florida department of transportation district seven n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Florida Department of Transportation District Seven PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Florida Department of Transportation District Seven

Florida Department of Transportation District Seven

989 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Florida Department of Transportation District Seven

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Florida Department of TransportationDistrict Seven 2014 Consultant Acquisition Plan (CAP) Workshop February 26, 2014

  2. WELCOME Paul J. Steinman, P.E. District Seven Secretary

  3. TRENDS AND CONDITIONS Jim V. Moulton, P.E. District Director Transportation Operations

  4. QUESTIONS Jim V. Moulton, Jr., P.E. Director Transportation Operations 813-975-6274

  5. TRENDS AND CONDITIONS Debbie Hunt District Director Transportation Development

  6. Where are the capacity projects?

  7. Managed Lanes

  8. GATEWAY EXPRESS N Ulmerton Rd. 690 690 686 686

  9. TAMPA BAY EXPRESS I-275 from Gateway to Howard Frankland Bridge I-275 Howard Frankland Bridge I-275/SR 60 Interchange & Veterans Connection I-275 Express to Downtown Downtown Interchange I-275 North I-4 I-75 South & North

  10. Possible Advancements

  11. POSSIBLE ADVANCEMENTS • SR 50 from Lockhart Rd to E of Remington Rd – PE • 9th St S (MLK St) from 7th Ave S to 8th Ave S – PE • SR 50/SR 50A from Cobb Rd to Broad St – PE • Hillsborough Ave from Memorial Hwy to I-275 – PD&E • I-275 @ I-4 – I-275 from Rome to MLK and I-4 from I-275 to Connector – PD&E • US 92 from I-4 to County Line – PD&E • SR 50/SR 50A Bypass from Broad St to Jefferson St – PE • SR 60 from Dover Rd to SR 39 – PE • SR 60 from Valrico to Dover Rd – PE • US 19 from N of CR 95 to N of Nebraska Ave – PE • US 19 from N or Nebraska Ave to S of Timberlane – PE • US 41 Floral City Bypass Study – PD&E

  12. QUESTIONS Debbie Hunt Director of Transportation Development 813-975-6133


  14. IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION AND CORRESPONDENCE Initiative started as an “Innovative Idea” DCE Memo 13-13 • Called for CEI and FDOT implementation of this effort immediately • Contractors encouraged to do so as well Memo of Understanding – Use of E-Commerce on Construction Contracts • Commitment from FDOT, FTBA and FICE

  15. IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION AND CORRESPONDENCE Requires Digital Signature Certificate • Cost to be included in consultant overhead • Typical cost about $120 per certificate Guidelines can be found at Www.Dot.State.Fl.Us/construction/forms/electronicsubmit/electronicformssubmit.Shtm • Agreement to use electronic signatures • Acquisition & use of electronic signatures • Providers for electronic signatures listed • Electronic submission of forms

  16. QUESTIONS Judi Sobczak District Construction Contracts Manager 813-975-6282

  17. CCEI INFORMATION SHARING Conrad Campbell, P.E. District Oak Park Resident Engineer

  18. CCEI INFORMATION SHARING Work Group 10 Contracts • Oak Park Construction Residency Interest in upcoming projects

  19. CCEI INFORMATION SHARING Things we are looking for: • CCEI demonstrates an understanding of D/B versus DBB projects • Design coordination • Full CCEI now selected from ‘Letters of Interest’ • Just a few pages and resumes – use it wisely! • Need enough information to make an informed selection

  20. CCEI INFORMATION SHARING Things we are looking for (cont.): • CCEI team’s sensitivity/awareness to businesses in project corridors • The best teams proactively address biz concerns • Proven team track record • Team members work well together • Personnel proposed = Actual project team

  21. CCEI INFORMATION SHARING Things we are looking for (cont.): • Quality/Timeliness of CO’s • Partnering • Issues are handled at the lowest level possible • ITS • Challenging/work that is late in our Roadway contracts

  22. QUESTIONS FDOT D7 Oak Park Office 4902 East 10th Avenue Tampa, FL 33605-4739 813-242-2400 Thank you!

  23. RECURRING REVIEW COMMENTS aka GROUNDHOG’S DAY AT THE D7 BIGHOUSE Frank W. Chupka, P.E. District Seven Consultant Management Administrator

  24. DRAINAGE DESIGN • Drainage maps do not adequately depict offsite drainage. • Unresolved conflicts between utilities and drainage structures. • Narrative does not support calculations for the tailwater and SHGWT elevations used for pond designs.

