The traffic bridge designer was Tsiouvaras Simmons Holderness (TSH). The pedestrian bridge designer was AMEC Foster Wheeler. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B8.1. Figure B8.1. Grand Avenue Bridge construction (Source: Colorado Department of Transportation).

74 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • Partnering kickoff meeting • ACM roles and responsibilities • ACM training (talk to other DOTs to learn from their experience; RE meets with other DOT staff to share and learn) 2. Administer CM-GC Design • Independent party design review 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • Cost-comparison spreadsheet • ICE • Interim pricing milestone and bid validation • Cost approach (list of cost model assumptions) • Risk pools • Colorado DOT CM-GC Manual 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • Continuity of team members • ACM public announcement (newspaper article about bridge closure that included the value of CM- GC delivery) 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B8.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Case Study 9. Trunk Highway (TH) 53 Relocation Project (CM-GC), Minnesota Project Name: Hwy 53 Relocation Name of Agency: Minnesota Department of Transportation Location: TH 53 from Bourgin Road to Second Avenue between Virginia and Eveleth, Minnesota Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Best Value–Unit Price Total Project Cost: $240 million ($156 million construction) Construction Schedule: November 2015–November 2017 Project Description: This road and bridge project covered 3.2 miles (Figure B9.1). The existing bridge was relocated to accommodate mining for United Taconite. The new 1,100 ft. bridge spans the Rouchleau Iron Ore Mine Pit. Steel girders were used on the three-span bridge approximately 250 ft. high. The foundation uses 30 in. micropiles. A new interchange was con- structed at Highway 135, and the interchange at Second Avenue is being reconstructed. The work included the relocation of City of Virginia utilities. Parsons was the bridge designer, Kiewit was the CM-GC, and Veit Specialty Contracting was the foundation contractor. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B9.1.

Case Study Summaries 75 Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • Minnesota DOT CM-GC Manual— Draft • Glossary of ACM terms (definitions of CM-GC terms in Manual) • Overview of FHWA involvement on ACM Projects • ACM roles and responsibilities (Section 3.1) • ACM training (from Innovative Contracting Office: PowerPoint slides and agenda; learn from experienced agency staff) • Partnering • Kickoff meeting • Monthly Subcabinet meetings for State Departments • Discipline task force (weekly Minnesota DOT Functional Group meetings) • Co-location 2. Administer CM-GC Design • None 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • Risk pools (Risk Register Level 1 and 2: allocate risk and identify $ amount) • Interim pricing milestone and bid validation (Exhibit 5.5-1 Sample Interim Pricing Milestone Schedule) and Figure 1: CM-GC Bid Validation Process (rev. April 2015) and Fig. 6.1- 1 CM-GC Price Proposal Validation Process • Cost-comparison spreadsheet (Exhibit 5.5-2 Sample Variance Report) • ICE • Innovation matrix: Cost and schedule savings (Form 5.4-1 Cost and Schedule–Savings Matrix Template) and (Form 5.4-2 Cost and Schedule Savings Summary Log Template) 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • None 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B9.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Figure B9.1. Hwy 53 Bridge construction (Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation).

76 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 10. Ina Road Traffic Interchange Project (CM-GC), Arizona Project Name: Ina Road Traffic Interchange Name of Agency: Arizona Department of Transportation Location: Ina Road and I-10, Tucson, Arizona Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Qualifications-Based Selection–Guaranteed Maximum Price Construction Cost: $124 million Construction Schedule: July 2016–June 2019 Project Description: This project will widen I-10 to six lanes for 1.5 miles and widen Ina Road to four lanes from Silverbell Road to Camino De La Cruz. The existing grade crossing of Ina Road at the Union Pacific Railroad will be replaced with a bridge over the railroad and I-10, approximately 25 ft. high. Improvements will also include two new bridges for Ina Road over the Santa Cruz River (Figure B10.1). The I-10 frontage road will be raised to meet the new Ina Road overpass. Additional improvements will include concrete box culverts, retaining walls, water and sewer relocations, and traffic signals. Psomas will be the designer, and Sundt–Kiewit will be the CM-GC. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B10.1. Figure B10.1. Ina Road–Santa Cruz Bridge (Source: Arizona Department of Transportation). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • Arizona DOT CMAR Process Guide, Sept. 2014 (obtained) • Established core team and lines of communication • Partnering 2. Administer CM-GC Design • None 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • ICE • Cost-comparison spreadsheet • Value Engineering spreadsheet • Interim pricing milestone and bid validation 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • Risk pools 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B10.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

