Group 2 - Robert Street Improvements

ValueEngineeringStudy
Report
TH952A,RobertStreetImprovements
SP190884
September1013,2013
MinnesotaDepartmentofTransportation
395JohnIrelandBlvd
St.Paul,MN55155

Disclaimer:
Theinformationcontainedinthisreportistheprofessionalopinionsoftheteammembersduringthe
ValueEngineeringStudy. Theseopinionswerebasedontheinformationprovidedtothe teamat the
timeofthestudy.Astheprojectcontinuestodevelop,newinformationwillbecomeavailable,andthis
information willneed tobeevaluatedonhowitmayaffecttherecommendationsandfindingsin this
report.Allcostsdisplayedinthereportarebasedonbestavailableinformationatthetimeofthestudy
andunlessotherwisenotedarein2013dollars.
Thisreportwaspreparedby:
HDREngineering,Inc.
701XeniaAvenueSouth,Suite600
Minneapolis,MN55416
TableofContents
ValueEngineeringSummary................................................................................................................1
Introduction..............................................................................................................................................1
VERecommendations...............................................................................................................................1
Introduction.........................................................................................................................................3
ProjectBackground...................................................................................................................................3
VEStudyTiming........................................................................................................................................4
ScopeoftheVEStudy...............................................................................................................................4
VETeamMembers....................................................................................................................................4
ProjectDescription..............................................................................................................................5
Introduction..............................................................................................................................................5
ConstraintsandControllingDecisions......................................................................................................6
StakeholderConcerns...............................................................................................................................6
InvestigationObservations.......................................................................................................................7
ProjectCostEstimate................................................................................................................................7
ProjectSchedule.......................................................................................................................................7
InformationProvidedtotheVETeam......................................................................................................8
ProjectAnalysis...................................................................................................................................9
SummaryofAnalysis.................................................................................................................................9
CostModel................................................................................................................................................9
PerformanceAttributes............................................................................................................................9
PerformanceAttributeMatrix................................................................................................................12
FunctionalAnalysis..................................................................................................................................12
FASTDiagram..........................................................................................................................................13
Speculation........................................................................................................................................15
Evaluation..........................................................................................................................................17
Recommendations.............................................................................................................................28
PerformanceAssessment........................................................................................................................28
Recommendations..................................................................................................................................30
DesignConsiderations.............................................................................................................................30
VERecommendationNo.1UseTrafficBarrels.......................................................................................33
VERecommendationNo.2Contractor/BusinessWeeklyMeetings......................................................37
VERecommendationNo.3aRelocateUtilitiesFirst...............................................................................41
VERecommendationNo.3bRiskMitigationSeparateWaterMainContract.....................................49
VERecommendationNo.4InnovativeContracting...............................................................................55
AppendixA........................................................................................................................................61
RobertStreetImprovements
ValueEngineeringStudyReport
TableofContentsi
September1013,2013
ValueEngineeringRecommendationApprovalForm.............................................................................61
AppendixB........................................................................................................................................65
VEStudyAgenda.....................................................................................................................................65
AppendixC........................................................................................................................................67
VEStudyAttendees.................................................................................................................................67
AppendixD........................................................................................................................................71
VEStudyReportOutPresentation.........................................................................................................71
AppendixE.........................................................................................................................................83
ValueEngineeringProcess......................................................................................................................83
PreVEStudy............................................................................................................................................83
ValueEngineeringJobPlan.....................................................................................................................83
PerformanceBasedResults....................................................................................................................85
Introduction........................................................................................................................................85
Assumptions........................................................................................................................................86
Step1DeterminetheMajorPerformanceAttributes.....................................................................86
Step2DeterminetheRelativeImportanceoftheAttributes.........................................................87
Step3EstablishthePerformanceBaselinefortheOriginalDesign.............................................87
Step4EvaluatethePerformanceoftheVERecommendations.....................................................87
Step5ComparethePerformanceRatingsofRecommendationstotheBaselineProject..........87
Reporting.................................................................................................................................................88
TableofContentsii
September1013,2013
ValueEngineeringSummary
Introduction
Thisvalueengineering(VE)reportsummarizestheeventsof
the study conducted for the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT) and facilitated by HDR
Engineering,Inc.
The subject of the VE Study was TH 952A, Robert Street
Improvements, SP 190884. The study was conducted
September 1013, 2013 with the presentation of findings
heldSeptember13,2013.
The primary objective of the team through application of
theVEJobPlan(seeAppendixE)wasto:
ValueSummary
ProjectCost:$22.0million
NumberofRecommendations:4
NumberofApprovedRecommendations:4
RecommendedCostSavings:$0.20million
ApprovedCostSavings:$0.20million
RecommendedScheduleSavings:6months
ApprovedScheduleSavings:6months
TotalNumberofTeamMembers:6
MnDOTEmployees:4
Others:2
ApplytheprinciplesandpracticesoftheVEJobPlan Facilitator: HDREngineering,Inc.

Conducted a thorough review and analysis of the
project
Brainstormedandevaluatepossibleimprovementopportunities
Used a fresh set of eyes to search for new/innovative approaches to constructability,
constructionstagingandtrafficcontrol
Identifypotentialvalueaddedandcostsavingopportunities.
VERecommendations
TherecommendationsarebrieflydescribedbelowandaredescribedindetailintheRecommendations
sectionofthereport.
1UseTrafficBarrels
$0.20Msavings
Replacethetemporaryconcretebarrierwithtrafficbarrelstoseparatetrafficfromtheworkzoneandto
delineatebusinessaccess.Thisrecommendationmitigatesconstructionimpacts.
2Contractor/BusinessWeeklyMeetings
NotQuantified
Have the contractor designated someone, most likely the foreman or superintendent, who will give
weeklyupdatestobusinessownersoftheexpectedworkforthatweek.Thisrecommendationmitigates
constructionimpacts.
3aRelocateUtilitiesFirst
Reduces6monthsofconstructionduration
Develop an order of work or first order of work contract provision that requires completing the
installation of the water main work along with the proposed sanitary sewer pipe and manhole
replacements prior to starting work within that section of Robert Street. This recommendation
mitigatesconstructionimpactsandwillreducetheoverallcontractduration.
ValueEngineeringSummary1
September1013,2013

3bRiskMitigationSeparateWaterMainContract
Reducesriskofdelay
Ifrightofwayacquisitionisdelayed,thenadvertiseandletaseparateconstructionprojectspecifically
fortheinstallationofthewatermainassociatedwiththeRobertStreetImprovementProject.Thisisa
response strategy to the risk that the rightofway will not be acquired by the project letting in April
2014andthattheprojectwillbedelayeduntiltherightofwaycertificationisapprovedbyFHWA.This
recommendationmitigatesconstructionimpactsandmitigatesanidentifiedprojectrisk.
4InnovativeContracting
Reduces6monthsofconstructionduration
To receive the best value for the project, incorporate innovative contracting methods within the
designbidbuild project delivery to reduce the overall duration of the project. This recommendation
mitigatesconstructionimpactsandwillreducetheoverallprojectduration.
In addition to the recommendations above, the VE Team generated several ideas that they felt were
importantenoughtobedocumentedasdesignconsiderationsforfurtherconsiderationbytheProject
Team.ThesedesignconsiderationsaresummarizedintheRecommendationssectionofthereport.
The VE Team wishes to express its appreciation to the project design team and management for the
excellent support they provided during the study. These recommendations and other ideas provided
willassistinthemanagementdecisionsnecessarytomovetheprojectforward.
BlaneLong,CVS,CCT
VETeamLeader
ValueEngineeringSummary2
September1013,2013
Introduction
This report summarizes the events of the VE Study conducted for MnDOT and facilitated by HDR
Engineering,Inc.ThesubjectofthestudywastheTH952A,RobertStreetImprovementsSP190884.
ProjectBackground
Robert Street is a trunk highway facility (TH 952A) owned by MnDOT and provides the major north
souththoroughfareforWestSt.Paul.Theroadwayisclassifiedasaminorarterial.Theprojecttermini
isMendotaRoadtothesouthandAnnapolisStreettothenorth.Theexistingconfigurationbetween
Mendota Road and Butler Avenue, Robert Street is a 5lane undivided roadway with no on street
parking. From Butler Avenue to Annapolis Street, Robert Street is a 3lane undivided roadway with
parkingonbothsides.
Figure1ProjectLocation
Introduction3
September1013,2013
VEStudyTiming
The study was conducted September 1013, 2013. The project was at 60% design at the time of the
study.
ScopeoftheVEStudy
ThescopeoftheVEStudywastoverifyorimproveuponconceptsbeingproposedfortheproject.To
accomplishthis,theVETeam:
AppliedtheprinciplesandpracticesoftheVEJobPlan
Conductedathoroughreviewandanalysisoftheproject
Brainstormedandevaluatedpossibleimprovementopportunities
Used a fresh set of eyes to search for new/innovative approaches to constructability,
constructionstagingandtrafficcontrol
Identifiedpotentialvalueaddedandcostsavingopportunities.
VETeamMembers
TheVETeamincluded:
MichaelArseneau
TiffanyDagon
CurtissKallio
BlaneLong
JoshMetcalf
AlminRamic
Design
Traffic
Construction
VETeamLeader
Design/Construction
Geometrics
Introduction4
September1013,2013
ProjectDescription
Introduction
Robert Street (Trunk Highway 952) is the main north/south transportation route through the heart of
thecommercialbusinessdistrictinWestSt.Paul.Itisanapproximately2.4mileroute,classifiedasanA
Minor Arterial Street and is under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Department of Transportation
(MnDOT).
FromMendotaRoadatthesouthendoftheCitytoButlerAvenueonthenorthendoftheCity,Robert
Street exists as a 5lane undivided roadway with no parking on either side and Average Daily Traffic
(ADT)rangingfrom16,000to26,000vehicles(per2009ADTmaps).FromButlerAvenuetothenorth
CitylimitlineatAnnapolisStreet,RobertStreetisa3laneundividedroadwaywithparkingpermittedon
eachsideand16,000vehiclesADT.
Throughoutthecorridor,butespeciallyinthesoutherntwothirds,therearenumerousdrivewaysalong
bothsidesofthestreet.Insomeareasthedrivewaysarespacedjust50feetapart.Becauseofthese
closelyspaceddriveways,thecrashratesalongRobertStreetarehigherthanaveragewhencompared
tootherundividedTrunkHighwaysinthemetroarea.
ThepurposeoftheprojectistoreconstructRobertStreettoimprovesafetyandmobilityandprovide
accommodationstomeettheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct(ADA)standards.Theprojectwillconvert
twowayleftturnlanesintoamedian,addtravellanesnorthofButlerStreetbyremovingparking,add
turnlanesandimprovesidewalks.
Figure2TypicalSection
ProjectDescription5
September1013,2013