  25. DRAINAGE DESIGN • Storm sewer systems and drainage structures too close to the right-of-way line (constructability concerns). • Proposed sidewalks above ground potentially causing flooding problems on adjacent properties (Back of sidewalk drainage needs to be addressed).

  26. ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING • No wetland limits on cross sections(This is where we show earthwork). • Not accounting for work zones or access points (Where does construction equipment enter and where will it be placed?) • Not including draft exemption request letters or draft permit application packages with Phase II plans (required by scope).

  27. ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING • Not providing FDOT copies of correspondence submitted to regulatory agencies. • Other Environmental stuff (Bats and subaqueous utility and transmission lines).

  28. ROADWAY DESIGN Design Exceptions and Variations • Still using AASHTO 2004 (not 2011) • Design Memo format available for minor variations • Cross Slope Corrections – Document exception in absence of drainage or safety concern Typical Sections • “Match Existing” – in absence of drainage or safety concern • “New” Elements on RRR – follow new construction criteria • Shoulder Design – Apply PPM Tables 2.3.1 through 2.3.4 using Design Year volumes Approval Levels • DDE – Pavement Design and Selection Reports, Typical Sections, Variations and Exceptions • DRDE – QA/QC Plans, Driveway/Sidewalk Reports, RRR Reports & Project Design Reports

  29. STRUCTURAL DESIGN • Lack of QA/QC, use of old plans without update, mixed units, inconsistent plan notes, incorrect dimensions, etc. • The justification of the proposed alternatives in a Bridge Development Report has not been properly discussed (span arrangement, determination of minimum vertical clearance, bridge versus retaining wall, structural safety, economic, constructability and aesthetic issues).

  30. STRUCTURAL DESIGN • Bridge rehabilitation report has not been provided and the proposed scope of rehabilitation shown in the plans cannot be justified. • Gravity walls are often proposed on sloped embankments (Design Standard 6011 is intended for installation on relatively level ground at the toe).

  31. TRAFFIC DESIGN • Submit voltage drop calculations for each branch circuit and submit load analysis calculations for each branch circuit and each distribution point. • Some light poles require special spread footing foundations to avoid underground utility conflicts (Provide plans and structural calculations for these).

  32. TRAFFIC DESIGN • Lighting design needs to consider and National Electrical Safety Code (NESE) and OSHA clearance requirements with overhead lines. • Provide temporary lighting on roads with existing lighting (Note to specify all construction phases).

  33. UTILITIES • Vvh information not shown on drainage structure sheets or cross section sheets. • Show utilities on sign, signal, and lighting plans(Add note directing contractor to Utility Adjustment sheets for contact and Vvh information).

  34. UTILITIES • Make sure drainage structure and pipe labels are turned on in utility adjustment sheets and include type of utility, disposition of utility, utility owner, and method of placement (TDUM). • Also place TDUM information in utility work by Highway Contractor Agreement(UWHCA) .

  35. ALL DISCIPLINES • Provide supporting calculations: when “You do the math,” show us the math. • When referring to a design/build Request for Proposal (RFP), give us the chapter and verse. • Design variations are still needed even if substandard item is shown in design/build concept plans.

  36. ALL DISCIPLINES • Do not hesitate to call a reviewer for clarification on a comment. • Continue using 2004 AASHTO Manual (FDOT has not adopted the 2011 version) • Abbreviated variation format not to be used for ADA, horizontal clearance, or sight distance design variations.

  37. QUESTIONS Frank Chupka District Project Management Administrator 813-975-6096

  38. DIGITAL DELIVERY Rick McCall Specifications Coordinator Program Management


  40. DIGITAL DELIVERY Electronic (PEDDS) Delivery Classical E-Delivery versus Digital (Certificate) Delivery D-Delivery

  41. DIGITAL DELIVERY • New method for electronically signing & sealing production plans • Plan sets • Specifications

  42. DIGITAL DELIVERY Approved by F.B.P.E. in August 2013 Mandatory in District 7 (effective December 2013) for all final production submittals