Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 1 Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration District of Columbia Department of Transportation Virginia.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 1 Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration District of Columbia Department of Transportation Virginia."— Presentation transcript:

1 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 1 Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration District of Columbia Department of Transportation Virginia Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Adventures in Building Another Washington Monument Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project d. D ISTRICT D EPARTMENT O F T RANSPORTATION Shirlene Cleveland, PE Deputy Director, Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Maryland State Highway Administration Cost and Schedule Management

2 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 2 Financial Overview

3 3 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Project Overview: Financial Total Project Funds = $2.524 Billion Virginia* $635 Million Maryland* $329 Million “Special” Federal Funds $1,544 Million District of Columbia $16 Million * - From various state and/or regular federal funding sources

4 4 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Financial Plan History Initial Financial Plan Approved in Sept. 2001 – –Total Project Budget = $2.442 Billion 2002 Update Approved in March 2003 – –Total Project Budget = $2.564 Billion 2003 Update Approved in March 2004 – –Total Project Budget = $2.427 Billion 2004 Update Approved in February 2005 – –Total Project Budget = $2.449 Billion 2005 Update Approved in April 2006 – –Total Project Budget = $2.444 Billion 2006 Update Approved in March 2007 – –Total Project Budget = $2.476 Billion 2007 Update Approved in March 2008 – –Total Project Budget = $2.524 Billion – –Update is on www.wilsonbridge.com Expenditures through December 2007 = $1,873 Million On Time, On Budget

5 5 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Project Budget by Element ElementBudget % of Total Construction Contracts$1,568M62% Engineering and Program Mgmt.$309M12% Construction Administration$196M8% Right-of-Way Acquisition$182M7% Construction Contingency$162M6% Environmental/Community Mitigation$35M1% ROW Administration$21M1% Congestion Management System$21M1% Old Bridge Rehabilitation$15M1% Project Contingency$15M1% TOTAL$2,524M100%

6 6 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 36 Projects Advertised and Bid to Date in MD & VA – –$1.494 Billion in Contracts Awarded to Date – –$119 Million under budget Overall, Bids are 7.4% Below Budget Contract Bid Performance As of April 2008 (amounts shown in $million)# of contractsProject EstimateAward Amount% Under Budget River Crossing5$732.18$2632.4913.6% I-295 Interchange4$191.46$190.340.6% MD 210 Interchange3$135.12$119.0311.9% Maryland Mitigation9$16.65$14.4813.1% US 1 Interchange8$303.57$277.368.6% Telegraph Road Interchange3$228.58$256.53(12.2%) Virginia Mitigation4$4.64$3.4126.5% Totals36$1,612.20$1,493.627.4%

7 7 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Developing the Project Scope/Budget

8 8 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Developing the Project Scope

9 9 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Developing the Project Budget Cost per Mile Estimates MSHA keeps databases of costs incurred over the years for different types of work Initial budgets developed using cost/mile for roadway work and cost/SF for bridge work, depending on type of work Added extra for intense MOT required 40% contingency for all cost/mile estimates Additional 15-30% added for potential utility impacts Early right-of-way costs also included MSHA keeps databases of costs incurred over the years for different types of work Initial budgets developed using cost/mile for roadway work and cost/SF for bridge work, depending on type of work Added extra for intense MOT required 40% contingency for all cost/mile estimates Additional 15-30% added for potential utility impacts Early right-of-way costs also included

10 10 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Developing the Project Budget Signature Bridge Estimates Since signature bridges are not often built in Maryland, looked for cost estimates for similar type structures around the country Added on additional costs for unique features of the project (i.e. bascule drawspan) Added on heavy contingencies to (hopefully!) cover any unknowns Since signature bridges are not often built in Maryland, looked for cost estimates for similar type structures around the country Added on additional costs for unique features of the project (i.e. bascule drawspan) Added on heavy contingencies to (hopefully!) cover any unknowns

