Transportation Delivered Fall 2013

D E L I V E R E DTRANSPORTATION>

FALL 2013

Creative Use of Cellular Concrete Keys

Colton Crossing Victory.> pg. 16

THIS IS OUR LAST PRINT ISSUE

See the insert inside the front and back covers for more information.

http://issuu.com/action/page?page=16

Public-Private Partnerships

US 36 Express Lanes

Colton Crossing Flyover

I N T H I S I S S U E

Colton Crossing Flyover By Jeff Teig, P.E., and Tom Kim, P.E.

[email protected]

16Creative Use of Cellular Concrete

Keys Colton Crossing Victory

Public-Private Partnerships By Mike Schneider and S. Tesse Rasmussen, P.E. [email protected]

6 Public-Private Partnerships: A Programmatic Approach for Public Authorities

US 36 Express Lanes By Brad Johnson, P.E., Rick Pilgrim, P.E., ENV SP, and John Schwab, P.E. [email protected]

10US 36 Establishes New Model for Express Lane Projects

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

[2]




Public Involvement

Perspective —4D Simulation

Modern Streetcars

Perspective—4D SimulationBy Gustavo Couto, PMP, Timothy Fish, P.E., and Adam Joslin [email protected]

26Entering a New Dimension: 4D Simulation Enhances Communication and Collaboration

Public InvolvementBy Theresa McClure, ENV SP, Laura Heilman and Michael Darbouze [email protected]

29 What to Do When No One Shows Up Taking Public Involvement Online

DEPARTMENTS4 Director’s Letter | 5 News & Notes | 32 What Moves Us

> TRANSPORTATION DELIVERED | FALL 2013

Modern StreetcarsBy David Vozzolo and Luke Olson, P.E. [email protected]

20 A Step-by-Step Look at Streetcar Program Development

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

[3]







Cover Photo: © Keith Philpott

EDITORIAL BOARDCharlie O’ReillyDirector of [email protected]

Suzanne PutnamPlanning & Communications [email protected]

Ken [email protected]

Wendy HarrisonContributing [email protected]

Transportation Delivered is a biannual publication produced by HDR, showcasing projects that increase capacity, enhance mobility and improve safety of roadways, waterways, airways and railways. To view this publication electronically, go to: www.hdrinc.com/transportationdelivered .In 2014, Transportation Delivered will move to all-electronic distribution. Please see the insert inside the cover for subscription information.

ABOUT HDR

HDR is a global employee-owned firm providing architecture, engineering, consulting, construction and related services through our various operating companies. Our more than 8,500 professionals are committed to helping clients manage complex projects and make sound decisions. To learn more about HDR’s Transportation program, visit us at www.hdrinc.com/transportation .

Charlie O’Reilly, Director of Transportation

DIRECTOR’S LET TERWelcome to the Fall 2013 issue of Transportation Delivered.

HDR strives to be a sustainable company, both in the projects we deliver and in our own business practices. As such, this will be the final print edition of Transportation Delivered. For those of you who receive print editions by mail, we request that you complete the pre-paid reply card found in this issue or visit http://www.hdrinc.com/TD-Digital to sign up for the electronic version of Transportation Delivered. If you already receive email alerts when new issues are published, your subscription will automatically be continued. We thank all of you for being loyal readers, and ask you to let us know if you have interests in specific markets, topics and trends so we can serve you even better in the future.

As for this issue, I am excited to bring you a sample of the diverse nature of our clients, projects and the services we provide. From 4D to P3, we are advancing technologies, techniques and design to tackle today’s transportation challenges.

On page 20, you will find a step-by-step guide to streetcar development. Streetcars are driving downtown development across the United States, and our transit experts are on the front line of this movement. Have you considered implementing a public-private partnership, but you’re not sure where to start? You’ll find an inside look at our programmatic approach to P3 on page 6, including how we are helping the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority deliver $800 million worth of improvements years earlier than programmed. Just east of Los Angeles, the recently completed Colton Crossing is improving operations for freight and passenger rail traffic while saving time and money for its stakeholders. Find out how a very creative use for cellular concrete made this possible on page 16.

