Sellwood Bridge May 8, 2018 Project Overview Project Overview

Sellwood Bridge May 8, 2018 Project Overview Project Overview

<p><strong>SELLWOOD BRIDGE </strong></p><p><strong>MAY 8, 2018 </strong></p><p><strong>PROJECT OVERVIEW </strong></p><p><strong>PROJECT OVERVIEW </strong></p><p>• Procurement: CMGC • Owner: Multnomah County • Location: Portland, Oregon • Contract Value: $227,000,000 • Construction Timeline: </p><p>• Started: December 2011 • Completed: January 2017 </p><p><strong>PROJECT TEAM </strong></p><p>• Agencies </p><p>• Multnomah County • City of Portland • Oregon Department of <br>Transportation </p><p>• Federal Highway Administration </p><p>• Designers/Consultants </p><p>• T. Y. Lin International • CH2M Hill • David Evans and Associates </p><p>• General Contractor </p><p>• Slayden/Sundt Joint Venture </p><p><strong>HISTORY </strong></p><p>• Originally a Ferry Crossing • Original Sellwood Bridge - Opened 1925 • In depth inspections - mid 1980’s &amp; 2003 </p><p>• Further “Band aids” were installed • Loads Restrictions enforced in 2004 </p><p>• In-depth inspection/evaluation 2005 </p><p>• Structural rating - 2 out of 100 </p><p>Local RR Tracks <br>OR 43 to Portland </p><p>Cemetery </p><p>Willamette River </p><p>Sellwood </p><p>Landslide <br>Riverpark and Sellwood Harbor <br>Condos <br>OR 43 to </p><p>Lake Oswego </p><p><strong>CMGC PROCUREMENT </strong></p><p><strong>CMGC </strong></p><p><strong>CONSTRUCTION MANAGER/GENERAL CONTRACTOR </strong></p><p>•••</p><p>Collaboration between Owner, Designer, and Contractor Up to Date Market Pricing </p><p>Owner </p><p>Design development </p><p>••</p><p>Constructability Reviews Value Engineering </p><p>••••</p><p>ROW/TCE acquisition &amp; Phasing Schedule Development Risk Management </p><p>Collaboration </p><p></p><ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">A/E </li><li style="flex:1">GC </li></ul><p></p><p>Other Owner Drivers: </p><p>•••</p><p>Sustainability Public involvement Minority Goals </p><p><strong>PRECONSTRUCTION </strong></p><p>• 7 Amendments (Design Packages) </p><p>• Able to release packages early to start work </p><p>••••</p><p>Shoofly Landslide Condo Demo/Reconstruct Main Bridge - GMP </p><p>• 60%, 90%, and 100% cost estimates • After each pricing exercise adjustments are made to validate the design aligns with the owners budget </p><p>• Design Modifications • Value Engineering • Material Selections • Means and Methods Evaluated </p><p><strong>CONTRACTING PLAN </strong></p><p>• DMWESB Goal - 20% • Created a Contracting <br>Plan with the Owner: </p><p>• 4 Categories </p><p>• Project Final DMWESB: </p><p>• 20.41% </p><p>• <strong>$45,491,206 </strong></p><p><strong>SMALL GC PACKAGES </strong></p><p>• 4 scopes of work separated into <br>GC-type packages </p><p>• Subcontractor solicitation, best value scoring, and scope management for the entire scope. </p><p>• Condo Demolition and Reconstruct - <br>$3.7M </p><p>• Macadam Bay Neighborhood – <br>$2.7M </p><p>• Powers Marine Park – <br>$300,000 </p><p>• Miles Place &amp; Butterfly Park – <br>$300,000 </p><p><strong>BEST VALUE SCORING </strong></p><p><strong>Maximum Available Points </strong><br><strong>Selection Criteria </strong></p><p>Multi-Use Bridge, Surveying, QC Testing </p><ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">Marine Package </li><li style="flex:1">All Other Open Bid </li></ul><p>Packages <br>Structural Steel Package </p><p><strong>Cost </strong></p><p>65 <br>5<br>40 20 <br>40 <br>5<br>40 15 </p><p><strong>DMWESB Participation Safety Record </strong></p><p></p><ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">15 </li><li style="flex:1">10 </li></ul><p>15 <br>10 15 <br>15 15 </p><p><strong>Key Personnel Relative Experience </strong></p><p>10 <br>5<br>10 <br>5</p><ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">10 </li><li style="flex:1">10 </li></ul><p>5</p><p><strong>Sustainability Work Plan </strong></p><p>5<br>15 </p><p><strong>Total Points </strong></p><p></p><ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1">100 </li><li style="flex:1">100 </li><li style="flex:1">100 </li><li style="flex:1">100 </li></ul><p></p><p><strong>CRAFT DEVELOPMENT </strong></p><p>• Apprenticeship Program </p><p>• Required 20% Apprentice per trade per subcontract for all contracts over $100,000 </p><p>• Craft Diversity for Total Project </p><p>• 14% <br>Women </p><p>Minority <br>• 20% </p><p><strong>CONSTRUCTION CHALLENGES </strong></p><p><strong>MAINTAINING VEHICLES/PEDESTRIANS </strong></p><p>• 30,000 Vehicles/Day • Heavily use by <br>Pedestrians/Bicyclists </p><p>Issue to be solved by proposers: </p><p>• Build bridge on exact footprint • No more than 30 days full closure </p><p><strong>ORIGINAL PLAN </strong></p><p>• Multnomah County intended to build the new bridge in halves. </p><p>• Maintain the existing structure while building the south half • Demolish the existing bridge • Build the North half </p><p>• Downfalls </p><p>• Environmental impacts due to additional cofferdams • Public/Worker safety • Redundant Structural Features • Schedule • Cost </p><p><strong>THE SHOOFLY </strong></p><p>• Use the existing Steel Truss for the Temporary Detour </p><p>• Install Temporary Piers in the River </p><p>• Construct new temporary approaches </p><p>• Translate the steel truss onto the Temporary Piers </p><p>• Use Shoofly while the new <br>Bridge was constructed <br>Approach to shoofly <br>Pile driving for temporary bents </p><p><strong>THE TASK </strong></p><p>• Truss </p><p>• 6.8 million pounds (3,400 tons) • 1,095 feet long </p><p>• Translate </p><p>• 66 feet North at West End • 33 feet North at East End • 7:30am to 9:30pm (14 hours) </p><p>• Jacks </p><p>• Horizontal – 5 pairs of 165,000lb capacity/jack <br>• Lifting – 40 (8 per pier) of 330,000 lb capacity/jack </p><p></p><ul style="display: flex;"><li style="flex:1"><strong>JANUARY 19</strong><sup style="top: -0.6em;"><strong>TH</strong></sup><strong>, 2013 “THE MOVE” </strong></li><li style="flex:1"><strong>SHOOFLY COMPLETE </strong></li><li style="flex:1"><strong>SHOOFLY BENEFITS </strong></li></ul><p></p><p>• Cost Savings - $5,000,000 • Cut 1 year off the schedule • Reduced the Environmental Impacts • Simplified the Phasing • Design Redundancy was eliminated – Sleeker Structure • Safety – Separated Public from Workers • Less the 20 days of bridge closures for the entire project </p><p><strong>LANDSLIDE STABILIZATION </strong></p><p><strong>LANDSLIDE </strong></p><p>• Entire West Approach constructed on an ancient landslide </p><p>• Original Bridge moved 3’ • Stabilization Shear Piles and Ground Anchors </p><p>• Landslide Monitored throughout construction to establish final design requirements </p><p><strong>LANDSLIDE STABILIZATION </strong></p><p>72” Diameter Shafts - 2,800 LF Ground Anchors – 92 EA </p><p><strong>LANDSLIDE STABILIZATION </strong></p><p>Ground Anchors were restressed to final design after the Bridge was completed </p><p><strong>PERCHED BOX CAISSONS </strong></p><p><strong>TRADITIONAL IN-WATER PIERS </strong></p><p>• 90-foot sheet piles driven into cobbles &amp; boulders </p><p>• In-water-work Restrictions &amp; <br>Schedule Impacts </p><p>• Large Concrete Seal &amp; Footing • Full Height Piers • Scour would be up to 65 feet • Costly </p>

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    45 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us