Theprojectwillalsoreconstructthestormsewernetwork,replacetrafficsignals,replacestreetlighting,
andinstallotherstreetscapeelements.TheprojectisintendedtoimprovetheentirelengthofRobert
StreetinWestSt.Paulinfourcategories:
Infrastructure
Milling/overlayoftheexistingbituminouspavementsurface
Replacementofbroken/deterioratedconcretecurbsections
Stormsewerupgrading/replacement
Improvementstopublicutilities(sanitarysewerandwatermains)asneeded.
Safety
Addingaraisedmediandowntheexistingcenterturnlane
ProvidingadditionalcapacityineachdirectiononthenorthendofRobertStreetbetweenButler
andAnnapolis
Intersectionimprovementsincludingwideningradii,signalupgrades,additionaldedicatedturn
lanestoRobertStreetfromselectsidestreets
Consolidationofdrivewayswhereappropriate.
Aesthetics
Replacingtheexistingstreetlightswithamoreefficientandaestheticlightsystem
Adding a "green element" along Robert Street through the use of boulevard trees and
landscapingelementswithinthecorridor.
Transit
Ensuringthedesigncanaccommodatepossiblefuturestreetcarlinesorbusrapidtransitwithin
theoutertravellane.
ConstraintsandControllingDecisions
Aspartoftheprojectbriefing,theVETeamwasgiventhefollowingprojectconstraintsandcontrolling
decisionsthatneededtobetakenintoaccountwhenconsideringpossiblealternatives:
80feetofrightofway
ProjectneedstobeletbyApril2014
Maintain2lanesinonedirectiononRobertStreetduringconstructionanddetourfortheother
direction
Maintainaccesstobusinessesduringconstruction
Maintainabusinessdetourduringconstruction
Maintainabypassdetourduringconstruction
Maintainabusdetourduringconstruction
Maintainpedestrianpathduringconstruction.
StakeholderConcerns
Workneedstobeginin2014
Driversandpedestrianswillbeguidedinaclearandappropriatemannerthroughtheworkzone
andtobusinesses
Minimize community impacts by completing work efficiently while maintaining quality
constructionrequirements
LatebidopeninginApril2014mayreducenumberofbiddersandincreaseprices.
ProjectDescription6
September1013,2013
InvestigationObservations
ThefirstdayofthestudyincludedapresentationfromtheProjectTeam.Thefollowingsummarizeskey
projectissues,projectdrivers,andobservationsidentifiedduringthesesessions:
Driversmakingillegalturns
Sidewalksindisrepair
Pavementcracking(duetoconcretepanels)
Pavementfailures/fatigue
Alotofdriveways(businesses)
Transit/pedestrianactivity
The north end (north of Butler Avenue) is different than the rest of project (residential vs.
business)
Pedestrianswithdisabilities
Somedrivewayswentnowhere
Thecontractorwilldig/backfillthetrenchforthewatermainbutSt.PaulWaterServicewilllay
thepipe.
ProjectCostEstimate
The VE Team was provided a design cost estimate (opinion of cost) prior to the study. The VE Team
notedthatthequantitieswithinthecostestimatedidnotnecessarilyreflectthe60%designreviewset
ofplansthatwasalsoprovidedtotheVETeam.ItwastheopinionoftheVETeamthatthedesignhas
progressedto60%andthecurrentestimatehasnotbeenupdatedyettoaccountfortheaddedscope
andquantities.Whereapplicable,theTeamusedtheunitbidpricesprovidedwithinthecostestimate
andobtainedquantitiesfromthe60%plans.
Table1CostEstimateSummary
Category
Subtotal
%ofTotal
Roadway
$4.09M
24.9%
Streetscape
$4.06M
24.6%
TrafficSignals
$1.93M
11.7%
StormSewer
$1.88M
11.4%
WaterMain
$1.31M
7.9%
Contingency
$1.14M
6.9%
Mobilization
$0.75M
4.6%
SanitarySewer
$0.65M
3.9%
Traffic/ErosionControl
$0.45M
2.7%
RetainingWalls
$0.22M
1.3%
$16.47M
100%
ConstructionTotal
ProjectSchedule
The project is scheduled to be advertised in January 2014 with a bid opening in April 2014. The
expectedconstructionstartisJune2014withtheprojectbeingcompletedin2017(3.5yearsduration).
ProjectDescription7
September1013,2013
InformationProvidedtotheVETeam
ThefollowingprojectdocumentswereprovidedtotheVETeamfortheiruseduringthestudy:
Table2InformationProvidedtoVETeam
Document
Date
PlanView1BLayoutSouthSection
July2013
PlanView1BLayoutNorthSection
July2013
Profile1BLayout
July2013
PreliminaryCostEstimate
August2013
DesignVerificationMeetingMinutes
October2011
ADAMeetingMinutes
April2012
WaterResourcesDesignMeetingminutes
July2012
AttachmentG12014AlternateRoutes
Nodate
Nodate
Nodate
CONDACMeetingPowerPointPresentation
August2013
ConstructionPlanViewsheets
August2013
ProjectMemorandum
Nodate
RobertStreetIntersectionsPlanViews
July2013
60%AgencyReviewSet
August2013
ConstructionStaging/SequencingReview
August2013
DraftProjectMemorandum
Nodate
ProjectDescription8
September1013,2013
ProjectAnalysis
SummaryofAnalysis
Thefollowinganalysistoolswereusedtostudytheproject:
CostModel
PerformanceAttributes
PerformanceAttributeMatrix
FunctionalAnalysis
FASTDiagram
CostModel
TheVETeamLeaderpreparedacostmodelfromthecostestimateprovidedtotheteam.
The cost model is organized to identify major construction elements or trade categories, and the
percentoftotalprojectcostforthesignificantcostitems.Figure3demonstratesthatreconstructionof
theroadwayandthestreetscape,whichincludesthelighting,isover50%oftheproject.
Figure3CostModel
PerformanceAttributes
Performance attributes an integral part of the value engineering process. The performance of each
projectmustbeproperlydefinedandagreeduponbytheProjectTeam,VETeamandstakeholdersat
the beginning of the each study. These attributes represent those aspects of a projects scope and
schedulethatpossessarangeofpotentialvalues.
TheVETeam,alongwith theProjectTeam,identifiedand definedtheperformanceattributesforthis
project and then defined the baseline concept as it pertains to these attributes. The following
performanceattributeswereusedthroughoutthestudytoidentify,evaluate,anddocumentideasand
recommendations.
ProjectAnalysis9
September1013,2013

Table3PerformanceAttributes
Performance
Attribute
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Definition
Baseline
Design/PostedSpeed=40MPHsouth
ofMarieAvenue,35MPHnorthof
MarieAvenue
Anassessmentoftrafficoperationsand
411drivinglanes(doesntinclude
safetyontheTH952A,RobertStreet
gutter)
withintheprojectlimits.
11left&rightturnlanes
Operationalconsiderationsincludelevel
Raisedcentermedianwidthvaries
ofservicerelativetothe20yeartraffic
(415)
projections,aswellasgeometric
considerationssuchasdesignspeed,sight EnhancedUturnstoallowlarger
passengervehicleatthefollowing
distance,andlaneandshoulderwidths.
intersectionsatMendotaRoad,Marie
Avenue,WentworthAvenue&Butler
Avenue.
Anassessmentoftrafficoperationsand
safetyonthelocalroadwayinfrastructure
(crossstreets).
Operationalconsiderationsincludelevel
ofservicerelativetothe20yeartraffic
projections;geometricconsiderations
suchasdesignspeed,sightdistance,lane
andshoulderwidths;bicycleand
pedestrianoperationsandaccess.
Anassessmentofthelongterm
maintainabilityofthetransportation
facility(s).
Maintenanceconsiderationsincludethe
Maintainability
overalldurability,longevityand
maintainabilityofpavements,structures
andsystems;easeofmaintenance;
accessibilityandsafetyconsiderationsfor
maintenancepersonnel.
5sidewalks(4wideatobstructions)
24pavedboulevardbetween
sidewalkandbackofcurb
MeetallADArequirements
WB50designvehicleforturning
movements
Spaceprovidedforbussheltersin
additiontotheexistingcondition.
4minimummilandoverlay
BituminousSurface
Midblockleftturnsaredifficultto
maintain
Landscapeinmedian(irrigation)
Lackofsnowstorage
Allbutonestormseweroutletison
theoutside
ProjectAnalysis10
September1013,2013

Table3PerformanceAttributes
Performance
Attribute
Construction
Impacts
Definition
Anassessmentofthetemporaryimpacts
tothepublicduringconstructionrelated
totrafficdisruptions,detoursanddelays;
impactstobusinessesandresidents
relativetoaccess,visual,noise,vibration,
dustandconstructiontraffic;
environmentalimpacts.
Anassessmentofthepermanentimpacts
totheenvironmentincludingecological
Environmental (i.e.,flora,fauna,airquality,water
quality,visual,noise);socioeconomic
Impacts
impacts(i.e.,environmentaljustice,
business,residents);impactstocultural,
recreationalandhistoricresources.
Project
Schedule
Anassessmentofthetotalproject
deliveryfromthetimeasmeasuredfrom
thetimeoftheVEStudytocompletionof
construction.
Baseline
Leftturnsatdrivewaysandcross
streetswouldbeallowed
Rightturnsfordeliverytruckswould
beallowed
Twolanesoftrafficinonedirection
duringconstruction.Thetrafficgoing
intheoppositedirectionwouldbe
divertedtoalternateroutes.
Nighttimeworkisallowwitha
variancetothenoiseordinance
Weekendworkispartofthebase
schedule
Multipledetours(business&around)
Temporarypedestrianroutewith
accessiblepedestriansignals
144parcelsneedsomekindof
acquisition:
Permanenteasements
Temporaryeasements
FeeAcquisition
Mediumriskofsomecontaminated
soils
Nonoisewalls
LettingApril2014
BeginConstructionJune2014
3.5yearconstructionduration
2014Constructancillary
improvementsoffRobertStreet,
includingparallelrouteimprovements,
temporarysignalsandsharedaccess.
Inaddition,constructRobertStreet
betweenAnnapolisandButler.
2015ConstructRobertStreetfrom
ButlertoWentworth.
2016ConstructRobertStreetfrom
WentworthtoMendotaRd.
2017Finalcleanup,punchlistitems,
remaininglandscaping.
ProjectAnalysis11
September1013,2013
PerformanceAttributeMatrix
Amatrixwasusedtodeterminetherelativeimportanceoftheindividualperformanceattributesforthe
project.TheProjectandVETeamsevaluatedtherelativeimportanceoftheperformanceattributesthat
wouldbeusedtoevaluatethecreativeideas.
These attributes were compared in pairs, asking the question: Which one is more important to the
purposeandneedoftheproject?Thelettercode(e.g.,A)wasenteredintothematrixforeachpair.
Afterallpairswerediscussedtheyweretallied(afternormalizingthescoresbyaddingapointtoeach
attribute)andthepercentagescalculated.
Table4PerformanceAttributeMatrix
Whichattributeismoreimportanttotheoutcomeoftheproject?
MainlineOperations
LocalOperations
TOTAL
A/B
5.5
26.2%
5.5
26.2%
3.0
14.3%
3.0
14.3%
1.0
4.8%
3.0
14.3%
21.0
100%
Maintainability
ConstructionImpacts
EnvironmentalImpacts
ProjectSchedule
FunctionalAnalysis
Functionalanalysisresultsinauniqueviewoftheproject.Ittransformsprojectelementsintofunctions,
which moves the VE Team mentally away from the original design and takes it toward a functional
conceptoftheproject.
Functions are defined in verbnoun statements to reduce the needs of the project to their most
elementallevel.Identifyingthefunctionsofthemajordesignelementsoftheprojectallowsabroader
consideration of alternative ways to accomplish the functions. The major functions identified by the
teamwere:
Reduceconflicts
Reducecollisions
Improvecorridorimage
Accommodateusers
Reducecongestion
Improvemobility
Reducemaintenancecosts(lighting/signals)
Improveeconomicvitality.
Table5showsthefunctionsassociatedwiththemajoritemsofworkasdefinedbythecostmodel.The
costsshownaretheoriginalcostfromtheestimateprovidedtotheTeamforcomparisonpurposesonly.
ProjectAnalysis12
September1013,2013

Table5FunctionalAnalysis
MajorItems
%of
Project
Verb
Noun
Cost
Support
Prepare
Load
Site
$4.09M
24.9%
Provide
Illuminate
Control
Create
Improve
Shelter
Roadway
Erosion
Path
Aesthetics
$4.06M
24.6%
TrafficSignals
Control
Direct
Traffic
Traffic
$1.93M
11.7%
StormSewer
Convey
Control
Water
Flow
$1.88M
11.4%
WaterMain
Supply
Water
$1.31M
7.9%
Contingency
Mitigate
Risk
$1.14M
6.9%
Mobilization
Mobilize
Equipment
$0.75M
4.6%
SanitarySewer
Convey
Wastewater
$0.65M
3.9%
Maintain
Reduce
Traffic
Erosion
$0.45M
2.7%
Retain
Earth
$0.22M
1.3%
Roadway
Streetscape
Traffic/ErosionControl
RetainingWalls
FASTDiagram
The Functional Analysis System Technique or FAST diagram arranges the functions in logical order so
thatwhenreadfromlefttoright;thefunctionsanswerthequestionHow?Ifthediagramisreadfrom
right to left, the functions answer the question Why? Functions connected with a vertical line are
thosethathappenatthesametimeas,orarecausedby,thefunctionatthetopofthecolumn.
TheFASTDiagramforthisprojectshowsImproveMainlineOperationsandImproveLocalOperationsas
the basic functions of this project. Key secondary functions included Maintain Traffic and Relocate
Utilities. This provided the VE Team with an understanding of the project design rationale and which
functionsofferthebestopportunityforcostorperformanceimprovement.
ProjectAnalysis13
September1013,2013
Figure4aFASTDiagram
Figure4bStageConstructionFASTDiagram
ProjectAnalysis14
September1013,2013
Speculation
DuringthespeculationorcreativephaseoftheVEJobPlan,theVETeambrainstormedideasonhowto
performthevariousfunctions.Theseideaswerebasedontheavailableinformationgiventothemat
thetimeofthestudy,takingintoconsiderationtheconstraintsandcontrollingdecisionsthatwerealso
giventothem.
Theideaslistedbelowcoincidewitheachfunctionbeingconsidered:
Function:MaintainTraffic(throughthecorridor)
Onelaneeachdirectionwithnosignedbypassdetour,noleftturns
Sameasbaselinebutmovetraffictomiddleandconstructtheoutsidesfirst
Fullclosure(oneblockatatime)
Fullclosure(entiresection)
Movetraffic(2laneseachdirection)tooutsideandconstructcenterofroadwayfirst
Movetraffictomiddle(2laneseachdirection)andconstructalltheutilitiesandsidewalksfirst
Eliminatetemporarybarrierandreduceconstructionspeedto25MPH
Signthebypassrouteonlyonce,coversignsinwinter
AllowA+Bbiddingtoshortentheprojectduration
Allowthecontractortomodifythetrafficcontrol,etc.withapproval
ConstructabilityreviewusingcontractorsASAP
Cut back the details, proposed stages, let the contractor determine the traffic control based
upontheconstraints(performancespecs)
UseATCforthetrafficcontrolwork,givethestagingplanstothecontractorpriortobidding
UseBestValuebiddingprocess
Utilizetheexistingsignalpolesfortemporarysignalsasmuchaspossible
Usetemporaryroundaboutsinsteadoftemporarysignals
Constructcurbtocurbononesideofroadway(eliminateonestage).
Function:MaintainTraffic(tobusinesses)
Maintain2lanesinonedirectionwithnoleftturnsandprovideafrontageagainstthebusiness
toprovideaccess
Contactindividualswithdisabilitiestoidentifytheirneeds
HavethecontractorconductaMondaymorningmeetingwiththebusinesses.
Function:RelocateUtilities
Eliminateundergroundutilityworkaspartoftheproject
Havethewatermainworkstartearly,priortocontract
Useajointutilitytrenchforallthedryutilitiesunderthesidewalk
Utilityworkiscompletedin2014beforeroadwayworkbegin.
Function:ImproveConstructability
Expandtherightofwayto100feet
Usefullroadwayclosures
Closesidestreetsduringconstruction
Useaseparatecontracttorelocateutilities
Streamlinetheapprovalprocesstobeginconstructionearlierin2014
Provideacontractorstagingarea
AllowreclaimforClass5materialorothermaterials(bedding/borrow)
Conductaprebidmeetingtodiscusstheprojectwiththeplanholders.
Speculation15
September1013,2013

