1 / 25

Alternate Bidding in Missouri

Alternate Bidding in Missouri. Transportation Estimators Association Annual Conference November 2-4, 2005 – Daytona Beach, FL. Interstate 44 … South-Central Missouri. TODAY’S PRESENTATION. Background Team Members Goals of the Team Risks Taken Outcomes Next Steps. Background .

riva
Download Presentation

Alternate Bidding in Missouri

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Alternate Bidding in Missouri Transportation Estimators Association Annual Conference November 2-4, 2005 – Daytona Beach, FL Interstate 44 … South-Central Missouri

  2. TODAY’S PRESENTATION • Background • Team Members • Goals of the Team • Risks Taken • Outcomes • Next Steps

  3. Background • Last formal review in 1998 • Issues with previous methods (Pro/Con) • Industry concerns • Public told us: • “We want smoother pavements.” • “Get in; Get out; Stay out!”

  4. Background Why now? • Dwindling financial resources • More emphasis on maintenance instead of new construction • Establishment of department goals • Publication of RDT Pavement Report (2002)

  5. Team Members MoDOT + Industry • MoDOT • FHWA • ACPA • MAPA • Contractors • (2 asphalt, 2 concrete)

  6. Goals of the Team Two desired outcomes … Provide public stakeholders with: • The best pavement product that can be delivered w/in current financial projections. • A clear understanding of pavement design and type selection process.

  7. Goals of the Team • Maintain two strong industries. ASPHALT CONCRETE

  8. Remaining arterials NHS Pavement Team Consideration Policy Decision Goals of the Team Collectors 9,000 miles of MoDOT’s system carry 86 percent of the traffic (NHS and remaining arterials).

  9. Risks Taken • Existing risk if no action taken. • Efforts by industry to mandate legislatively • Inviting industry to the table. • Could parochial biases be put aside? • Could discussions remain focused on topic? • Alternate bids • Would more competitive bids be realized? • Organizational risk. • Avoid skepticism & resistance to change

  10. Outcomes Life-Cycle Cost Adjustment Worksheet

  11. LCCA Worksheet

  12. LCCA Worksheet

  13. LCCA Worksheet

  14. Alt. Pavement Update for Jobs Thru June 2005 with LCCA Factor • 24 Alternate Projects to Date ($320.7 mil) • 21 Full Depth ($295.3 mil) • 3 Rehabilitation ($25.4 mil) • Full Depth • 12 Asphalt Awards ($170.4 mil) • 9 Concrete Awards ($124.9 mil) • Rehabilitation • 1 Asphalt Award ($2.6 mil) • 2 Concrete Awards ($22.8 mil)

  15. Results – Difference in Low Bids • Low PC Bids vs. Low AC Bids LCCA Factor not Applied • PC Total – $223,509,000 • AC Total - $220,580,000 • Difference - $2,929,000 (1.3%) • Low PC Bids vs. Low AC Bids LCCA Factor Applied • PC Total – $223,509,000 • AC Total - $231,411,000 • Difference - $7,902,000 (3.5%) LCCA Factor has Determined Low Bid 2 Times since October 2003.

  16. Results – Over 2 Lane Miles

  17. Results – Over 2 Lane Miles

  18. Other Facts • All Alt jobs with no LCCA have Asphalt awards • AC price Average for alternate paving projects is $36.78/ton or 15.7% lower than the 3yr ac average of $43.62/ton. • Concrete CY equivalent price for alternate paving projects is $96.77/CY or 6.3% lower than the 3 yr pc avg. of $103.28

  19. Outcomes • Pavement Rehabilitation Strategies • For existing Portland cement concrete (PCC), both plain and HMA overlaid • Unbonded JPCP overlays • HMA overlays on rubblized PCC • Transition from existing pavement design model to new model (Mechanistic-Empirical).

  20. Outcomes • Clearly Written, Established Process • Readable & Understandable • Consistent & Efficient

  21. Next Steps • Phase two • Implement new pavement design process. • Develop calibration model for Missouri roadway conditions. • Subsequent generation of M-E designs for pavement types selected by the MoDOT/Industry Pavement Team. Will result in variable pavement thicknesses dependent upon local conditions.

  22. Next Steps ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED • Some of the issues yet to be resolved: • Finalize costs to be included in LCCA. • I.e., user costs, vehicle operation costs, etc. • Review results from initial alternate bid pavement projects. • Is staged construction a valid design consideration? • Are full-depth shoulders cost effective?

  23. Next Steps ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED • Some of the issues yet to be resolved: • Should noise impact and friction become pavement design considerations? • Are recycled pavement savings tangible and should they be included in LCCA?

  24. Closing • We are committed to: • Provide the best value to our customers. • Keep industry involved as we learn more. Questions? Full report available on line at: www.modot.gov/newsandinfo/PavementTypeSelection.htm

  25. Outcomes • New Pavement Strategies • Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement (JPCP), or • Conventional Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) • Polymer Modified Asphalt (PMA) – top 2 lifts on most heavily traveled NHS & principal arterial routes • Stone Matrix Asphalt (SMA) – top lift on interstates

More Related