ODOT/ACEC Partnering AwardExcellence in Highway Design

2019 Nomination Template

Project Nomination Deadline: March 15, 2019District Capital Program Administrator Final Submission Deadline:

March 21, 2019

transportation.ohio.govwww.acecohio.org

Please direct any additional questions to: Mat Mauger | Office of Consultant Services | 614-644-0623 | M at . M a u g e r @ d o t.o h i o . g ov

The nomination process has two steps:1) Consultants and/or ODOT Employees complete a draft nomination using this Word template

o Draft nominations (in MS Word format) are to be emailed to the respective ODOT District Capital Program Administrator (see the map and table below) by Friday, March 15, 2019

Please save this file using unique name(s) for your nomination(s) to avoid confusion and overwriting issues. Completed document should be no more than 25 total pages, maximum (not including the embedded picture

pages). All requested images should be included using the Picture fields available with the specific questions. Do not submit hard copies of any nomination materials, attach additional documents and do not send CD-

ROMs. Many entry fields in this form accept ‘Rich Text’ formatted material, but reformatting directly in the fields is

limited/restricted due to the templated nature of this presentation. Copying and pasting of formatted text, including bulleted text, indents, font size, etc., from other unrestricted Word files or other documents is possible and acceptable.

2) District Capital Program Administrators use this portal link (ODOT Intranet Only) to submit pre-screened/completed nomination Word format document(s) by Thursday, March 21, 2019

o Please save file(s) using unique name(s) for each nomination to avoid confusion and overwriting issues.o Each district may submit a maximum of two (2) submissions per category for final review

Please direct any additional questions to: Mat Mauger | Office of Consultant Services | 614-644-0623 | M at . M a u g e r @ d o t.o h i o . g ov

ODOT DISTRICTCAPITAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATORS

D-1: Chris Hughes(419) 999-6901

chris.hughes@dot.ohio.gov

D-2: Mike Gramza(419) 373-4466

mike.gramza@dot.ohio.govD-3: Bob Weaver

(419) 207-7158b o b . w e a v e r@ d o t . oh i o . g ov

D-4: Gery Noirot(330) 786-2270

gery.noirot@dot.ohio.govD-5: Julie Gwinn(740) 323-5240

julie.gwinn@dot.ohio.gov

D-6: Thom Slack(740) 833-8340

th o m .sla c k @ d o t . o h i o .g o v D-7: Matt Parrill(937) 497-6802

m a t t. par r i l l @ d o t . o h io. gov

D-8: Stefan Spinosa(513) 933-6639

st e f a n .s p i nos a @ d o t. o h i o .g o v D-9: Christopher

Pridemore(740) 774-9067

D-10: Eric Reed(740) 568-3951

eric.reed@dot.ohio.govD-11: Nick Susich

(330) 308-3996nick.susich@dot.ohio.gov

D-12: Dave Lastovka (216) 584-2115

Dave.Lastovka@dot.ohio.gov

Project Nomination Form

Project Name: UNI-31-0.23

Project PID: 88614

Consultant Agreement No.: 17348

County or Municipality: City of Marysville

ODOT District: ODOT District 6

Consultant Name: Northwest Consultants, Inc.

Category for which project is being nominated Category 1: Construction Value - $0 to $5,000,000

Construction Value $1,859,841.

Construction Project Number 170335

Dates of PS&E, Letting and Construction Completion

PS&E: 03/20/2017Letting: 05/11/2017Construction Completion: 07/27/2018

Name of Organization Submitting ODOT District 6

Contact person for award-related material/submittal (Name, email, phone,

mailing address)

Thom Slack District Six CPAThomas.Slack@dot.ohio.gov740-833-8340

1

Region Contact Person and their role NA

Project Personnel and their roles, including significant players from bureaus

(e.g. Structures), agencies, consultants, etc.