Case Study Summaries 77 Case Study 11. E-470 (CM-GC), Colorado Project Name: E-470 Road Widening Project Name of Agency: Colorado Public Highway Authority Location: Adams, Arapahoe, and Douglas Counties, Colorado Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: CM-GC–Best Value–Unit Price Total Project Cost: $90 million Construction Schedule: Spring 2016–December 2017 Project Description: This section of E-470 was constructed in 1997–1998 and consists of two lanes in each direction plus a climbing lane in one section. A traffic and revenue study predicted that the highway in this area would experience level-of-service D congestion between 2018 and 2021. This project added a third lane in both directions for the 8-mile section of the highway between Parker Road and Quincy Avenue (Figure B11.1). Eleven bridges will all be widened to the ultimate 6-lane configuration. There were no toll infrastructure improvements in this project, and the existing pavement was overlaid. A multipurpose pedestrian–bike trail was also constructed adjacent to the road as part of this project. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B11.1. Figure B11.1. E-470 Widening (Source: Colorado Department of Transportation).

78 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 12. Braddock Road–Pleasant Valley Roundabout (D-B), Virginia Project Name: Braddock Road (Route 620) and Pleasant Valley Road (Route 609) Intersec- tion Improvement Name of Agency: Virginia Department of Transportation Location: Fairfax Country, Virginia Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Low Bid–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $5.9 million Construction Schedule: April 2015–May 2016 Project Description: This project involved the design and construction of improvements to Braddock Road (Route 620) and Pleasant Valley Road (Route 609) and the installation of a roundabout at the intersection (Figure B12.1). The project included, among other things, (a) the design and construction of a roundabout, (b) widening and improvements on existing roads, (c) milling and overlay, (d) demolition of pavement, (e) right of way acquisition, (f) drainage, (g) storm water management, (h) erosion and sediment control, (i) utility relocations, (j) light- ing, and (k) signing and pavement marking within project limits. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B12.1. Agency Activities Initial 1. Administer Alignment between CM- GC, Designer, and DOT • Kickoff meeting • Pre-proposal meeting • Field views (one-on-one meetings to view project location) 2. Administer CM-GC Design • Value Engineering Matrix • Continuity of team members required in RFP 3. Administer CM-GC Preconstruction Services • ICE • Cost comparison spreadsheet • Reconciliation meetings when differences between ICE and CM-GC were discovered • Open book estimating (subs bids were shown to PHA) 4. Administer CM-GC Construction • Hold points used, but not required • One public meeting held in preconstruction phase 5. Administer CM-GC Closeout • None Table B11.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

Case Study Summaries 79 Figure B12.1. Braddock Road–Pleasant Valley Roundabout (Source: Virginia Department of Transportation). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Kickoff meeting • Scope Validation Period • Continuity of team members 2. Administer D-B Design • Comment Resolution Meetings (in- progress design) • Design QC Checklist (Alternative Plan Standards) 3. Administer D-B Construction • ACM hold points 4. Administer D-B Closeout • None Table B12.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Case Study 13. West 4th Street Bridge (D-B), Pennsylvania Project Name: West 4th Street Bridge Name of Agency: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Location: Williamsport, Pennsylvania Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Low Bid–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $3.39 million Construction Schedule: Spring 2016–August 2017 Project Description: The project removed and reconstructed an 8 in. concrete bridge deck with epoxy overlay of a 413-feet five-span steel girder bridge (Figure B13.1). The bridge had three lanes and a sidewalk on both sides. Steel beams and concrete piers were repaired as needed, and the steel structure was painted. The D-B team consisted of CBM Smith and Susquehanna Valley Construction Corp. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B13.1.

80 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Figure B13.1. West 4th Street Bridge (Source: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B and DOT • ACM roles and responsibilities (in contract) 2. Administer D-B Design • Pennsylvania Project Collaboration Center (PPCC) is in-house software that organizes all project documents into a standard folder organization, automatically routes documents to DOT reviewers, and tracks reviews. • Submission requirement/review times (in contract, section VII, table) • Overview of FHWA involvement on ACM projects (Innovative Bidding Toolkit, App. B - Submittal Review Responsibility Checklist, p.190) 3. Administer D-B Construction • Innovative Bidding Toolkit 4. Administer D-B Closeout • Contractor Performance Evaluation Form and weighting system Table B13.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Case Study 14. SR-299 Bridge over I-24 (D-B), Georgia Project Name: SR-299 at I-24 Bridge Replacement Name of Agency: Georgia Department of Transportation Location: Dade County, Georgia, SR-299 over I-24 Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $7.2 million ($1 million design and $6.2 million construction) Construction Schedule: December 2015–June 2017 Project Description: The project covers approximately 0.16 miles along SR 299. Existing SR 299 right-of-way is slightly variable, ranging from 200 ft. on the west side of I-24 to 255 ft. on the east side of I-24 (Figure B14.1). The existing bridge is approximately 34.5 ft. wide and 240 ft. long