The US 36 Express Lanes project on page 10 is a sustainable solution that sets new standards for project procurement, design of multimodal infrastructure and use of an active traffic management system. Innovations like these remind me of something Mel Placilla, our director of professional services for transportation, recently said. “We must think of technical excellence as a never-ending quest. It is something we will always strive to achieve, and each day we will be challenged to go even further.” Our article about

4D technology on page 26 discusses how we are going further with project simulations by combining 3D models with the element of schedule, improving collaboration and communication. Finally, the public involvement article on page 29 highlights our development and application of new tools that help you engage stakeholders.

As always, I hope you enjoy reading Transportation Delivered. If you have questions about any of the

topics in this issue, please let us know. Our experts are passionate about their work and would be

glad to talk to you.

[4]







N E W S & N O T E S

CBIS Program ManagementThe Iowa Department of Transportation, District 4 (Iowa DOT) selected HDR as program manager/general engineering consultant (PM/GEC) for the Council Bluffs Interstate System (CBIS) program. CBIS is the largest project in Iowa DOT’s five-year Transportation Improvement Program, with a $1.04 billion program value. CBIS addresses growing traffic and related congestion and safety concerns on Interstates 80 and 29 in the Council Bluffs metropolitan area.

The program includes full reconstruction of approximately 18 miles of mainline interstate, 14 interchanges and 30 bridges—improving the condition of the roadways, reducing traffic congestion and accidents and adding capacity. HDR is developing a customized programmatic approach to help Iowa DOT effectively set priorities and allocate resources, capitalize on efficiencies and identify and mitigate risks.

PROJEC TS

AWARDS

PEOPLE

Bernie Arseneau, P.E., P.T.O.E., is HDR’s new Global Director–Traffic Management Systems. He leads our expertise in managed lanes, traffic safety and intelligent transportation systems. Based in Minneapolis, Arseneau previously was deputy commissioner/chief engineer at Minnesota Department of Transportation and brings 30 years of experience from the owner’s perspective. He is a member of the Institute of Transportation Engineers and has been active with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and the Transportation Research Board. Arseneau is a member of the board of directors of the Transportation Professional Certification Board Inc.

HDR Welcomes Sharon Greene + AssociatesSharon Greene + Associates, a firm specializing in transportation economics and financial analysis, has joined HDR. “Together, with HDR experts in the fields of economics, finance and program management, we are well-positioned to offer unique infrastructure financing and consulting services that will help our clients be successful,” said Charlie O’Reilly, Transportation Business Group Director. “These expanded capabilities enhance HDR’s capability to operate as a strategic consulting organization, offering an extensive portfolio of financial planning, project finance, and public-private partnership advisory services.”

OTIA III Oregon State Bridge Delivery Program | Oregon Department of TransportationAmerican Road & Transportation Builders Association’s Transportation Development Foundation 2013 Dr. J. Don Brock TransOvation Award

Using Value Analysis to Define the Engineering Division | Ontario Ministry of Transportation 2013 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Value Engineering Awards, Most Improved Process

Utah County I-15 Corridor Expansion | Utah Department of TransportationDesign-Build Institute of America National Design-Build Award for Transportation Projects

Crosstown Parkway Extension, Port St. Lucie | Florida Department of Transportation2013 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Value Engineering Awards, Projects in Excess of $100 Million

HDRWTS International 2013 Employer of the Year

Hoover Dam Bypass | Federal Highway Administration, Central Federal Lands Highway Division International Federation of Consulting Engineers Centenary Award of Excellence in Major Civil Engineering

I-84 Snake River Twin Bridges | Idaho Department of Transportation2013 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Value Engineering Awards, Projects of $25 Million to $100 Million

> Hoover Dam Bypass | Boulder City, NV © Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

[5]

By Mike Schneider and S. Tesse Rasmussen, P.E.

Public-Private Partnerships:A Programmatic Approach for Public Authorities

> As P3 program manager for LA Metro, we are helping them deliver $800 million in needed improvements years earlier than programmed.

© iS

tock

.com

/HDR

[6]

One of the first things one learns upon entering the consulting world is the age-old question, “what keeps my clients

up at night?” As consultants, we strive to provide top-notch service to our clients—meeting and exceeding their

requirements on a daily basis, and anticipating their needs as often as possible.

