Reason for Acceptance or Rejection

Transcription

1 Value Engineering Approval Form Project: 25th Avenue & Union Pacific Grade Separation #6 VE Study Date: January 28 through February 1, 2013 Form updated: 5/7/2013 (Final) FHWA Functional ENV 1 ROW 1 The VE team recommends that the team coordinate with IDOT and FHWA to confirm NEPA reevaluation requirements based on changes to the Phase I ; especially utility relocation and the Combined Metals access road on the newly acquired Cozzi property. The VE team recommends that team update the Phase II schedule to reflect the activities and durations required using the IDOT land acquisition policies and procedures. Design team coordinated with IDOT and FHWA. No further NEPA action required. Special waste studies are progressing in accordance with the recommendations from Phase I. Any additional environmental issues will be described in technical memorandum. The team updated the schedule subsequent to the VE workshop. A copy of the updated schedule was provided to the VE team on 3/21/2013. Based on a cursory review, further coordination is required with IDOT and the municipalities to refine and land acquisition assumptions and timelines. Cost Validate regulatory compliance ROW 2 The VE team recommends that the local agency use precertified staff/firms that have successfully navigated the IDOT land acquisition on previous s. Additionally, the local agency should seek "quick take" authority from the Illinois legislature and Illinois Municipal League. Local municipalities have hired pre-certified firms experienced in IDOT's land acquisition procedures. Conditional approval: Neither IDOT nor the municipality believe that "quick take" authority is required for this. SCHED 1 The VE team recommends that the team review, update, and refine the attached schedule that includes the review and submittal and durations. Design team has updated schedule. start date is now May 2014.

2 SCHED 2 A new schedule has been developed by the VE team that takes into account the actual es and procedure timeframes of the various major tasks. The intent is to provide the team a realistic schedule as well as to outline the critical path so that resources can be applied to those activities that have a major impact on getting the to construction. Design team has updated schedule. start date is now May Schedule reflects critical path tasks and major milestone completion dates. SCHED 3 Convene review workshops of the ers' staff to review the submittal package before transmitting to IDOT and review agencies. Convene a multi-disciplinary IDOT review team to review and comment on plans in one location at the same time in order to expedite the review. IDOT BLR and the team believe this approach is no longer required to maintain schedule. STM 1 Based on the VE team initial review and the discrepancies referenced in the report above, the VE team recommended further evaluation of the drainage and this has resulted in the the evaluation of 3 specific drainage items, listed in STM 2. STM3 and STM 4. Due to the location of the, the outlined in the IDOT Drainage Manual. refinement of drainage will continue during Phase II to, optimize, and minimize associated Cost

3 STM 2 VE team suggests re-evaluation of the stormwater calculations to produce updated storage volume requirements. Design the initial conveyance systems in accordance with Chapter 12 of the LDS to determine if the proposed large detention structures are necessary. It is also recommended that the team explore the occurrence of flooding outside the limits which would affect the undersized sewers. Perhaps other issues would occur if the exisitng storm sewers are undersized as much as the calculations show. Updates to the roadway profile, removal and replacement of pipes located within the area, and updated roadway profiles could improve the intermediate problems reported in the LDS. Due to the location of the, the outlined in the IDOT Drainage Manual. refinement of drainage will continue during Phase II to, optimize, and minimize associated Cost STM 3 The VE team recommends removal of large box culverts for detention that appears to not be needed based on current calculations. However should it be needed based on updated evaluation per STM 2 recomendation, VE team supports the idea of relocating the stormwater detention facilities to the acquired property areas. Due to the location of the, the outlined in the IDOT Drainage Manual. refinement of drainage will continue during Phase II to, optimize, and minimize associated ($1,232,000)

4 STM 4 The VE team recommends that the team reevaluate the need for the special restrictor manholes. These structures are often large, difficult to install, and some have a large increase in price over a standard Type A manhole. Due to the location of the, the outlined in the IDOT Drainage Manual. The criteria are somewhat more conservative and require detention in this particular case. refinement of drainage will continue during Phase II to, optimize, and minimize associated ($24,000) STR 2 Use Steel Plate Girders with 40-inch deep web rather than 48-inch deep web. Based on further analysis and refinements since the VE workshop, the consultant has determined that significant changes to the profile, web depth standards, cross-sections, bridge deck elevations and retaining wall elevations would result in negligible costs savings ($15,000). As a result, the consultant recommends no change to the proposed. Neither IDOT nor the municipalities have any concerns with this approach. ($186,000) STR 3A Relocate the south abutment 10-ft further north and the south pier (Pier 1) 5-ft further north. After further review, the team reduced the south span by 25' and the overall bridge length by 35'. Neither IDOT nor the municipalities had concerns with this approach. Therefore, the consultant will continue to progress the. ($271,000) and

5 STR 3B The VE team recommends using semi-integral abutments for this structure. IDOT expressed concern about how the forces and differential movement between the approach slab, the MSE wall and fill would be addressed and would require additional detail prior to approving a change in the Phase I concept. After further review, the consultant recommended maintaining the stub abutments for the proposed structure. Neither IDOT nor the municipalities had concerns with this approach. No change in cost. Reduce maintenance and extend life of structure. STR 3C The VE team recommends that the team consider using drilled shaft foundations for this. The VE team feels strongly that the piles will be a greater cost when considering the side effects of damaged property of the nearby buildings which will then force the construction of the drilled shafts during construction. Design team agreed with the VE team regarding drilled shafts. Potential Cost ; and UTIL 1 The VE team recommends that two advance contracts be considered to streamline overall construction activities as well as to minimize closure of 25th Avenue: Advance contract for sanitary sewer, water main, and building demolition. Advance contract for steel contract fabrication. The team is currently pursuing an advance municipal utility relocation contract. advance contracting efforts, including advance structural steel, will be considered and coordinated with IDOT and the municipalities as the advances. Reduce maintenance and extend life of structure.

6 STR 5 The recommends that an additional strip of land (approximately 15-feet in width) be acquired on the west side of 25th Avenue between Grant Street and the UP Railroad. This area would provide access from the south to maintain the proposed bridge structure. The team proposes using the permanent easement for new access road on the Cozzi O'Brien property west of 25th Ave. to assist with utility relocations and UP property access. An updated municipal sewer and water relocation plan concept was presented to the municipalities on 3/14/2013 and no major issues were identified. Private utility relocation strategies are still pending, but the consultant has made them aware of the permanent easement which is available for their use. detailed reviews are pending, but the consultant is proceeding with this approach. Additionally, neither the IDOT nor the municipalities had concerns associated with long-term maintenance of the structure without the additional strip of land on the west side. Potential Cost Enable construction of bridge. longterm maintenance Total for all # recommendations: ($1,713,000) Total for # accepted recommendations: ($1,527,000) Total Project Cost (Revised Phase I PDR Data) $30,288,000 Number of Design Suggestions 6 Please provide justification if the value engineering study recommendations are not approved or are implemented in a modified form. The DOT is required to report Value Engineering results annually to FHWA. To facilitate this reporting requirement, this Value Engineering Approval Form may be used. IDOT, through its management team, has implemented the above recommendations by issuing directives and guidance to its team. * FHWA Functional Benefit Criteria Each year, State DOT's are required to report VE recommendations to FHWA. In addition to cost implications, FHWA requires the DOT's to evaluate each approved recommendation in terms of : s that mitigate or reduce hazards on the facility. : s that improve real-time service and/or local, corridor or regional levels of service of the facility. : s that successfully avoid or mitigate impacts to natural and/or cultural resources. : s that improve work zone conditions or expedite the. : s not readily categorized by the above performance indicators.