11 11 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Developing the Project Budget Major Quantities Estimate As the Project progressed into Preliminary Engineering stage, major quantities estimates were prepared Quantities and costs for major categories of Grading, Structures, Paving, Shoulders, Major Landscaping and Major Traffic and Utility Items were estimated Remaining category items’ (MOT & Preliminary Items, Drainage, Other Landscaping and Other Traffic and Utility Items) costs estimated as a percentage of the major categories Right-of-way and utility estimates also updated Contingency of 15-25% added to estimate, depending on apparent risk for particular area of work As the Project progressed into Preliminary Engineering stage, major quantities estimates were prepared Quantities and costs for major categories of Grading, Structures, Paving, Shoulders, Major Landscaping and Major Traffic and Utility Items were estimated Remaining category items’ (MOT & Preliminary Items, Drainage, Other Landscaping and Other Traffic and Utility Items) costs estimated as a percentage of the major categories Right-of-way and utility estimates also updated Contingency of 15-25% added to estimate, depending on apparent risk for particular area of work

12 12 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Developing the Project Budget Refining the Estimates Unified Preliminary Investigation (PI) or 30% Plans prepared for the main bridge and each interchange to facilitate better cost estimating Work broken into contracts based on construction and MOT needs The design of work that was needed first was advanced first, while the rest of the work remained at the PI stage Detailed cost estimates prepared as design advanced beyond the PI stage Contingencies at Semi-Final or 65% Plans was 15% and 5% for Final Review or 90% Plans Unified Preliminary Investigation (PI) or 30% Plans prepared for the main bridge and each interchange to facilitate better cost estimating Work broken into contracts based on construction and MOT needs The design of work that was needed first was advanced first, while the rest of the work remained at the PI stage Detailed cost estimates prepared as design advanced beyond the PI stage Contingencies at Semi-Final or 65% Plans was 15% and 5% for Final Review or 90% Plans

13 13 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Developing the Project Budget The Financial Plan The FHWA requires Financial Plans for all megaprojects (>$1 billion), updated yearly FP shows expenditures, updated project schedule, projected costs yet to be incurred (with appropriate inflation factors), how projected costs were estimated, how costs will be covered, and changes in the total cost of the Project FP encourages cost accountability Most contracts could not be advertised for construction until a Financial Plan was adopted (Dredging and Foundations contracts were exempted in the federal bill that provided their funding) The FHWA requires Financial Plans for all megaprojects (>$1 billion), updated yearly FP shows expenditures, updated project schedule, projected costs yet to be incurred (with appropriate inflation factors), how projected costs were estimated, how costs will be covered, and changes in the total cost of the Project FP encourages cost accountability Most contracts could not be advertised for construction until a Financial Plan was adopted (Dredging and Foundations contracts were exempted in the federal bill that provided their funding)

14 14 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Developing the Project Budget Construction Contingencies 24.5% contingency added to each construction contract: –4% to pay for GEC –10% for construction changes or claims –10% for construction contract management –0.5% for miscellaneous 24.5% contingency added to each construction contract: –4% to pay for GEC –10% for construction changes or claims –10% for construction contract management –0.5% for miscellaneous

15 15 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Staying “On Time, On Budget”

16 16 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bidding & Award Schedule: Bridge & Maryland Approach Date Contract Awarded Millions of Construction Dollars 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 BR-1$14.5M9.14.2000 BR-2$125.4M3.22.2001 BR-3A$186.0M11.7.2002 BR-3B$115.5M2.13.2003 BR-3C$191.2M5.1.2003 MA-1A$9.4M6.7.2001 MA-1$42.4M9.20.2001 MA-2&3$45.4M10.31.2002 MA-4$93.2M2.17.2005 MB-1&2$18.7M12.18.2003MB-3$40.8M3.31.2005 MB-4$59.5M11.10.2005

17 17 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-2 Foundations Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:November 20, 2000 148 Plan sheets / 510 IFB pages # Addenda:10 # Questions:182 Bids Opened:March 22, 2001 Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:November 20, 2000 148 Plan sheets / 510 IFB pages # Addenda:10 # Questions:182 Bids Opened:March 22, 2001 Foundation Locations (V7 thru M10) Foundation Locations (V7 thru M10)