The issues keeping our clients up at night range from continually improving services, to navigating the political landscape

and reaching consensus, to planning, funding/financing and successfully delivering new projects on time and on budget.

Balancing these issues often is difficult and elusive, but one way we are helping clients achieve these goals is by providing

program management services for public-private partnerships (P3s).

Establishing a P3 ProgramSo what is P3 program management? P3s are contractual arrangements between a governmental agency or authority and a private entity for the primary purpose of developing and/or operating and maintaining public infrastructure, normally in the domain of the governmental sector. This project delivery method typically involves the private sector as a partner to public authorities in all aspects of a project, including design, construction, operations, maintenance and/or financing. Private participation in project delivery includes strategic financial investment in key projects and transference of targeted project development and implementation risk to private partners, resulting ideally in both the acceleration of project delivery and increased leveraging of public resources.

The key to developing a multi-project P3 program—one that becomes an embedded programmatic approach to project delivery—is evaluating and screening a large number of projects and identifying those that have the best opportunity for successfully attracting private sector participation, while assuring that public policy objectives are achieved. The initial screening is tailored to the specific needs of the client, with a mixture of both qualitative and quantitative evaluation measures. After projects are identified as potential partnership candidates, a program manager such as HDR develops a business plan for each project to define it. The business plan includes evaluating known funding sources, comparing a variety of delivery methods and recommending a path forward. This analysis may result in a P3 project delivery recommendation, but it also can result in a recommendation to proceed with design-build or even a traditional design-bid-build.

[7]

If the public authority decides to proceed with a P3, we work with the client and other third parties to develop the documents necessary to bring a concessionaire or project developer on-board. This requires a team of lawyers, engineers, procurement specialists and financial experts working closely with the public owner to develop technical provisions, funding profiles, contract documents, concession agreements and all other state or locally required materials. We collaborate with the client throughout the procurement process, and once a concessionaire is on-board and the P3 project is underway, we can assist in overseeing the design, construction, operations and maintenance activities on behalf of the owner/client.

Putting P3 Program Management to Work in L.A.HDR | InfraConsult is the P3 program manager for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) P3 Program. Since 2009, we’ve provided specialized advice on the development of a P3 program to deliver high-priority transit and highway transportation projects in Los Angeles County, Calif. The program started with an initial task of evaluating 81 projects included in the Los Angeles Measure R initiative and Metro’s draft 2008 Long Range Transportation Plan. The analysis appraised project readiness and risk factors that could affect project delivery, including scale, scope, capital and operating characteristics, and development potential.

We undertook a comprehensive project screening process that identified 14 highway and transit projects for continued consideration. These projects were the best candidates for using P3 to accelerate project delivery and attracting new sources of capital. Metro’s Board of Directors then selected six projects for further assessment based on

various factors, including modal equity (transit vs. highway), location (subregional equity), partnership delivery model (design-build, predevelopment agreement, design-build-finance) and funding and financing options (tolls, availability payments). The projects included:

• I-710 (Long Beach Freeway) South, including the I-710 South Early Action Projects—Freeway widening and freight corridor development for expediting goods movement

• SR-710 North Gap Closure—Potential for a 5-mile toll tunnel to complete a long-standing missing link of the regional freeway network (assuming a highway tunnel was selected as the locally preferred alternative)

• High Desert Corridor—A new at-grade tolled highway in northeastern Los Angeles County

• Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor—Light Rail Transit (LRT) line connecting two existing routes

• Regional Connector—An LRT connector integrating several transit modes in Downtown Los Angeles

• Metro Red Line Westside Extension—A long-planned subway extension to the west from Hollywood to Santa Monica

After conducting additional strategic assessment, we recommended adding three more projects to the program:

• Sepulveda Pass Corridor—A “premium” rail transit and tolled highway tunnel under I-405 providing alternative access to the most congested highway segment in the United States

• Accelerated Regional Transportation Improvements (ARTI)—A “package” of six environmentally cleared highway improvements, including a new high occupancy toll (HOT) lane

