PRESENTATION
MONTANA DOT’s CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW PROGRAM –
“BUILDING COMMUNICATION”
PRESENTED BY:
Gerry Brown Ray Sacks
Jake Goettle, P.E.
Construction Engineering Services Bureau
2015 AASHTO VE Conference – August 2015
Washington, DC
2
WELCOME
MONTANA AND MDT
MONTANA TRAFFIC
WASHINGTON, DC POLITICS
MONTANA POLITICS
MONTANA LANDSCAPE
9
AGENDA • Introduction • Constructability Review Types • Communication • Constructability Review Procedures • Constructability Review Flowchart • Performance Measurement Example • Constructability Review Checklist Example • Summary • Questions/Comments
10
INTRODUCTION • Formal constructability reviews started in 2000
– Oversite function to address plan errors & reduce construction change orders
• Constructability reviews were refined in 2005 – Assist design teams in development of construction plans
• Utilizing a construction perspective – Reviews provide input and comments on PS&E package to
design project managers to improve the overall project quality – Constructability Review is not a plan check!
• Contract Administration • Special Provisions and Contract Language • Contract Changes and Project Overruns • Construction Procedures, Equipment and Materials Handling • Construction Schedules and Staging Requirements
11
CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW TYPES • Formal Review
• Requires construction expertise • Study design plans versus actual construction requirements • Usually used on complex or urban type projects • Plans are approximately 60% design stage
• Design Stage Review • Requires construction expertise • Performed on all projects at all design stages
• Has a designated constructability reviewer • Introduces construction expertise into the earliest stages of
project concept and design • A project is not complete when the plans are ready for
contact but rather when construction is complete and Contract Administration has been finalized.
12
COMMUNICATION
• Communication should be effective and trustworthy – Requires time and a professional approach – Written comments and providing input at plan
development meetings – Online, E-mail, telephone and face to face interaction
13
COMMUNICATION
• Comment Examples: • Consider/suggest this approach or this material. • Please review the following information on Plan Sheet
3 for clarity. • The quantities in the Summary on Plan Sheet 2 do not
match those items in the bid estimates. Please clarify. • Please add an item to the Estimate for work shown on
plan sheet 5. • Thanks for the opportunity to participate in this project
review.
14
CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW PROCEDURES
• Construction Engineering Services Bureau –Constructability Review (CR) Section
• Provide coordination between Construction Engineering Services and Preconstruction (Design) Services
• Conduct constructability reviews at all design stages – PFR, AGR, SOW, PIH, FPR and Blue Sheet (Pre-bid)
• Provide CR comment documentation and adjudication • Enter information, prepare reports and maintain a CR
tracking sheet
15
CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW PROCEDURES
• Construction Engineering Services Bureau –Value Analysis (VA)
• Conduct VA Studies • Document VA Study recommendation adjudication and/or
implementation • Monitor VA Program • Annual Reporting
16
CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW PROCEDURES
• Construction Engineering Services Bureau – Post Construction Reviews (PCR)
• Provide a feed-back loop of communication from the field crews back to the design staff
• Conduct PCR meetings and provide written reports • Identify, distribute and follow-up on “lessons learned” • PCR’s are used to monitor Value Analysis
recommendations and constructability review comments for future implementation on design plans
17
CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW FLOW CHART
(CR = Constructability Reviewer)
PROJECT NOMINATED (District/HQ/Consultant Design)
PFR Report
A/GR Report
Scope of Work Report
Plan-In-Hand Report
Preliminary Field Review (PFR)
Preliminary Alignment/Grade (A/GR)
Review Meeting
Plan-In-Hand Office and Field Review
Final Plan Review (FPR) Report
Blue Sheet Review
Advertise/Bid/Award
Design Follow-Up by CR
Construction
Post Construction Review CR Follow-Up
Post Construction Review Report Action Items
CR Attends and Provides Input to
PFR Report
CR Reviews PFR Report
CR Attends and Provides Input to
A/GR Report
CR Reviews A/GR Report
Monitor and Implement Lessons Learned for
Future Projects
Maintain CR Database
Design Parameters Meeting and Report
CR Attends and Provides Input to
PIH Report
CR Reviews PIH Report
DA/DESS/DCE and Preconstruction Engineer
ENTE
R CO
MM
ENTS
IN C
R DA
TABA
SE
18
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT EXAMPLES
19
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT EXAMPLES
20
Section & Surfacing ( ) Will the new finished top width match the Route Segment
Plan? Will additional width be provided for future overlays? ( ) Should alternate surfacing sections be considered?
