Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today

[Dog Walker]

It's not being delayed because of the costs.  The cost now is still less than the original plan which was designed to use up money allocated for the Lexus lanes on 295 NE quadrant.

Maybe the bids came in ridiculously high or had bad schedules or unacceptable conditions.  More info please.

[southsider1015]

Cost is the reason.  Both bids came in $40 million over the estimate.  They came in high because of the scope creep, and because of the complexity of the project.  Bad schedules?  Both contractors are highly qualified, but the project is extremely difficult due to the proposed work and available space.

[southsider1015]

Scope cutting will need to occur.  I think that every part of the project could be on the chopping block.

And I didn't mean that it's never going to happen...just not for another 4-5 years or so.  2 years to readvertise, 2-3 years to construct.  Who knows what could happen between now and then.  I agree that it would be a pretty insane act to cut it from the project after everything that happened.

Who knows.  Maybe the project heads back on the shelf, and next time it rears its head, we'll be seeing Express Lanes across the Fuller Warren.

So you're just speculating?

Yep.  Everyone is.

[southsider1015]

Scope cutting will need to occur.  I think that every part of the project could be on the chopping block.

And I didn't mean that it's never going to happen...just not for another 4-5 years or so.  2 years to readvertise, 2-3 years to construct.  Who knows what could happen between now and then.  I agree that it would be a pretty insane act to cut it from the project after everything that happened.

I'm willing to bet you're wrong again.  best guess is FDOT just allocates more money in next year's budget...and the project is delayed for no more than 1 year

Glad you think I'm wrong.  My guess is that they split it into two projects...one for Fuller Warren, one for the I-10 work.  The procurement process is probably a minimum of 6 months.  That's from advertisement to bid submittal.  And that assumes they start now.  Best case, they start in FDOTs next fiscal in July.  So probably at least a year from now.  My guess is longer, but again, just a guess.

[southsider1015]

Who would be the three? For all we know, one or more of them may have been in contact with some of the people posting in this thread.

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/statemaintenanceoffice/District2MapContacts.shtm


Start at the top.  Add the PM and the DDE.

[tufsu1]

Who would be the three? For all we know, one or more of them may have been in contact with some of the people posting in this thread.

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/statemaintenanceoffice/District2MapContacts.shtm


Start at the top.  Add the PM and the DDE.

Thanks for the ancient D2 contact list...Will Watts (listed in Lake City) has been in the private sector for nearly two years...and Chris LeDew (listed in the Jax office) hasn't worked at FDOT for more than 2 years.

[southsider1015]

Who would be the three? For all we know, one or more of them may have been in contact with some of the people posting in this thread.

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/statemaintenanceoffice/District2MapContacts.shtm


Start at the top.  Add the PM and the DDE.

Thanks for the ancient D2 contact list...Will Watts (listed in Lake City) has been in the private sector for nearly two years...and Chris LeDew (listed in the Jax office) hasn't worked at FDOT for more than 2 years.

And of course you know I don't mean Will.

Greg, Larry, Jim, and Kathy.

[cline]

southsider, I get that roadways are obviously where your bread is buttered but you have a odd obsession with railroading through these highway projects all over the place. I'm sick of this whole notion of "the region needs it" and f@ck the communities that are going to be affected. That's the mentality that destroyed communities when they built the highway system originally. Hell, they planned it that way in the name of slum and blight removal.

And of course we all know this is just going to be another "fix" until the next "fix" another few years down the road. We just completed the thing and now we have to spend more millions to accommodate future growth and imaginary level of service standards. Of course, there's money to be made in all of this.

I'm not buying the "for the region" bullshit. The communities that are affected have faces and voices, the "region" does not. Jacksonville isn't just here for regional infrastructure support. We are an actual city with actual communities and people.

[Steve]

My frustration is that the folks that design these solutions aren't held accountable. With this project, the changes they're talking about would have likely been cost-neutral had they been done the first time, save for the Shared Use Path which has no effect on auto traffic.

Does any state have some sort of rule that contractors who complete design-build projects that meet or exceed LOS goals will be preferred in future bids? I just feel like a lot of the issues that the interchange has should have been obvious, like the weave created after US17 merges to I-10. They even built two sets of ramps, yet didn't segregate traffic well at all. Likewise, traffic from I-95 North to I-10 to US17 was obviously going to create a mess with those cars changing a minimum of 3 lanes in a mile.

My understanding was that the project started in 2005 was a design build done by Archer Western. I think AW is doing the Overland Bridge as well, but that project (while it has some capacity improvements) is largely an operational project necessitated by the End of Life of the existing structure.

[southsider1015]

southsider, I get that roadways are obviously where your bread is buttered but you have a odd obsession with railroading through these highway projects all over the place. I'm sick of this whole notion of "the region needs it" and f@ck the communities that are going to be affected. That's the mentality that destroyed communities when they built the highway system originally. Hell, they planned it that way in the name of slum and blight removal.