Holly Grimes, ODOT District Six, Project ManagerJonathan Drummond, Northwest Consultants, Project ManagerJacob Dainiel, ODOT District Six, Construction Project ManagerEdie Adams, ODOT District Six, Utilities CoordinatorMicheal Andrako, Public Service Director, City of Marysville

Award Ceremony Information:

Person(s) accepting award at ceremony (Name, Email, phone)

Jonathan Drummond HYPERLINK "mailto:jdrummond@nci-eng.com"jdrummond@nci-eng.com 419-360-0863Holly Grimes holly.grimes@dot.ohio.gov 740-833-8370

Names to show on certificate, up to 6 persons and their

companies or roles

Jonathan Drummond Northwest Consultants, Inc. Consultant Project ManagerHolly Grimes ODOT District Six, Project Manger Edie Adams ODOT District Six, Utilities Coordinator

One JPG image to be used on certificate

2

3

Executive Summary:

Overall purpose, goals, and design methodology

The purpose of this project was to replace a deficient bridge on SR-31 (N. Main St.) over Mill Creek in the City of Marysville. The project site presented a multitude of challenges for construction of the proposed bridge. In spite of these challenges ODOT, the City, and the Consultant were able to not only complete the project, but leave the site in much better condition than before.

The existing 160’ long 3-span bridge was replaced with a more hydraulically efficient 140’ long single span bridge. The superstructure consisted of weathering steel plate girders on full-height, semi-integral abutments founded on steel H-piles. Texas Classic Combination Rail was utilized along the curbline at the City’s request to separate pedestrians from vehicular traffic. Unique steel tube pedestrian-only rail was detailed for the bridge fascia.

The project site was extremely tight. In the southwest quadrant an existing commercial building addition was identified as an encroachment and removed as part of the project. This encroachment was located mere feet from the existing wingwall. In the southeast quadrant an existing grain elevator imposed construction scheduling constraints, such that the project needed to be complete prior to fall harvest season. In the northwest quadrant was a City water treatment plant, meaning several watermains were present in the area, including a 12” watermain attached to the existing bridge and a 6” watermain buried in the channel directly to the west of the bridge. In the northeast quadrant was a narrow multi-use path corridor providing access to McCarthy Park. This path was had be maintained throughout construction in order to limit 4F impacts.

There were numerous public and private utilities present, with very limited space for relocation. Reducing the overall bridge span, removing the encroaching building, and early discussions with utility owners were key to creating enough space to relocate all utilites. In the case of water, sanitary, and gas the owners were able to implement small projects ahead of the bridge project to reroute and eliminate a 6” watermain, a 10” sanitary sewer

4

& siphon, and a 2” gasmain from crossing the stream in the vicinity of the bridge. This left enough space for the 12” watermain relocation, included with the project, and poles for aerial line relocations on both sides of the bridge.

Highlight any unique aspects of the project

Since this bridge is the northern entrance to Marysville, the City desired a more aesthetically pleasing bridge rail, and no approach guardrail. To accomplish this the Consultant developed several alternatives for the City to review. The Texas Classic Combination Rail was selected, and a TL-2 Railing Adequacy Check was submitted and approved by OSE for use on this bridge. The location of the rail changed several times throughout the design process from along the curb line, to the back of the sidewalk, and back to the curb line at Stage 3. ODOT and the Consultant worked with the City to incorporate these requests and keep the project on schedule. Unique steel tube pedestrian-only railing was detailed for use on the edge of the bridge sidewalk. In the approach quadrants the Texas Classic Rail was extended off the bridge, and tapered beyond the 8’ Urban Lateral Offset prior to being terminated with tapered end sections. Concrete rail utilized sandstone colored sealer, and pedestrian rail was painted black, which was coordinated with future City projects to add to the northern gateway concept.

The most unique aspect of this project was the schedule, both during design and construction. During design it was a challenge to juggle the sometimes competing needs of ODOT, the City, utilities, private businesses, permitting agencies, and the public. Diligent coordination ensured that each party’s issues were being addressed without creating problems elsewhere, and that the project was progressing on schedule without any hidden show-stoppers. Construction sequencing was also an issue that had to be addressed during design. Demolition of the existing building needed to occur prior to utility relocations. After building demo was completed by ODOT’s contractor, aerial utilities (DP&L, Centurylink, and Charter Cable) were lined up to immediately complete their relocations in the fall of 2017. ODOT’s contractor could then complete waterline relocation and foundation work in late winter/early spring, have the bridge complete, and open the road to traffic by mid-summer of 2018, in plenty of time for farmers to deliver to the grain elevator in fall of 2018.

5

6

Judging Criteria:

A. Project Development Process

1 Project development schedule maintained

a. Consultant completion schedule, scoped vs. actual

Despite all of the unexpected issues uncovered, the evolving requests from the City, and the many utility relocations required, the project was completed within the original design schedule and sale/award dates.

