TECHNICAL PROPOSAL - myDOCSmydocs.dot.ga.gov/info/publicdownloads/Downloads/Pamela Cromwell... · I-85 Express Lanes PI Number: 110600 Gwinnett County Page 2 Request for Proposals

Proposal for the

I-85 Express Lanes Project

TECHNICAL

PROPOSAL

P.I. Number: 110600Gwinnett County

ORIGINAL

I-85 Express Lanes

PI Number: 110600 Gwinnett County Page 1

Request for Proposals Technical Proposal Submittal

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TAB C.1 PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE/CONSTRUCTION PHASING PLAN

C.1.a Preliminary Schedule ......................................................................................................................... 2

C.1.b Construction Phasing Plan ................................................................................................................. 4

C.1.c Project Schedule and Allowable Programming Software .................................................................... 7

TAB C.2 TRAFFIC CONTROL

C.2.a Traffic Management, Control and Sequencing Approach ................................................................... 8

C.2.b Conceptual Construction Staging Diagrams ....................................................................................... 8

C.2.c Narrative Description on the Sequence of Construction ..................................................................... 8

C.2.d Intended Laydown, Recycling, Staging, Disposal and Maintenance Locations ................................ 11

C.2.e Description of How the ROW/Adjacent Roads/Properties will be Maintained/Protected ................... 11

TAB C.3 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND APPROACH

C.3.a Organization Chart Outlining ............................................................................................................ 12

C.3.b/c Key Personnel Matrix Fit/Function/Responsibility/Percent Time to Project ...................................... 12

C.3.d Current and Projected Workload and Backlog .................................................................................. 15

C.3.e Construction Management Approach ............................................................................................... 16

C.3.f Participating Members and Major Non-Participating Members Relationships .................................. 19

C.3.2 Internal Organization Systems

C.3.2.a Working Together ............................................................................................................................. 19

C.3.2.b Decision-Making Process ................................................................................................................. 20

C.3.2.c Communication Methods .................................................................................................................. 20

C.3.2.d Quality Process ................................................................................................................................ 20

C.3.2.e Interfacing with Stakeholders ........................................................................................................... 21

C.3.3 Safety ............................................................................................................................................... 21

C.3.4 Environmental Management

C.3.4.a Environmental Commitments ........................................................................................................... 22

C.3.4.b Environmental Risks ......................................................................................................................... 23

C.3.5 Project Management Interview ......................................................................................................... 23

Organizational Chart ........................................................................................................................ 24

TAB C.4 DBE PARTICIPATION ..................................................................................................................... 25

TAB C.5 PROJECT DIFFERENCES FROM REFERENCE INFORMATION DOCUMENTS .......................... 27

C.1

Pre

limin

ary

Sch

edu

le/

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Ph

asin

g P

lan

I-85 Express Lanes



C.1 PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE & CONSTRUCTION PHASING PLAN

A key element of the Project Management Plan (PMP) is the Project Baseline Schedule and Construction Phasing Plan. An integral part of development of the Technical and Price Proposals was development of the Preliminary Baseline Schedule to confirm the CWM Team’s ability to achieve the contractual milestones as determined by GDOT and SRTA. In addition to providing a tool to measure design and construction progress during the project course, the schedule will be maintained as a planning tool and used to communicate our project execution plan to GDOT, the CWM Team and other stakeholders.

A primary task of the CWM Team during the proposal phase was development of the project design, project management approach and traffic management approach with a focus on being able to meet or exceed the contract milestones. The Preliminary Baseline Schedule contained in the Supplemental Information binder and the Construction Phasing Plan described below demonstrate that the design, permitting and construction activities are sequenced in an efficient and coordinated manner from NTP 1 to Final Acceptance. This gives GDOT and SRTA confidence that all contractual milestones will be achieved.

C.1.a Preliminary Schedule: The Preliminary Baseline Schedule is consistent and developed in general conformance with the Work Breakdown Structure described in the Technical Provisions, Volume 3, Section 2.2. It graphically illustrates critical design and development activities and relationships which are coordinated with environmental approvals, permitting, preconstruction activities and construction. The Preliminary Baseline Schedule includes activities for:

• NEPA Re-Evaluation • Utility Coordination and Relocations • Permitting and Environmental Approvals • Tolling Installation, Integration and Testing • Volume 3, Attachment 23-1 Submittals • GDOT and Agency Review and/or Approval and subsequent review and approval if required

The schedule format, structure and logic is also consistent with the Construction Phasing Plan developed by the CWM Team and includes all major work activities required under the contract.

Overall Schedule Approach: During the proposal phase, key personnel and task managers worked with Project Development Groups in their particular disciplines to provide input for the Preliminary Baseline Schedule. In collaboration with the Project Scheduler, Kyle Marchman, PE, this data was coordinated and used as the basis for the preliminary schedule and Construction Phasing Plan. This same staff of experienced design, permitting and construction professionals is the core management team designated for the I-85 Express Lanes Project. The Project will benefit from this management continuity by bringing their depth of specific project knowledge and expertise to the Project from RFQ to Project Acceptance. This collaborative approach under the direction of Mr. Marchman will continue through development of the 120-Day Schedule and the Project Baseline Schedule.

Subsequent to project award, the first and most critical scheduling task will be development of the comprehensive Project Baseline Schedule, which will be submitted within 90 days of NTP 1. During the period of NTP 1 to approval of the Project Baseline Schedule, the CWM Team will utilize a 120-Day Schedule, updated monthly, to track and manage initial activities. The Preliminary Baseline Schedule, submitted with this proposal, will be refined during this period to ensure a comprehensive and accurate schedule is submitted and accepted by the Department.

I-85 Express Lanes PI Number: 110600 Gwinnett County Page 3


The Project Baseline Schedule ultimately becomes the primary tool for monitoring and managing the project through the use of various CPM schedule outputs throughout the design and construction phases. These schedule outputs will assist the Management Team in understanding the effect of outside influences and constraints. This data gives management the knowledge it needs to maintain a proactive approach to schedule management and for use in pre-emptive planning to create a recovery schedule when necessary. The Project Baseline Schedule will also become a critical component of the PMP tool box and will serve as a valuable asset in ensuring successful project delivery.

To guarantee success, the CWM Team will work “at risk” prior to NTP 1 and will approach the enhancement of the Preliminary Baseline Schedule and schedule management with the following objectives:

1. Buy-in from GDOT, SRTA, Key Stakeholders and Subcontractors 2. Clearly Defined Roles and Responsibilities of Each Team Member Incorporated and Identified 3. Clear Identification of Contractual and Internal Milestones and Critical Path 4. Organizing and Prioritizing Design and Pre-Construction Activities in Support of Construction

An initial step in refining the Preliminary Baseline Schedule will be to meet with the GDOT, SRTA, other governmental agencies, key stakeholders, as well as subcontractors and vendors, to identify and fully understand all key or controlling constraints and incorporate this information into the schedule. Additional information generated from these meetings will be integrated into the design and construction logic to produce a comprehensive and detailed budgeting and procurement plan.

The CWM Team understands the design and pre-construction tasks must be scheduled to accommodate construction durations and to take full advantage of the construction resources available to this Project. The Construction Team, led by the Lead Contractor Superintendent, will further develop the construction phasing and logistical plan so that Team resources are fully integrated for maximum efficiency and optimum schedule performance. These plans will be refined in collaboration with the Design and Quality Management Teams so the Project Baseline Schedule reflects an aggressive, but realistic approach to project delivery. Scheduling of design packages will be fully integrated into the schedule and coordinated with construction needs. Likewise, quality control, environmental approvals and permitting, and utility coordination and relocation activities already in the Preliminary Baseline Schedule will be expanded and refined to present a fast-tracked yet credible construction schedule. This collaborative effort by the CWM Team, as well as GDOT, SRTA and other key stakeholders, will ensure a thorough understanding of the schedule and how each individual’s role supports schedule performance.

As stated earlier, the CWM Team considers the Project Baseline Schedule to be a fundamental management tool and understands that schedule management is critical to a project’s success. The Project Baseline Schedule will be used for planning and monitoring the actual progress of the Work, as well as providing supporting documentation for determining payment request amounts. The schedule will be updated and reviewed during design and construction meetings to allow prompt resolution of issues so project performance remains on schedule and within budget. It will also be the source of project information for project management and GDOT/SRTA. Contract milestones in the schedule will be integrated so impacts occurring in one activity are reflected throughout the schedule and a realistic completion date is always reported. Monthly status reports during the term of the Design-Build Agreement will include schedule updates so that management reports are current and accurately reflect Project status. Examples of monthly CPM schedule reports that the CWM Team may utilize during the course of the Project include the following:

• Utility Coordination and Relocation Status • Graphical representation of the Status of Work by Management Area and subsection • Comparison of planned progress to actual progress • Design Submittal look ahead • 60-day look ahead on required GDOT and Government approvals • Five week look ahead • Critical Items report/Critical Path

I-85 Express Lanes



Milestone Dates: The CWM Team understands the expectations of all stakeholders and is dedicated to delivering a quality project on time and on budget. As evidence of our commitment, the Preliminary Baseline Schedule, including the critical tasks of NEPA Re-Evaluation, environmental permitting, utility coordination and toll system integration, proposes achieving the Substantial Completion 1,031 days after NTP 1.

To establish critical milestone dates within the Preliminary Baseline Schedule, a NTP 1 issuance date of September 1, 2015 was assumed. When the actual NTP 1 date is known, the schedule will be updated accordingly. Based upon the assumed NTP 1 date, contractual calendar dates for the Contract Milestones are shown in the following table.