Thispageisleftintentionallyblank
Speculation16
September1013,2013
Evaluation
Although each project is different, the evaluation process for each VE effort can be thought of in its
simplestformasawayofcombining,evaluating,andnarrowingideasuntiltheVETeamagreesonthe
proposalstobeforwarded.
Taking into consideration the constraints and controlling decisions, the team discussed each idea and
documented the advantages and disadvantages. Each idea was then carefully evaluated with the VE
Teamreachingconsensusontheoverallratingoftheidea(zerothroughfive).Highratedideas(fouror
higher) were developed further; those that were considered to be equivalent to the baseline (rated
three) were documented as design considerations; and lowrated ones (two or lower) were dropped
fromfurtherconsideration;however,theteamprovidedashortdescriptionandjustificationtosupport
thelowrating.Theratingvaluesareshownbelow:
5=GreatOpportunity
4=GoodOpportunity
3=DesignConsideration(comparabletoProjectTeamsapproach)
2=MinorValueDegradation
1=MajorValueDegradation
0=FatalFlaw(unacceptableimpactordoesntmeettheprojectpurposeandneed)
=Advancedasrecommendation
=Forwardedasdesignconsideration
=Droppedfromfutureconsideration
Function:MaintainTraffic(entirecorridor)
#
Description
Advantages
Eliminatesbypassdetour
Onelaneeachdirectionwithno
signedbypassdetour,noleft
turns(alltemporaryaccessis
rightin/rightout)
Disadvantages
Businesscommunitymay
notlike
Busseswillstillneedto
stop
Emergencyresponse
Difficultytoenforce
Increasesigning
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
2
Justification/Comments/Disposition:
Thisideawasdroppedfromfurtherconsideration.
Evaluation17
September1013,2013
Description
Advantages
Disadvantages
Mayeliminateonestageof
construction
Sameasbaselinebutmove
traffictomiddleandconstruct
theoutsidesfirst(sidewalks&
utilities)
Needtomaintainmore
temporaryaccessesatthe
sametime
Increasedneedfor
pedestrianaccessduring
construction
Additionalnighttime
closuresforstormsewer
crossings
Difficultforcontractorto
workbothsidesatsame
time
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
1
Description
Advantages
Fullclosureoneblockatatime
(Butbusinessstillhaveaccess)
Shouldreduce
constructionduration
Mayreducecost
Disadvantages
Businessesmayobject
Increasestraffic
detours/signingetc.
Increasedcongestion
Localinfrastructuremay
notbeabletosupport
addedvehicles
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
2
AblockisconsideredtobefromcrossstreettocrossstreetthatcanaccessOakdaleAvenue.Thisidea
wasdroppedfromfurtherconsideration.
Evaluation18
September1013,2013
Description
Advantages
Shouldreduce
Mayreducecost
Disadvantages
Fullclosure(entiresection)
Businessesmayobject
Increasestraffic
detours/signingetc.
Increasedcongestion
Localinfrastructuremay
notbeabletosupport
addedvehicles
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
1
Description
Advantages
Movetraffic(2laneseach
direction)tooutsideand
constructcenterofroadway
first
Disadvantages
Lessensneedforbypass
detour
Maintains2laneseach
directionforlongerperiods
oftime
Stormsewercrossingneed
tobeconstructedfirst
Slowerconstructionthan
thebaseline
Mayneedtoreducetoone
laneeachdirectionduring
sanitarysewer
replacement
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Stage1constructinside,stage2constructoutside,stage3grindandpaveatnight.
Thisideausesmonolithiccurbinthemedianandthesanitarysewerisreplacedfirst.Thisideawas
droppedfromfurtherconsideration.Incorrectingthecrownoftheroadwaythemedianneedstobe
excavatedandreplacedwhichnegatestheuseofmonolithiccurbandrequiresawiderfootprint.
Rating:
1
Description
Advantages
Movetraffictomiddle(2lanes
eachdirection)andconstructall
theutilitiesandsidewalksfirst
Disadvantages
Lessensneedforbypass
detour
Maintains2laneseach
directionforlongerperiods
oftime
Stormsewercrossingneed
tobeconstructedfirst
Slowerconstructionthan
thebaseline
Mayneedtoreducetoone
laneeachdirectionduring
sanitarysewer
replacement
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
1
Sameaspreviousideajustreorderofstages,noleftturnsduringstageone.Thisideawasdropped
Evaluation19
September1013,2013

fromfurtherconsideration.
Description
Advantages
Eliminatetemporarybarrier
Eliminatescostandtime
relocatingbarrier
Provides4ofadditional
width
Eliminatemultiple
snaggingofvehicle
Makesiteasierfor
materialsandequipment
tomovetoandfromthe
workarea
Disadvantages
Mayincreaseconflict
betweenworkersand
traffic
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
Will still need some barrier adjacent to open trenches if in close proximity to traffic. This idea was
movedtofurtherdevelopment.
Description
Advantages
Signthebypassrouteonlyonce,
coversignsinwinter
Reducescost
CoordinationwithDakota
County
Disadvantages
Stakeholdersmaynotlike
Differentdirections(NBvs.
SB)
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
3
DesignConsideration
Description
Advantages
AllowA+Bbiddingtoshorten
theprojectduration
Reduceconstruction
duration
Disadvantages
Tightbudgetwithcomplex
fundingmechanism
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
4
A=costandB=duration.Thisideawasmovedtofurtherdevelopment.Combinewithideas13,14,
32
Evaluation20
September1013,2013
Description
Advantages
Allowthecontractortomodify
thetrafficcontrol,etc.with
approval
10
Disadvantages
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
Baselineidea
Description
Advantages
Conductaconstructability
reviewusingcontractorsASAP
11
Maylearnimprovedways
tosavecostandtime
Improvethebidabilityof
theplans
Disadvantages
Timetoimplementideas
ifmajorrevisionsare
needed
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
3
Useretiredcontractorsastheteam.DesignConsideration
Description
Advantages
Cutbackthestagingdetails,and
letthecontractordeterminethe
trafficcontrolbaseduponthe
constraints(performancespecs)
12
Allowsforcontractor
innovation
Maysavecost&time
Disadvantages
Difficultforcontractor
(prime&sub)tobid
Mayaddtobidduration
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
3
DesignConsideration
Description
Advantages
UseATCforthetrafficcontrol
work,givethestagingplansto
thecontractorpriortobidding
13
Allowsforcontractor
innovation
Agencygets100%of
savings
Disadvantages
Needtohavetheplans
availabletothebidders
early
Maydelayletting
Newtodesignbidbuild
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
4
CombinewithIdeas9,14,32
Evaluation21
September1013,2013
Description
Advantages
UseBestValuebidding
process
14
Disadvantages
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
4
CombinewithIdeas9,13,32
Description
Advantages
Utilizeasmuchaspossiblethe
existingsignalpolesfor
temporarysignals
15
Mayreducecost
Disadvantages
Maynotworkinall
location
Theexistingpolesmaynot
betallenough
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
3
DesignConsideration
Description
Advantages
Usetemporaryroundabouts
insteadoftemporarysignals
16
Mayimprovetrafficflow
duringconstruction
Eliminatesneedfor
temporarysignals
Disadvantages
Makesreconstructionof
intersectionmoredifficult
Willnotworkatmore
intersection
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
2
Evaluation22
September1013,2013
Description
Advantages
Constructoutsidecurbto
mediancurbononesideof
roadway(eliminatesonestage)
theprojectintwostages
eliminatingthe3rdstageand
utilizemonolithiccurbtoreduce
excavation
17
Reducesconstructiontime
Minimizeimpactstousers
Reducesexcavation
Disadvantages
Mayaddcostforcurbing
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
3
DesignConsideration
Function:MaintainTraffic(tobusinesses)
#
Description
Advantages
18
Maintain2lanesinone
directionwithnoleftturnsand
provideafrontageroadagainst
thebusinessestoprovideaccess
Disadvantages
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
1
Addressedwithinpreviousideasandthebaseline.Thisideawasdroppedfromfurtherconsideration.
Description
Advantages
Contactindividualswith
disabilities(pedestrians)to
identifytheirneeds
19
Disadvantages
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
Reasonableaccessforpedestrianswillbemaintainedtoallbusinessesaspartofthebaseline.
Evaluation23
September1013,2013
Description
Advantages
20
Havethecontractorconducta
Mondaymorningmeetingwith
thebusinessesduring
construction
Buildsabetterrelationship
betweenthecontractor
andthebusinesses
Disadvantages
Nonenoted
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
4
Thisideawasmovedtofurtherevaluationanddevelopment.
Function:RelocateUtilities
#
Description
Advantages
Eliminateundergroundutility
workaspartoftheproject
21
Disadvantages
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
Fatally flawed because the utilities are a part of the current scope of this project. This idea was
droppedfromfurtherconsideration.
Description
Advantages
Havethewatermainworkstart
early(separatecontract),prior
tocontract
22
Utilityworkdoesntaffect
thestaging
Reduceriskforthe2014
work
Temporarywater
connectionsareabigrisk
tothecontractor
Allowsworktobegineven
ifROWisdelayed
Disadvantages
Somebusinessaccesswill
beimpactedmultipletimes
23monthsmoretraffic
control
Coordinationissueswith
twocontractor
Twocontractsto
administer
Additionalpatching
required
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
4
Riskmanagementstrategytoinsureworkbeginsin2014.Thisideawasmovedtofurtherevaluation
anddevelopment.
Evaluation24
September1013,2013
Description
Advantages
Useajointutilitytrenchforall
thedryutilitiesunderthe
sidewalk
23
Assistsinmaintainingthe
schedules
Reduceoverall
Lessequipmentwithin
workzone
Disadvantages
Mayaddtocostofproject
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
3
DesignConsideration
Description
Advantages
Utilityworkiscompletedfirst
beforeroadwayworkbegins
24
Utilityworkdoesntaffect
thestaging
Reduceriskforthe2014
work
Temporarywater
connectionsareabigrisk
tothecontractor
Keepsmorelanesoftraffic
openonRobertStreetfor
thefirstyear
Bettercoordination
betweensubcontractor
Disadvantages
Somebusinessaccesswill
beimpactedmultipletimes
Additionalpatching
required
Nothingsappearsfinished
Secondandthirdyear
thereismultiple
operations
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
4
Thisideawasmovedtofurtherevaluationanddevelopment.
Function:ImproveConstructability
#
Description
Advantages
25
Expandtherightofwayto100
Disadvantages
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
0
Fatallyflawed.Noadditionalrightofwaywillbeacquiredbeyondwhathasalreadybeenidentified.
Evaluation25
September1013,2013
Description
26
Advantages
Usefullroadwayclosures
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Disadvantages
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
Fatallyflawed.Thesurroundinginfrastructure(roadways)cannothandletheadditionalcapacityofa
fullclosureofRobertStreet.Thisideawasdroppedfromfurtherconsideration.
Description
Advantages
Closenonsignalized
intersectionsduring
constructioninthevicinity
27
Canconstructhalfata
timevs.onequarterata
time
Improvedtrafficflowon
mainline
Removesturningconflicts
Disadvantages
Lossofaccess
Additionalvehiclethrough
signalizedintersection
Emergencyresponsetimes
mayincrease
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
Baselineassumes15dayclosurethisideaassumesclosureuntilmajorityofworkiscompleted(non
bituminousidea).Designconsiderationtoincreasethelengthofclosures.
Description
Advantages
Useaseparatecontractto
relocateutilities
28
Disadvantages
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
4
SameasIdea22
Description
Advantages
Streamlinetheapprovalprocess
tobeginconstructionearlier
within2014
29
Abilitytohaveletting
occurearlierintheyear
Disadvantages
Streamlineapprovalmay
missitemsresultingin
changeorders
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
1
Notpossibleunderthecurrentreview/approvalprocess.ThebaselineistocompletetheplansASAP.
Evaluation26
September1013,2013
Description
Advantages
Provide(secure)contractor
stagingareas
30
Levelsthebidding
environment
Disadvantages
Nonenoted
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
3
DesignConsideration
Description
Advantages
Allowtheuseofreclaimed
materialforClass5materialor
othermaterials
(bedding/borrow)
31
Lowercost
Greenfootprint
Disadvantages
Mayrequirerelaxationof
standardspecs
Mayrequireastockpile
locationwithinclose
proximity
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
3
DesignConsideration
Description
Advantages
Conductaprebidmeetingto
discusstheprojectwiththeplan
holders
32
Buildsabetterrelationship
betweenthecontractor
andtheagency
Disadvantages
Nonenoted
Mainline
Operations
Local
Operations
Maintainability
Construction
Impacts
Environmental
Impacts
Project
Schedule
Rating:
4
CombinewithIdeas9,13,14.
Evaluation27
September1013,2013
Recommendations
TheVERecommendationsarepresentedaswrittenbytheteamduringtheVEStudy.Whiletheyhave
beeneditedfromtheVEreporttocorrecterrorsorbetterclarifytherecommendation,theyrepresent
theVETeamsfindingsduringtheVEStudy.Thefollowingtableisasummaryofallrecommendations
generatedandtheirimpacttotheproject.
Table6SummaryofRecommendations
#
Description
CostSavings
Schedule
Savings
Performance
$0.20M
12weeks
9%
UseTrafficBarrels
Contractor/BusinessWeeklyMeetings
None
None
3%
3a
RelocateUtilitiesFirst
N/Q
6months
11%
3b
RiskMitigationSeparateUtilityContract
N/Q
N/Q
9%
InnovativeContracting
N/Q
6months
11%
Total
$0.20M
NQ=Notquantifiableatthistime
The cost comparisons reflect a difference or delta between the baseline idea and the VE
Recommendation. As the project progresses, these values can be updated to reflect actual
implemented results. These values shown have been adjusted by 10% to reflect the additional
cumulativecostsof:
Table7CostEstimateMarkups
Markup
Percentage
MiscellaneousItemAllowance
5%
Mobilization
5%
TotalMarkup
10%
PerformanceAssessment
As the VE Team developed recommendations, the performance of each is rated against the baseline
concept.Changesinperformancearealwaysbasedupontheoverallimpacttothetotalproject.Once
performance and cost data have been developed by the VE Team, the net change in value of the VE
recommendationscanbecomparedtotheoriginaldesignconcept.
Inordertocompareandcontrastthepotentialforvalueimprovement,individualrecommendationsare
comparedtothebaselineprojectforallattributes.Forthisexercisethebaselinewasgivenascoreof5.
TheresultingvalueimprovementscoresallowawayforMnDOTtoassessthepotentialimpactoftheVE
recommendationsontotalprojectvalue.
Recommendations28
September1013,2013