18 18 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-2 628 Round Steel Piles (4’ – 6’ Diameter) 350 Square Concrete Piles (24” x 24”) Regular Cofferdams Large Cofferdam Boxes Tremie Concrete Pile Concrete Footing Concrete Substructure Concrete 628 Round Steel Piles (4’ – 6’ Diameter) 350 Square Concrete Piles (24” x 24”) Regular Cofferdams Large Cofferdam Boxes Tremie Concrete Pile Concrete Footing Concrete Substructure Concrete 114,100 Linear Feet 14,100 Linear Feet 24 4 27,000 Cubic Yards 11,300 Cubic Yards 55,700 Cubic Yards 19,500 Cubic Yards 114,100 Linear Feet 14,100 Linear Feet 24 4 27,000 Cubic Yards 11,300 Cubic Yards 55,700 Cubic Yards 19,500 Cubic Yards Bid Price Contractor Tidewater/ Kiewit/Clark McLean/ Cianbro Cashman Weeks/Lane/ Interbeton Modern Continental $0 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $125,396,511 $128,480,712 $134,122,525 $134,454,905 $187,347,360 -5.2% +1.6% -2.9% +1.4% +41.6% Approximate Quantities $150,000,000 $200,000,000 Engineer’s Estimate $132,297,880 Engineer’s Estimate $132,297,880 $25,000,000 $75,000,000 $125,000,000 $175,000,000

19 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 19 Contract BR-2 Bridge Foundations Largest Steel Pile 225 Feet Long – 72” in Diameter Hunting Tower 100 Feet @ 48” Dia. 38,200 LF @ 54” Dia.21,060 LF @ 66” Dia. 25,420 LF @ 72” Dia.29,470 LF = 22 Miles A Total of 640 Steel Pipe Piles:

20 20 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-2

21 21 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project I-295 Contract MA-1 Ramps E, F, E-1 Designer:JMT / WRA Joint Venture Advertised:June 25, 2001 597 Plan sheets / 767 IFB pages # Addenda:6 # Questions:15 Bids Opened:September 20, 2001 Designer:JMT / WRA Joint Venture Advertised:June 25, 2001 597 Plan sheets / 767 IFB pages # Addenda:6 # Questions:15 Bids Opened:September 20, 2001 Ramps E & F Ramp E-1

22 22 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project I-295 Contract MA-1 Paving Earthwork 4 Retaining Walls 6 Bridges (25 Spans) 835 Steel H-Piles Paving Earthwork 4 Retaining Walls 6 Bridges (25 Spans) 835 Steel H-Piles 62,250 tons 343,000 Cubic Yards 1,550 Square Yards 168,700 Square Feet of Deck 66,100 Linear Feet 62,250 tons 343,000 Cubic Yards 1,550 Square Yards 168,700 Square Feet of Deck 66,100 Linear Feet Bid Price Contractor Wagman Dick Corp. Corman Flippo Cherry Hill Fru-Con Shirley / Tidewater Shirley / Tidewater $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 $35,000,000 $40,000,000 $45,000,000 $50,000,000 Approximate Quantities $42,435,333 $43,285,624 $43,466,557 $45,548,442 $45,995,030 $46,689,878 $47,238,193 +7.0% +16.0% +9.1% +14.8% +9.6% +17.7% +19.1% Engineer’s Estimate $39,664,584 Engineer’s Estimate $39,664,584

23 23 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project I-295 Contract MA-1

24 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 24 Challenge: Re-bidding Contract BR-3

25 25 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3 Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:August 13, 2001 1,204 Plan sheets / 1,195 IFB pages # Addenda:7 # Questions:130 Bids Opened:December 13, 2001 Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:August 13, 2001 1,204 Plan sheets / 1,195 IFB pages # Addenda:7 # Questions:130 Bids Opened:December 13, 2001

26 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 26 Bid Opening Day-December 13, 2001  Engineer’s Estimate... $487 million, the largest construction contract ever advertised by the Maryland State Highway Administration  One Bid... For $860 million by the joint venture of Kiewit, Tidewater & Clark (KTC), 75% (or $373 million) above the estimate  Funding Responsibility... By agreement in the Project’s Financial Plan, Maryland was responsible for covering any cost overruns on its contracts  Budget Implications... The difference between bid and estimate could not be covered by the existing budget and no readily available sources of additional funding (such as increased tolls). For the contract to build the substructure and superstructure of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge...