Case Study Summaries 81 and accommodates one lane of traffic in each direction. The proposed bridge will have the same number of lanes but will be widened to meet current SHTO and Georgia DOT requirements. All approach work to accommodate the bridge widening will be limited to SR 299 between the I-24 ramp terminals. No additional right-of-way or easement will be required for the removal of the existing bridge or the construction of the new bridge. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B14.1. Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Role and Responsibilities definitions in the D-B Manual • Kickoff meetings for preliminary design, final design, and a design workshop • One-on-one meetings for ATCs • Stipend provided for unsuccessful proposers who have ATCs Georgia DOT would like to purchase 2. Administer D-B Design • Monthly design meetings • “Huddle Up” Meetings between monthly meetings • E-Builder used to store all design reviews and project documents 3. Administer D-B Construction • 3rd party CEI hired by Georgia DOT • Biweekly project update meetings • Public meetings prior to SR-299 closure, flyer provided to public • Live feed of construction during closure available to the public 4. Administer D-B Closeout • D-B post construction evaluation/lessons learned (completed by Georgia DOT and D-B team) Table B14.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Figure B14.1. SR-299 Bridge over I-24 (Source: Georgia Department of Transportation).

82 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 15. US-2–US-41 Iron Mountain Road Rehabilitation (D-B), Michigan Project Name: Reconstruction of US-2–US-41 at M-95 North Junction Name of Agency: Michigan Department of Transportation Location: Breitung Township, Dickinson County, Michigan (Upper Peninsula) Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Low Bid–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $1.9 million Construction Schedule: March 2017–September 2017 Project Description: This project was located in Breitung Township, Dickinson County, on US-2–US-141 at M-95. The project included reconstruction of the existing four-lane boulevard section and realignment–geometric configuration to a five-lane section along US-2–US-141 (Figure B15.1). One of the project goals was to reduce rollover potential through geometric improvements in cross slope, grade breaks, horizontal alignments, and vertical profiles. The project consisted of road rehabilitation, including concrete pavement repairs and hot mix asphalt, cold milling, and resurfacing. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B15.1. Figure B15.1. US-2–US-41 Iron Mountain Road rehabilitation (Source: Michigan Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 83 Case Study 16. I-75 (SR 93A) ITS (D-B), Florida Project Name: I-75 (SR 93A) from north of I-275 to Manatee–Hillsborough County Line Name of Agency: Florida Department of Transportation Location: Manatee and Hillsborough County, Florida Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Low Bid–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $2.9 million Construction Schedule: January 2017–April 2018 Project Description: This project included ITS Freeway Management for Tampa Bay Sun- Guide on I-75 (SR 93A) from the existing communication hub north of the I-275 Interchange to the Manatee–Hillsborough County Line in Manatee County. The project covered a length of 5.32 miles. Work included the design and installation of an underground conduit, message boards, and poles with cameras for live traffic feeds (Figure B16.1). A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B16.1. Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Internal D-B Training (not project specific) • Informal partnering • Roles and responsibilities outlined in RFP (could use more detail in the team’s opinion) 2. Administer D-B Design • Over-the-shoulder reviews • Internal Technical Reviews • Project website used for all documentation 3. Administer D-B Construction • Incentives for Superior Quality (HMA and longitudinal joint density) outlined in RFP 4. Administer D-B Closeout • All similar to D-B-B Table B15.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. (a) (b) Figure B16.1. The I-75 (SR 93A) ITS Project included (a) installation of an underground conduit and pole foundation and (b) ITS cabinet (Source: Florida Department of Transportation).

84 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Informal kickoff meeting • Formal partnering 2. Administer D-B Design • 3rd-Party Design Reviews 3. Administer D-B Construction • None 4. Administer D-B Closeout • Contractor Past Performance Rating (same as D-B-B) Table B16.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Case Study 17. SR 90 Traffic Signal ITS (D-B), Florida Project Name: SR 90–US 41–SW 8 Street Adaptive Signal Control Technology Pilot Project Name of Agency: Florida Department of Location: Miami–Dade County, Florida Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Low Bid–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $3.8 million Construction Schedule: February 15, 2016–June 30, 2017 Project Description: This project required the deployment of an InSync Fusion-type model adaptive signal control technology system throughout 29 intersections on SR 90, US 41, and SW 8 Street. The D-B team was responsible for the design, installation, integration, testing, documentation, training, and warranty services for the project. This newly installed system allow for real-time traffic monitoring as opposed to pre-timed signals. The existing signals were left in place, and new cameras were added to the existing structures. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B17.1. Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Informal kickoff meeting • Formal Partnering 2. Administer D-B Design • 3rd-Party Design Reviews • Design Reviews roles and responsibilities 3. Administer D-B Construction • Internal Signal Inspectors came to project at 60%, 90%, and 100% 4. Administer D-B Closeout • Contractor Past Performance Rating (same as D-B-B) Table B17.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