Table8ValueMatrix
TH952A,RobertStreetImprovementsSP190884
Attribute
Attribute
Weight
Concept
Baseline
MainlineOperations
26.2
14.3
10
Total
Performance
131
131
131
3a
131
3b
131
131
131
131
131
3a
131
3b
131
131
71
71
71
3a
71
3b
71
71
71
100
86
3a
100
100
100
Baseline
24
24
24
3a
24
14.3
3b
ProjectSchedule
4.8
3b
Baseline
ConstructionImpacts
Baseline
14.3
Maintainability
Baseline
26.2
LocalOperations
PerformanceRating
1
24
24
Baseline
71
86
71
3a
100
3b
86
100
Understanding the relationship of cost, performance, and value of the project baseline and VE
recommendationsisessentialinevaluatingVErecommendations.Comparingtheperformanceandcost
suggestswhichrecommendationsarepotentiallyasgoodasorbetterthan,theprojectbaselineconcept
intermsofoverallvalue.
Recommendations29
September1013,2013

Table9ValueMatrixResults
OVERALLPERFORMANCE
Performance
(P)
%Change
Performance
%
Cost
Change
(C)
Cost
%Value
Improvement
Baseline
500
EliminateTemporaryBarrier
543
9%
$15.1
1%
35.88
10%
Contractor/BusinessWeekly
Meetings
514
3%
$15.3
0%
33.55
3%
557
11%
$15.3
0%
36.34
11%
3a RelocateUtilitiesFirst
$15.3
Value
Index
(P/C)
32.62
3b
RiskMitigationSeparate
UtilityContract
543
9%
$15.3
0%
35.41
9%
557
11%
$15.3
0%
36.34
11%
Recommendations
The results of this study are presented as individual recommendations to the original concept or
baseline.
Eachrecommendationconsistsofasummaryofthebaseline,adescriptionoftherecommendation,a
listing of its advantages and disadvantages, and a brief narrative that includes justification, sketches,
photos,assumptionsandcalculations(whereapplicable)asdevelopedbytheVETeam.
Performancemeasuresarecalculatedbyrating,onascaleof1to10,theoverallprojectagainsteachof
the weighted criteria to arrive at a total score (rating times weight, and totals for all criteria added
together).Thedifferencebetweentherecommendationandthebaselineisexpressedasapercentage.
ThecostcomparisonsreflectacomparablelevelofdetailasintheestimateprovidedtotheVETeam.
DesignConsiderations
In addition to the recommendations above, the VE Team generated a number of ideas that they felt
wereimportantenoughtobedocumentedandshouldbefurtherconsideredbytheProjectTeam.
For the 2014 and 2015 construction seasons, sign the bypass route only once, cover signs in
winter.
Conductaconstructabilityreviewusingretiredcontractors.
Cutbackthestagingdetails,andletthecontractordeterminethetrafficcontrolbaseduponthe
performancespecificationswouldrequirelumpsumtrafficcontrol.
Utilize to the extent possible the existing signal systems for temporary signals. Guys can be
hungbetweenpoles;signalsandotherresourcesmaybereusedinatemporaryconfiguration.
Construct the project in two stages, eliminating the 3rd stage, and utilize monolithic curb to
reduce excavation. Using monolithic curb may reduce some excavation to construct the
median. This idea was moved to further evaluation and development. After evaluation and
reviewofthecrosssections,itwasdeterminedthatexcavationtoconstructthemedianandfix
thecrownormovethepivotpointwillstillbeneeded.Sinceagutterpanisnotneededonthe
high side of the roadway, B6 curb was considered. The cost difference between B6 curb and
B612 is only $1 per linear foot so this idea was lowered to a 3 and moved to a design
consideration.
Useajointutilitytrenchforallthedryutilitiesunderthesidewalk.
Recommendations30
September1013,2013
ClosenonsignalizedintersectionsduringconstructioninthevicinityBaselineassumes1to5
day closure. This idea assumes closure until majority of work is completed (non bituminous
idea).Thiswillincreasethedurationoftheclosures.
Identifyandsecurecontractorstagingareas.
AllowtheuseofreclaimedmaterialforClass5materialorothermaterials(bedding/borrow)
Afterinvestigatingthisidea,itwasdiscoveredthatthebaselineconditionleavesthedecisionof
use of reclaimed materials open for the contractor if they can achieve the standard of the
material. The design assumes that some of the reclaim could be used for sidewalk bedding
(embankment)buttheamountofmilledbituminousismuchlargerthanwhatisneededonthe
project.Storageofthematerialsuntilneededisalsoanissue.
Recommendations31
September1013,2013

Recommendations32
September1013,2013
VERecommendationNo.1
UseTrafficBarrels
IDEANO.
Baseline
Precast concrete barrier will be placed along the length of the work zone within each stage, to
separatetheworkersfromtraffic.
Recommendation
Replacetheconcretebarrierwithtrafficbarrels.
Advantages
Disadvantages
Reducescost
Reducesconstructionduration
Easiertoshifttraffic
Easiertoadjustaccessthroughtheworkzone
tolocalbusinesses
Nopositiveseparationbetweenworkersand
traffic
CostSummary
Cost
Baseline
$0.18M
Recommendation
$0
CostSavings
$0.18x10%markup=$0.20M
FHWAFunctionalBenefit
Safety
Operations
Environment
Construction
Other
Recommendations33
September1013,2013
UseTrafficBarrels
IDEANO.
Discussion/Sketches/Photos
Figure5Workersplacingtrafficbarrier
Withtheremovalofthebarrier,themovementsofbothgeneraltrafficandthoseofthecontractor
are improved by allowing the constraints of the work zone to be adjusted much more easily to
accommodateindividualmovements.Indoingthis,accesstothelocalbusinessaccessismaintained
atahigherlevel.
Figure6Workersmovingtrafficbarrels
Besidesacostsavingsforusingtrafficbarrelsinsteadofconcretebarriertherewillalsobesavingsin
contract duration because barrels can be quickly set up and reset without any specific equipment
needs.
Recommendations34
September1013,2013
UseTrafficBarrels
IDEANO.
Assumptions/Calculations
Portableconcretebarrier:$14.16/lin.ft.use$15
Relocateportableconcretebarrier:$3.17/lin.ft.use$4
o Relocation of barrier between stages in each construction season for shifting traffic
fromonesideoftheroadtotheother.
traffic
**PricesfromtheAverageBidPricesforAwardedProjects,EnglishUnits,Spec.Year05
FromRSMeanstheaveragepriceforatrafficbarrelis$30eachwiththecosttoresetandremove
fromtheprojectincludedwithinothertrafficcontrollaborcosts.
For a 2530 MPH posted speed barrels are typically placed 40 apart on tangents and 20 apart on
tapers.Halfoftheprojectlengthisapprox.1.25milesor6,600LF.
6,600LF/40=165barrels.
Assumeanother165barrelsforallofthebusinessaccessandcrossstreetsforatotalof330barrels.
Baseline
ItemDescription
Unit
Unit
Cost
Qty
Recommendation
Total
Unit
Cost
Qty
Total
Year2014Barrier
lin.ft.
2715
$15
$40,725
Year2014RelocateBarrier
lin.ft.
3325
$4
$13,300
Year2015Barrier
lin.ft.
3310
$15
$49,650
lin.ft.
3925
$4
$15,700
Year2016Barrier
lin.ft.
4025
$15
$60,375
lin.ft.
3345
$4
$13,380
TrafficBarrels
Each
330
$30
$9,900
Baseline
$193,130
Recommendation
$9,900
CostSavings
$183,230
Totals
UseTrafficBarrels
IDEANO.
Recommendations35
September1013,2013

PERFORMANCEMEASURES
Performance
AttributesandRatingRationaleforRecommendation
MainlineOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
LocalOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Maintainability
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Reducescost
Reducesconstructionduration
Easiertoshifttraffic
Easiertoadjustaccessthroughtheworkzonetolocalbusinesses
Nochangetobaseline
131
5
26.2
131
131
5
14.3
Contribution
71
70
Rating
7
14.3
Weight
Contribution
71
100
Rating
5
4.8
Weight
ProjectSchedule
131
Weight
ConstructionImpacts
5
26.2
Weight
Contribution
Weight
Contribution
Baseline Recommendation
Thisshouldreducetheoverallconstructionduration
Contribution
24
24
Rating
6
14.3
Weight
Contribution
TotalPerformance:
71
86
500
544
NetChangeinPerformance:
9%
Recommendations36
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
20
Baseline
City/State provides a business liaison to keep businesses informed of schedule and construction
progress.
Recommendation
This recommendation is to have the contractor designated someone, most likely the foreman or
superintendent,whowillgiveweeklyupdatestobusinessownersoftheexpectedworkforthatweek.
Advantages
Disadvantages
Provides an outreach to local businesses

duringconstruction
Allows the businesses to schedule
staff/deliveriesaccordingly
Buildsarelationshipbetweencontractorand
thebusinesses
Schedule changes may cause businesses to

loseconfidenceinContractor
CostSummary
Cost
Baseline
$0
Recommendation
$0
CostSavings
$0(Pricelesstotheinformedbusinessowners!)
Safety
Operations
Environment
Construction
Other
Recommendations37
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
20
InaMitigationofConstructionImpactsreportdatedFebruary2009preparedbyMnDOT,improving
businessoutreachwasconsideredoneofthemostimportantrecommendations.
Thereportcanbefoundatthefollowinglink:
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/businessimpacts/pdfs/businessimpactsreportfeb2009.pdf
InsteadofamiddlemantheVETeamrecommendsthatthecontractormeetswiththebusinesses
everyMondaymorningtorelaythatweeksscheduleofwheretheconstructionactivitieswillbe.This
canoccuratoneofthebusinesseswithinthatweeksworkarea.
Not all the businesses need to attend every meeting. An email can be sent out to the affected
businessesonFridaylettingthemknowwhereandwhenthemeetingwilltakeplace.Withinthee
mailastreettostreetgenerallocationoftheaffectedbusinessessotheyknowwhetherornottheir
attendancemightbeneeded.
Havingthecontractorconductthesemeetingswillmakethebusinessesfeelliketheyarepartofthe
solution and allow them to make revisions to their business activities (workers, resources and
deliveries)basedupontheinformationobtainedduringtheseweeklymeetings.
Thesemeetingsshouldbekepttoaminimumduration,3045minutesinlength.Thepurposeofthe
meeting is for the contractor to deliver information to the businesses with minimal questions and
answers.Itisnotintendedtobeacomplaintsessionforanyone.
A contract provision would need to be written, it is suggested that the cost of providing these
meetingsisincludedwithintheothercostsoftrafficcontrolitems.
Recommendations38
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
20
PERFORMANCEMEASURES
Performance
MainlineOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
LocalOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Maintainability
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Reducedduetocommunication&outreachthroughthesemeetings
Nochangetobaseline
131
5
26.2
131
131
5
14.3
Contribution
71
71
Rating
6
14.3
Weight
Contribution
71
86
Rating
5
4.8
Weight
ProjectSchedule
131
Weight
ConstructionImpacts
5
26.2
Weight
Contribution
Weight
Contribution
Nochangetobaseline
Contribution
24
71
Rating
5
14.3
Weight
Contribution
TotalPerformance:
71
71
500
514
3%
Recommendations39
September1013,2013