CONTRACT MILESTONE SCHEDULED

DATE SCHEDULED

DATE Turnover of Hub Buildings, Fiber backbone 12/10/17 Turnover of Toll Related ITS sites 04/14/18 Turnover of first 4 toll sites 12/24/17 Physical integration with SRTA’s existing 04/19/18 Turnover of second 4 toll sites 01/07/18 Turnover of remaining Toll Rate CMS 04/29/18 Turnover of third 4 toll sites 01/21/18 SRTA Network – All splicing complete 04/29/18 Turnover of fourth 4 toll sites 02/04/18 Substantial Completion Deadline 06/28/18 Turnover of fifth 4 Toll sites 02/18/18 End to End Testing 07/19/18 Turnover of remaining toll sites 03/04/18 Maintenance Acceptance Deadline 12/25/18 Turnover of Toll Rate CMS (5) 03/30/18

Critical Path: In addition to the Preliminary Baseline Schedule provided in the Supplemental Information binder, an Executive Level summary of the schedule and a report with the Critical Path only is also included. The schedule indicates the early Project Critical Path runs through GDOT acceptance of the Submittal Schedule and Construction Phasing Plan, which according to Volume3 Section 23 is required before any design submittals are made. Once these submittals are accepted, GDOT acceptance of the Concept Layout Plan as soon as possible is critical so that the anticipated NEPA Re-Evaluation can begin. Design mobilization, field survey and verification will be among the first tasks to expedite advancement of the Concept Layout (and preliminary plans) to confirm environmental impacts so Special Studies and the NEPA Re-Evaluations can proceed. Completion of the NEPA Re-Evaluation remains on the Critical Path until complete.

A construction start is anticipated at the end of June 2016, once the NEPA Re-Evaluation is approved and other permitting requirements are satisfied. Construction will need to commence in all three management areas as quickly as possible, however, the Critical Path will shift to construction in Area 2. Area 2 contains the I-85/I-985 intersection and involves extensive retaining wall, bridge and culvert construction. The Critical Path remains in Area 2, beginning with the grading operation and the box culvert extension at Station 1173+00. These activities stay on the Critical Path until complete. The Critical Path then shifts to Stage 2 of MSE retaining wall 22 construction and then through completion of the superstructure for Bridge 2. Advancement of these activities, along with other roadway elements is important to support construction of Bridge #2 and related MSE retaining walls.

Once this Stage 2 bridge and retaining wall work is complete, final base and paving work in Section S-3 becomes critical so that placement of the OGFC and final pavement markings on I-85 Southbound can be accomplished and substantial completion achieved. Remaining critical work for Maintenance Acceptance is completion of any punch list items and GDOT issuance of a Certificate of Maintenance Acceptance.

C.1.b Construction Phasing Plan: The CWM Team’s management approach divides the Project into three distinct geographical Areas, as illustrated in the following figure. The aggressive nature of the schedule requires dedicated designers and construction managers for each area to responsibly manage the production and schedule in their areas while coordinating and integrating with the other area managers to achieve the Project’s common milestones. The delineation of each area, as generally described below, was based on the size and similar scope, as well as terrain, traffic control requirements, working conditions and external constraints.

I-85 Express Lanes



• Area 1: Old Peachtree Road to I-85/I-985 Intersection

• Area 2: I-85/I-985 Intersection to Station 1290+00

• Area 3: Station 1290+00 to Hamilton Mill Road

The construction logistical plan developed during the construction planning phase will focus on allocating specific management and equipment resources in each area to meet the fast-track delivery requirements. Project controls will be established in each area for monitoring quality, safety, and schedule performance. Project-wide coordination and reporting protocols will be maintained within each area to document adherence with all contractual requirements and to confirm that the goals and objectives of the PMP are being met. The specific design and management staff assigned to each area will be supported by project-wide engineering, quality control, scheduling and administrative staff. Key management from each area will be actively involved in project-wide scheduling and resource allocation meetings to ensure continuity and coordinated interactions between each area.

As illustrated on the Preliminary Baseline Schedule and Construction Phasing Plan, each management Area has been sub-divided into sections to facilitate determining the optimum construction sequence. Section delineation was based upon providing a logical progression of work, taking advantage of the substantial pool of labor and equipment resources this Team has at its disposal, while recognizing NEPA Re-Evaluation requirements and permitting constraints. Each Area was divided into northbound sections, southbound sections and median sections. Based upon southbound stationing, the approximate station range for each section is shown on the following table:

I-85 NORTHBOUND - OUTSIDE

AREA # SECTION # STATION to STATION LENGTH (lf)

A-1 N1 1000+00 1089+00 8,900.00

A-1 N2 1089+00 1170+00 8,100.00

A-2 N3 1170+00 1290+00 12,000.00

A-3 N4 1290+00 1433+00 14,300.00

A-3 N5 1433+00 1531+00 9,800.00

53,100.00

I-85 SOUTHBOUND - OUTSIDE


A-1 S1 1000+00 1089+00 8,900.00

A-1 S2 1089+00 1170+00 8,100.00

A-2 S3 1170+00 1290+00 12,000.00

A-3 S4 1290+00 1433+00 14,300.00

A-3 S5 1433+00 1531+00 9,800.00

53,100.00

I-85 Express Lanes



I-85 NB/SB MEDIAN


A-1 C1 1000+00 1089+00 8,900.00

A-1 C2 1089+00 1136+00 4,700.00

A-2 C3 1136+00 1170+00 3,400.00

A-2 C4 1170+00 1290+00 12,000.00

A-3 C5 1290+00 1433+00 14,300.00

A-3 C6 1433+00 1531+00 9,800.00

53,100.00

As discussed previously, the Critical Path flows through Area 2 requiring early advancement of the Bridge Foundation Investigations, Wall Foundation Investigations, Bridge and Retaining Wall plans. Once the necessary designs are completed, the proper permits and agency approvals are obtained and Released for Construction plans are issued, and the infrastructure and toll system construction will be begin in all three Areas.

Infrastructure construction in the northbound (N) sections occurs primarily in sections N-1 and N-2 with retaining wall construction, grading, drainage and paving to facilitate outside widening to create space for the Express Lanes in the median and the northbound auxiliary lane and new outside shoulder. Infrastructure construction in segments N-3 through N-5 is minimal, and primarily involves work required to support sound barrier installation.

Construction in the southbound (S) sections in Area 1, sections S-1 and S-2 is focused on widening to the outside to accommodate the Express Lanes in the median and for construction of the southbound auxiliary lanes and new outside shoulder. Segment S-3 in Area 2 involves the most complex traffic movements on the project to facilitate shifting of the southbound traffic for staged demolition and construction of Bridge 2 and also includes new construction on the inside for the southbound Express Lanes. Infrastructure construction in Area 3, Segments S-4 and S-5 involves shifting traffic to the inside with minimal shoulder work to support sound barrier installation.

Median sections, C-1 and C-2 in Area 1 require median barrier wall modifications for toll system infrastructure and milling and overlaying to establish the Express Lanes. Area 2 incorporates Sections C-3 and C-4 with several elements on the Critical Path and including Bridge 1 which will covey the northbound Express Lane over I-985. Early advancement, close monitoring and specific coordination of resources in these areas is crucial to meeting the contractual milestones. Section C-4 includes widening of the inside northbound lane for construction of the Express Lane and buffer zone and the widening to the inside of the existing bridge over SR 20. Construction of the median separated Express Lanes is accomplished in Area 3, sections C-5 and C-6.

GDOT Submittals and Review Times: The CWM Team developed a comprehensive design schedule as part of the project Preliminary Baseline Schedule which incorporates all of the submittals required by Volume 3, Section 23 of the RFP. For the design submittals, CWM has also subdivided the project into separate Areas that correspond to our Construction Phasing Plan and our NEPA Re-Evaluation, MS-4 and permitting approach.

All of the design plan packages except the bridge plans will be submitted by Design Area, with each Design Area acting as a self-contained “project” for review purposes. Bridge plans will be submitted per bridge, with each bridge acting on a standalone basis.

Appropriate review times have been included in the Preliminary Baseline Schedule for all submittals according to the requirements of the RFP. The integration of the design management staff with construction personnel and GDOT representatives, along with the use of weekly progress meetings and a detailed submittal tracking log, will help the CWM Team avoid surprising the design reviewers and allow them to plan their workload well in advance of actually receiving a submittal. In each weekly progress meeting, the CWM Team will include agenda items for:

• A look-ahead schedule of submittals coming in the next two weeks; • An update on submittals under review; and • A discussion of comments on submittals recently returned to the CWM Team.

I-85 Express Lanes



This weekly flow of information between the designers and reviewers will help GDOT review staff plan their upcoming workload. This collaborative planning will ensure the CWM Team that it can rely on timely responses to its submittal packages.

Careful consideration will be given to ensure that the limit on the maximum number of submittals under review by GDOT has not been exceeded and the appropriate amount of additional review time has been added according to the requirements of Volume 3, Section 23 of the RFP. The graph of submittals anticipated by month will help GDOT plan reviewer staffing levels according to the needs of the CWM Team’s production schedule.

C.1.c Project Schedule and Allowable Programming Software: The Preliminary Baseline Schedule included in the Supplemental Information binder will be the foundation for the Project Baseline Schedule. It will be created and developed utilizing Primavera P6 Version 8.3 software that meets the requirements of Volume 3, Section 2.2.3.

C.2

Tra

ffic

Co

ntr

ol

I-85 Express Lanes



C.2 TRAFFIC CONTROL

C.2.a Traffic Management, Control and Sequencing Approach: A primary measure of the project success and maintaining public confidence in the project will be the ability to efficiently move motorists through the project limits while minimizing delays, consideration of environmentally sensitive areas and establishing a safe environment for both the traveling public and workers. The CWM Team will utilize a five-step multi-faceted approach to achieving this measure of success that addresses traffic management from project procurement to final acceptance. This approach utilizes time tested techniques in addition to innovative measures maintaining the maximum level of service possible for motorists traveling through the Express Lanes Project. The CWM Team’s approach to traffic management includes:

1. Development of the Traffic Management Plan (TMP) submitted within 120 days of NTP 1. The TMP will meet the requirements of the FHWA Work Zone Mobility and Safety Program and provide the qualifications of the traffic engineering and operations personnel. The TMP will also outline the procedures for public notification, governmental entity coordination, installation and maintenance of traffic control devices and procedures for incident management and response.

2. Development of a Traffic Control Plan (TCP) for each phase of construction. These detailed plans will be developed in accordance with the MUTCD, AASHTO’s Roadside Design Guide, GDOT Special Provision 150 – Traffic Control and the Technical Provisions. They will be submitted for each construction stage and all traffic shifts with details of all traffic control devices, striping and signage. Conceptual construction staging diagrams are included in the Supplemental Information binder accompanying this Proposal.