Case Study Summaries 85 Case Study 18. Lahaina Bypass Phase 2 (D-B), Maui, Hawaii (HDOT) and Lakewood, Colorado (Central Federal Lands) Project Name: Lahaina Bypass 1B-2 Name of Agency: Central Federal Lands with Hawaii Department of Transportation Location: From the southeastern termini of the previous 1B-1 phase and southeast to the existing Honoapiilani Highway (State Route 30) near cut mountain. Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Low Bid–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $38.6 million Construction Schedule: January 2017–January 2018 Project Description: The project consisted of designing 2.7 miles to accommodate a divided four-lane highway (Figure B18.1). However, only two of the four lanes will be built initially. Construction included concrete pavement, earth embankments, culvert drainage crossings (cor- rugated metal pipe and concrete box culverts), a Geotextile Reinforced Soil over-crossing bridge structure at Punakea Street, drainage detention basins, two at-grade signalized intersections (Kai Hele Ku and Hokiokio Place), and a southern connector road. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B18.1. Figure B18.1. Lahaina Bypass Phase 2 (Source: Hawaii Department of Transportation and Central Federal Lands). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Collocation • ACM roles and responsibilities (in contract) • Meet with regulatory agencies to educate them about the D-B process and why a contractor is involved before permits are issued (agenda and meeting summary) 2. Administer D-B Design • None 3. Administer D-B Construction • None 4. Administer D-B Closeout • None Table B18.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

86 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 19. US 60 (Grand Avenue) and Bell Road Interchange (D-B), Arizona Project Name: US 60 (Grand Avenue) and Bell Road Interchange Name of Agency: Arizona Department of Transportation Location: Surprise, Arizona Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $42.2 million Construction Schedule: January 2016–March 2017 Project Description: This project involved construction of the Bell Road bridge over US 60 (Grand Avenue) and the BNSF Railway tracks to replace an at-grade crossing (Figure B19.1). The project used a median urban design interchange with center on and off ramps to minimize impacts to adjacent property. Improvements included storm drain and utility relocations. Bell Road was closed for 8 months and a detour was implemented during that time to accelerate the construction schedule so that the road could open before the start of the Cactus League minor league baseball season. The design–builder was Coffman Specialties, Inc. with T.Y. Lin performing structural design. The general engineering consultant was AECOM. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B19.1. Figure B19.1. US 60 (Grand Avenue) and Bell Road Interchange (Source: Arizona Department of Transportation). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B and DOT • Design-Build Procurement and Administrative Guide, 3rd Edition, Dec. 2007 • Arizona DOT Process Improvement Review Report: Design–Build, August 2012 • Co-location (from day one, waiting 90 days was too long) • Partnering 2. Administer D-B Design • Allowing formatting changes: (to plans-roll plots; eliminated summary sheets) • Review response period (10 days) 3. Administer D-B Construction • Incentive program for superior quality (Workmanship Incentive Program) • Risk pools (allowance for additional quantity) 4. Administer D-B Closeout • Risk-reduction assessment (register completed at the start and again at the end to determine how much risk was reduced) Table B19.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

Case Study Summaries 87 Case Study 20. Route 8 (D-B), Connecticut Project Name: Route 8 Name of Agency: Connecticut Department of Transportation Location: Route 8/25 north of I-9, Bridgeport, Connecticut Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $36.2 million Construction Schedule: June 2015–September 2016 Project Description: This project involved the design and replacement of the superstruc- tures (beams and concrete deck) on separate northbound and southbound bridges over Lindley Street and Capital Avenue (Figure B20.1). These bridges were originally built in 1972. Accelerated bridge construction involved the use of prefabricated modular steel beams units. This method reduced impacts to traffic from 2 years to less than 14 days for each half of the road. The work also included retaining walls, traffic signals, and turn lanes. The design– builder was Manafort Brothers, Inc., and Parsons Brinckerhoff. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B20.1. Figure B20.1. Route 8 (Source: Connecticut Department of Transportation).