( ) Can existing roadway materials be salvaged for other use? l match the Route Segment Plan? Will additional width be provided for future overlays?
( ) Should alternate surfacing sections be considered? ( ) Can existing roadway materials be salvaged for other use?
( ) Will the new finished top width match the Route Segment Plan? Will additional width be provided for future overlays?
( ) Should alternate surfacing sections be considered? ( ) Can existing roadway materials be salvaged for other use?
ALIGNMENT & GRADE REVIEW CHECKLIST (PARTIAL) Project No. Number Control No. Number Project Description: Text Date: Date Typical Section & Surfacing ( ) Will the new finished top width match the Route Segment Plan? Will additional width be provided for future overlays? ( ) Should alternate surfacing sections be considered? ( ) Can existing roadway materials be salvaged for other use? ( ) Should pulverization be utilized? Geometrics ( ) Are alignment issues addressed – inadequate stopping sight distance, sharp horizontal curves, horizontal hidden by the vertical alignment? Earthwork & Grading ( ) Is unclassified excavation or embankment-in-place appropriate for the grading? ( ) Review the mass diagram. Is the project balanced? ( ) Is borrow required – is it readily available? Can the grades or horizontal alignment be adjusted to reduce the amount of borrow? ( ) Is there a large excess of excavation? Can the grades or horizontal alignment be adjusted to reduce the excess? Where can this material be disposed? ( ) Is earthwork phasing compatible with other construction requirements? Rock Excavation ( ) Will blasting be needed? Is it allowed and have local ordinances/laws been included? Topsoil ( ) Is a topsoil source available that will meet specification requirements? ( ) Are topsoil stockpile sites available within the R/W? Constructability Issues ( ) Is there a cheaper or faster way to accomplish the work or a method that has fewer conflicts with traffic? ( ) Is special slope treatment required? If yes, how is it measured and paid? ( ) Will the proposed grade result in removal of the existing mat? What measures are included to address potential problems with the mat removal? ( ) Has the design restricted or limited available construction means and/or methods? ( ) Have areas that may restrict normal equipment use been eliminated or minimized? ( ) Can widening be accomplished on one side rather than on each side? ( ) Are temporary overload crossings necessary and have they been designated? ( ) Has overload hauling through the project been considered for large earthwork volume projects? ( ) Are roadway grading and fill widths compatible with standard construction equipment? ( ) Are there sliver fills – can they be eliminated? ( ) Can the PTW can be utilized until the new surface is completed? If so, the existing roadway material may not be available for the construction of the new roadway embankment. ( ) Pay special attention to whether specific materials types are available (where and when) during staged construction. Are they measured and paid separately from the standard grading? ( ) Is weather or time of year a critical factor?
21
SUMMARY • Constructability Reviews improve the project by:
– Increasing value – Reducing costs – Accelerating delivery – Reducing risks
• Utilize experienced construction personnel to review plans from a construction perspective
• Develop constructability review procedures and processes • Use project design stage checklists • Develop a tracking system • Be professional when communicating plan input and comments • Be an integral part of the project design team
22
SUMMARY – cont. • MDT integrates Constructability Reviews, Value Engineering
and Post Construction Reviews to enhance project development – Allows for residual implementation opportunities
• Conduct Post Construction Reviews to provide a feed-back loop of communication from the construction field crews back to the design staff
• Real time ”Change Order Review” on all active construction projects – Allows communication of construction issues, corrective actions taken,
and information sharing to be used in future constructability reviews
• All of these techniques will lead to the continued improvement of project design plans.
23
QUESTIONS/COMMENTS