3. Providing enhanced public outreach/communication by supplementing GDOT’s public outreach program. The CWM Team will establish and maintain a dedicated project website and will acquire and activate a Hazard Advisory Radio (HAR) system. This website, www.I-85 Express Lanes.com, and the HAR system would be utilized, in conjunction with GDOT’s NaviGAtor System and GDOT’s Drive Smart website, to provide access to real-time travel information and project updates. Message boards set up at the beginning of the northbound and southbound lanes will display messages directing motorist to the website and will also display the AM radio call number that can be called for current traffic information.

4. The organization of a Project Development Group (PDG). This step actually began early in the procurement stage. This group was tasked with developing the project specific framework for the TMP and to develop efficient technical solutions for the TCP. As depicted on the conceptual construction staging diagrams, this PDG was able to develop an innovative plan to move traffic through the I-85/I-985 interchange utilizing staged construction phasing with minimal impact to traffic flow. This group will continue meeting during the design and construction phases to refine and optimize the conceptual plans and ultimately oversee implementation of the detailed plans for each phase of the TCP.

5. Implementation of GDOT approved Alternative Technical Concepts (ATC’s) allowing limited continuous lane closures from Friday night until Sunday morning northbound and southbound, south of I-985. By utilizing these ATC’s, the CWM Team will employ accelerated construction methods that will facilitate early completion of the auxiliary lanes with no temporary traffic shifts of the general purpose lanes. Close coordination with GDOT public communications staff, along with early notification and timely updates through the enhanced communications website and HAR system, will be employed prior to these weekend operations to provide the traveling public with the information it needs to efficiently plan its travel through the worksite.

C.2.b Conceptual Construction Staging Diagrams: Conceptual Construction Staging Diagrams are included in the Supplemental Information binder accompanying this Proposal.

C.2.c Narrative Description on the Sequence of Construction: The primary objective of the TMP will be to safely move the traveling public through the Project. A second but equally important objective will be to create and implement a plan that allows for accelerated construction that will be conducive to achieving the project milestones. The TMP will satisfy these two objectives and will also address specific project challenges such as:

I-85 Express Lanes



• Limited continuous weekend lane closures • Restricted Duration and Length of Shoulder Closures • SRTA Lane Closure and Traffic Control Requirements for Installation, Commissioning and Testing • SRTA Sign Uncovering Plan

Due to the accelerated schedule, construction will occur simultaneously in all three management areas. To maintain consistent implementation of the TMP, a full-time and dedicated Traffic Control Team will be employed to ensure that implementation of traffic control plans is in accordance with standards and specifications and that traffic control devices are properly maintained. The Traffic Control Team will also be available to respond to issues as they arise.

Each management area presents unique challenges resulting in different maintenance of traffic (MOT) approaches for lane closures, shoulder closures and traffic shifts. All traffic control measures will follow the contract guidelines with shoulder closures, where allowed, limited to a maximum length of one mile for a maximum duration of 180 days. Following are general concept overviews of the traffic control and sequencing approaches with specific examples of traffic shifts and management strategy for each Area.

AREA 1 – STATION 2000+00 TO 2170+00

NORTHBOUND AND STATION 1000+00 TO

STATION 1170+00 SOUTHBOUND EXPRESS LANE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW

Construction in Area 1 primarily involves widening to the outside to allow the existing inside general purpose lanes to be converted to managed lanes. It also includes the transition of the northbound managed lane from being directly adjacent to the general purpose lane to an independent lane proceeding through the I-985 intersection. The existing outside shoulder northbound and southbound will be removed, and a new 12’ travel lane to be utilized as an auxiliary lane and new 12’ shoulder will be constructed.

Stage 1 – Stations ±2001+00 to ±2078+00 northbound and Stations ±1005+00 to ±1135+00 southbound – Advance warning signs will be installed in accordance with GDOT Special Provision 150 and the latest edition of the MUTCD. Traffic will remain in its present configuration for construction of the auxiliary lanes. Accelerated construction methods with limited continuous weekend closures described in ATC CWM-002A and ATC CWM-008A will be utilized to minimize daily lane closures, maintain current lane widths and avoid temporary striping and lane shifts. Stage 2 – Existing northbound and southbound general purpose lanes will be shifted out to the new auxiliary lanes/outside widening to accommodate installation of tolling and ITS infrastructure in the existing median barrier and to facilitate SRTA and Toll Integrator’s installation and testing of tolling equipment. Stage 3 – Lane closures will be installed area wide in accordance with the parameters outlined in Volume 2, Section 18 for construction of the milled and inlayed final surface, Express Lane striping, general purpose lane final striping and commissioning and testing of the SRTA tolling system.

AREA 2 – STATION 2170+00 TO STATION

2190+00 NORTHBOUND & STATION

1170+00 TO STATION 1290+00

SOUTHBOUND

EXPRESS LANE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW

Construction in Area 2 includes removal of the existing I-85 over I-985 bridge, construction of Bridge No. 2 to accommodate I-85 southbound and the southbound express lane over I-985 and Bridge No 1 which is dedicated to the northbound Express Lane over I-985. Also included is inside widening of I-85 southbound to accommodate an auxiliary lane, the existing general purpose lanes and the southbound managed lane and

Stage 1 – Southbound from Station ±1186+00 to ±1265+00 – To create space for the Express Lane construction, the travel lanes will be shifted 2’ outside to accommodate temporary barrier wall on the inside shoulder. This shift results in the outside edge line being 2’ outside of the current edge line. To eliminate the uneven pavement this situation creates, the OGFC will be removed to the current edge line and replaced with 2’ of OGFC in locations where the OGFC does not have sufficient width. To facilitate the first stage of Bridge 2 construction, the existing travel lanes will be shifted outside from Station 1169+00 to 1186+00. OGFC will be installed on the outside shoulder to remove rumble strips and temporary barrier wall will be installed on the newly created inside shoulder to separate the Stage 1 bridge demolition and construction.

I-85 Express Lanes




2190+00 NORTHBOUND & STATION

1170+00 TO STATION 1290+00

SOUTHBOUND


buffer. Construction of the northbound managed lane is also included in this Area.

Stage 2 – Southbound from Stations 1132+00 to 1218+00 the travel lanes will be shifted inside within 2’ of the newly constructed Stage 1 of Bridge 2 to allow space for Stage 2 construction. Stage 3 – For the entire area northbound and southbound, lane closures will be installed as needed for final surface course paving and striping for placement of lanes in their final alignment. Also, lane closures for SRTA commissioning and testing will be used and temporary traffic signage will be removed.


2530+00 NORTHBOUND TO STATION

1290+00 TO STATION 1531+00

SOUTHBOUND


Construction in Area 3 includes continuation of construction of the barrier separated Express Lanes and buffer zone between the existing northbound and southbound general purpose lanes ending at Hamilton Mill Road.

Stage 1A – Stations ±2187+50 to ±2550+00 Northbound – Advance warning signs will be installed in accordance with the GDOT Special Provision 150 and the latest edition of the MUTCD. From Stations 2187+50 to 2260+00 travel lanes will remain in their current location and temporary barrier wall will be installed as needed along the inside shoulder to provide positive separation for the buffer zone and Express Lane construction. From Stations 2260+00 to 2318+00 the existing outside buffer lane will be utilized to accommodate construction by reducing the travel lane widths to 11 LF and shifting traffic to the outside travel lane and the buffer lane creating space on the inside for temporary barrier wall placement. Solid white striping will be installed between the travel lanes to discourage lane changes through the construction zone. From Station 2318+00 to 2550+00 the travel lanes will be shifted 2’ to the outside to allow room for the Express Lane and buffer construction. The OGFC will be milled to the existing edge line and 2’ of new OGFC installed to create a smooth joint. This shift creates a 4’ area for inside placement of the barrier wall and a 1’ buffer next to the travel lane.

Stage 1B – Station 1290+00 to 1531+50 Southbound – Install advanced warning signs and obliterate existing striping and restripe to reduce the travel lanes width to 11 LF. To accommodate Express Lane and buffer zone construction from Station 1320+00 to 1531+50 shift the travel lanes 2’ outside the existing edge line to allow temporary barrier placement along the inside shoulder. To maintain a smooth joint with the outside travel lane, the OGFC will be removed to the current edge line and replaced with 2’ of OGFC in locations where the OGFC has insufficient width. From Station 1265+00 to 1320+00 shift the travel lanes 12’ outside to utilize the existing outside buffer lane to create construction space. A solid white stripe will be installed between the travel lanes to discourage lane changes through the construction zone.

Stage 2A – Northbound stage 2 requires construction on the outside for sound barrier 2-2, drainage and guardrail. The northbound lane from Station 2189+00 to 2273+60 will be reduced to 11’ lanes and shifted to the inside edge of the newly constructed buffer zone. Temporary barrier wall will be installed 1’ from the edge of the outside travel lane.

I-85 Express Lanes




2530+00 NORTHBOUND TO STATION

1290+00 TO STATION 1531+00

SOUTHBOUND


Stage 2B – Southbound travel lanes from Station 1479+50 to 1520+50 and 1314+50 to 1358+50 will be reduced to 11’. Traffic will be shifted to the inside edge of the buffer zone with temporary barrier wall installed on the outside shoulder to create a work zone for sound barrier construction. To construct sound barrier 3-3 adjacent to the ramp and auxiliary lane from Station 1257+00 to 1276+00, traffic will be shifted to the inside to the CD lanes to accommodate temporary barrier wall installed on the outside shoulder. Temporary paving may be installed at the gore area between the ramp and auxiliary lane to accommodate the transition after the gore area.

Stage 3 – For the entire area, northbound and southbound, lane closures will be installed as needed for final surface course paving and striping for placement of lanes in their final alignment. Also lane closures for SRTA commissioning and testing will be used and temporary traffic control signage will be removed.

C.2.d Intended Laydown, Recycling, Staging, Disposal and Maintenance Locations: The CWM Team proposes to establish a laydown area in the vicinity of the SR 20 Interchange at Station 2295+00 northbound and, with GDOT’s concurrence, a staging area in the vacant rest area located adjacent to the project at Station 2132 +00 northbound. Additional staging and equipment maintenance will be performed at CWM’s satellite location on Hillcrest Road in Norcross, Georgia. Further maintenance support will be provided at CWM’s main office in Marietta.