88 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 21. Milton IM 089-3 (66) (D-B), Vermont Project Name: I-89 Bridges over Lamoille River Name of Agency: Vermont Department of Transportation (VTrans) Location: I-89 over the Lamoille River, Milton, Vermont Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $23.5 million Construction Schedule: Fall 2013–August 2017 Project Description: The project replaced the two 1967-era bridges for northbound and southbound traffic over the Lamoille River with one bridge (Figure B21.1). The new 106-feet wide bridge is three spans with steel girders. Maritime traffic remained open during construction. A barge system was implemented for construction in the river. An endangered species of mussels needed to be relocated before construction started. This project received Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B and DOT • ACM public announcement: newsletter note on pre-fabricated bridge units, PBU • RFP-spec for QMP • RFP-spec for QC plans • RFP-spec for public outreach • RFP-spec for TMP • ACM kickoff meeting (pre- construction meeting) sample agenda • Preproposal meeting PowerPoint • Training workshop for industry: sample agenda, PowerPoints • Training workshop for agency staff: sample agenda, PowerPoints • RFP-specs for over the shoulder reviews • RFP-guidelines for ERC and final submittal 2. Administer D-B Design • In the plan table of contents, plan sheets not included in a submittal were grayed out. Sample plan sheet with grayed line in table of contents from E. Hartford • Excel spreadsheet for tracking design submittals • Route 8 Project agreement with FHWA • Connecticut DOT Steward agreement with FHWA • RFP-spec for key personnel on site for specified activities 3. Administer D-B Construction • Guidance on QC for contractor and QA for owner • Spreadsheet used to check pay applications. Guidance on how to check performance and not pay for work not meeting performance standards 4. Administer D-B Closeout • Lessons Learned from Route 8 D-B Table B20.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

Case Study Summaries 89 special permission to construct outside the typical construction season window of Decem- ber 1 through April 15. The project was constructed in three phases. The first phase was a new section of the bridge between the existing bridges. In the second phase, the west side bridge was demolished and replaced, followed by the east side in the third phase. The design– build team included Tetra-Tech Construction and URS. EIV was the quality assurance manager for the D-B team. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B21.1. Figure B21.1. I-89 Bridge (Source: Vermont Department of Transportation). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Roles and responsibilities in the RFP • Permitting kickoff meeting • Project kickoff meeting 2. Administer D-B Design • FHWA design–build activity guideline • VTrans changes to key personnel guidelines • Role of ECO (in RFP) • Submittal summary sheet (example from the Burlington project) • Over-the-shoulder reviews • Discipline review meeting 3. Administer D-B Construction • Material Acceptance Plan from the Burlington project • Hold points described in RFP 4. Administer D-B Closeout • Punch list descriptions in RFP Table B21.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

90 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 22. Wellwood Avenue over Route 27 (D-B), New York Project Name: Wellwood Avenue over Route 27 Name of Agency: New York State Department of Transportation Location: Town of Babylon, Suffolk County Project Delivery Method/Procurement/Contract Type: D-B/Best Value/Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $20.4M Construction Schedule: Spring 2016-–Summer 2017 Project Description: This project involved construction of a new bridge with two travel lanes, shoulders, and sidewalks (Figure B22.1). The existing bridge, built in 1961, carried over 90,000 vehicles per day. Construction also included new bridge approaches, guardrail, parapet walls, pavement, striping, and a slight widening of Wellwood Avenue. Travel remained open during peak hours while construction took place with some temporary closures during off-peak hours. Active construction activities were limited to off-peak hours. The design–builder was Posillico Civil, Inc. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B22.1. Figure B22.1. Wellwood Avenue Bridge (Source: New York State Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 91 Case Study 23. St. Louis District Safety Project (D-B), Missouri Project Name: St. Louis District Safety Project Name of Agency: Missouri Department of Transportation Location: Projects are divided across 31 locations across Franklin and St. Charles Counties, Missouri. Key locations include Route 47 from Route 50 to the North Outer Road in Franklin County, as well as Route 94 from Siedentop Road to Route 364 in St. Charles County Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $24.11 million Construction Schedule: July 2017–November 2018 Project Description: Safety improvements at 31 locations will occur. The D-B team was selected partly because of the estimated number of lives that could be saved for each location. These improvements include right turn angle changes, intersection warning systems, pavement treatments, reflective pavement markers, rumble strips, and flashing stop signs (Figure B23.1). The design–build team includes NB West Contracting Company, Horner & Shifrin, Inc., Lochmueller Group, and Engineering Design Source, Inc. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B23.1. Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Continuity of key personnel RFP Instructions to Proposers sections 1.11 and 1.15 • D-B Procedures Manual I of V, 2011 • D-B Procedures Manual III of V, 2011 • D-B Procurement Process Report, 2003 • D-B Practice Report, 2002 • Informal partnering, RFP Part 2, D-B 103-2 • Prework meeting to highlight key differences for D-B roles and responsibilities (Agenda) • Training class for employees new to D-B-PowerPoint presentations or other training materials 2. Administer D-B Design • Design Review Checklist • D-B specific folder layout structure for ProjectWise, New York State DOT Project Development Manual, Appendix 14 (obtained) 3. Administer D-B Construction • NCR light spreadsheet used for tracking 4. Administer D-B Closeout • Project Quality Assurance Report- template or outline Table B22.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