Recommendations40
September1013,2013
VERecommendationNo.3a
IDEANO.
24
Baseline
Constructionofthewatermainandsanitarysewerimprovementswillbesplitoverthe2014,2015,
and2016constructionseasons.
Recommendation
Develop an order of work or first order of work contract provision that requires completing the
installation of the water main work along with the proposed sanitary sewer pipe and manhole
replacementspriortostartingworkwithinthatsectionoftheproject.
Advantages
Disadvantages
Water main and sanitary sewer replacement

doesntaffectoverallprojectstaging
Reduces risk for the project stakeholders and
contractor
Above ground temporary water service
connectionsareabigrisktothecontractor
Removes coordination with St. Paul Regional
Water Services from the rest of the prime
contractorsresponsibilities
Eliminates the need for the detour routes
during the first construction season, reducing
thetotalprojectcostsforthedetour
Provides a more palatable project for
contractors and specifically subcontractors
biddingonitemssuchassidewalkandpaving
asthisworkwouldbein2seasonsratherthan
spreadover3
Shouldeliminateanyworkin2017
Some business accesses will be impacted

multipletimes
CostSummary
Cost
Baseline
N/Q
Recommendation
N/Q
CostSavings
N/Q
Safety
Operations
Environment
Construction
Other
Recommendations41
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
24
The 60% design includes construction of the water main and sanitary sewer improvements over 3
yearsduringthe2014,2015,and2016constructionseasons.
2014Season
Watermain andserviceconnectionsatAnnapolis,Hurley,Haskell,Bernard, Stanley,Butler,and
Orme
Replacementofsanitarysewermanholes
2015Season
WatermainSBStation349+20toWentworthAvenue
WatermainLoganAvenuetoOrmeStreet
SanitarySewerSBWentworthAvenuetoThompsonAvenue
2016Season
WatermainSBStation306+00toSBStation321+00
WatermainSBStation328+10toMarieAvenue
WatermainSBStation342+85SBStation349+20
WatermainEastsideofRobertStreetNBStation128+50toMarieAvenue
TheimprovementswillincludeinstallationofnewsanitarymanholesandPVCsanitarypipe,liningof
existing sanitary pipe, and replacement of water main and service connections. The main
constructionactivitiesassociatedwiththiswork(i.e.excavation,backfill,trafficcontrol,etc.)willbe
completedbyacontractorwhiletheactualwaterpipeinstallationandserviceconnectionworkwillbe
completedbyresourcesfromtheSt.PaulRegionalWaterServices.
Figure7BaselineProjectSequencing
This recommendation is to develop an order of work or first order of work contract provision that
wouldrequirecompletingtheinstallationofthenewsanitarysewerpipe,sanitarymanholes,water
main, and service connections prior to starting other work within that section of the project. This
would complete the major utility work in the 2014 season ahead of all other construction activities
andwouldeliminatetheneedforthedetourroutesduringthefirstseasonofconstruction.
Temporary water service will be above ground by connecting users to hydrants and water
connections. Having this many pipes and/or hoses lying on the ground adjacent to and within the
work area will be problematic to the contractor. By removing the water main from the rest of the
workthisreducestheriskofmaintainingtemporarywaterservicetobusinessesandresidents.
Completingthisworkpriortobeginningotheractivitieswillreducesomerisktoprojectbymakingthis
projectmoreappealingtocontractorsbymovingthemainconstructionactivities(i.e.curb,sidewalk,
paving, signals) to two seasons rather than having them spread out over three seasons. Some
Recommendations42
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
24
contractorsmayelecttonotbidontheprojectastheymaynotwanttocommitresourcestoathree
yearprojectandaffecttheirabilitytobidonotherprojectsduringthistimeframe.
Becauseofthedelayedstartofconstruction(June2014)thereisariskthattheworkscheduledfor
2014betweenArlingtontoButlerwontbecompletedpriortowinter,resultinginsomeworksuchas
thebituminouswearingcoursetobecompletedin2015.Thismaycausesomedifficultieswithsnow
removalandotherwintermaintenanceoperations.
Figure8RecommendedProjectSequencing
Thisrecommendationwilllikelybeappealingtolocalbusinesses,eventhoughitwillincludemultiple
timeswhenconstructionactivityinfrontoftheirbusinesses,itwillmaintaincurrenttrafficoperations
along Robert Street through the first year of construction. This recommendation will also likely be
appealingtothetransitauthority.
Construction on sidewalks and other items could begin once the work zone for the water main has
movedfarenoughdownRobertStreet.Thereshouldbeasufficientdistancebetweenworkzoneso
thatthereisnooverlapofsigningandothertrafficcontrolitems.
Recommendations43
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
24
Assumptions
Dailyproductionrateforwatermaininstallationincludesexcavation,pipeinstall,andbackfilling
ofthetrench(asprovidedbyProjectTeam).Thisworkonthemainlinescouldbeinexcessof200
linear feet per day depending on conflicts with other utilities (per discussions with St Paul
RegionalWaterServices).
Dailyproductionrateforserviceconnectionsincludesexcavationandinstallationofthepipefrom
themaintothelocationofthenewserviceconnectionandinstallationofthemeter/valves/etc.
associatedwiththenewconnection(basedevelopedusingRSMeans,reducedbasedonspecific
projectworkandpreviousconstructionexperience)
Dailyproductionrateforfirehydrantsinstallationincludesexcavationandinstallationofthepipe
fromthemaintothenewhydrantlocationandplacementofthenewhydrant(basedeveloped
usingRSMeans,reducedbasedonspecificprojectworkandpreviousconstructionexperience)
Daily production rate for sanitary sewer installation includes excavation, pipe install, and
backfillingofthetrench.
Daily production rates assume installation of new sanitary manholes will be approximately two
days, including all excavation, installation, backfilling and compaction, and paving. The daily
production for replacing existing manholes will be approximately 2 to 3 days, including
excavation,removalanddisposaloftheexistingmanholes,installationandconnectionofthenew
manhole, backfilling and compacting, and paving. Additional time was incorporated in the
productionrateduetotheexcavationdepthsrequired.
Testingofthenewpipecanbecompletedwithinthecontractworkingdays.
Trenches can be covered temporarily with steel plates for any new excavations within the
roadwaytoaccommodateinstallationandtestingactivities.
Waterservicecanbemaintainedtoallcurrentcustomerswiththeproposedlocationofthenew
watermain.
Water main piping and service connections will be installed and tested by the St. Paul Regional
WaterServices.
Installationofthesanitarysewerandwatercomponentsoftheprojectasthefirstorderofwork
will allow this work to be completed in the short 2014 season and will allow the contractor to
complete the remaining hardscaping, stormwater, and roadway improvements in the 2015 and
2016seasons,eliminatingworkinthe2017season.
Identifyingthisworkasfirstorderwillmakethejobmoreappealingtosubcontractorsasthework
willbeconfinedtoseasonsratherthan3plus.Theoverallprojectcostisapproximately$20M,
withtheworkspreadover3to3.5years;thismaymaketheprojectunappealingtocontractors
resultinginaminimalnumberofbidders.
Recommendations44
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
24
Calculations
The following tables were developed based on the information contained in the 60% Contract
Drawings and includes approximate lengths of piping derived from scaling the pipe locations as
identifiedinthedrawings.
Table10WaterMainConstruction
Location
Beginning
End
MendotatoCarol
306+02
320+89
Carol
CaroltoEmerson
328+14
382+93
128+65
130+73
Marie
EmersontoWyoming
389+35
Fire
Hydrants
(each)
WaterMain
402+41
Stanley
Bernard
Haskell
Hurley
Annapolis
ProjectLimits
103+86
238+03
(linearfeet)
1487
105
5479
208
160
1306
60
60
60
60
120
Service
Connections
(each)
58
17
Production
Rate
Time
100LF/DAY
4EA/DAY
100LF/DAY
100LF/DAY
100LF/DAY
100LF/DAY
100LF/DAY
(workingdays)
15
2
1
55
15
2
2
13
4
1
1
1
1
1
1EA/DAY
Total
45
157
100LF/DAY
4EA/DAY
100LF/DAY
100LF/DAY
4EA/DAY
100LF/DAY
100LF/DAY
45
Table11SanitarySewerConstruction
Location
Beginning
End
Sanitary
Sewer
New
Manholes
Replace
Manholes
Production
Rate
Time
(linearfeet)
(each)
(each)
(workingdays)
WentworthAvenuetoThompsonAvenue
157+30
169+22
2380
100LF/DAY
24
19
1EA/3DAYS
38
11
1EA/2DAYS
11
Total
73
Recommendations45
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
24
Total working days based on installation activities as indicated above is 230 based on a linear
installation approach and does not account for concurrent work activities. The total working days
requiredtocompletethisworkwillbelessasthewatermainandsanitarysewerpipeinstallationscan
occur concurrently; however, the work will have to be scheduled so there is not conflicting traffic
controlorworkzoneareas.
Totalpotentialworkingdaysforwatermainandsanitarysewerinstallation:
Mobilization~5days
Watermain,Hydrant,&ServiceConnection~155days
SanitarySewerandManholes~73
RoadwayCleanupandRestoration~10days
TotalWorkingDays=5+155+73+10=243days
Totalconstructiondurationinmonths:
Assumesalldays,exceptSundaysarecountedasworkingdays
(243days)(26days/month)=9.3Months
Assumesalldayseachmontharecountedasworkingdays
There would be other minor work activities included in this work to repair sidewalk and driveways
where installation of the new main impacts these, but this work can be completed within the
durationsandwillbetemporaryuntiltheRobert StreetImprovement projectcomesthroughinthe
followingyear.
*The number of working days for the water main installation could be reduced by 50% based on a
conversation regarding the daily production rate and installation methods with St Paul Regional
WaterServices.
Recommendations46
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
24
PERFORMANCEMEASURES
Performance
MainlineOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
LocalOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Maintainability
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Water main and sanitary sewer replacement doesnt affect overall

projectstaging
Reducesriskfortheprojectstakeholdersandcontractor
Abovegroundtemporarywaterserviceconnectionsareabigriskto
thecontractor
RemovescoordinationwithSt.PaulRegionalWaterServicesfromthe
restoftheprimecontractorsresponsibilities
Eliminates the need for the detour routes during the first
constructionseason,reducingthetotalprojectcostsforthedetour
Nochangetobaseline
131
5
26.2
131
131
5
14.3
Contribution
71
71
Rating
7
14.3
Weight
Contribution
71
100
Rating
5
4.8
Weight
ProjectSchedule
131
Weight
ConstructionImpacts
5
26.2
Weight
Contribution
Weight
Contribution
Couldeliminateanyworkin2017
Provides a more palatable project for contractors and specifically
subcontractorsbiddingonitemssuchassidewalkandpavingasthis
workwouldbein2seasonsratherthanspreadover3
Contribution
24
71
Rating
Contribution
TotalPerformance:
14.3
Weight
71
100
500
544
14%
Recommendations47
September1013,2013

Recommendations48
September1013,2013
VERecommendationNo.3b
RiskMitigationSeparateWaterMainContract
IDEANO.
22
Baseline
Constructionofthewatermainimprovementswillbesplitoverthe2014,2015,and2016construction
seasons.
Recommendation
Develop,advertiseandletaseparateconstructionprojectspecificallyfortheinstallationofthewater
mainassociatedwiththeRobertStreetImprovementProjects.Thisisaresponsestrategytotherisk
thattherightofwaywillnotbeacquiredbytheprojectlettinginApril2014andthattheprojectwill
bedelayeduntiltherightofwaycertificationisapprovedbyFHWA.
Advantages
Disadvantages
Water main installation doesnt affect overall

projectstaging
Reducesriskfortheprojectstakeholdersandthe
Contractor
Temporary service connections are a big risk to
thecontractorandothercontractwork
Separate contract allows work to begin on