• High Desert Multi-Purpose Corridor—A redesigned program

[8]

integrating the proposed toll highway with high speed rail connecting northern Los Angeles County and Las Vegas

Program Refinement Through Business Case ModelsWe conducted strategic assessments of the selected projects to a level that enabled a better understanding of the specific characteristics of each project, including development of a detailed “business case” to determine value for money, lifecycle cost factors and project attributes most promising for attracting private investment and/or risk sharing. The risks of traditional design-bid-build project delivery were assessed and compared to the risks identified with alternative project delivery methods. The evaluation included preparing risk registers and risk profiles, optimizing the projects using “risk-adjusted” capital and operating cost assumptions, developing cash flow-based financial analyses, refining cost and schedule estimates, and evaluating the effects on the overall program. Financial models were developed for each of the projects, including shadow bids, public sector comparators and value for money analysis—an integral aspect of most P3 projects.

Based on this information, Metro identified the projects, or elements thereof, that would undergo development of business case models. The resulting models presented the analysis and recommendations on how Metro should proceed specifically with P3 procurement for each project. Recommendations included:

• Project performance expectations • Project implementation strategy, including scope, schedule

and budget• Corporate and governance structure for concession• Advice on procurement strategy and Metro’s applicable

project organizational structure

Metro determined that the Accelerated Regional Transportation Improvements Program (ARTI) would be the first P3 project to go through procurement. We currently are assisting Metro with procurement for a design/build/finance/operate/maintain (DBFOM) P3 agreement for ARTI. The program consists of planned highway projects in Los Angeles County that were essentially cleared environmentally, but programmed for construction in the future (2020 to 2030). These projects have been packaged into one program to be awarded to one concessionaire under a P3 agreement, utilizing an availability payment model for implementation. By bundling several similar projects into a single package to be implemented using the DBFOM approach, with Metro funding in the form of availability payments over a 35-year period, $800 million in needed improvements will now be delivered years earlier than programmed.

Our role in the procurement process includes scheduling and coordinating, conducting industry outreach, and preparing

the request for qualifications, request for proposals, technical provisions, P3 agreement, TIFIA application, California Transportation Commission application (project proposal report), and assisting Metro in the procurement and negotiation process.

Lessons LearnedWhen developing a new process, there are always opportunities for lessons learned, and the P3 program management assignment is no exception. There are two principal reasons for program success.

First, the importance of having the right firms/people on the team cannot be overstated. The Metro P3 program management team includes a top global financial advisory firm, KPMG, and a national leader in transportation legal issues, Nossaman. HDR ensures that technical questions are addressed accurately. Local and national funding/financing advice is provided by HDR | Sharon Greene + Associates, a team of project finance experts that recently joined the HDR family. Leadership by HDR | InfraConsult melds the variety of advice and information generated by this team into a cohesive package for the client.

A second attribute of the P3 program management team’s success is a comprehensive understanding of the client’s needs as well as the political intricacies of the region. HDR combines a network of P3 specialists with local resources to provide the full spectrum of expertise needed to anticipate your needs and deliver tailored solutions.

Last WordCreating a P3 program can allow public agencies to identify a shortlist of projects that may be good P3 candidates, and then develop those projects as time, budget and political reality permits. The Metro P3 program is an industry model for public agencies seeking new and innovative methods of delivering and operating their capital projects.

We are one of the few consultants with experience in this area. By supporting our clients in focusing their priorities and clearly identifying pathways for effective project delivery, we help them sleep better at night.->

For more information, contact [email protected]

[ ...the importance of having the right firms/

people on the team cannot be overstated ]

[9]

By Brad Johnson, P.E., Rick Pilgrim, P.E., ENV SP, and John Schwab, P.E.

Establishes New Model for Express Lane Projects

[10]

Colorado’s US 36 meanders through 18 picturesque, rolling miles between Denver and Boulder. But in contrast to the

beautiful scenery, travelers along the route have unfortunately faced many challenges.

Built in 1952 as a toll road, the investment in this corridor was paid off in 1968. Today, much of the original highway and interchange structures have outlived their useful lives—and there is no alternate, parallel route between the two cities.