92 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Partnering meeting • Kickoff meeting • RFP and contract • Chief Engineer Authorization • Continuity of key personnel • FHWA oversite agreement • Co-location (description in RFP) 2. Administer D-B Design • Audits • External SharePoint Workflow process • Permit log • Discipline Task Force meeting • Over-the-shoulder meetings for disciplines, except the Safety project had the entire team meet weekly • SharePoint folder organization, 1000– 9000 • Additional Applicable Standard (AAS) form 3. Administer D-B Construction • Workflow sheet to track what materials • Hold points (in Quality Management Plan) 4. Administer D-B Closeout • None Table B23.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Figure B23.1. St. Louis District Safety Project Improvement location (Source: Missouri Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 93 Case Study 24. I-25–Cimarron Interchange (D-B), Colorado Project Name: I-25–Cimarron Interchange Phase 2 Name of Agency: Colorado Department of Transportation Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado, at I-25 Interchange between Colorado Avenue (north) and South Nevada Avenue (south), 8th Street (west), and the Cimarron Street (US 24) bridge over Fountain Creek (east) Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $72 million Construction Schedule: March 2015–November 2017 Project Description: The project consisted of rebuilding the interchange with new bridges on I-25 and US 24, improved trail connectivity, and a new connection between 8th Street and Cimarron Street (Figure B24.1). Improvements included bridges, ramps, additional lanes, over- lay, signals, stream channel reconstruction, multi-use trail extension, pedestrian bridge, and landscaping. The D-B contract was with Kraemer North America, LLC; and the lead designer was Tsiouvaras Simmons Holderness. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B24.1. Figure B24.1. I-25 bridge demolition (Source: Colorado Department of Transportation. Photograph courtesy Cherry Creek Recycling). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer alignment between D-B Team and DOT • ACM roles and responsibilities (communicated during the RFQ and RFP stages, and in the one-on-one meetings (4 hrs.) with D-B teams) • D-B champion (to keep all team members on track with the D-B process) • Partnering (Project First system) 2. Administer D-B Design • Document specialist: not only to save and organize documents, but to remind people what documents they need to submit by when (request job description of document control person) • Witness and hold points 3. Administer D-B Construction • None 4. Administer D-B Closeout • None Table B24.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

94 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Figure B25.1. New I-405 dual express toll lane system in Kirkland, Washington (Source: Washington State Department of Transportation). Case Study 25. I-405, NE 6th Street to I-5 (Bellevue to Lynnwood) Widening and Express Toll Lanes Project (D-B), Washington Project Name: I-405, NE 6th Street to I-5 Widening and Express Toll Lanes Project Name of Agency: Washington State Department of Transportation Location: Seattle metro area, I-405 from NE 6th Street in Bellevue to I-5 in Lynnwood Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $155.5 million Construction Schedule: February 2012–August 2017. Express toll lanes opened to traffic on September 27, 2015. Project Description: Between downtown Bellevue and SR 522 in Bothell, Washington State DOT and the design–builder added one lane in each direction and converted the existing carpool lane to a dual express toll lane system with dynamic pricing (Figure B25.1). Between SR 522 in Bothell and I-5 in Lynnwood, Washington State DOT and the design–builder converted the existing carpool lane to a single express toll lane. The construction scope also included a new northbound braided ramp system to improve traffic operations between the NE 160th Street and SR 522 interchanges, wider shoulders for buses in two areas of southbound I-405, seven new noise walls, one noise berm, and environmental mitigation, including stormwater enhance- ments. The design-build contract was with Flatiron Constructors. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B25.1.

Case Study Summaries 95 Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer alignment between D-B Team and DOT • ACM roles and responsibilities (Partnering materials that emphasize new/different roles in a D-B project; RFP; Contract; PMP; QMP) • Partnering • Example scenario to discuss QA-QC- QV roles • ACM training (Washington State DOT D-B Training modules; Contractor D-B Training: including video and PowerPoint) • Co-location 2. Administer D-B Design • Road map for tech reports • Cover memo for design submittals that provides context to reviewer; what is and is not for construction • Contract file index (App.F14, for document control) 3. Administer D-B Construction • Commitment database-summarizing permit commitments • Incentives: environmental and pavement smoothness • Transfer of franchise rights • Emergency contact cards • Training (for federal auditors on how to interpret D-B invoices) • Tracking sheet for as-builts 4. Administer D-B Closeout • Checklist for administrative items at closeout, or email or memo describing deficiencies • Spreadsheet listing all contractor action items organized by Preconstruction, Construction, and Post construction Table B25.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Case Study 26. Business 40 (Salem Parkway) (D-B), North Carolina Project Name: Business 40 (Salem Parkway) Name of Agency: North Carolina Department of Transportation Location: Business 40 highway west of 4th Street to east of Church Street Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $99.2 million Construction Schedule: Segment A: Fall 2017–Fall 2018 Segment B: Fall 2019–Su 2020 Segment C: Fall 2018–Fall 2019 Segment D: Su 2018–Fall 2018 Project Description: Construction for segments A–D, covering 1.2 miles, will remove and replace the existing pavement with new concrete, modernize entrance and exit ramps, lengthen