Robert Street prior to the rightofway
certificationbeingcomplete
Removes coordination with St Paul Regional
Water Services from the rest of the prime
contractorsresponsibilities
Some business access locations will be

impactedmultipletimes
Coordination with two contractors when
the rest of the Roberts Street
Improvementprojectbegins
Twocontractstoadminister
CostSummary
Cost
Baseline
N/Q
Recommendation
N/Q
CostSavings
N/Q
Safety
Operations
Environment
Construction
Other
Recommendations49
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
22
The 60% design includes construction of the water main replacement over 3 years during the 2014,
2015,and2016constructionseasons.
2014Season
ConnectionsatAnnapolis,Hurley,Haskell,Bernard,Stanley,Butler,andOrme
2015Season
SBStation349+20toWentworthAvenue
LoganAvenuetoOrmeStreet
2016Season
SBStation306+00toSBStation321+00
SBStation328+10toMarieAvenue
SBStation342+85SBStation349+20
EastsideofRobertStreetNBStation128+50toMarieAvenue
Theimprovementswillincludereplacementofreplacementofthewatermainandserviceconnections
in various locations along the project corridor; the main construction activities associated with this
work(i.e.excavation,backfill,trafficcontrol,etc.)willbecompletedbyacontractorwhiletheactual
pipe installation and service connections will be completed by resources from the St. Paul Regional
WaterServices.ThiswillrequireclosecoordinationbetweentheprimecontractorandSPRWS.
Figure9BaselineProjectSequencing
This recommendation is to remove the water main construction element from the Robert Street
Improvement project and develop and bid a separate construction project specifically for the
installation of the water main and new service connections. This recommendation is a response
strategyfortheriskthattherightofwaycertificationwillnotbeapprovedbyFHWAintimetobegin
work on the corridor by June 2014. Because of funding requirements and the need to show the
businesscommunitythatworkasstartedtheprojectneedstobeginin2014.
Thiscontractcouldbedevelopedandbidinearly2014,allowingworktobeginonthecorridorpriorto
havingRightofWaycertificationforthefullRobertStreetImprovementProject.Thiscontractcouldbe
managedbytheCityofSt.Paulifthatwouldfacilitatemoreefficientcoordination.
Recommendations50
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
22
Assumptions
Dailyproductionrateforwatermaininstallationincludesexcavation,pipeinstall,andbackfillingof
thetrench(asprovidedbyProjectTeam).Thisworkonthemainlinescouldbeinexcessof200
linearfeetperdaydependingonconflictswithotherutilities(perdiscussionswithStPaulRegional
WaterServices).
Dailyproductionrateforserviceconnectionsincludesexcavationandinstallationofthepipefrom
the main to the location of the new service connection and installation of the meter/valves/etc.
associatedwiththenewconnection(basedevelopedusingRSMeans,reducedbasedonspecific
projectworkandpreviousconstructionexperience)
Dailyproductionrateforfirehydrantsinstallationincludesexcavationandinstallationofthepipe
from the main to the new hydrant location and placement of the new hydrant (base developed
usingRSMeans,reducedbasedonspecificprojectworkandpreviousconstructionexperience)
Awardingaseparatecontracttocompletethewatermainreplacement/installationworkwillallow
theprimecontractortofocusoncompletingthisworkandcoordinationwiththeSt.PaulRegion
WaterServiceswillbecompletedinoneseasonratherthanstretchedover3seasons.
Testingofthenewpipecanbecompletedwithinthecontractworkingdays.
Trenchescanbecoveredtemporarilywithsteelplatesforanynewexcavationswithintheroadway
toaccommodateinstallationandtestingactivities.
Servicecanbemaintainedtoallcurrentcustomerswiththeproposedlocationofthenewwater
main.
Water main piping and service connections will be installed and tested by the St. Paul Regional
WaterServices.
Recommendations51
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
22
Calculations
Thefollowingtablewasdevelopedbasedontheinformationcontainedinthe60%ContractDrawings
andincludesapproximatelengthsofpipingderivedfromscalingthepipelocationsasidentifiedinthe
drawings.
Table12WaterMainConstruction
Location
Beginning
End
Watermain
Fire
Hydrants
Service
Connections
Production
Rate
Time
(linearfeet)
(each)
(each)
(workingdays)
1487
100LF/DAY
15
4EA/DAY
105
100LF/DAY
MendotatoCarol
306+02
320+89
Carol
CaroltoEmerson
328+14
382+93
128+65
130+73
Marie
EmersontoWyoming
389+35
402+41
Stanley
5479
100LF/DAY
55
58
4EA/DAY
15
208
100LF/DAY
160
100LF/DAY
1306
100LF/DAY
13
17
4EA/DAY
60
100LF/DAY
Bernard
60
100LF/DAY
Haskell
60
100LF/DAY
Hurley
60
100LF/DAY
Annapolis
120
100LF/DAY
45
1EA/DAY
45
ProjectLimits
103+86
238+03
Total working days based on installation activities as indicated above is 157 based on a linear
installation approach and does not account for concurrent work activities. The total working days
required to complete this work will vary slightly as some of the service installation and hydrant
installationworkcouldhappenconcurrentlywiththeinstallationofthewatermain.
Totalpotentialworkingdaysforwatermaininstallation:
Mobilization~5days
*Watermain,Hydrant,&ServiceConnection~155days
RoadwayCleanupandRestoration~10days
TotalWorkingDays=5+155+10=170days
Totalconstructiondurationinmonths:
Recommendations52
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
22
Assumesalldays,exceptSundaysarecountedasworkingdays
Assumesalldayseachmontharecountedasworkingdays
There would be other minor work activities included in this work to repair sidewalk and driveways
whereinstallationofthenewmainimpactsthese,butthisworkcanbecompletedwithinthedurations
and will be temporary until the Robert Street Improvement project comes through during the
followingyear.
*The number of working days for the water main installation could be reduced by 50% based on a
conversationregardingthedailyproductionrateandinstallationmethodswithStPaulRegionalWater
Services.
Recommendations53
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
22
PERFORMANCEMEASURES
Performance
MainlineOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
LocalOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Maintainability
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Reduces the total amount of time that construction activities are

goingoninfrontofabusiness
Nochangetobaseline
131
5
26.2
131
131
5
14.3
Contribution
71
71
Rating
7
14.3
Weight
Contribution
71
100
Rating
5
4.8
Weight
ProjectSchedule
131
Weight
ConstructionImpacts
5
26.2
Weight
Contribution
Weight
Contribution
Thiswillmitigateariskthattheprojectstartisdelayed
Contribution
24
71
Rating
Contribution
TotalPerformance:
14.3
Weight
71
86
500
544
9%
Recommendations54
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
9,13,14,32
Baseline
Theprojectwillbeadvertisedusingdesignbidbuildcontractingmethod.
Recommendation
Toreceivethebestvaluefortheprojectincorporateinnovativecontractingmethodswithinthe
designbidbuildprojectdeliverytoreducetheoveralldurationoftheproject.
Advantages
Disadvantages
Innovativecontractingmethods(seenextsection)
Prebidmeeting
o Builds a better relationship between the
contractorandtheagency
o Highlights project/contract requirements that the
Contractor must plan for and consider in bid (i.e.
MOTandTPAR)
CostSummary
Innovative contracting methods

(seenextsection)
Prebidmeeting
o Notamandatorymeeting,soall
Contractorsmightnotattend
Cost
Baseline
N/Q
Recommendation
N/Q
CostSavings
N/Q
Safety
Operations
Environment
Construction
Other
Recommendations55
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
9,13,14,32
State and local transportation agencies (DOTs) are increasingly exploring ways to complete
highway projects faster while meeting stringent cost, quality, and safety performance measures.
DOTsmusttakeintoaccountprojectcharacteristicssuchasprojectsize(cost),type(preservation,
rehabilitation,orreconstruction),andcomplexity(urbanorrural,significanttrafficimpact,number
of project elements) when evaluating innovative contracting options that promote accelerated
projectcompletionorfacilitateachievementofotherperformanceobjectives.
Mostinnovativecontractingmethods changehow DOTsprocureanddeliveraproject,usingthe
traditional designbidbuild delivery approach as the benchmark. Contracting alternatives that
shouldbeconsideredforuseonthisprojectinclude:
Costplustime bidding (A+B) aims to expedite project completion through competitive

bidding on the construction time (days). A+B bidding is used on projects with significant
impacts to motorists, businesses, emergency services or other groups that will be directly
impactedbytheproject.
AlternativeTechnicalConcept(ATC)providesamechanismthatallowsContractorstopropose
changestotheplansduringthebiddingphase.TheATCapproachpromotescompetitionand
theexchangeinnovativeapproachesearlyinthedesignprocess,givingDOTstheopportunity
toselectprovendesignandconstructionsolutionsthatofferthebestvalue.
BestValueContractingallowstheownertoconsiderotherfactorsinadditiontopriceinthe
awardandexecutionofconstructioncontracts.Bestvalueprocurementismostusefulwhen
a project has unique objectives or challenges that may be difficult to meet using traditional
lowbidprocurement.
Lane rental encourages contractors to minimize road user impacts during construction by
restrictinglaneuse.
Becauseofthesignificanceofthebusinessandpedestrianimpacts,itisrecommendedthatapre
bidmeetingbeheldforplanholders.Thefocusofthemeetingwouldbeonconstructionstaging,
maintenanceoftraffic,businessimpactmanagement,TemporaryPedestrianAccessRoutes(TPAR)
andtodiscussinnovativecontractingifamethodisselectedforuseonthisproject.
Information presented will be highlighted areas of the plans/specs regarding these items. It is
important to stress the significance of these items, and to communicate to the Contractor that
communicationwiththebusinesses,aswellasaccessforbusinessesandpedestrians,issomething
theyneedtoincorporateintotheirworkandintheirestimatefortheproject.
Attendance at the prebid meeting should include the Project Engineer, MnDOT Traffic
representative, City of West St. Paul representative, Project Manager, and MnDOT Area
representative.
Recommendations56
September1013,2013
Innovative
Contracting
Method
A+B
Description
9,13,14,32
Pros
A+Bbiddingfactorstimepluscosttodetermine
the low bid. Under the A+B method, each
submittedbidhastwocomponents:
Earlier
completionof
project
Adollaramountforcontractitems
Contractor's
schedulemust
minimize
construction
timeanddelays
Bcalendardaysrequiredtocompleteproject
Calendardaysaremultipliedbyaroadusercost,
furnished by the owner, and added to the A
componenttoobtainthetotalbid:
A+(Bxroadusercostperday)=totalbid
Theformulaonlydeterminesthelowestbidfor
award and not the payment to the
contractor. A+B can be an effective technique
to reduce delays for critical projects with high
road use. Contracts incorporate a disincentive
provision assessing road user costs to
discouragecontractorsfromexceedingthetime
bid. Contracts may include an incentive
provision to reward contractors if work is
completed in fewer days than bid. Generally,
MnDOTspecifiesamaximumincentive.
Alternative
Technical
Concept
IDEANO.
The effective use of this concept can align

incentives for both the contractor and the
owner to develop ideas which remove
inefficienciesorconstructabilityproblemsinthe
design, and improve the project by reducing
costs,time,andrisksofadverseoutcomesforall
concerned.
The incentive for an owner to include the
provision for ATC proposals is to encourage
contractor to develop innovations to help
reducecostorscheduleandimprovevalue.The
owner benefits from reduced costs and/or
constructionimpactduration.
Forthisproject,ATCswouldonlybeallowedfor
stagingandmaintenanceoftraffic.MnDOTand
the City would review the proposed ATCs and
respond with: Approved, Not Approved,
ConditionallyApproved,orNotanATC(allowed
bycontract)
Cons
Contractormust
taketimeto
developa
reliableschedule
Contractchanges
are
magnified;too
manychanges
nullify
Contractormust
advantagesof
coordinatewith
A+B
subcontractorsto
meettime
Moreresources
constraints
mayberequired
forcontract
administration
Moreintense
negotiationsfor
additionalwork
because
timelinessis
critical
Encourage
Contractor
innovationwhich
cansavetime
andcost
ATCapproval
processmightbe
difficultduetoall
thestakeholders
thatmaybe
involved
(MnDOT,City,
SPRWS)
MnDOThasnot
beenableto
implementATCs
onDBBprojects
inthepast
Requires
additional
advertisingtime
Alltrafficcontrol
itemsmustbe
lumpsum
Recommendations57
September1013,2013
Innovative
Contracting
Method
A+BandATC
Description
AcombinationofA+BandATCs
IDEANO.
9,13,14,32
Pros
Cons
Encourage
Contractor
innovationwhich
cansavetime
andcost.
Maybetoolate
intheprocessfor
thiscontracting
method.
Potentialforbest
qualified
Contractors
wouldbe
evaluatedhigher
AddingATCs
mayeliminate
someconsofthe
A+Balone.
Involvementwith
Officeof
Innovative
Contractingand
FHWAtypically
beginsat30%
plancompletion
AddingA+Bto
ATCwould
provideincentive
forContractorto
developtime
saving(evenif
notcostsaving)
improvements
BestValue
BestValue is a procurementprocess where price Encourage

and other key factors can be considered in the
Contractor
evaluation and selection process to minimize
innovationwhich
impacts and enhance the longterm performance
cansavetime
andvalueofconstruction.
andcost.
Evaluation criteria must include price and may Potentialforbest
qualified
includetime,staging,andqualifications.
Contractors
wouldbe
evaluatedhigher
Maybetoolate
intheprocessfor
thiscontracting
method.
Involvementwith
Officeof
Innovative
Contractingand
FHWAtypically
beginsat30%
plancompletion
Recommendations58
September1013,2013
IDEANO.
9,13,14,32
PERFORMANCEMEASURES
Performance
MainlineOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
LocalOperations
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Maintainability
Rating
Nochangetobaseline
Innovativecontractingshouldminimizeconstructionimpacts
Nochangetobaseline
5
26.2
131
131
5
14.3
Contribution
71
71
Rating
7
14.3
Contribution
71
100
Rating
5
4.8
Weight
ProjectSchedule
131
Weight
131
Weight
ConstructionImpacts
5
26.2
Weight
Contribution
Weight
Contribution
Innovativecontractingshoulddecreasetheconstructionduration
Contribution
24
24
Rating
Contribution
TotalPerformance:
14.3
Weight
71
100
500
557
11%
Recommendations59
September1013,2013