2 Effective comment and conflict resolution process

ODOT and the Consultant met with the City several times thoughout the project in order to discuss opportunities to enhance the project. These face to face meetings were very effective at resolving differences in vision for the project. Ultimately this partnering made the project a success. ODOT was very accommodating with the City’s requests; the Consultant was able to incorporate these requests into the plans, sometimes with very short notice; and the City provided much needed assistance to the project, including use of City streets for the detour route and elimination of sanitary sewer conflicts prior to construction.

3 Cooperative and effective project management

The Consultant and ODOT Project Managers worked effectively together throughout this project. The Consultant PM was able to manage the design budget effectively thoughout the dynamic project development process by ensuring staff did not get too far ahead with details until he was sure all parties were on-board. If more information was needed this was communicated immediately to the ODOT PM, and work was put on hold until the issues were resolved. This made it much more challenging to complete design and QA/QC at each submittal, but allowed the Consultant to absorb several significant changes in scope without having to pursue contract modifications. This would not have been possible without the efforts of the ODOT PM to coordinate and pursue timely responses from various sources within ODOT, and ensure that

7

ODOT’s direction was applied consistently throughout the remainder of the project.

4 CES Score for project 83

5 Consultant Contract Historya. Prime Agreement – Scope and Fee Original Agreement for Preliminary Engineering, Alternatives

Evaluation Report, and Subsurface Utility Engineering - $65,206b. Modifications – Scope and Fee Modification 1 for Stage 1 thru Final Engineering, Geotechnical

Investigation, and Pre-Bid Questions - $169,707Modification 2 Structure revisions to remove the pedestrian bump outs mid-span and relocate Texas Classic rail system as requested by the City of Marsyville-$39,564Modification 3 for additional Traffic Contol work as requested by the City of Marysville-$6,926Modification 4 for On-Going Services-$3,000

B. Plan and Contract Quality

1 Project bid cost relative to budget estimates as a measure of fiscal planning

Preliminary Estimate - $1,990,650.00Final Estimate - $2,050,000.00Contract Awarded Amount - $1,859,841.33

2 Quantity variationsa. Total number of bid items on

project(s)108

b. Number of items for which the final quantity was within 2% of the quantity as let

98

3 Contract Change Ordersa. Number and value of change orders.

Explain why changes were needed10- 4 Extra work as requested by the City, 1 Extra work for Pile splicing cost, 5 Regular work for typical quantity adjustments. 001 EWCO APPR $1,080.00 10/20/2017 12/04/2017 Tree removal-City002 EWCO APPR $3,865.46 11/29/2017 03/19/2018 Waterline fittings-City

8

003 RWCO APPR $52,277.16 05/01/2018 07/23/2018 Quantity Adjustments-Regular adjustment per specs004 RWCO APPR $231.84 05/15/2018 07/23/2018 Pull Box Material Change-City005 RWCO APPR $28,917.26 10/10/2018 12/20/2018 Final Quantities-Regular adjustment per specs006 EWCO APPR $22,750.10 10/24/2018 11/30/2018 PILE SPLICING COSTS—Extra work plan revision007 EWCO APPR $7,665.43 10/30/2018 11/30/2018 Removal of Existing Footer-Extra work changed conditions008 RWCO APPR $490.82 11/01/2018 11/30/2018 Detour Signage Change-City009 EWCO APPR $1,890.21 11/01/2018 11/30/2018 Culvert Extension- Changed conditions010 FINL APPR ($3,250.21) 12/24/2018 01/08/2019 104.02

b. Number of design related changes. Explain why changes were needed

Additional Pile splicing quanity needed above what was originally called for in the plan.

c. Dollar change from “as let” cost due to CCO's and quantity revisions

$115,918.07

d. Cost change as percentage of as let cost

6%

4 Addendaa. Number of addenda issued prior to

letting2

b. General nature and change in construction cost for each addenda

Addenda 1 was issued to revise the utility note and add Intermediate coat to field painting of fascia beam. Nominal cost adjustment.Addenda 2 was issued to revise the Sheet Pile quantity, Structual Steel Camber Table and confirm bearing plate pay items. No adjustment was made to the estimate.

