slide1
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
A Synthesis of Highway Practice

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 30

A Synthesis of Highway Practice - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 92 Views
  • Uploaded on

David C. Wilson, P.Eng., CVS. 2004 Government VM Conference Montreal, QC. A Synthesis of Highway Practice. Value Engineering Applications in Transportation. Preliminary Results Presentation. This Presentation…. Five Aspects:. VE in Transportation – History Lesson. Study Objectives.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'A Synthesis of Highway Practice' - jennica


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1
David C. Wilson, P.Eng., CVS

2004 Government VM Conference Montreal, QC

A Synthesis of Highway Practice

Value Engineering

Applications in Transportation

Preliminary Results Presentation

slide2
This Presentation…
  • Five Aspects:
  • VE in Transportation – History Lesson
  • Study Objectives
  • Survey Approach and Literature Review
  • Key Observations
  • Future Directions and Needs
history lesson
History Lesson
  • 1940’s – VE development in manufacturing
  • 1950’s – US Government (Bureau of Ships)
  • 1960’s – Incentives in construction contracts
  • 1970’s
    • 1970, Federal-aid Highway Act required VE
    • 1973, FHWA appointed VE Coordinator; encourages VE
    • 1975, FHWA/NHI VE training program initiated
  • 1980’s – AASHTO recognizes VE; Guidelines
history lesson4
History Lesson
  • 1990’s
    • 1991, ISTEA permitted FHWA to revisit VE requirement (encourage vs. require)
    • 1993, OMB Circular A-131 VE requirement
    • 1995, National Highway Designation Act
      • $25M threshold on federal-aid NHS projects
    • 1997, FHWA Regulation 23 CFR Part 627 response
    • 1999, AASHTO Guidelines revised
  • 2000’s
    • 2002, Final ruling on D/B VE requirements
history lesson5
History Lesson
  • NCHRP 78 (1981)
    • VE primarily on standards and specifications
    • Few DOT’s active at the time
    • DOT VE Pioneers
      • California – 1969
      • Idaho and Virginia – 1973
      • Minnesota – 1975
      • Florida – 1976
      • New Mexico – 1977
      • Oregon and Pennsylvania - 1979
nchrp 35 04 study objectives approach
NCHRP 35-04 Study Objectives/Approach
  • Summarize current practices/programs
  • Focus
    • Policies, guidelines, project selection
    • Education and awareness
    • Applications
    • Implementation
    • Monitoring
    • Future Needs
  • Approach
    • Extensive DOT survey
    • Literature Review
survey
Survey
  • 46 question survey developed
  • Distribution
    • NCHRP sent survey to 52 DOTs in United States
    • TAC sent survey to Canadian DOTs and Cities
    • Toll Authorities not included
    • Federal Lands recently received survey
  • Response
    • 37 US DOTs; 4 Canadian DOT’s
    • 3 Cities (New York; Ottawa; Winnipeg)
survey8
Did not respond

to survey

Note: Puerto Rico did not respond (not shown)