Recommendations60
September1013,2013
AppendixA
ValueEngineeringRecommendationApprovalForm
Project:
VEStudyDate:
TH952A,RobertStreetImprovementProjectSP190884
September1013,2013
Accept
Reject
Acceptforfurther
review
Environment
Construction
Other
Added
Cost
($million)
Operations
Estimated
Savings
($million)
Safety
Reason
(Orusethepagesattheendofthismemo)
UseTrafficBarrels
$0.20
3a
RiskMitigationSeparateUtility
Contract
Totalfor4recommendations
0 $0.20
$0
Totalfor4acceptedrecommendations
0 $0.20
$0
Recommendation
3b
4
Pleaseprovidejustificationifthevalueengineeringstudyrecommendationsarenotapprovedorareimplementedinamodifiedform.
MnDOTisrequiredtoreportValueEngineeringresultsannuallytoFHWA.Tofacilitatethisreportingrequirement,aValueEngineeringRecommendationApprovalFormis
includedintheAppendixofthisreport.Iftheregionelectstorejectormodifyarecommendation,pleaseincludeabriefexplanationofwhy.Pleasecompletetheformand
returnittoMinnieMilkert,MnDOTStateValueEngineer,MS696
AppendixA61
September1013,2013
SignatureProjectManager
7October2013
Date
JonP.Solberg
Name(pleaseprint)
ReasonforAcceptanceorRejectionofRecommendation
1. Usetrafficbarrels.
Thisrecommendationisacceptableandcanbeeasilyimplementedinthefinaldesignplans.
2. Weeklycontractor/businessownermeetings.
Thisrecommendationisacceptableandwillbemadepartoftheprojectrequirements/specifications.
3. Utilities:
a.
Relocatetheutilitiesfirst(underprojectspecificationsschedule)
b.
RiskMitigationLetaSeparateUtilityContract
TheCityissomewhatconcernedaboutimplementingeitheroftheserecommendationsduetothefollowingfactors:
o
Additionaltemporarypavement,curbandsidewalkrestorationwillbenecessarytoallowtheroadwaytobeopenedastheyfinisheachsection.
Thesecostsarenotbudgetedandwouldnotoccuriftheutilitiesweredoneatthesametimeastheroadway.Itisestimatedtoadd
approximately$500,000totheprojectcosts.
StPaulRegionalWaterServiceshaveindicatedthattheirwatermaincrewsandtemporarywaterservicematerialsmaynotbeavailabledueto
thesheeramountofwatermainworkproposedalreadyin2014.Therearenearly10milesofwatermainreplacementinotherprogrammed
city,county,andstateprojectsin2014.Theabilitytodedicatethetwofulltimecrewsthatwouldbeneededforthiseffortwillbechallenging.
(Note:Theirpolicyisthattheagencycontractorexcavatesthetrenchandbackfills,butSt.PaulWatercrewsactuallyinstallthepipe.)
Businessownerswillbesubjecttomultipleyearsofconstructioninareasthatsewerandwaterarebeingreplaced.Theyhavebeeninformed
previouslythattheywouldonlybeimpactedforoneyear.
AppendixA62
September1013,2013
Certaintemporaryitemssuchasbituminouscurbandsidewalksaremoresusceptibletowinterdamageduetosnowremovaloperationsand
equipment.
o Iftheadvancebidpackageisdonebyadifferentcontractorthantheroadway,warrantydeficienciescanbecomeanissuebetweencontractors
(i.e.,settlementsoverutilitytrenches,etc.).Often,theretendstobealotoffingerpointingastoifthewarrantyrelateddamageswerecaused
bytheutilitycontractororpavingcontractor.
o Privateutilityrelocationswillbedifficult,astheygenerallyprefertocompletethisworkwhentheroadwayisunderconstructiontoreducetheir
overallconstructioncostsforrestoringpavement,sidewalk,etc.
o Temporarywaterservice(abovegroundhoseconnections)ishighlyweatherdependent.Temporaryservicecanonlybeplacedreliablybetween
May15andNovember1.Anythingpastthosedatesisahigherrisk.Ithasbeendonesuccessfullyoutsideofthesedatesinthepast,butithas
alsofailed(i.e.,frozen/crackedtemporarymainsthatputcustomersoutofwaterfortwoplusdays).Whiletemporarywaterserviceswillbe
neededanyway,duetothelargevolumeofworktobedoneiftheutilitiesareconstructedseparately,itmaynotgetfinisheddueto
temperatureconcernsinthelatefall.
o StPaulWaterisconcernedaboutthewillingnessofthecontractortoplaceanemphasisonthecompletingthewaterinatimelyfashion..
Frequently,St.Paulwatercrewsaresidelinedonaprojectduetotheexcavationcontractorpullingoffofthewaterexcavationtodootherwork,
suchassewerorstorm.Ifone,possiblytwo,fulltimewatermaincrewsaregoingtobededicatedtotheadvanceutilitywork,thenthe
understandingthatthosecrewsshouldworkstraightthroughtheprojectmustbeaddressedintheprojectspecificationsandcontract
management.Theirexperiencehasshownthatthisdoesnothappenaswellasplanned.
o Basedontheaboveconcerns,thisrecommendationisrejected.St.PaulWaterServicesdoesnothavesufficientcrewstoconstructallthewater
mainin2014,additionallytheamountoftemporaryworkmayresultinmorecoststhantimesavingstotheproject.Theonlybenefitthatthe
Cityseesindoingthisistoallowworktoproceedin2014ifthereareanydelaysingettingtheroadwayplanscompletedorapprovedbyMnDot
oriftherearedelaysintherightofwayacquisitionschedule.TheCitywillcontinuetomonitortheprogressoftheplansandapprovalsandif
scheduleslippagebecomesaconcern,theywillreevaluatethisoption.
4. Innovativecontracting
o
TheCitywouldbeagreeabletoexploringalternativebiddingmethods(i.e.,A+BBidding,AlternativeTechnicalConcepts,Incentives/Disincentives,etc.).
TheywouldlookfordirectionfromMnDOTonguidanceonthisitemandforthestandardcontractlanguagethatshouldbeputintothebidding
documentsforthemethodofcontractingselected.TheCitysuggeststhatameetingbescheduledwithMnDotConstructionServicestofurtherexplore
thebenefitsofimplementingalternativebidingoptions.
AppendixA63
September1013,2013
FHWAFunctionalBenefitCriteria
Eachyear,StateDOTsarerequiredtoreportonVErecommendationstoFHWA.Inadditiontocostimplications,FHWArequirestheDOTstoevaluateeach
approvedrecommendationintermsoftheprojectfeatureorfeaturesthatrecommendationbenefits.Ifaspecificrecommendationcanbeshowntoprovide
benefittomorethanonefeaturedescribedbelow,counttherecommendationineachcategorythatisapplicable.
Safety:Recommendationsthatmitigateorreducehazardsonthefacility
Operations:Recommendationsthatimproverealtimeserviceand/orlocal,corridor,orregionallevelsofserviceofthefacility.

Environment:Recommendationsthatsuccessfullyavoidormitigateimpactstonaturalandorculturalresources.
Construction:Recommendationsthatimproveworkzoneconditions,orexpeditetheprojectdelivery.
Other:Recommendationsnotreadilycategorizedbytheaboveperformanceindicators.
AppendixA64
September1013,2013
AppendixB
VEStudyAgenda
TuesThurs.:
Fri.:
SP190884ValueEngineeringStudy
TH952A,RobertSt.(fromMendotaRdtoAnnapolisSt.)
TuesdaySeptember10FridaySeptember13,2013
MarylandAve.TruckStation;244EastMarylandAve.;St.Paul,MN55117
WatersEdgeBuilding;1500W.CountyRoadB2;Roseville,MN551133174
ValueEngineeringStudyAgenda
Tuesday,Sept.10:MnDOTMarylandAve.TruckStation
8:00am
WelcomeandIntroductions
OverviewandtrainingofVEProcess
InformationPhase
8:45am
DesignTeamspresentationoftheproject
9:45am
Virtualsitevisit(GoogleEarth)
Whatarethegoalsandobjectives?
Whataretheconstraintsandcontrollingdecisions?
Whataretheassumptions?
Whataretheriskhavebeenidentified?
DefineandWeighPerformanceAttributes
FunctionalAnalysisPhase
10:15am
FunctionalAnalysisdevelopmentandtraining
CreativePhase
10:45am
BegintoBrainstormideastoimprovethevalueoftheproject
Noon
SiteVisitLunchalongtheway
about3:30pm
SiteVisitObservations
4:00am
ContinueSpeculation
5:00pm
Adjournfortheday
Wednesday,Sept.11
(BringLaptopsifyouhavethem)
8:00am
ContinueSpeculationandmoveintoEvaluationPhase
EvaluationPhase
10:00am
Noon
Definetheadvantagesanddisadvantagesoftheideas
Lunch
1:00pm
CompletetheEvaluationPhase
4:30pm
Assignrecommendationstoteammembersfordevelopment
AppendixB65
September1013,2013