C. Alignment and Location Design

1 Alternativesa.

Number and general nature of alternative alignments including relationship to location of existing roadway

The proposed bridge was built on existing alignment.

9

2 Alignment fita.

Efforts to fit to topography thereby minimizing cuts and fills, allowing flatter backslopes, more gradual driveway slopes, etc.

The profile of SR-31 was increased approximately 6” to allow for the deeper superstructure of the proposed single span bridge. This was able to be mitigated while meeting all L&D criteria within 50’ of the ends of the approach slabs, allowing for minimal impacts to drives and sidewalks.

3 Design practicesa.

Safety and maintenance-related considerations incorporated into design. (Improving vision, raising grade through marshes, etc.)

During initial site visits it was noted that the end spans of the existing bridge were silted up, and the existing piers were trapping debris. This indicated that the existing bridge may have been oversized. Hydraulic analysis confirmed that a 20’ shorter single-span bridge would pass the required flow. A single span bridge allows the natural channel shape to pass under the bridge, which increases both safety and maintenance. A full channel section improves safety by virtually eliminating scour. This in combination with deep foundations and rock channel protection results in a bridge well protected from failure due to scour. A full channel section will also keep debris from accumulating at the structure, thus reducing the need for maintenance after every flood event.

D. Cost-Effective Design

1 Safety and maintenance-related considerations. Identify this impact in terms of ODOT construction cost, cost to traveling public, or cost to entire public

Eliminating the encroachment and relocating utilities was challenging and time consuming, but as a result of these efforts the ideal bridge type was able to be constructed at this site. It was tempting to utilize a more complicated structure and work around all these difficulties, but that would have resulted in a more expensive project and more difficult future projects since all of the problems encountered would still be present.

2 Project Maintainability Replacing the bridge with a shorter single-span bridge reduced the initial construction cost and future maintenance costs by eliminating 960 square feet of bridge deck. Use of weathering steel

10

eliminated the costs associated with painting the beams. Semi-integral abutments were utilized to eliminate expansion joints. This will protect the steel beams from corrosion due to leaking joints above.

E. Complexity of Design

1 Unusual, non-standard, or innovative design features and practices

The City’s request for aesthetic enhancements resulted in the use of non-standard bridge combination rail, non-standard approach rail treatment, and non-standard pedestrian rail. For the bridge rail the City desired a unique appearance, but ODOT was keen to ensure that the rail was a NHS crash test approved system. The Consultant searched the FHWA listing of approved crash shapes, and developed several non-ODOT standard options for the City to choose from. Off the bridge tapered end sections were utilized to terminate the railing. Departing ends were outside the clear zone of oncoming traffic so they could be terminated at the normal offset. Approach ends were tapered at a 1:9 slope beyond the 8 foot Urban Lateral Offset before termination. The pedestrian rail was designed from scratch by the Consultant to meet all AASHTO height, spacing, and loading requirements. Nine (9) bridge plan sheets were required to fully detail the use of non-standard railings with the required approach treatments.

2 New technology and products used N/A

3 Degree of coordination and timing Timing was absolutely critical to the successful completion of this project. During design a detailed sequence of construction was necessary in order to ensure that all environmental restriction dates were complied with and all aspects of the project could be completed in the proper order without painting the contractor into a corner. Discussions with utility companies resulted in as many relocations as possible prior to construction, however some could not be completed until the encroaching building was removed. The City and ODOT looked into selling the building demo as a separate project ahead of the bridge project but could not pull it off. At that

11

point it was decided to include the work in the bridge contract. The District asbestos inspector completed the asbestos survey in short order, and ODOT Union County Highway crews helped out by removing trees over the winter to avoid restriction dates. The contractor removed the building right after award in the summer of 2017. After building demo was completed by ODOT’s contractor, the District Utility Coordinator had the aerial utility companies (DP&L, Centurylink, and Charter Cable) lined up to immediately complete their relocations in the fall of 2017. ODOT’s contractor could then complete waterline work over the winter, demolish the existing bridge, and build the temporary work pad prior to in-stream work restrictions starting in April of 2018. Bridge construction would then take place in spring/early summer of 2018 with the road being re-opened to traffic by mid-summer of 2018, in plenty of time for farmers to deliver to the grain elevator in fall of 2018. Based on this required sequence of construction it was critical to sell the project in May 2017, or the project would have to be delayed a year. With such a small window it was crucial to maintain the design schedule, and coordinate with all parties to ensure they were prepared to do their part when their time came.