27 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 27 Washington Post-December 14, 2001

28 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 28 Development of Engineer’s Estimate u u Value Engineering review of initial estimates conducted by Project Team in 1999. u u Engineer’s Estimate prepared by bridge design consultant 1999-2001 u u Detailed review and approval by Federal Highway Administration u u Acceptance by the USDOT Office of the Inspector General

29 29 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3 Precast Segment Concrete Substructure Concrete for abutments Substructure Concrete for piers Superstructure Concrete Fabricated Structural Steel 410 Concrete Piles (24” Square) 265 Round Steel Piles (2.5’ – 4.5’ Diameter) Precast Segment Concrete Substructure Concrete for abutments Substructure Concrete for piers Superstructure Concrete Fabricated Structural Steel 410 Concrete Piles (24” Square) 265 Round Steel Piles (2.5’ – 4.5’ Diameter) 40,400 Cubic Yards 4,500 Cubic Yards 50,200 Cubic Yards 50,900 Cubic Yards 101,700,000 Pounds 19,200 LF 45,000 LF 40,400 Cubic Yards 4,500 Cubic Yards 50,200 Cubic Yards 50,900 Cubic Yards 101,700,000 Pounds 19,200 LF 45,000 LF Bid Price Contractor Kiewit/Tidewater/Clark $0 $200,000,000 $400,000,000 $859,954,042 +76.5% Approximate Quantities $500,000,000 $900,000,000 Engineer’s Estimate $487,193,589 Engineer’s Estimate $487,193,589 $100,000,000 $300,000,000 $600,000,000 $700,000,000 $800,000,000

30 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 30 How Could This Have Happened?

31 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 31 Potential Contractor Issues Resulting in Limited Competition  Uncertainty in the economy (especially after Sept. 11)  Contract size / complexity  Surety bonding issues  Many mega-transportation projects across the US had a concurrent bidding period  Many contract specifications were not seen as "contractor friendly”  Uncertainty about the Project Labor Agreement (PLA)

32 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 32 Immediate Decisions  Preserve the Approved Bridge Concept  Continue Building the Bridge’s Foundations  Act Quickly, but Get it Right  Collect the Best Advice Available

33 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 33 Independent Review Committee to Help Understand the BR-3 Bid  Committee of nationally recognized construction and design experts is providing an independent evaluation of the factors that inhibited competition and resulted in bid prices far in excess of the engineer’s estimate.  Evaluation includes recommendations that the MSHA will consider in gaining additional competition and reduced bid prices, such as; negotiating with the sole bidder. re-advertisement of the project. repackaging the bid documents into smaller contracts and re-advertising. Changes to the design of the project including value engineering recommendations, and changes in bid requirements that could result in more competition and reduced cost, are also being evaluated.  Committee of nationally recognized construction and design experts is providing an independent evaluation of the factors that inhibited competition and resulted in bid prices far in excess of the engineer’s estimate.  Evaluation includes recommendations that the MSHA will consider in gaining additional competition and reduced bid prices, such as; negotiating with the sole bidder. re-advertisement of the project. repackaging the bid documents into smaller contracts and re-advertising. Changes to the design of the project including value engineering recommendations, and changes in bid requirements that could result in more competition and reduced cost, are also being evaluated. Mission of Committee

34 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 34 Membership on the Independent Review Committee Tom Warne Chairman Charles B. Perry II John R. Lamberson Delon Hampton Webb W. Hayes William A. Weseman Arun M. Shirole Clifford Freyermuth Bob Ferguson

35 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 35 Independent Review Committee Initiatives  Value Engineering (VE) Study  Contract Documents Review  Contractor Interviews  Re-advertisement Scenarios

36 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 36 Review of Contract Documents  Were Requirements too Difficult / Confusing / Unclear ?  Were Contract Provisions Burdensome to Contractor ?