And of course we all know this is just going to be another "fix" until the next "fix" another few years down the road. We just completed the thing and now we have to spend more millions to accommodate future growth and imaginary level of service standards. Of course, there's money to be made in all of this.

I'm not buying the "for the region" bullshit. The communities that are affected have faces and voices, the "region" does not. Jacksonville isn't just here for regional infrastructure support. We are an actual city with actual communities and people.

OK.  Great.  Obsessed though? 

[southsider1015]

My frustration is that the folks that design these solutions aren't held accountable. With this project, the changes they're talking about would have likely been cost-neutral had they been done the first time, save for the Shared Use Path which has no effect on auto traffic.

Does any state have some sort of rule that contractors who complete design-build projects that meet or exceed LOS goals will be preferred in future bids? I just feel like a lot of the issues that the interchange has should have been obvious, like the weave created after US17 merges to I-10. They even built two sets of ramps, yet didn't segregate traffic well at all. Likewise, traffic from I-95 North to I-10 to US17 was obviously going to create a mess with those cars changing a minimum of 3 lanes in a mile.

My understanding was that the project started in 2005 was a design build done by Archer Western. I think AW is doing the Overland Bridge as well, but that project (while it has some capacity improvements) is largely an operational project necessitated by the End of Life of the existing structure.

Held accountable how?  FDOTs current Design-Build  process has minimum requirements with opportunities to add value to the project.  Of course, the best improvements are the ideas that cut cost and add value.  FDOT scores the proposals, and in combination with the price (and construction days), an overall score is developed. Best score wins.

So it's up to FDOT to score up or down the proposals as they see fit.  So your misdirected blame needs to be put on FDOT, not the contactors or designers.  There's a shortlisting that occurs, and of course the successful teams will be scored positively.  That's includes both AW and Superior on this project. 

The last big I project was not Design-Build.  Overland was

[Steve]

^Held accountable for blowing this thing the first time. I don't know the exact way to do it. This isn't my professional field, but it's crazy that we spent $152m on this just four years ago, and we have to go back to the drawing board to fix it, when most of what they are recommending could have been done initially, at cost-neutral.

I'm not trying to "blame" anyone - what's done is done; you can't unspend the money. If the project wasn't design-build then you're right, this probably is FDOT's responsibility. The bottom line is that with FDOT (and true of other areas of government), if something doesn't turn out right, then more money is spent.

[cline]

My frustration is that the folks that design these solutions aren't held accountable. With this project, the changes they're talking about would have likely been cost-neutral had they been done the first time, save for the Shared Use Path which has no effect on auto traffic.

Does any state have some sort of rule that contractors who complete design-build projects that meet or exceed LOS goals will be preferred in future bids? I just feel like a lot of the issues that the interchange has should have been obvious, like the weave created after US17 merges to I-10. They even built two sets of ramps, yet didn't segregate traffic well at all. Likewise, traffic from I-95 North to I-10 to US17 was obviously going to create a mess with those cars changing a minimum of 3 lanes in a mile.

My understanding was that the project started in 2005 was a design build done by Archer Western. I think AW is doing the Overland Bridge as well, but that project (while it has some capacity improvements) is largely an operational project necessitated by the End of Life of the existing structure.

Held accountable how?  FDOTs current Design-Build  process has minimum requirements with opportunities to add value to the project.  Of course, the best improvements are the ideas that cut cost and add value.  FDOT scores the proposals, and in combination with the price (and construction days), an overall score is developed. Best score wins.

So it's up to FDOT to score up or down the proposals as they see fit.  So your misdirected blame needs to be put on FDOT, not the contactors or designers.  There's a shortlisting that occurs, and of course the successful teams will be scored positively.  That's includes both AW and Superior on this project. 

The last big I project was not Design-Build.  Overland was

The design traffic was clearly f@cked up the first time by whoever did that. And now we're having to literally pay the price to fix it. So who's fault is that?

[RattlerGator]

I'm not trying to "blame" anyone - what's done is done; you can't unspend the money.

Well . . . I think you definitely are trying to blame someone:

My frustration is that the folks that design these solutions aren't held accountable.

And, maybe you're right to do so. More often than not, though, reasonable (albeit frustrating from a distance) decisions were made based on the money constraint (or some other real constraint) that was pressing at the time.

I would like to see more transparency with these projects if for no other reason to calm down the bitch-and-moan crowd. Maybe FDOT should be required to publish on projects of this scale an After-Action-Report (due no later than 2 years after work has begun, whether or not the project has been completed) itemizing crucial departmental decisions affecting scope of initial project, solicitation of community input, scope of revised project & revisions based on community input, solicitation of bids, and award of bid.

It would allow the public to have a better insight into what FDOT does, how it is constrained by federal/state/local mandates, and how available dollars play into all of this.

Anyone know if such a process and resulting document already exists?

[Steve]

^That's exactly what I'm talking about. I don't view this as blame but improving the process so we don't keep making the same mistake.