Used widely by commuters and tourists, the US 36 corridor is home to Colorado’s largest population of construction workers and nearly 50 percent of the state’s federal laboratories and research centers. Industries including commercial freight, renewable energy and aerospace are located along the highway, and are responsible for almost 17 percent of the region’s business and employment.

The highway runs diagonally across the area’s arterial grid system, with volumes exceeding 100,000 vehicles per day in many segments. More than 9,000 riders use the frequent inter-city bus service each day, which is the highest ridership in the Regional Transportation District’s (RTD’s) seven-county region.

In an effort to improve this economically vital corridor, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) initiated the US 36 Express Lanes project. Led by CDOT along with the RTD, the project will transform the four-lane divided, access-controlled highway into a six-lane divided highway. It will reconstruct the pavement and widen the highway to add one managed express lane in each direction, as well as 12-foot shoulders inside and out.

By Brad Johnson, P.E., Rick Pilgrim, P.E., ENV SP, and John Schwab, P.E.

Establishes New Model for Express Lane Projects©

Keith

Philp

ott

[11]

The project is a sustainable solution that encourages more efficient travel patterns, ultimately reducing congestion, fuel consumption and environmental impacts. The managed lane in particular provides many of those benefits to users and to CDOT, including:

• Linking to the I-25 Express Lane system leading into downtown Denver

• Allowing high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs) to use the lane free of charge

• Charging single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs) on a variable rate throughout the day to use the lane

• Creating themed bus rapid transit (BRT) canopies at five stations within the highway right-of-way, each with an adjacent park-and-ride

• Generating a revenue stream to offset a portion of the capital and operating costs

The project is split into two phases, as shown in Figure 1. Phase I starts at Federal Boulevard and runs 11 miles to 88th Street, while Phase II continues on to Foothills Parkway in Boulder.

CDOT selected the Ames/Granite Joint Venture, along with HDR as the lead designer, as the design-build team for the Phase I project. For the Phase II project, CDOT selected a public-private partnership (P3) team that consists of Plenary Roads Denver as the concessionaire, the Ames/Granite Joint Venture as the design-builder and HDR as the lead designer.

Motivated to Improve MobilityIn 2004, CDOT and RTD started a joint project to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and obtain the Record of Decision (ROD) for US 36. The two agencies worked together to

> Figure 1: Phases 1 and 2 of CDOT’s US 36 Express Lanes project.

[12]

identify the Preferred Alternative, promoting extensive public and stakeholder participation throughout the process. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) issued the ROD in 2009.

A key part of the overall success is that local jurisdictions in the corridor were highly motivated to make improvements. A seven-member Mayors and Commissioners Coalition (MCC) worked with CDOT and RTD to reach a consensus on a Preferred Alternative—the addition of the managed lane in each direction. The MCC lobbied in Washington, D.C., each year to secure funding support of state and local efforts by CDOT and RTD.

CDOT and RTD also combined efforts to develop a menu of funding and financing options. Funding included several sources: CDOT formula funds; the regional Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program; RTD FasTracks funds; and CDOT Funding Advancement for Surface Transportation & Economic Recovery (FASTER) bridge replacement dollars.

Financing included a $10 million TIGER grant for Phase I to leverage a TIFIA loan of $54 million, which will be repaid from managed lane revenues.

Innovative Solutions Every Step of the WayWith an estimated total project cost exceeding $500 million and available funding of only $312 million, the project required an innovative project delivery mechanism to construct as much of the 18-mile corridor as possible with the limited budget. CDOT chose the design-build delivery method for Phase I of the project, and in 2011 began innovative fixed price/best value procurement.

The procurement approach established a design-build contract amount of $231 million, which was communicated to design-build proposers as part of the Request for Proposals (RFP). The RFP identified a basic configuration—the base scope that was required in design-builder proposals to be considered responsive—and five additional requested elements (AREs).

An ARE was a clearly-defined scope element, such as a specified additional length of mainline, a bridge replacement or an interchange reconstruction. If a design-builder was able to provide the basic configuration for less than the $231 million contract amount, the design-builder could add one or more AREs to the proposal.