Construction debris will be disposed of at Metro Green Recycling which is located on Pleasantdale Road in Doraville. This facility has the capability to recycle construction debris and to process soil for future use. Other permitted facilities may be used as they become available.

C.2.e Description of How the Right-of-Way and Adjacent Roads and Properties Will Be Maintained and Protected: The CWM Team will utilize the project maintenance crews to inspect the project on a routine basis to identify potential issues that may impact the traveling public and to promptly initiate action to resolve problems. The CWM Team will be proactive in keeping maintenance issues to a minimum by routinely:

• Watering exposed areas to control dust • Maintaining erosion control devices • Inspection of traffic control devices • Maintaining construction entrances

Intervals for maintenance activities established in the Standard Specifications, Sections 104.05 and 105.14, and Maintenance during Construction will be the minimum goals for the CWM Team.

When possible, construction activities that are in close proximity to residential areas will be scheduled during daytime hours to minimize noise and vibration. Haul routes will be planned to avoid residential areas. For any rock blasting, a vibration monitoring program will be established that includes pre-existing and post-construction surveys. Lighting for night time operations will be implemented in accordance with industry standards and considering safety of the construction personnel and traveling public, quality and impact to adjacent properties.

C.3

Pro

ject

Man

agem

ent

and

Ap

pro

ach

I-85 Express Lanes



C.3 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND APPROACH

C.3.a Organization Chart Outlining Structure: One of the keys to success on the I-85 Express Lanes Extension Project will be to assemble a design-build (D-B) team that can communicate and work effectively with GDOT and SRTA to complete the design and permitting phase by the earliest possible date. This Project also demands that this team have first-hand design and construction experience working within the parameters of an aggressive schedule. There is no tolerance within this project scope or schedule for a “learning curve” or “on-the-job training.”

C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc. (CWM) has organized such a design-build team (CWM Team). The key managers assigned to this Project have local knowledge of the corridor, have worked directly together on similar projects and have demonstrated their knowledge of the policies and procedures developed by GDOT’s Innovative Delivery Office. Examples include the successful completion of the KIA Interchange D-B project in Troup County, and the efficient management and completion of the design and permitting phases of the I-75 South Managed Lanes D-B project which facilitated an early construction start.

The CWM Team organizational structure, shown in the organization chart provided at the end of this TAB, identifies the project management team and illustrates each members function and relationship within the overall team. The CWM Team was organized based on the premise that each Key Personnel and Task Manager possesses the required technical expertise and relevant experience in their particular discipline and also have the ability to:

• Develop clear, concise communication policies with the goal that all team members have an implicit understanding of project expectations at every level to minimize errors, potential disputes and rework

• Recognize, address and communicate critical issues in the early phases of the project. • Work in a timely manner while maintaining excellent quality. • Coordinate with GDOT, SRTA and other stakeholders in a partnering manner that focuses on the

challenges ahead while preventing them from becoming roadblocks to success.

C.3.b & C.3.c Key Personnel Matrix Fit/Function/Responsibility/Percent Time to Project: The following table identifies and describes the level of commitment of each Key Personnel and Task Manager and their level of experience, specific function and responsibility on the project.

Meeting the aggressive milestones dictated by the project schedule will be a function of immediately employing local resources upon receipt of the Notice to Proceed (NTP). CWM and ARCADIS have the managers and support staff currently engaged and ready to hit the ground running upon receipt of NTP 1.

KEY PERSONNEL MATRIX TITLE & NAME

YRS

EXP D-B

COMMITMENT

ROLE/RESPONSIBILITY

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE / QUALIFICATIONS

KEY PERSONNEL

Lead Contractor Project Manager Bob Thompson

35 100%

Manage the planning, permitting, execution, and control of all project aspects.

More than 35 years of diverse experience in the transportation infrastructure industry including 12 years of D-B pursuit and project management. Project Manager for seven GDOT D-B Projects. B.S. Engineering Operations

Lead Contractor Superintendent Freddy Sumner

23 100%

Manage overall construction, subcontractor coordination, and scheduling in accordance with safety, environmental, and quality plans.

23 years of overall experience and 15 years of construction experience at the superintendent level or above. Construction Manager on fast-track projects, including D-B projects ranging from $31 million to $342 million. B.S. Construction Management

Lead Design Engineer Keith Kunst, PE

19 100% Manage the project’s design in coordination with environmental

19 years of all aspects of project engineering, design and plan production with a construction and design background, including D-B

I-85 Express Lanes




YRS

EXP D-B

COMMITMENT

ROLE/RESPONSIBILITY

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE / QUALIFICATIONS

documents, utilities, right-of-way, and construction.

projects ranging from $30 million to $176 million, including I-75 South Managed Lanes Design-Build. M.S. Business Administration-Finance and B.S. Civil Engineering

Assistant Contractor Project Manager Kyle Marchman, PE

9 100%

Assist Project Manager by maintaining project schedule of record, submit schedule updates and provide status updates to management.

9 years of multi-faceted construction experience with an in-depth knowledge of P6 scheduling and construction/D-B estimating and project development. B.S. Civil Engineering

Design Quality Assurance Manager Steve Callis, PE

41 75%

Responsible for day-to-day management of Design Quality.

41 years of planning and design transportation projects and quality assurance and plan review of complex interstate projects, including I-75 South Managed Lanes Design-Build. B.S. Civil Engineering

Lead Roadway Engineer William Dial, PE

15 100%

Oversee design of managed lanes, auxiliary lanes, and ramp systems and coordinate other discipline leads and construction managers.

15 years of experience specialized in the management, review and design of roadway projects, including design-build experience for interstates, urban storm drainage systems, and developing and coordinating complex MOT plans and staging with operations staff, including I-285 at SR 400 Interchange Design-Build. M.S. and B.S. in Civil Engineering

NEPA Lead Robin Stevens

15 50%

Lead NEPA and environmental activities and coordinate with other discipline leads.

15 years of experience leading and preparing environmental impact statements, environmental assessments and decision documents under the NEPA, including design-build projects, linear transportation, site-specific land management activities, large-scale programmatic undertakings, and controversial proposals involving conflicting interests amongst organizations. B.A. Biology and Psychology

Lead Toll Facilities/ITS Engineer Shubhendu Mohanty, PE

9 100%

Manage design of the ITS and Tolling system and coordinate with the Toll System Integrator.

9 years of experience developing traffic volumes for projects ranging from major interstate and arterial corridors to new interchanges and conventional/non-conventional intersection designs, including traffic simulation studies, interstate and arterial corridor analysis, and traffic engineering design. M.S. and B.S. in Civil Engineering

Lead Structures Engineer Kristen Kasmire, PE

18 75%

Lead structural design efforts, including bridge replacement over I-985 and SR 20 widening, and any retaining walls required for the project.

18 years of diverse experience for design-build and value engineering projects, including sign support structures, retaining walls and drainage structures. M.S. and B.S. in Civil Engineering

Survey Lead Mike Peppers, PLS

14

100% During Survey Stage

Manage all survey aspects, supervise field personnel, QA/QC and sign/seal deliverables.

14 years of experience in surveying services for transportation improvements, including boundary, ROW, stream, topographic, and wetland boundary, as well as research land records and GIS services. He has specific experience conducting ecological surveys,

I-85 Express Lanes




YRS

EXP D-B

COMMITMENT

ROLE/RESPONSIBILITY

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE / QUALIFICATIONS including Section 404-related stream cross sectional survey projects. B.S. Geography

Worksite Utility Coordination Supervisor Jeff Jacques

32 40%

Manage utility adjustments and coordinate design with the utility design engineer should the need arise.

32 years of highway construction experience including four years as a GDOT District Utilities Engineer, now serving as a Project Utility Coordinator on CWM projects including the I-75 South Managed Lanes D-B.

Roadway Superintendent Ryan Beech

10 100%

Manage roadway construction including erosion control, coordination of traffic control and subcontractor scheduling.

10 years of highway construction experience including serving as the Assistant Project Manager on several D-B projects. B.S., Civil Engineering

Structures Superintendent Brad Nelson

36 100%

Manage bridge construction and scheduling in accordance with safety, environmental, and quality control plans.

36 years of direct structures construction experience in Georgia with first-hand knowledge of all phases of bridge work including scheduling and design-build.

TASK MANAGERS

Environmental Compliance Manager Brian Johnson

15 50%

Manage compliance with all environmental laws, regulations and policies, and coordination with WECS on implementation and monitoring of erosion control plan.

8 years of experience involving design of erosion control plans and supporting documentation for environmental permitting and 7 years of direct field experience in managing compliance of erosion control plans.

Lead Geotechnical Engineer Thomas Scruggs, PE

32 As Needed

Preparation of geotechnical reports and budgets, assist with planning site investigations and laboratory testing and analysis. Provide project progress reports.

32 years of experience in the geotechnical engineering field investigating site conditions, analyzing laboratory tests, preparing bridge and retaining wall foundation reports, soil survey reports and conducting special problem investigations. Assisted with construction inspection of geotechnical-related activities. Involved in five previous D-B projects for GDOT.

DBE Manager Benny Brown

17 As Required

Manage DBE outreach program and document performance in accordance with contract requirements.

17 years of overall experience with 12 years of DBE outreach programs and DBE contract compliance. Bachelor of Business Administration

SRTA Construction Interface Bill Gunter

11 As Required

Designated interface with SRTA and TSI regarding toll system and ITS construction.

11 years of experience in the transportation industry working in state government as a design consultant and contractor on Tolling, ITS and traffic signal projects. B.S. Civil Engineering

Traffic Control Supervisor Jeff Duncan

29 100%

Responsible for the implementation, inspection and maintenance of the MOT plan.

An industry leader with 29 years of experience in all aspects of work zone traffic control, including lane closures and detour design and implementation for major interstate projects; such as the detour of traffic in the Brookwood

I-85 Express Lanes




YRS

EXP D-B

COMMITMENT

ROLE/RESPONSIBILITY

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE / QUALIFICATIONS Interchange for GDOT’s 14th Street and 17th Street Bridge projects. Certified Worksite Traffic Control Supervisor

Survey Manager Dwight Keaton

25 100%

Management of control packages, construction surveying and production of As-Built plans.

