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

WASHINGTON, DC TRAFFIC

MONTANA TRAFFIC

WASHINGTON, DC POLITICS

MONTANA POLITICS

WASHINGTON, DC LANDSCAPE

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