Survey

US DOT Responses Still Required

literature review
Literature Review
  • Scope
    • North America
  • Primary Sources
    • AASHTO
    • FHWA
    • Miles Foundation
    • Conference Proceedings
    • Journals
    • Universities
key observations
Key Observations
  • Developing policy and guidelines
    • FHWA VE Regulation serves as basis in US
    • No common federal requirement in Canada
    • Selected DOTs
      • Developed specific guidelines
      • Developed manuals
        • Separate manuals
        • Chapters within Design Manuals
key observations12
Key Observations
  • Selecting Projects
    • Generally US DOTs use $25M threshold
    • Some variation examples
      • Nevada - $10M (if policy enacted)
      • Pennsylvania, Ohio - $20M
      • New Hampshire - $50M
      • Virginia, Alaska, Ontario - $10M
    • Rarely on small projects
    • Build stakeholders consensus
    • Validate project scope or resolve issues
    • “Because we have to!”
key observations13
Key Observations
  • Comparative benchmarks
    • 1981 (NCHRP Synthesis 78)
      • Primarily on standards and specifications
      • Rarely projects
    • 2004 (NCHRP Synthesis - New)
      • Rarely standards and specifications
      • Primarily on projects
key observations14
Key Observations
  • Team Leaders
    • Majority require CVS as Team Leader
    • AVS and VMP generally not permitted
    • Most require a PE as a leader
  • Job Plans
    • Generally similar to SAVE Job Plan
    • Variations generally expand basic steps
      • Caltrans has 13 step job plan
key observations15
Key Observations
  • Education and Awareness
    • Training
      • FHWA/NHI; Consultants; SAVE Conference
    • 70% of DOTs do not have a formal program
    • 19 DOT’s with training programs in place (5-10 yrs)
      • California – 1,200 staff
      • Virginia – 2,300 (1,500 still with VDOT)
      • Washington, New Jersey, Ontario – 350 each
      • Michigan, North Carolina, Arizona - < 20 each
    • Budget constraints have impacted training
key observations16
Key Observations
  • VE Related Tools
    • Most Popular
      • Cost models
      • FAST diagrams
      • Evaluation matrices
    • Emerging
      • Project Performance Measures
      • Risk registers
      • Cause-Effect (Wishbone diagram)
      • Choosing By Advantages (long term opportunity)
key observations17
Key Observations
  • Study Duration
    • Typically 3-5 days; sometimes split workshops
    • DOT Motivation
      • Staff availability
      • VE study costs
    • Pressures on VE Team
      • Selecting ideas
      • Evaluating ideas
    • Results/quality may be affected if not enough time allocated to workshop
key observations18
Key Observations
  • Evaluating/Shortlisting Ideas - Criteria
    • Project cost
    • Constructability
    • Road safety
    • Traffic staging
    • Schedule impacts
      • Right-of-way
      • Environmental
key observations19
Key Observations
  • Emerging Evaluation Approaches
    • User delay
      • During construction
      • Post-construction
    • Road safety
      • Explicit consideration of crash costs
      • Human factors reviews
  • Reaching consensus
    • 60% of DOTs use open discussions to reach agreement
key observations20
Key Observations
  • Acceptance of VE Proposals
    • ± 60% of DOTs have form of implementation strategy or meeting in place
      • Michigan, Ontario, California have meetings
      • New York permits Regional Offices to decide on VE proposals
    • VE Organization Reporting Relationship
      • Primarily part of Design Branch
      • Some report to Financial Branch
        • New York City
        • Virginia
key observations21
Key Observations
  • Monitoring VE Performance
    • FHWA reporting requirements typically govern
      • Focused on ROI
        • Construction costs
        • Study costs
        • Savings (design or construction – VECP)
    • Performance Improvement
      • California
      • Florida
      • Virginia
      • New Mexico
      • Washington
key observations22
Key Observations

FHWA Program Report

Top 10 States – VE Expenditures

Source: FHWA

key observations23
Key Observations

Source: WSDOT

threats and opportunities
Threats and Opportunities
  • Education
    • Refresh knowledgeable workforce
      • DOT staff attrition or promotion
      • Consultant demographics
    • SAVE Module I and II
      • Training courses need to evolve
      • Permit more diverse VE-related tools
    • NHI Courses
      • Maintain access to DOTs
threats and opportunities25
Threats and Opportunities
  • Project Scope and Selection
    • Opportunities to expand VE
      • Smaller projects (lower thresholds)
      • Non-NHS federal-aid projects (non-mandated)
      • Standards and specifications
  • Measuring Performance
    • Consider project performance improvement
      • Project performance measures
      • Tracking database (racing forms)
threats and opportunities26
Threats and Opportunities
  • Stakeholder Involvement
    • Value planning
    • Value-based design charettes
  • VE Acceptance
    • Defining implementation process
      • Detailed responses
      • Due Diligence
    • Declaring a “Champion”
      • Managing the VE proposals
      • Managing the decision-making system
research needs challenges
Research Needs/Challenges
  • Key Challenges
    • How can we improve the readiness of the VE community?
    • How can safety, risk, user delay and other user costs be effectively considered?
    • What is the most appropriate method to measure project performance?
    • What role will emerging evaluation techniques play in future decision-making?
    • How can links be forged with other assessment tools?
slide28
Summary…
  • Five Aspects:
  • VE in Transportation – History Lesson
  • Study Objectives
  • Survey Approach and Literature Review
  • Key Observations
  • Future Directions and Needs
slide29
David C. Wilson, P.Eng., CVS

2004 Government VM Conference Montreal, QC

A Synthesis of Highway Practice

Value Engineering

Applications in Transportation

Preliminary Results Presentation

slide30
Contact

David C. Wilson, P.Eng., CVS

Vice President

NCE Limited

2800 Fourteenth Avenue, Suite 206

Markham, ON, L3R 0E4

T (905) 943-4443

F (905) 943-4449

[email protected]

ad