25 years of survey management experience coordinating multiple crews on fast track multi-staged projects.

Safety Director Chris Blair

12 As Needed

Manage the safety program, training program, review safety plans and audit work activities to verify and improve safety performance.

12 years of construction safety program management and hazard analysis. Certified Associate Risk Manager and OSHA 500 trainer. B.S. Environmental Science

Note: in D-B denotes individual with past design-build experience.

C.3.d Current and Projected Workload and Backlog: CWM is solely committed to work in the State of Georgia and will provide the majority of the construction and project management for the CWM Team. CWM has a current backlog of $750 million with a GDOT capacity rating in excess of $2.3 billion. Projecting actual performance of the backlog into future years, the effective backlog for 2015 is approximately $335 million, with $220 million for 2016 and $155 million for 2017. These levels of backlog are far below the management and financial resources of the company, as demonstrated by average revenues exceeding $450 million for the last three years. With an expected start date of 2016 for construction, CWM has more than an adequate current capacity to meet the challenges of the I-85 Express Lanes project.

Between NTP 1 and NTP 3, the CWM Team will employ the same logistical plan development scheme utilized on the I-75 South Managed Lanes project to ensure resources are committed and deployed efficiently to maximize an aggressive start. Management of future workload will take into account the backlog created by this project and other future work that can be accomplished by the current resources of CWM of which the majority are now being utilized within Metro Atlanta in close proximity to the Project.

The CWM Team’s local presence and long history in the market have given us the opportunity to develop close working relationships with subcontractors and vendors with proven GDOT experience and local resources. In addition to the CWM pool of at least 1,000 workers and 800 pieces of equipment that are ready to be assigned to the Project, a number of these subcontractors will join the team to provide additional labor, equipment and technical skills to the CWM Team.

A key element in the project scope of work is the Tolling Infrastructure and ITS component. The CWM Team has selected and is pleased to have subcontracting commitments from Carlson Construction Services, LLC (DBE) and Brooks Berry Haynie and Associates to perform this scope of work. Their participation in the Project Development Groups (PDG’s) during the procurement phase provided valuable insight into the Tolling and ITS scope development and delivery schedule. A combined 70 years of experience, current working relationships with the CWM Team and GDOT/SRTA experience make them ideal partners.

ARCADIS, the Lead Design Consultant, has more than 55 years of local experience and employs a staff of 112 transportation and environmental professionals in the Atlanta office with the additional support of 95 professionals located in Georgia. An international firm founded in the Netherlands in 1888, the local office of ARCADIS can call on the substantial resources of 5,000 employees in the U.S. and 28,000 worldwide. Additionally, ARCADIS has supplemented the Design Team with key subconsultants who maintain fully staffed engineering offices in Atlanta with staff that has worked with GDOT for many years.

I-85 Express Lanes



ARCADIS has design capacity of more than $18 million per year as demonstrated by their 2014 Georgia performance of $18.5 million. A portion of this design capacity is committed to other projects under contract, but in addition to the individuals shown on the organizational chart, there is significant remaining capacity to allocate resources as necessary. The Atlanta Infrastructure staff has a current backlog of $12 million, of which only $8 million is allocated over the next 12 months. With more than $10 million in ready capacity, and coming off the successful completion of both the I-75 South Managed Lanes Design-Build Project Plans and the I-285 at SR 400 Costing Plans, ARCADIS is exceptionally staffed and suited for the I-85 Express Lanes Project. In addition, ARCADIS’ subconsultants have additional capacity in the millions.

Continuous logistical planning, schedule monitoring and integration of subcontractors and vendors will provide the framework for the path to achievement of all contractual milestones and timely substantial completion of the Project.

C.3.e Construction Management Approach: The CWM Team’s management of the I-85 Express Lanes Project will be governed by the Project Management Plan (PMP). This Plan will be developed so that it can serve as the blue print and primary tool utilized to manage the design and permitting functions. The PMP will also incorporate a management approach to ensure the Project is constructed in a safe, environmentally sensitive, and timely manner while maintaining GDOT’s high standards for quality. The effectiveness of this project specific plan will be enhanced by incorporating “lessons learned” from the previous and successful collaboration between the Lead Contractor Project Manager, Bob Thompson and the Lead Design Engineer, Keith Kunst, PE, both of whom are fully committed to the success of the Project.

The PMP, submitted within 30 days of NTP 1, is viewed as a “living document” resulting from the compilation of several plans that define the roles and expectations of all stakeholders. It will provide the guidelines for the decision making process and strategies that will be utilized to manage the schedule, public involvement, scope, environmental commitments and quality assurance on the I-85 Express Lanes Project. The PMP will continue to be refined during the project’s course to address the design and construction in an integrated manner until Project completion.

The CWM Team will utilize a two phased approach to managing the Project. Phase 1 the development phase, began with the development of the CWM proposal and includes design and permitting functions. Phase 2 is considered the construction phase. This phase is primarily focused on construction and delivering the Project; however the CWM Team recognizes that the design team continues to play a vital part in this phase. In both phases the project is divided into three distinct geographic Management Areas, as illustrated in the following figure. Each Area has its own distinct characteristics and limitations related to design, environmental permitting, scheduling and construction. Consequently, the CWM approach is to assign a unique set of design and construction managers to advance each Area.

I-85 Express Lanes



During the development phase key personnel and task managers have held regularly scheduled meetings working within the outline of the project development plan (PDP) to complete the following tasks:

• Development of a Project Management Plan • Alternate Technical Concept Development • Preliminary Project Schedule • Development of a Risk Matrix • DBE Subcontracting Opportunity Meeting and Bid Package Development • Evaluation of Environmental Commitments • Evaluation and Development of Technical Solutions for MS4 Compliance • Development of a MOT Plan • Identification of Utility Conflicts and Solutions • Development of Project Quantities and Cost Estimates • Production of Submittal Documents and Plans

The CWM Team’s key management principal during the shift to the D-B phase of the project is for the key personnel and task managers assigned to the development phase to transition to the D-B phase. This principal ensures that first-hand knowledge and experience gained during the procurement and development phase is not lost by passing the project off to new staff. The development phase staff will be supplemented by additional design staff, construction managers, safety, quality, and environmental managers who can benefit by the experience of the development staff to advance the design, permitting and construction planning in an aggressive manner.

The design and permitting function will be segmented by technical discipline; roadway design, structures design, drainage design, traffic engineering, ITS, tolling environmental, lighting, utilities and support functions, such as survey and geotechnical. Each geographical Management Area will be advanced with submittals prioritized by the schedule.

Effective communication and transparency among all stakeholders promotes sharing of information that results in a cohesive design and construction plan. The CWM Team encourages and desires participation in Project meetings at all levels from GDOT, SRTA, designers, subcontractors and utility owners to ensure that key elements of the project are coordinated into a consistent and efficient design.

In addition to the regularly scheduled meetings, an effective communication plan among the CWM Team and GDOT is important in maintaining design consistency, quality and schedule. The CWM Team will utilize the GDOT project web-based management system “e-Builder.net” for communications and for file sharing and electronic communications. With multiple subconsultants working on the design plans, a system must be established for design file management and communication. ARCADIS will implement a dedicated Microsoft Window SharePoint website that will facilitate internal team communications through the use of file sharing, events calendars, task lists and a project contact list. The SharePoint site will also be the location for sharing digital plan sets, submittals, meeting minutes, agendas, and other Project events between the Design and Construction Team. This collaborative software tool has been an effective management tool on the I-75 South Managed Lane project in Henry County and has been used during the development phase of this Project.

The CWM Team’s strategy for advancing the design development will be to develop the overall project schematic and Submittal Schedule within 60 days of NTP 1. Upon approval of these plans, staged design submittals will be developed in each Management Area to advance the Released for Construction (RFC) drawings following the Project’s Critical Path.

In addition to the staged design submittal process by Area, phased NOI’s may be required to facilitate an early construction start, which is critical to achieving the Project’s intermediate and substantial completion milestones. The CWM Team’s approach will be to begin the update to special studies at NTP 1 to seek a design change NEPA Re-Evaluation that encompasses all three segments. ARCADIS has an efficient record of delivering data for ecology addendums, facilitating the GDOT consultant’s preparation of the addenda and re-evaluation documents. If the NEPA Re-Evaluation and RFC drawings are completed before receiving the USACOE 404 permit, a NOI for Area 3 and the east end of Area 2 will be obtained to allow groundbreaking activities.

I-85 Express Lanes



During the project’s design phase, the Design Team will be joined by a Construction Team comprised of Construction Managers with many years of experience in managing GDOT design-build projects. Several of these construction managers were participants in the PDG’s and were instrumental in developing the MOT plan, construction logistical plan and project schedule. Their constructability reviews were an important part of the design review process because they identified potential issues; such as conflicts between utilities, drainage, traffic staging, structures, ITS and tolling infrastructure. Being involved in the PDGs enabled these managers to develop working relationships with the Design Team, which opened lines of communication during the review process providing a “constructible” set of plans that will reduce the number of request for information from the field, expediting a smooth transition from design to construction.

Upon receipt of NTP 3 for an Area and issuance of necessary agency approvals, RFC drawings and approval of all contract management plans, the CWM Team will transition into the project’s construction phase. As discussed previously, a logistical plan for identifying the specific labor, equipment and material resources will be developed. The Construction Team will be structured in a similar fashion as the Design Team with managers responsible for the construction of all scope in their respective areas. Resources will continue to follow the segmental project approach with adequate resources allocated in sufficient numbers to meet the logistic and schedule requirements identified during the construction planning stage.

The CWM Team’s plan for ensuring that adequate resources are allocated to maintain the project schedule is to divide each Area by discipline and, based on an analysis of schedule durations, determine the number of crews required in each discipline to meet the production rates. Further review of the schedule and determination of concurrent activities will refine the field personnel and equipment requirements. Once crew requirements are determined, equipment is allocated by specific needs and an analysis of what equipment can be shared between crews.