37 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 37 Interviews with Contractors  Constructability  Schedule  Availability of Materials  Bonding / Insurance  Contract Oversight  Project Labor Agreement  Contract Terms  Contract Size  Competition from Other Megaprojects  Environmental Issues Potential Bidders Were Asked Their Perceptions Regarding:

38 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 38 Objectives for Proceeding  Minimize Delay  Increase Competition  Decrease Cost of the Structure

39 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 39 Minimize Delay  Move Some Work to Other Contracts  Advertise the Bascule Work ASAP

40 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 40 Increase Competition  Break Contract into Three Smaller Contracts  Stagger Ad Dates of the Three Contracts  Clarify PLA Requirements  Make Contracts More Contractor Friendly  Conduct Nationwide Marketing Campaign

41 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 41 Re-Advertisement Scenario ( Advertise 3 Contracts )Bascule(BR-3A) MD Marine Work (BR-3C) VA Land-based Work (BR-3B) Work (BR-3B)

42 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 42 Bascule Span Construction BR-3B BR-3A BR-3C Key DatesBR3A Bascule BR-3B VA Approach BR-3C MD Approach AdvertisementJuly 2, 2002Oct. 15, 2002Jan. 7, 2003 Bid OpeningNov. 7, 2002Feb. 13, 2003May 1, 2003 Actual NTPFeb. 21, 2003April 22, 2003June 13, 2003 Est. CompletionAug. 15, 2008Oct. 17, 2008Dec. 31, 2008

43 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 43 Marketing Outreach  Contractors were notified in writing of project's progress  Advertisements were placed in major trade media  Personal calls were made to construction firms to: Inform of changes to contract Encourage to consider bidding Request further suggestions for improving the project

44 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 44 Refinements to Specifications  Reduced performance/payment bonds to 50%  Reduced insurance requirements  Lowered Retainage Provisions  Increased Mobilization Cap from 10% to 15%  Provided Lump Sum breakdowns  Identified VE suggestions  Allowed Payment for stored materials  Clarified PLA Requirement

45 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 45 Value Engineering Changes  Steel box girders replaced with steel plate girders  Options of pre-casting piers or cast in place piers  V-piers refined to simplify tie beams and knuckle connection  Structural elements redesigned to increase uniformity and repeatability

46 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 46 Bidding Results for BR-3A, BR-3B, and BR-3C  18 contractors submitted bids for contracts BR-3A, BR-3B, and BR-3C either singly or as part of joint ventures  BR-3A (Bascule Contract) attracted 5 bidding teams Low Bid: American Bridge/Edward Kramer & Sons for $186 million 10.7 % over the estimate  BR-3B (Virginia Approach) attracted 7 bidding teams Low Bid: Granite/Corman Construction for $115.5 million 27.7% under the estimate  BR-3C (Maryland Approach) attracted 4 bidding teams Low Bid: Edward Kramer & Sons/American Bridge/Trumbull for $191 million 25.0% under the estimate

47 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 47 Washington Post on the Re-bids

48 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 48 Lessons Learned  Avoid advertising at the same time as other signature bridges, if possible  Remember that when it comes to signature bridges, the owner needs contractors more than they need the owner  Reach out to the contracting community early and often to spark and maintain interest  Try to make the contract terms contractor friendly  Remove as much uncertainty as possible from the contract prior to advertising  Emphasize the owner’s active involvement

49 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 49 Lessons Learned (Continued)  Must balance need for competition with risks associated with multiple contractor interfaces  Use extreme caution when incorporating anything into a contract that might lessen competition  Techniques exist to mitigate contract interface risk, but no techniques exist to mitigate for a lack of competition

50 50 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3A Bascule Spans Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:July 2, 2002 585 Plan sheets / 815 IFB pages # Addenda:5 # Questions:206 Bids Opened:November 7, 2002 Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:July 2, 2002 585 Plan sheets / 815 IFB pages # Addenda:5 # Questions:206 Bids Opened:November 7, 2002 Work Area