4 Number and type of controls governing Based on the different work and agencies involved, several design standards were utilizied to complete the project. ODOT Standards were utilized for the majority of bridge and roadway design. AASHTO, FHWA, and NHS Standards were defaulted to for the barrier rail design. City of Marysville Standards were utilized for the waterline relocation design.

5 Number of traffic control stages Construction was completed in one stage while traffic was maintained utilizing a detour. Due to the nature of SR-31 terminating in downtown Marysville, the designers needed to take a regional look at the role SR-31 played in the movement of traffic in and around Marysville, and attempt to effectively sign a large area. Detour signs were set up on SR-4, SR-31, SR-38, and US-33 up to 8 miles away from the bridge in order to intercept all traffic that could wind up on SR-31 going into downtown Marysville. In addition, a

12

separate truck detour route was established to keep trucks on state routes and local truck routes. The car only detour was signed utilizing the shortest available route. All local route use was coordinated with and approved by the City of Marysville and Union County.

F. Community Sensitive Design

1 Mitigation of Adverse Impact on Public During Construction

Traffic was maintained during construction with a detour. Since SR-31 begins less than a quarter of a mile south of the bridge at 5th Street in downtown Marysville, a detour route utilizing only state routes was not possible. ODOT’s efforts to work with the City on incorporating aesthetic enhancements into the bridge were reciprocated by the City by allowing ODOT to detour traffic onto local routes. This inter-agency cooperation resulted in the shortest possible detour route for the traveling public, reducing delays and inconvenience. The detour required making an acute angle turn at the intersection of SR-31 and North Maple Street. In order to mitigate issues at this intersection during the detour it was switched to an all-way stop and pavement markings were redone to make the turn more manageable. A separate truck detour route was established to help trucks avoid this intersection and stay on state routes north of Marysville.

2 Preservation of Natural Areas In the northeast quadrant of the bridge a multi-use path connects the east sidewalk of N. Main St. with McCarthy Park. Since this extension is part of the park access was maintained throughout construction to avoid 4F impacts.

3 Reestablishment of Natural Vegetation or Wetlands

N/A

4 Preservation of Historical and Archeological Features

N/A

5 Enhancement of Cultural Resources N/A

13

6 Community Sensitive Design The City indicated a desire for a more aesthetic bridge rail, placed along the curb line to separate pedestrians from vehicular traffic, that would coordinate with future projects they had planned to create a northern gateway concept. These non-standard elements were incorporated into the bridge design, utilizing color concepts provided by the City, to support their efforts.

7 Overall Aesthetic Appeal The existing deteriorated bridge was replaced with a new bridge incorporating the City’s preferred bridge railings. In addition, approach guardrail was eliminated through careful layout of the approach concrete rail. Removal of the encroaching building and the overgrowth also did a tremendous amount to improve the appearance of the area, including making the entrance to the multi-use path more inviting.

Location Map(s)

At least one high-level location map. Please attach an IMAGE FILE of your map here (take and upload a snapshot or screen capture image if the original map is only available as a PDF or other non-compatible image file format)

14

15

Photographs

Use the Picture boxes below to add up to 10 digital photos (.JPG or other compatible format) suitable for large-screen display. Before-and-after photos are encouraged. Please use the caption field to provide details on each image.

Existing Bridge UNI-31-0023 – Looking South

(photo - 16)

(photo - 17)

Finished Bridge UNI-31-0023 – Looking South

(photo - 18)

UNI-31-0023 – Texas Classic Combination Rail

(photo - 19)

UNI-31-0023 – Pedestrian Rail

(photo - 20)

Existing Southwest Quadrant – Showing Encroaching Building & Utility Pole

(photo - 21)

Setting beams once the building demolition and pole relocation were complete

(photo - 22)

Finished Southwest Quadrant – Showing Removed Building Addition & Relocated Utility Pole

(photo - 23)

Existing Channel – Showing Ineffective End Span

(photo - 24)

Finished Bridge – Showing Improved Channel

(photo - 25)

Aerial Photo Showing Modifications to Intersection of SR-31 and N. Maple Street During Detour

(photo - 26)