CWM understands that self-performed work offers the maximum opportunity for flexibility and control of the Critical Path work. Planning the correct balance of self–performing and subcontracted work ensures that adequate resources are employed to maintain the Project Schedule. Significant portions of the ITS and Tolling Infrastructure work will be subcontracted to our dedicated subcontractors, Carlson Construction Services, LLC and Brooks, Berry, Haynie and Associates. In addition, the CWM Team is committed to and has created a DBE Plan that will continue to identify and develop work packages for DBE firms.

The CWM Team’s subcontracting plan will be successful as key subcontractors participated in the PDG process in the development stage and these firms and others will continue to participate in Project meetings during the design and construction phases. These meetings give the CWM Team the opportunity to receive input to design, coordinate, and clearly define the scope and quality of subcontractor’s work.

The Project Scope and limitations on traffic restrictions will determine the daily operating hours of the project. The CWM Team’s approach for routine operations will be for each shift to work 10 hours, Monday through Saturday. CWM intends to utilize accelerated construction methods for the construction of the northbound and southbound auxiliary lanes in Area 1. This will require night work and weekend work as allowed by the Design-Build Agreement. Certain other areas of the Project may work at night which will include activities that:

• Significantly impact traffic congestion on I-85 or I-985 • Involve bridge demolition, beam erection or deck pours • Can only be performed during allowable lane closures • Require traffic shifts • Involve the testing of SRTA tolling equipment • Involve the operation of numerous trucks, such as asphalt placement and aggregate or excavation haul • Require two shifts per day to maintain the schedule

The CWM Team has developed a Construction Phasing Plan within the framework of our management philosophy of dividing the project into three Management Areas. The design, permitting and construction of each Area has been staged to promote the earliest possible start to construction with an emphasis on safely and efficiently moving the traveling public through work areas without compromising the safety of our workers.

I-85 Express Lanes



The phasing of each Area was determined with careful analysis of the Area’s scope, schedule and risk factors with demarcation of the Management Areas into logical segments of work with consideration to overall integration of the work to avoid conflicts, such as drainage and storm water flow between the stages. Constructability has been analyzed in each Area to maximize earth work balance to reduce the length of hauls and for proper placement of ingress and egress points for construction activities minimizing the impact to motorists, businesses, and residents in the project corridor while maintaining reasonable access to the project for material deliveries.

C.3.f Participating Members and Major Non-Participating Members Relationships:

The following is a table indicating the roles of Participating Members and Major Non-Participating Members and their shares of ownership of any joint venture entities.

NAME

ORGANIZATION POSITION

JOINT VENTURE % OWNERSHIP

PROJECT ROLE

C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc.

Participating Member Not Applicable Developer &

Prime Contractor ARCADIS U.S., Inc. Major Non-Participating Member Not Applicable Lead Engineering Firm

The following is a table showing the relationship between any of the Participating Members and Major Non-Participating Members.

NAME ORGANIZATION POSITION RELATIONSHIP C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc.

Participating Member CW Matthews is the sole Participating Member and will be the contracting entity with GDOT

ARCADIS U.S., Inc. Major Non-Participating Member ARCADIS U.S., Inc. is the sole Major Non- Participating Member and will operate under a subcontract agreement with CW Matthews

C.3.2 INTERNAL ORGANIZATION SYSTEMS

C.3.2.a Working Together: The CWM Team understands that the most critical relationship for success of the I-85 Express Lanes Project is between GDOT and the CWM Management Team. To foster this relationship, the CWM Team will promote a work environment that encourages communication, trust, cooperation and mutual respect among GDOT and other stakeholders. CWM has a long history of dispute avoidance based on its commitment to developing and maintaining an atmosphere that encourages open lines of communication, supports discussions, timely recognition and resolution of disputes, aligns expectations while integrating GDOT, SRTA, the CWM Team and other stakeholders into one unified team with common goals.

The CWM Team will employ its time proven strategy of meeting integration and encouraging the participation in Project meetings at all levels by GDOT, SRTA, subcontractors, designers, and utilities to foster the sharing of information across all disciplines. The GDOT/CWM Team will establish a protocol for meetings, which will begin with two Project Kickoff Meetings. The participants in the first meeting will be GDOT and the CWM Team. This meeting will act as an open forum for candid discussions related to ways the parties will work together, communications protocol, identification and prioritization of concerns, issue resolution and establishment of common goals. The meeting will provide a framework for establishing the means and methods going forward for achieving project goals. A second Kickoff Meeting following the same format will be held with a wider range of stakeholders; including utility companies, SRTA, FHWA, Gwinnett County and other affected stakeholders.

The GDOT/CWM Team will establish a calendar for meetings including technical staffs, construction managers, utilities, safety personnel, subcontractors and vendors to facilitate coordination between design and construction increasing the efficiency of the GDOT/CWM Management Team. These regularly scheduled meetings are listed in the following table.

I-85 Express Lanes



MEETING FREQUENCY PARTICIPANTS Kickoff Meeting #1 Project Start GDOT, CWM Team

Kickoff Meeting # 2 Project Start GDOT, SRTA, CWM Team, FHWA, Community Groups, Utilities, and other Stakeholders

Technical Group As Needed GDOT, CWM Team Technical Staff

Project Development Group Weekly GDOT, Design, Construction, QA/QC, Utilities, Subcontractors

Design Quality As Needed GDOT, Design, Construction, Quality Construction Logistical Bi-Weekly Construction, CWM Senior Management Utility Coordination Bi-Weekly GDOT, Utilities, Design, Construction

Construction Coordination Weekly CWM, Construction, Subcontractors, Design, Quality, Schedule, Safety, MOT

Electronic Toll Systems As Needed SRTA, GDOT, Design, Construction, ETCS Integrator and Consultants

Project Meeting Monthly GDOT, SRT, CWM Senior Management Safety Hazard Analysis Daily Construction, Subcontractors Safety Monthly GDOT, Construction, CWM Senior Management

Schedule Review Monthly GDOT, CWM Senior Management, Schedule, Construction, Project Controls

C.3.2.b Decision-Making Process: The CWM Team’s record of effective decision-making is based on the ability to manage high profile, fast-tracked projects while maintaining an atmosphere that encourages the communication of issues in a receptive non-threatening manner. This approach supports and encourages early recognition and resolution. The CWM Team’s management strategy of meeting integration promotes dispute avoidance through constant communication among all stakeholders, reducing the chance of misunderstanding.

When a dispute is identified, resolution is encouraged at the lowest level possible at the earliest possible time. If the issue cannot be resolved at this level, the issue will be referred to the next level of management and will be monitored by the Project Manager, who will focus the Management Team on a timely resolution to avoid schedule or cost impacts. Issues that affect the Critical Path will be given the highest priority.

C.3.2.c Communication Methods: The Project Manager will provide a protocol for documentation and communication to team members on the status of issues that may be in dispute or require escalation to higher management levels. In the event that an issue is not resolved at the lowest level and requires escalation to higher levels, contract provisions already accepted by the lead designer and major subcontractors will provide for unimpeded continuation of all work while negotiating a resolution of the issue.

The foundation of the Project communication plan is our meeting integration strategy which will give all stakeholders the opportunity to meet face-to-face on a regularly scheduled basis to communicate the status of project goals, expectations, construction, environmental and quality issues, safety, public outreach and schedule. Each meeting will be documented by minutes that will be available for review by all participants and action item lists will be developed to identify critical issues and establish milestones for resolution.

On a daily basis, the CWM Team will utilize the GDOT web-based management website, e-Builder.net, for all file storage, communication and correspondence. This system will provide automated tracking of time critical submittals and will be the official record of all project communication. CWM will utilize Maxwell StreetSmarts Version 7.5 for internal financial controls and Oracle Contract Manager Version 14 for internal document management control.

C.3.2.d Quality Process: The CWM Team will develop the Project Quality Management Plan (QMP), which will include a Design Quality Management (DQM) Plan and a Construction Quality Management (CQM) Plan, to be the core document for managing the quality of the project and documentation of any changes from the design processes or nonconforming work through a Nonconformance Report Process. The DQM will define the specifications,

I-85 Express Lanes



qualifications and procedures for developing a quality design. The CQM will document the detailed procedures, specifications and frequencies for construction quality verification.

The quality management process starts at project inception with submittal of the QMP no later than 30 days from NTP 1 and continues through project acceptance. The DQM Plan will outline the procedures for a system of independent design checks and as illustrated on the CWM Team organizational chart, the Design QA Manager, Steve Callis, PE, functions independently of the Design Team by reporting to the Lead Contractor Project Manager, Bob Thompson.

The construction engineering inspection and testing functions of the CQM Plan will be performed independently of the Design-Build Team by GDOT or authorized representatives. Any materials verification by the Design-Build Team required by the specifications will be performed in GDOT certified labs under the supervision of Andrew Brooks, PE who has no responsibilities for performance of the work.

C.3.2.e Interfacing with Stakeholders: CWM acknowledges the importance to the Project of SRTA, FHWA, GDOT’s consultants and other stakeholders and welcomes their participation and involvement in the Project. Beginning at the Kickoff Meetings, all stakeholders will be integrated into the project meeting protocol. Each entity; such as the toll system integrator, utilities and subcontractors will be invited to participate in PDG and Technical Meetings to promote communications and the early identification and resolution of issues before they impact the schedule and timely completion of the Project.

Timely communication of information to the traveling public and all stakeholders will be important in maintaining public and media support for the Project. The CWM Team will coordinate and collaborate with GDOT in development of a comprehensive Public Information and Communications Plan that will outline the communications protocol utilized by GDOT to keep the public informed of scheduled project activities, traffic restrictions and emergency situations.

C.3.3 SAFETY

Safety of our employees, subcontractors and the traveling public is of paramount importance and the first responsibility of all members of the CWM Team. We will mandate that safety at all times remains the primary consideration in all aspects of the project execution. All members of the CWM Team are committed to implementing and delivering a comprehensive safety program which establishes a zero accident goal for the project and the traveling public. The safety program focuses on loss prevention through the use of safety training and hazard identification, awareness and avoidance.