5:00pm
Adjournfortheday
Thursday,Sept.12
(BringLaptopsifyouhavethem)
DevelopmentPhase
8:00am
Noon
Developtheideasthatevaluatedthebestintorecommendations
Lunch
1:00pm
ContinueDevelopmentPhase
4:00pm
Defineandevaluatetheperformanceofrecommendations
5:00pm
Adjournfortheday
Friday,Sept.13:MnDOTWatersEdge
8:00am
VETeamReviewofRecommendations(iftimepermits)
PresentationPhase
9:15am
10:00am
Noon
VETeampracticewalkthroughpresentation
PresentationofVEFindings
Adjourn
AppendixB66
September1013,2013
AppendixC
VEStudyAttendees
SP190884
TELEPHONE
2013
September
NAME
10
11
12
13
ORGANIZATION
POSITION/DISCIPLINE
Office
Cell
E-MAIL
Michael Arseneau
MnDOT
Design
Liz Benjamin
MnDOT
Construction
Lynne Bly
MnDOT
Multi-Model Planning
Tiffany Dagon
MnDOT
Traffic
David Juliff
SRF Consulting
Project Manager
(651) 234-7652
michael.arseneau@state.mn.us
elizabeth.benjamin@state.mn.us
lynne.bly@state.mn.us
tiffany.dagon@state.mn.us
(763) 249-6718
djuliff@srfconsulting.com
(763) 249-6748
Jim Gersema
SRF Consulting
Curtiss Kallio
MnDOT
Construction
Molly Kline
MnDOT
Maintenance
jgersema@srfconsulting.com
curt.kallio@state.mn.us
(651) 234-7909
molly.kline@state.mn.us
AppendixC67
September1013,2013
VEStudyAttendees
SP190884
TELEPHONE
2013
September
NAME
ORGANIZATION
POSITION/DISCIPLINE
Office
Cell
E-MAIL
10
11
12
13
Blane Long
Josh Metcalf
HDR Engineering
Design/Construction
Minnie Milkert
MnDOT
State Value Engineer
Gina Mitteco
MnDOT
Bikes and Pedestrians
Jenny Morris
MnDOT
Project Management
Almin Ramic
MnDOT
Geometrics
James Rosenow
MnDOT
Flexible Design
HDR Engineering
VE Team Leader
(360) 570-4411
(360) 742-7682
Blane.Long@hdrinc.com
(360) 570-4417
(360) 239-9516
Josh.Metcalf@hdrinc.com
(651) 366-4648
(651) 336-3657
minnie.milkert@state.mn.us
gina.mitteco@state.mn.us
jenny.morris@state.mn.us
(651) 366-4673
almin.ramic@state.mn.us
(651) 366-4673
james.rosenow@state.mn.us
Matt Saam
City of West St. Paul
Mike Salmanowicz
City of West St. Paul
(651) 552-4130
msaam@cityofwsp.org
Public Works Superintendent
(651) 552-4160
(651) 755-9234
msalmanowicz@cityofwsp.org
AppendixC68
September1013,2013
VEStudyAttendees
SP190884
TELEPHONE
2013
September
10
11
12
NAME
ORGANIZATION
POSITION/DISCIPLINE
Office
Cell
E-MAIL
13
David Sheen
MnDOT
Traffic
(651) 234-7824
David.sheen@state.mn.us
Jon P Solberg
MnDOT
Project Manager
Darwin Yasis
MnDOT
Geometrics
(651) 234-7729
jon.solberg@state.mn.us
(651) 366-4623
Darwin.yasis@state.mn.us
AppendixC69
September1013,2013
AppendixC70
September1013,2013
AppendixD
VEStudyReportOutPresentation
AppendixD71
September1013,2013
AppendixD72
September1013,2013
AppendixD73
September1013,2013
AppendixD74
September1013,2013
AppendixD75
September1013,2013
AppendixD76
September1013,2013
AppendixD77
September1013,2013
AppendixD78
September1013,2013
AppendixD79
September1013,2013
AppendixD80
September1013,2013
AppendixD81
September1013,2013
AppendixD82
September1013,2013
AppendixE
ValueEngineeringProcess
ValueEngineering(VE)isasystematicprocessusingamultidisciplinaryteamtoimprovethevalueofa
project through the analysis of its functions. The VE process incorporates, to the extent possible, the
values of design; construction; maintenance; contractor; state, local and federal approval agencies;
otherstakeholders;andthepublic.
The primary objective of a VE Study is value improvement. The value improvements might relate to
scope definition, functional design, constructability, coordination (both internal and external), or the
schedule for project development. Other possible value improvements are reduced environmental
impacts,reducedpublicinconvenience,orreducedprojectcost.
PreVEStudy
PriortothestartofaVEStudy,theProjectManager,VETeamLeader,andtheStateValueEngineering
Coordinatorcarryoutthefollowingthreeactivities:
InitiateStudy
o PrepareVEStudyrequest
o Definescope,objectiveandgoalsofthestudy
o Definestudytiming
OrganizeStudy
o ConductPreStudymeeting
o Selectteammembers
o Preelicitrisks(ifapplicable)
o Identifyperformanceattributes(ifapplicable)
PrepareData
o Collectanddistributedata
o Preparecostmodels
o Prepforstudy.
AlloftheinformationgatheredpriortotheVEStudyisgiventotheteammembersfortheiruse.
ValueEngineeringJobPlan
TheValueEngineeringJobPlanwasemployedinanalyzingtheproject.Thisprocessisrecommendedby
SAVEInternationalandiscomposedofthefollowingphases:
InformationTheobjectiveofthisphasewastoobtainathoroughunderstandingoftheprojectsdesign
criteria and objectives by reviewing the projects documents and drawings, cost estimates, and
schedules.
FunctionalAnalysisThepurposeofthisphasewastoidentifyanddefinetheprimaryandsecondary
functionsoftheproject.AFunctionalAnalysisSystemTechnique(FAST)wasusedtoquicklydefinethe
functionsoftheproject.
AppendixE83
September1013,2013
Creative/Speculation During this phase the team employed creative techniques such as team
brainstormingtodevelopanumberofalternativeconceptsthatsatisfytheprojectsprimaryfunctions.
Evaluation The purpose of this phase was to evaluate the alternative concepts developed by the VE
Teamduringthebrainstormingsessions.Theteamusedanumberoftoolstodeterminethequalitative
andquantitativemeritsofeachconcept.
Development Those concepts that ranked highest in the evaluation were further developed into VE
recommendations. Narratives, drawings, calculations, and cost estimates were prepared for each
recommendation.
PresentationTheVETeampresentedtheirfindingintheformofawrittenreport.Inaddition,anoral
presentationwasmadetotheownerandthedesignteamtodiscusstheVErecommendations.
Implementation/Resolution Evaluate, resolve, document and implement all approved
recommendations.
Figure10ValueEngineeringJobPlan
AppendixE84
September1013,2013
PerformanceBasedResults
Usingperformanceattributesprocessisanintegralpartofthevalueengineeringprocess.Thisprocess
provides the cornerstone of the VE process by providing a systematic and structured means of
considering the relationship of a projects performance and cost as they relate to value. Project
performance must be properly defined and agreed upon by the stakeholders at the beginning of the
value study. The performance attributes and requirements developed are then used throughout the
studytoidentify,evaluate,anddocumentalternatives.
Introduction
The methodology described herein measures project value by correlating the performance of project
scopeandscheduletotheprojectcosts.Theobjectiveofthismethodologyistoprescribeasystematic,
structuredapproachtostudyandoptimizeaprojectsscope,schedule,andcost.
Value engineering has traditionally been perceived as an effective means for reducing project costs.
Thisparadigmonlyaddressesonepartofthevalueequation,oftentimesattheexpenseofoverlooking
therolethatVEcanplaywithregardtoimprovingprojectperformance.Projectcostsarefairlyeasyto
quantify and compare through traditional estimating techniques. Performance is not so easily
quantifiable.
TheVETeamLeaderwillleadtheteamandexternalstakeholdersthroughthemethodology,usingthe
poweroftheprocesstodistillsubjectivethoughtintoanobjectivelanguagethateveryonecanrelateto
and understand. The dialog that develops forms the basis for the VE Team understanding of the
performance requirements of the project and to what degree the current design concept is meeting
thoserequirements.Fromthisbaseline,theVETeamcanfocusondevelopingalternativeconceptsthat
willquantifybothperformanceandcostandcontributetooverallprojectvalue.
Performancebasedvalueengineeringyieldsthefollowingbenefits:
Buildsconsensusamongprojectstakeholders(especiallythoseholdingconflictingviews)
Developsabetterunderstandingofaprojectsgoalsandobjectives
Develops a baseline understanding of how the project is meeting performance goals and
objectives
IdentifiesareaswhereprojectperformancecanbeimprovedthroughtheVEprocess
DevelopsabetterunderstandingofaVErecommendationseffectonprojectperformance
Develops an understanding of the relationship between performance and cost in determining
value
Uses value as the true measurement for the basis of selecting the right project or design
concept
Provides decision makers with a means of comparing costs and performance (i.e., costs vs.
benefits)inawaythatcanassisttheminmakingbetterdecisions.
Methodology
Theapplicationofperformancebasedvalueengineeringconsistsofthefollowingsteps:
1.
Identify key project (scope and delivery) performance attributes and requirements for the
project
AppendixE85
September1013,2013

2.
3.
4.
5.
Establishthehierarchyandimpactoftheseattributesupontheproject
Establish the baseline of the current project performance by evaluating and rating the
effectivenessofthecurrentdesignconcepts
Identifythechangeinperformanceofalternativeprojectconceptsgeneratedbythestudy
Measure the aggregate effect of alternative concepts relative to the baseline projects
performanceasameasureofoverallvalueimprovement
The primary goal of value engineering is to improve project value. A simple way to think of value in
termsofanequationisasfollows:
Value
Performance
Cost
Assumptions
Before embarking on the details of this methodology some assumptions need to be identified. The
methodology described in the following steps assumes the project functions are well established.
Projectfunctionsarethewhattheprojectdeliverstoitsusersandstakeholders;agoodreferencefor
the project functions can be found in the environmental documents purpose and need statement.
Project functions are generally well defined prior to the start of the value study. In the event that
project functions have been substantially modified, the methodology must begin a new from the
beginning(Step1).
Step1DeterminetheMajorPerformanceAttributes
Performance attributes can generally be divided between Project Scope components (Highway
Operations,EnvironmentalImpacts,andSystemPreservation)andProjectDeliverycomponents.
It is important to make a distinction between performance attributes and performance requirements.
Performance requirements are mandatory. All performance requirements MUST be met by any idea
beingconsidered.
Performanceattributespossessarangeofacceptablelevelsofperformance.Forexample,iftheproject
wasthedesignandconstructionofanewbridge,aperformancerequirementmightbethatthebridge
must meet all current seismic design criteria. In contrast, a performance attribute might be Project
Schedule which means that a wide range of alternatives could be acceptable that had different
durations.
The VE Team Leader will initially request that representatives from Project Team and external
stakeholders identify performance attributes that they feel are essential to meeting the overall need
and purpose of the project. Usually four to seven attributes are selected. It is important that all
potentialattributesbethoroughlydiscussed.
TheinformationthatcomesoutofthisdiscussionwillbevaluabletoboththeVETeamandtheProject
Owner.Itisimportantthattheattributebediscretelydefined,andtheymustbequantifiableinsome
form.Byquantifiable,itismeantthatauseablescalemustbedelineatedwithvaluesgivenonascaleof
0to10.A0indicatesunacceptableperformance,whilea10indicatesoptimaloridealperformance.
The vast majority of performance attributes that typically appear in transportation value studies have
AppendixE86
September1013,2013
been standardized. This standardized list can be used as is or adopted with minor adjustments as
required.Everyeffortshouldbemadetomaketheratingsasobjectiveaspossible.
Step2DeterminetheRelativeImportanceoftheAttributes
Once the group has agreed upon the projects performance attributes, the next step is to determine
their relative importance in relation to each other. This is accomplished through the use of an
evaluativetooltermedinthisreportasthePerformanceAttributeMatrix.
This matrix compares the performance attributes in pairs, asking the question: An improvement in
whichattributewillprovidethegreatestbenefittotheprojectrelativetopurposeandneed?Aletter
code(e.g.,a)isenteredintothematrixforeachpair,identifyingwhichofthetwoismoreimportant.
Ifapairofattributesisconsideredtobeofessentiallyequalimportance,bothletters(e.g.,a/b)are
enteredintotheappropriatebox.This,however,shouldbediscouraged,asithasbeenfoundthatin
practiceatieusuallyindicatesthatthepairshavenotbeenadequatelydiscussed.
Whenallpairshavebeendiscussed,thenumberofvotesforeachistalliedandpercentages(which
will be used as weighted multipliers later in the process) are calculated. It is not uncommon for one
attributetonotreceiveanyvotes.Ifthisoccurs,theattributeisgivenatokenvote,asitmadethe
listinthefirstplaceandshouldbegivensomedegreeofimportance.
Step3EstablishthePerformanceBaselinefortheOriginalDesign
Thenextstepistodefinethebaselineasitpertainstoeachperformanceattribute.Thebaselineisthen
givenascoreof5onascaleof0to10foreachattribute.
Step4EvaluatethePerformanceoftheVERecommendations
Once the performance of the baseline has been established for the original design concept, it can be
usedtohelptheVETeamdevelopperformanceratingsforindividualVErecommendationsastheyare
developedduringthecourseofthevaluestudy.ThePerformanceMeasuresformatthebackofeach
recommendationisusedtocapturethisinformation.
Itisimportanttoconsidertherecommendationsimpactontheentireproject,ratherthanondiscrete
components.
Step5ComparethePerformanceRatingsofRecommendationstotheBaselineProject
Thelaststepintheprocessistodeveloptheperformanceratingsfortheoriginaldesignconcept.The
VE Team groups the recommendation into a scenario (or scenarios) to provide the decision makers a
clearpictureofhowtherecommendationsfittogetherintopossiblesolutions.Atleastonescenariois
developedtopresenttheVETeamsconsensusofwhatshouldbeimplemented.Additionalscenarios
are developed as necessary to present other combinations to the decision makers that should be
considered. The scenario(s) of VE recommendations are rated and compared against the original
concept.TheperformanceratingsdevelopedfortheVEScenariosareenteredintothematrix,andthe
summaryportionofiscompleted.Thesummaryprovidesdetailsonnetchangestocost,performance,
andvalue,usingthefollowingcalculations.
% Performance Improvement = Performance VE Strategy / Total Performance Original

Concept
ValueIndex=TotalPerformance/TotalCost(inMillions)
%ValueImprovement=ValueIndexVEStrategy/ValueIndexOriginalConcept
AppendixE87
September1013,2013
Reporting
FollowingtheVEStudy,theTeamLeaderassemblesallstudydocumentationintothedraft/finalreports:
PublishResultsPrepareadraftandafinalVEStudyReport;distributeprintedandelectronic
copiesasneeded.
The VE Study is complete when the report is issued as a record of the VE Teams analysis and
development work, as well as the Project Teams implementation dispositions for the
recommendations.
AppendixE88
September1013,2013

Group 2 - Robert Street Improvements

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Group 2 - Robert Street Improvements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ValueEngineeringStudy

ApplytheprinciplesandpracticesoftheVEJobPlan Facilitator: HDREngineering,Inc.

Provides an outreach to local businesses

Schedule changes may cause businesses to

Water main and sanitary sewer replacement

Some business accesses will be impacted

Water main and sanitary sewer replacement doesnt affect overall

Water main installation doesnt affect overall

Separate contract allows work to begin on

Some business access locations will be

Reduces the total amount of time that construction activities are

Innovative contracting methods

Costplustime bidding (A+B) aims to expedite project completion through competitive

The effective use of this concept can align

BestValue is a procurementprocess where price Encourage

State Value Engineer

Bikes and Pedestrians

City of West St. Paul

City of West St. Paul

% Performance Improvement = Performance VE Strategy / Total Performance Original

You might also like