96 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Kickoff meeting • Scoping checklist for stakeholder involvement 2. Administer D-B Design • D-B Submittal Guidelines, May 2009 • Express D-B Bridge Replacement, Submittal Guidelines, Year 5, March 2016 • Geotechnical Guidelines for D-B Projects, June 2009 • Guidelines for the Preparation of Signing and Final Pavement Marking Plans for D-B Projects, May 2016 • Guidelines for the Preparation of ITS and Signal Plans by Private Engineering Firms, April 2014 • Guidelines for the Preparation Signing Plans for D-B Projects, Aug. 2007 • Guidelines for the Preparation Traffic Control and Pavement Marking Plans for D-B Projects, Aug. 2008 • Roadway Design Guidelines for D-B Projects, Aug. 2016 • State D-B office distributes all D-B submittals 3. Administer D-B Construction • D-B Contract Administration Guidelines • ACM public announcement 4. Administer D-B Closeout • None Table B26.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. the acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramps, remove and replace nine vehicular bridges and two pedestrian bridges, widen existing shoulders, add new shoulders, add multi- use path, construct retaining walls, install 15 miles of ITS, and improve 20 miles of signage (Figure B26.1). The design–builder will be Flatiron Constructors, Inc., Bly the Development Company Joint Venture, and HDR Engineering, Inc. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B26.1. Figure B26.1. Rendering of Peters Creek Parkway Bridge (Source: North Carolina Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 97 Case Study 27. MD 404–US 50 to East Holly Road (D-B), Maryland Project Name: MD 404–US 50 to East Holly Road Name of Agency: Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration Location: Talbot County, Queen Anne’s County, and Caroline County, Maryland Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $105 million D-B contract, with $5 million “No Excuse” incentive for substantial completion Construction Schedule: June 2016–November 2017 (substantial)–July 2018 (final) Project Description: This project involved the design and construction of a four-lane divided highway on MD 404 from US 50 to East Holly Road, approximately 9 miles (Figure B27.1). The pavement cross-section included travel lanes that were 12 feet, inside shoulders that were 4 feet, and outside shoulders of 10 feet. The median was 34 feet with a traffic barrier. Improvements included new pavement, pavement rehabilitation, a new bridge over Norwich Creek, box and pipe culverts, signing, marking lighting, ITS, and 120 acres of right-of-way acquisition. A sum- mary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B27.1. Figure B27.1. MD 404 (Source: Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration). Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Overview of FHWA Involvement on ACM Projects (FHWA Non-exempt Review Process, Table IV-1) • Partnering • ACM training (PowerPoint training presentation for designers) • Maryland DOT State Highway Administration Design Build Manual, Jan. 2013 2. Administer D-B Design • Independent party design review (Independent Design Quality Assurance [IDQA] hired by D-B) • Design Quality Assurance Audits 3. Administer D-B Construction • None 4. Administer D-B Closeout • None Table B27.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

98 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 28. I-15–I-215 Devore Interchange Improvements (D-B), California Project Name: I-15–I-215 Devore Interchange Improvements Name of Agency: California Department of Transportation with cooperation with San Ber- nardino Associated Governments Location: I-15 and I-215, San Bernardino County, California Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $208 million Construction Schedule: December 2012–September 2016 (Final acceptance April 2017) Project Description: This project reconfigured Interstate 15 and Interstate 215 Interchange near Devore within San Bernardino County (Figure B28.1). Improvements included adding one new lane in each direction, a new northbound main line for I-15, a truck bypass lane in each direction, and reconnecting the historic Route 66, which was severed in construction 40 years ago. Also included were 18 bridges and drainage structures. Work required construc- tion over three railroad tracks. Construction accommodated environmental permits related to the kangaroo rat, an endangered species. The design–builder was Atkinsons Contractors, LP and URS Corporation. The project received multiple awards including multiple partnering awards, award for best project in California ENR, AECOM roadway project of the year, and runner-up on CTS competition. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B28.1. Figure B28.1. I-15 and I-215 Devore Interchange (Source: California Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 99 Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Over-the-shoulder reviews • Collocation • Standard template for the design-build contracts. • ATCs from procurement process • Early geometric drawings • Partnering Meeting: agenda, list of questions • Training: description or agenda of 2- week training for agency staff to learn how to procure and administer a D-B project • Roles and responsibilities: table or list • Team members are hand-picked 2. Administer D-B Design • Three specified reviews for every design package, described in contract • Internal database to manage reviews: sample spreadsheet • Joint comment resolution meeting with the design builder: sample agenda • Guidance for reviewers to focus on contract and standards • Flow chart for design exceptions • FHWA involvement • Weekly task force meetings: list of task forces; example table for tracking status • Tracking Multiple package: example spreadsheet or index for folders on server • Description of how progress payments are made 3. Administer D-B Construction • Independent Quality Assurance (IQA) description of software QMOST • Training for inspectors: description or agenda • Refresher training for inspectors: description, agenda • IPads for inspection: description of use • Partnering session with only inspectors and construction field employees: agenda • Monthly meeting with community: sample agenda • Public outreach: list of contract requirements 4. Administer D-B Closeout • Lesson learned Table B28.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation.