As a result of this unique procurement approach, CDOT received highly-competitive technical proposals that included numerous AREs, providing substantially more scope than included in the basic configuration. The fixed price/best value procurement proved successful in creating a competitive bidding environment that encouraged creativity and innovation, ultimately delivering a project that exceeded the expectations of CDOT and the project’s stakeholders.

For Phase II of the project, CDOT chose to go in a different direction and pursue a public-private partnership (P3) procurement. With the P3 approach, CDOT sought a private entity, or concessionaire, that could enter into a long-term contract to finance the design and construction of the remaining corridor. The concessionaire would then operate and maintain the entire corridor in exchange for a share of the toll revenue generated by the express lanes.

> The fixed price/best value procurement proved successful in creating a highly-competitive bidding environment that encouraged creativity and innovation, ultimately delivering a project that exceeded the expectations of CDOT and the project’s stakeholders.

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

[13]

Under this agreement, the concessionaire assumes the original TIFIA loan of $54 million and risk of repayment from Colorado’s High-Performance Transportation Enterprise (HPTE). Colorado formed HPTE to aggressively pursue more efficient means of financing important surface transportation infrastructure projects. Goal: Be a Model for Other StatesIn addition to the unique procurement, the project features many other innovations, including several firsts for the state of Colorado. Though lessons learned from other projects across the country were incorporated into each step of the project’s development, CDOT’s goal was to complete a project from which other states could study and learn.

For example, the US 36 Express Lanes project is the first in Colorado to build infrastructure that supports four different modes of travel: HOV, tolled managed lanes, a separated commuter bikeway alongside the highway and BRT.

The current design allows RTD buses to use the managed lane—great for regional buses, but problematic for local bus service. The majority of local buses enter at one interchange and exit at the next interchange, which causes them to compete to get into the general purpose lanes. CDOT is allowing the shoulders to be used for RTD’s buses when the general purpose lanes are congested—again, a first in Colorado.

Phase I is setting another benchmark by implementing advanced technology with Colorado’s first active traffic management (ATM) system. The system will reduce congestion and enhance safety through a series of electronic signs located throughout the corridor to relay real-time traffic conditions to drivers, allowing them to make proactive decisions about their route and mode of travel.

The ATM system will provide several benefits to the traveling public. For example, in the past, between 40 and 50 percent of accidents along the corridor were secondary—rear-end collisions following initial accidents. CDOT expects the ATM system to reduce that percentage.

Ames/Granite and HDR introduced several innovations, including the use of concrete pavement that has a 35-year design life, aimed at reducing long-term maintenance costs for CDOT. The pavement design also features several overlay sections, in which the new concrete pavement is constructed on top of the existing pavement. This approach maximizes re-use of materials, saving cost and reducing environmental impacts.

Another innovation developed through the project team’s commitment to maintaining the existing number of lanes

Design, Operation of the US 36 Express LanesIn addition to reconstructing the existing mainline facility, the US 36 project will add an express lane in each direction that will serve BRT operations, as well as HOV and SOV. BRT and HOV are able to use the express lanes free of charge, while SOV are tolled.

The US 36 express lanes are standard 12-foot travel lanes to the left of the general purpose lanes. The lanes are separated from the general purpose lanes by a four-foot striped buffer; physical separation devices, such as delineators or barriers, are not used to separate the express lane and general purpose lanes.

A striped buffer width of four feet reduces the “friction” that occurs between faster vehicles in the express lane and slower vehicles in congested general purpose lanes. With a narrower separation, express lane traffic tends to travel only marginally faster than the general purpose lanes. Buffer widths greater than four feet can be misinterpreted by drivers as a refuge zone, thereby compromising safety. A full 12-foot shoulder exists between the express lane and the concrete median barrier, providing a refuge for stopped vehicles without blocking the express lane.

Ingress and egress is limited to designated access points between the interchanges. Initial access points were established by CDOT in the project’s planning stages. During the final design process, HDR refined the locations of the access points to effectively integrate with the overall roadway design, including geometric, drainage, utility and signing considerations.

At designated access points, the striped buffer transitions to skip striping for a general distance of 3,000 feet, allowing combined ingress and egress. Ingress to and egress from the express lanes is prohibited outside of these zones.