As evidenced by the fact that CWM’s loss experience rates are continuously below industry standards, the CWM Safety Program is a proven system with its foundation in the philosophy of insisting that all personnel have day to day responsibility for safety, but with particular focus on the Foreman and Worker level, and continuous Safety training and education. This philosophy empowers personnel who directly perform the work to have the appropriate training and resources necessary to recognize and mitigate hazards immediately. The effectiveness of the program is continually evaluated through our formal Safety Audit Program. This program provides regularly scheduled Safety Audits of randomly selected operations. Participation in the audits include personnel at every level, from senior management to craft workers, and provides an immediate and recordable safety evaluation.

The CWM Safety Program will include the following key elements:

• Senior management commitment to safety • Dedicated Safety Manager with responsibility for safety of project personnel and the public • Safety orientation for every employee and subcontractor prior to beginning work. • Substance abuse prevention program that includes pre-employment testing and random verification after

employment • Experienced personnel for implementation and monitoring of Maintenance of Traffic Plans • Safety planning in all phases of project delivery • Safety Audit Program • Specialized Training in specific discipline areas • Continuing Safety training and education

I-85 Express Lanes PI Number: 110600 Gwinnett County Page 22


• Daily hazard analysis • Protocols for accident investigation and follow–up actions

Implementation of the CWM Safety Program will be under the direction of Mr. Chris Blair. Chris is certified as an Associate Risk Manager and OSHA 500 trainer with more than 10 years of experience in the construction industry managing safety programs and providing employee safety training. His onsite experience has helped him develop effective approaches to safety and compliance.

Continuous training is a basis of the CWM Safety Program and begins when a new employee is hired and continues throughout the duration of their employment. CWM offers 35 safety training classes per year that are tailored to the employees’ discipline and exposure to specific hazards. Core components of the training program include:

• New hire orientation • Defensive Driving • 10-hour OSHA training course • First Aid, CPR • Alcohol Awareness • Specific discipline training including; Fall Protection, Competent Person, Confined Space Entry, Rigging,

MOT Certified Flaggers, Crane Hand Signals and Crane Assembly • Specific equipment operator certifications including; Certified Crane Operators and Fork Lift Operators

C.3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

C.3.4.a Environmental Commitments: The CWM Team’s approach to environmental compliance and permitting will begin at NTP 1 with early integration of the design NEPA lead, ecologists, compliance managers and construction managers into the Technical Groups and Project Development Groups to identify potential environmental issues and develop mitigation strategies to avoid potential schedule delays. The CWM Team is committed to environmental compliance and will mandate adherence to the environmental management plan through every phase of the project.

Members of the CWM Team have a comprehensive understanding of environmental requirements and best practices from their qualifications and past experience working on urban freeway projects. Their most recent first-hand experience was working together on the I-75 South Managed Lanes project where the CWM Team was able to successfully navigate the NEPA Re-evaluation and permitting process to implement a phased NOI approach that expedited the start of construction by four months.

The Environmental Management Team will be led by Robin Stevens in the design and permitting phase and by Brian Johnson in the construction compliance stage. Ms. Stevens has 15 years of experience in the NEPA process, relevant federal and state permitting requirements and is a well-respected industry veteran. Ms. Stevens has developed relationships with the appropriate regulatory agencies that will enable the team to have early communication and coordination with agencies to address any concerns. In addition, Ms. Stevens knows exactly what information GDOT’s NEPA consultants will need to perform their re-evaluation since she has successfully performed the same for GDOT on several D-B projects, including the I-20 Collector-Distributor Project. Brian Johnson has 15 years of experience in environmental engineering and serves as CWM’s full-time Environmental Manager. Brian is experienced in developing and managing individual and general NPDES permits and storm water pollution plans and monitoring compliance with Section 404 permit conditions.

The following table identifies the environmental commitments, potential re-evaluations and documentation necessary to complete the project.

• NEPA Re-Evaluation for Design Modifications Ecology Report Addendum Assessment of Effects Addendum Noise Report Addendum Air Quality Report Addendum

• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit (GAR 1000002), Notice of Intent

I-85 Express Lanes



• NPDES General Construction Permit (GAR 1000003), Notice of Intent • NPDES Construction General Permit (GAR 150000), Notice of Termination • Georgia Stream Buffer Variance • Section 404 Nationwide or Regional Permit (if additional required) • Section 404 Individual Permit (if additional required) • Waste/Borrow Pit Local Land Disturbance Permits and Associated Documents • Migratory Bird Treaty

The CWM Team’s recent experience on projects of this size has led it to recognize that education of the construction team, including all levels of field personnel in the project’s environmental requirements is a key strategy in eliminating compliance issues. With an emphasis on looking ahead for early recognition of issues, the full-time Worksite Erosion Control Supervisor (WECS) assigned to this Project, and under the direction of Brian Johnson, will train our construction personnel on the specific project requirements.

In addition, Erosion Control Inspectors (under the direction of the WECS), will perform daily inspections of all applicable project components. Daily inspections of staging areas and BMPs will occur in each project management segment of the project alignment, so that the full length of the project is inspected on a weekly basis, as required by NPDES permits. Immediate inspections will be conducted following qualifying rain events or other events which could possibly damage BMP’s. At specific project locations, such as culverts, there will be additional construction personnel with a WECS certification which will help with specific daily inspections and ensure compliance with applicable regulations and erosion control requirements.

C.3.4.b Environmental Risks: As discussed earlier, during the design phase, the CWM Team will continue to identify additional environmental impacts and risks, and will propose mitigation strategies to avoid, minimize, or eliminate environmental impacts. Listed below are potential environmental risks and a description of the CWM Team’s approach to mitigate, eliminate or reduce those risks.

RISK MITIGATION

Environmental Permitting Delays

• Thorough assessment and understanding of permitting requirements • Early and continuous agency coordination • Avoid stream buffer variance issues by designing with no impacts • Designing the project within the already identified ROW

Impact to Buffers, Streams, Protected Species, Aquatic Life

• Close monitoring and compliance with Erosion and Sediment Control Plans, variances and permits

• Limit construction entrance/exit areas • Use dedicated erosion control personnel (WECS) • Periodic re-training of WECS and construction personnel • Train monitoring personnel in specific protected species recognition • Schedule construction activities to avoid spawning/nesting/breeding seasons in accordance

with the environmental commitments Public Outreach • Coordinating closely with GDOT to maintain open communication channels

C.3.5 PROJECT MANAGEMENT INTERVIEW

The CWM Team looks forward to the opportunity to participate in the Project Management Interview. The four attendees representing the CWM Team are:

• Bob Thompson, Lead Contractor Project Manager • Freddy Sumner, Lead Contractor Superintendent • Keith Kunst, PE, Lead Design Engineer • William Dial, PE, Lead Roadway Engineer

LEAD CONTRACTOR

PROJECT MANAGER

ARCADIS1

Willmer8

Specialty Services

LEAD DESIGN CONSULTANT TEAM

LEGEND1CW Matthews 2ARCADIS 3Atlanta Consulting Engineers 4New South Associates (DBE) 5Pont Engineering (DBE) 6Southeastern Ecology (DBE)7Southeastern Engineering, Inc. 8Willmer Engineering 9Wolverton & Associates *denotes Key Team Lead

Geotechnical

Area Class:

6.01a, 6.02

*William Dial, PE2

Roadway Lead

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

ARCADIS1

Outreach /

Communications

ACE3

Highway

Lighting

Peter Feininger1

Bruce McNitt2

Bob Thompson1

Roadway Design

Holly Bauman, PE2

Amanda Check, PE2

Matt Crenshaw, PE2

Jes Laing, EIT2

Hydraulics

Jody Hughey, PE2

Erosion Control

Rainfall/Runoff

Kim Baker, PE2

QA Manager: *Steve Callis, PE2

Joe Leoni, PE2

QA DESIGN TEAM

*Robin Stevens2

NEPA Lead

NEPA Documents

Robin Stevens2

History

Summer Ciomek4

Patrick Sullivan4

Air/Noise

Jody Peace, PE2

Kouskik Arunachalam, PE2

Ecology/Permitting

Alex Levy2

Melissa Rottenberg2

Jordan Myers2

Freshwater Aquatic

Chris Skelton6

*Shubhendu Mohanty,

PE2

Traffic Lead

ITS

Shubhendu Mohanty, PE2

Luis Velasquez, EIT2

Toll Facilities Design

Shubhendu Mohanty, PE2

James McNabb, PE2

Traffic

Prasoon Sinha, PE,

PTOE2

Will Thies, EIT2

*Kristen Kasmire, PE2

Bridge Lead

Bridge Design

James McNabb, PE2

Jin Liu, PE2

Sean Garland, PE5

Harold Carter, EIT2

Bridge Hydraulics

Jody Hughey, PE2

Martina Novak, PE2

*Mike Peppers, PLS2

Survey Lead

Surveying

Mark Anderson, PLS2

Lance Dutra2

Chris Adams, RLS7

SUE

Buck Wright9

Utility Coordination

Andy Rikard2

Area Classes: 1.06a,

1.06b, 1.06c, 1.06d,

1.06e, 1.06g

Area Classes:

4.01, 6.02Area Classes:

5.01, 5.02, 5.08

LEAD CONTRACTOR TEAM

*Jeff Jacques1

*Kyle Marchman, PE1

ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER

Area Classes: 3.01, 3.04,

3.05, 3.06, 3.07, 3.09,

3.12, 3.17, 9.01, 9.03Area Classes:

3.06, 3.07, 3.09, 3.17

Area Class:

3.15

Andrew Brooks, PE1 *Freddy Sumner1 Chris Blair1

CONSTRUCTION MANAGER

*Ryan Beech1

ROADWAY SUPERINTENDENT

*Brad Nelson1

STRUCTURES SUPERINTENDENT

TBD1

WORKSITE EROSION

CONTROL SUPERVISOR

Jeff Duncan1

TRAFFIC CONTROL

SUPERVISOR

Keith Kunst, PE2

Request for ProposalsTechnical Proposal Submittal

Page 24

B.1 TEAM ORGANIZATION CHART:

Area Class:

Not Required

*Brian Johnson1

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE

MANAGER

SAFETY DIRECTORCONSTRUCTION QUALITY

ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL

WORKSITE UTILITY

COORDINATION SUPERVISOR

LEAD DESIGN CONSULTANT

PROJECT MANAGER

AREA 2 AREA 3

Superintendent

Field Engineer

Subcontractors

Vendors

AREA 1

Superintendent

Field Engineer

Subcontractors

Vendors

Superintendent

Field Engineer

Subcontractors

Vendors

AREA 1 – 3 KEY SUBCONTRACTORS & VENDORS

Adams Grading Co. (DBE) – Clearing Peek Pavement Marking LLC - Striping

Tricor Construction (DBE) – Sound Barrier C & G Concrete Constr. (DBE) – Misc Concrete

Argos Ready Mix LLC – Concrete Supplier Vulcan Materials – Aggregate Supplier

Blount-Sanford Contracting – Barrier Wall Brooks Berry Haynie – ITS & Toll Infrastructure

Jake Martin & Sons (DBE) – Grassing Cymco 7 (DBE) – Reinforcing Steel

C.4

DB

E P

arti

cip

atio

n

I-85 Express Lanes



C.4 DBE PARTICIPATION

As evidenced by its execution of Form I, DBE Certification, in the Administrative Information Submittal, the CWM Team is committed to meeting or exceeding the Project’s DBE goal of 14% of the overall Project design and construction costs. Our approach to maximizing DBE participation over the entire duration of the project will be to proactively seek opportunities for DBE participation during the pre-bid plan development, design, permitting and construction phases of the project.