100 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Case Study 29. Northwest Corridor Express Lanes (D-B), Georgia Project Name: Northwest Corridor Express Lanes Name of Agency: Georgia Department of Transportation Location: I-75 from Akers Mill Road to Hickory Grove Road and along I-575 from I-75 to Sixes Road northwest of downtown Atlanta, Georgia. Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: P3 with a Design–Build–Finance– Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $598.5 million administration cost, with an additional $18.2 million com- munity improvement district project. Construction Schedule: October 2014–Summer 2018 Project Description: This project involves the construction of 29.7 miles of two reverse toll lanes along I-75 from Akers Mill Road to Hickory Grove Road and along I-575 from I-75 to Sixes Road (Figure B29.1). Two express lanes will be built to the west of the existing lanes along I-75 between I-285 and I-575. From that interchange, one express lane will be added along I-75 north to Hickory Grove Road and one express lane will be added along I-575 to Sixes Road. Construction will include roadway, bridges, MSE walls, sound barrier walls, ramps, and tolls. The design–builder will be NorthWest Express Road-Builders, a joint venture between Archer Western Contractors, Hubbard Construction Company, and the Parsons Transportation Group, who serve as lead engineering designers. A summary of the initial tools for the investiga- tion is shown in Table B29.1. Figure B29.1. Northwest Corridor express lanes (Source: Georgia Department of Transportation).

Case Study Summaries 101 Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer Alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Kickoff meeting • Partnering meetings • Progress meetings, weekly • Contract and RFP • Co-location • Over-the-shoulder reviews • FHWA and Georgia DOT Oversite Agreement 2. Administer D-B Design • Discipline review checklist tied to Georgia DOT standards and project contract • e-Builder cloud-based construction management software • Submittal guide and index 3. Administer D-B Construction • Critical Activity Plan (CAP) defines hold points • Assure-It materials data base 4. Administer D-B Closeout • None Table B29.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Case Study 30. I-95 at I-295 Interchange (D-B), Florida Project Name: I-95 at I-295 Interchange Name of Agency: Florida Department of Transportation Location: Jacksonville, Florida, Duval County Project Delivery Method–Procurement–Contract Type: D-B–Best Value–Lump Sum Total Project Cost: $176.9 million Construction Schedule: July 2016–Fall 2020 Project Description: The interchange at I-95 and I-295 North will be modernized and reconfigured to improve traffic flow, safety, and increase capacity. The project includes a col- lector distributor system, which allows motorists traveling along I-295—whether exiting or passing through—to maneuver through the interchange with few lane shifts (Figure B30.1). Auxiliary lanes and minor ramp improvements will be added to I-95 and the Airport Road interchange. The Cole Road Bridge over I-95 is also being replaced. I-295 North and US 17 are also under construction, including bridge replacement–construction, ramp reconstruction, and road work along US 17. A summary of the initial tools for the investigation is shown in Table B30.1.

102 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Agency Activities Initial Tools 1. Administer alignment between D-B Team and DOT • Confidential one-on-one meetings for ATCs • Cost–Savings Initiative (CSI) • Computer based D-B training for technical committee members 2. Administer D-B Design • 3rd-party review (Design firm and firm that wrote the RFP) • Changing plan standards for D-B Design 3. Administer D-B Construction • PR staff utilized, open houses, flyers, etc. • “Hold Points” variation used (driven piles) 4. Administer D-B Closeout • CPPR Rating – Contractor Past Performance Rating Table B30.1. Summary of initial tools for investigation. Figure B30.1. Rendering of intersection reconfiguration (Source: Florida Department of Transportation).