51 51 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3A CIP Bascule Concrete Fabricated Structural Steel Stainless Rebar Regular Rebar CIP Bascule Concrete Fabricated Structural Steel Stainless Rebar Regular Rebar 31,812 Cubic Yards 14,105,000 Pounds 1,933,000 Pounds 6,073,000 Pounds 31,812 Cubic Yards 14,105,000 Pounds 1,933,000 Pounds 6,073,000 Pounds Bid Price Contractor American Bridge/ Kraemer Cianbro/ Weeks Tidewater/ Traylor Perini/ Tutor-Saliba Frucon/ Cleveland Bridge $0 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $185,919,836 $221,263,100 $241,958,000 $242,276,788 $244,740,557 +10.7% +44.3% +31.8% +44.1% +45.8% Approximate Quantities $150,000,000 $250,000,000 Engineer’s Estimate $164,896,736 Engineer’s Estimate $164,896,736 $200,000,000

52 52 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3A

53 53 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3A

54 54 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3B Virginia Approach Spans Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:October 14, 2002 484 Plan sheets / 335 IFB pages # Addenda:5 # Questions:123 Bids Opened:February 13, 2003 Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:October 14, 2002 484 Plan sheets / 335 IFB pages # Addenda:5 # Questions:123 Bids Opened:February 13, 2003 Work Area

55 55 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3B Bid Price Contractor Granite/ Corman Archer Western Trumbull Cianbro/ Weeks Tidewater/ Lane Fru-Con Facchina $0 $25,000,000 $50,000,000 $75,000,000 $100,000,000 $125,000,000 $150,000,000 $175,000,000 $115,505,592 $117,067,449 $119,065,913 $129,420,989 $130,868,065 $136,014,950 $157,963,876 -27.7% -18.1% -26.7% -19.0% -25.5% -14.9% -1.1% Engineer’s Estimate $159,776,873 Engineer’s Estimate $159,776,873 Superstructure Concrete 410 each 24” Square Concrete Piles Fabricated Structural Steel Epoxy Coated Rebar Superstructure Concrete 410 each 24” Square Concrete Piles Fabricated Structural Steel Epoxy Coated Rebar 18,570 Cubic Yards 19,200 Linear Feet 27,269,000 Pounds 5,799,000 Pounds 18,570 Cubic Yards 19,200 Linear Feet 27,269,000 Pounds 5,799,000 Pounds Approximate Quantities

56 56 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3B

57 57 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3B

58 58 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3C Maryland Approach Spans Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:January 6, 2003 509 Plan sheets / 425 IFB pages # Addenda:6 # Questions:128 Bids Opened:May 1, 2003 Designer:PTG (Parsons) Advertised:January 6, 2003 509 Plan sheets / 425 IFB pages # Addenda:6 # Questions:128 Bids Opened:May 1, 2003 Work Area

59 59 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3C Bid Price Contractor Kraemer/ American Bridge/ Trumbull Fru-Con Tidewater/ Traylor Cianbro/ Cherry Hill $0 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000 $200,000,000 $191,182,746 $197,511,947 $203,090,016 $213,278,210 -25.0% -22.5% -20.3% -16.3% $275,000,000 Engineer’s Estimate $254,895,721 Engineer’s Estimate $254,895,721 Pier Concrete Superstructure Concrete Fabricated Structural Steel Epoxy Coated Rebar 165 each Round Steel (3’ – 4.5’ Diameter) Piles Pier Concrete Superstructure Concrete Fabricated Structural Steel Epoxy Coated Rebar 165 each Round Steel (3’ – 4.5’ Diameter) Piles 35,900 Cubic Yards 27,200 Cubic Yards 40,003,000 Pounds 11,346,300 Pounds 25,500 Linear Feet 35,900 Cubic Yards 27,200 Cubic Yards 40,003,000 Pounds 11,346,300 Pounds 25,500 Linear Feet Approximate Quantities $25,000,000 $75,000,000 $125,000,000 $175,000,000 $250,000,000 $225,000,000

60 60 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3C

61 61 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Bridge Contract BR-3C

62 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 62 Higher Expectations for the Budget Budget control is crucial  The public, the press, elected officials and the FHWA expect megaprojects to be built within the budget  A Project Financial Plan helps assure budget accountability  The Project budget should have adequate contingencies to cover potential field changes/claims

63 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 63 Completed WWB Bridge

64 Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 64 Any Questions?


Download ppt "Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 1 Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration District of Columbia Department of Transportation Virginia."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google