The first step in this process was to research The Georgia State UCP Directory and the GDOT Highway Construction Availability Report to develop a project specific DBE solicitation list. The goal of this research was to identify the maximum number of firms and work classes that would provide opportunities for DBE participants specific to the scope and duration of this project.

After the CWM Team’s solicitation list was complete, each firm was extended an invitation to attend a project specific DBE Subcontractor Opportunity Meeting held on May 12, 2015. The meeting gave potential DBE subcontractors information including:

• Definition of Project Scope • Management Approach • Potential Opportunities by Work Class • Conceptual Quantities • Schedule • Contact Information for Questions • Information on CWM’s Bidding and Document Access Process

Subsequent to the Subcontractor Opportunity Meeting, there have been follow up meetings and discussions with individual firms resulting in a plan that includes DBE Participation from NTP 1 to substantial completion of the project as demonstrated below.

I-85 Express Lanes



After award of the project, the CWM Team will implement its DBE Performance Plan that will continue to encourage DBE contracting opportunities and DBE contract compliance by:

• Identifying specific categories of services and work tailored for DBE firms. • Developing bid packages that are structured to encourage DBE participation. • Providing DBE firms with timely information about plans, specifications, plan revisions and contract

requirements for solicitation response. • Providing assistance in the procurement process and good faith contract negotiations. • Monitoring protocols that confirm the acceptability of DBE firms for work performed on this contract. • Providing assistance in obtaining bonding, material and equipment resources. • Utilizing the services of available minority organizations to provide assistance in the recruitment and

placement of DBE firms. • Reporting DBE commitments to GDOT on a monthly and annual summary basis including documentation

confirming all payments to the DBE participants.

The efforts of the CWM Team during the Request for Proposal phase of the project have resulted in the commitment of 35 DBE firms in 19 different Work Codes / Area Classes to join the CWM Team in designing and constructing this significant project. These commitments are evidenced in the Form I -DBE Commitments List and are summarized in Table 1-2.

TABLE 1-2

FIRM TASK AREA CLASS OR

WORK CODE

Pont Engineering, Inc., Marietta, GA Bridge Design & Shop Drawing Review 4.01

Southeastern Engineering, Inc. (SEI), Marietta, GA Design Survey 5.01

Ranger Consulting, Inc., Rome, GA Bridge Foundation Studies 6.02

CTCS, Inc., Traffic Control Specialists, Atlanta, GA Traffic Control 150

Clean Water Consultants, Inc., Winder, GA Miscellaneous Erosion Control Items 163

Adams Grading Company, Inc., Waco, GA Clearing & Grubbing Right of Way 201

Grier Brothers Enterprises, Inc., Atlanta, GA Hauling Soil Within The Project 205a

Four Seasons Trucking, Inc., Decatur, GA Hauling Asphaltic Conc Mix 400a

Derrick Pugh, Inc., Decatur, GA Haul Liquid AC 400b

C & G Concrete Construction Co., Inc., East Point, GA Miscellaneous Concrete 441

CYMCO 7, Inc., Decatur, GA Reinforcement Steel 511

Tricor Construction, Inc., Spartanburg, SC Sound Barriers 624

Bonn-J Contracting Inc. of Florida, Chuluota, FL Mech Stabilized Emb Retaining Walls 626

Safety Signal Co., Inc., Union City, GA Highway Signs 636

Celebrity Fence Company, Inc., Ellenwood, GA Fence (Chain, Woven or Barbed Wire) 643

Jake Martin & Son Contractors, Inc., Gainesville, GA Grassing 700

Kelly Construction Co., Inc., Mableton, GA Hauling Aggregate 800a

Carlson Construction Services, LLC, Marietta, GA Fiber Optic System 935

GC Electrical Solutions, LLC, Riverdale, GA ATMS 940

C.5

Pro

ject

Dif

fere

nce

s

I-85 Express Lanes



C.5 PROJECT DIFFERENCES FROM REFERENCE INFORMATION DOCUMENTS (RID)

During the preparation of the proposal, the CWM Team included several design and construction optimizations such as the use of slopes to eliminate walls, the use of walls to eliminate impacts, revisions to the staging plan, shifting the location of sound walls for constructability while maintaining performance, etc. In addition to these minor modifications and optimizations, the CWM Team identified two major improvements to the base design as represented in the Reference Information Documents (RID). These revisions provide better constructability, improved construction value, improved staging, improved use of existing infrastructure, and reduced long-term maintenance requirements for GDOT and other factors. The proposed revisions do not deviate from the contract requirements including required design criteria, speed designs, managed lane performance criteria, laneage and buffer requirements, etc.

These improvements demonstrate the CWM Team’s dedication to using creativity and innovation in the design-build process to provide improved value to GDOT/SRTA, while also reducing construction impacts to the traveling public. Schematic representations of these revisions are enclosed in the Supplemental Information binder accompanying this Proposal and a description of each one of these revisions along with the background and benefits from the revision are described below:

Revision #1 – Southbound Alignment Shift at the Bridge over I-985

This revision occurs between approximate Southbound stations 1130+00 to 1180+00 and Northbound express lanes stations 3014+00 to 3061+00. The schematic of the change is shown on Supplemental Information binder sheets RID (1) 1-2.

The RID drawings though this station range typically kept the southbound general purpose lanes at or near their existing location. In the area of the bridge over I-985, the general purpose lanes were laid on top of existing (although with several feet of grade change) and widening was to the inside. As the lanes continued to the south, the widening shifted from all inside to all outside. This outside widening required the reconstruction of the I-985 entrance lanes, had some ESA impacts and required extensive walls to stay within the existing ROW. North of the bridge over I-985, the RID design used a tall fill wall on the outside NB express lane which tied into the existing 2:1 slope.

The CWM Team’s improved design flattens the southbound curve from 5,200’ as proposed in the RID to 8,750’, which, in addition to leaving a better rate of curvature and improved horizontal sight distance for the finished condition, also greatly improves the contractor’s ability to maintain traffic during construction and reduces the shoring required to construct the bridge. As detailed further in the Traffic Control section, the revised design is able to use the first half of the new southbound bridge for Stage 2 traffic rather than needing to use the northbound managed lane via temporary crossovers. Those crossovers would necessitate lower speed temporary profiles, would require long lengths of throwaway pavement and would involve a more divergent shift in temporary alignment. As a result, the improved temporary condition of Stage 2 will be closer to the high-level operational standards of the finished condition.

South of the I-985 Bridge, the revised design provides the same typical section of the RID, but performs all SB widening to the inside. This approach uses available green space better, eliminates all of the reconstruction needed for the I-985 entrance, eliminates a significant length of wall along the outside limits and greatly improves the staging (primarily in the I-985 entrance area).

North of the I-985 Bridge, the revised design eliminates all of the proposed walls through the use of standard fill slopes (2:1 max). The walls proposed in the RID would need significant lengthening of MSE straps to overcome global stability problems and would also need extensive shoring just to be built. The proposed use of fill eliminates the significant capital costs of walls and shoring, improves staging and schedule, eliminates the long-term global stability concerns, and reduces perpetual inspection and maintenance obligations for GDOT. While this revision increases stream and wetland impacts in the median, impacts are eliminated on the outside of I-85. In addition, the changes in impacts do not change the permitting requirements of the project, the changes will be documented via NEPA and special study re-evaluation, and all mitigation credit costs will be paid for by the Contractor.

I-85 Express Lanes



Revision #2 – Improved Utilization of Existing Infrastructure through the I-85 at SR 20 Interchange

This revision occurs primarily between northbound stations 2265+00 to 2315+00 and southbound stations 1260+00 to 1316+00. The schematics of the change is shown on supplemental drawings package sheets RID (2) 1-3.

The revised alignment improves on the RID and uses existing infrastructure better by incorporating the additional lane that was built under the most recent I-85 at SR 20 interchange reconstruction. As shown in the typical sections on supplemental drawings package sheet RID (2) 1, PI 110360 provided for a third 12’ general purpose lane by constructing 24’ wide full depth pavement represented as outside shoulder. The revised design uses the 36’ of full depth mainline pavement built under that project by aligning the two existing lanes and 12’ of the proposed buffer (future third lane) with it. The resulting outside shoulder is the standard 12’ paved and the rest of the needed construction (additional 2’ buffer, managed lane and shoulder) will be constructed to the inside as originally planned.

In addition to optimizing unused existing infrastructure, reducing capital expenditures and providing better value, this revision improves staging through the area, improves median drainage/gutter spread and reduces perpetual maintenance costs for GDOT. In addition, the revision provides the contractually required 50’ width of pavement between inside and outside edges of pavement delineated as two GP lanes (24’), a buffer (14’), and a managed lane (12’). The proposed typical section is also shown in the supplemental information drawings.

C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc.

Drawer 970

Marietta, GA 30061

Telephone: 770.422.7520