The express lanes feature an all-electronic tolling (AET) system for assessing charges to SOV. A transponder mounted to the windshield of the vehicle is recognized by the AET, and a toll is assessed to a pre-paid account. If a transponder is not used, the AET system can identify the vehicle owner through automatic license plate recognition technology, and the toll charge, along with a fee, is mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle.

The AET system also includes the ability to assign toll rates based on level of congestion, otherwise known as “congestion pricing.” The goal of congestion pricing is to maintain a high level of service in the express lane through variable toll pricing. When speeds in the general purpose lanes—and potentially the express lane—start to slow, the toll will increase to limit express lane usage to drivers willing to pay a higher premium for expedited travel.

A C

LO

SE

R L

OO

K

[14]

during construction. To meet this commitment, Ames/Granite and HDR developed a maintenance of traffic (MOT) plan that included additional width of temporary pavement, reduced shoulder width and incorporated more emergency pullouts and extended times for courtesy patrols.

The temporary widening shifted all traffic onto the westbound lanes of the facility, allowing for reconstruction of the entire eastbound direction. Upon completion of construction of the eastbound lanes, all traffic will be shifted onto the new pavement and the westbound lanes will be reconstructed in their entirety.

The MOT concept has allowed for all existing lanes of traffic—including auxiliary and HOV lanes—to remain open during construction, minimizing impacts to the traveling public.

The Phase II project continues implementation of the same innovative practices established by Phase I, including the ATM system and concrete pavement design. It also features a diverging diamond interchange (DDI) at McCaslin Boulevard.

As seen in Figure 2, the DDI concept is based on a standard diamond interchange, with a shift in the crossroad traffic within the interchange. Through traffic on the crossroad crosses paths twice as traffic is shifted to the left side of oncoming traffic between the ramps, allowing left turn movements to occur without crossing oncoming traffic. The result is fewer traffic signal phases and greater traffic capacity. The DDI also features far fewer conflict points, reducing opportunities for crashes.

To Phase II, and Beyond…Ames/Granite and HDR are delivering Phase I in record time—six months ahead of CDOT’s schedule. Phase I’s 11 miles should be completed/toll ready by Dec. 15, 2014. The Phase II design and construction picks up at the terminus of the Phase I project and includes reconfiguration of the McCaslin interchange, widening two bridges and constructing three new bridges. Design of Phase II started in August 2013 and construction is scheduled for completion in early December 2015. ->


[ Though lessons learned from other projects across

the country were incorporated into each step of

the project’s development, CDOT’s goal was to

complete a project from which other states

could study and learn. ]

> Figure 2: The diverging diamond interchange at US 36 and McCaslin Boulevard will improve safety and capacity.

[15]

By Jeff Teig, P.E., and Tom Kim, P.E.Colton Crossing Victory

Creat ive Use ofC E L LU L A R CO N C R E T E Keys

[16]

Colton Crossing has come a long way in the 130 years since it first opened. Back then, Southern Pacific

Railroad hired Virgil Earp to stand guard and prevent California Southern from crossing its track in Colton, Calif. Ultimately, Earp was forced to step aside, and the crossing was completed.

Traffic through Colton Crossing has grown substantially since Earp’s time. By 2008, it would handle more than 100 freight and passenger trains each day, making it one of the busiest at-grade rail-to-rail crossings in the United States.

The modern-day Colton Crossing comprises Union Pacific Railroad’s (UPRR’s) east/west tracks and BNSF Railway’s north/south tracks, with Amtrak and Metrolink using the lines for passenger rail. The nearby ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles rank as the largest combined harbor in the country, and the metropolitan area is home to nearly 18 million residents. To better serve freight and passenger movement in the region, San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) partnered with UPRR, BNSF and other stakeholders to construct a flyover structure to elevate the UPRR mainline tracks approximately 35 feet above the BNSF tracks. The project would deliver economic, environmental and social benefits, while improving operations for the railroads.

Creat ive Use ofC E L LU L A R CO N C R E T E Keys

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

[17]

Interstate 10

BNSF Mainline

UPRR Mainline

> The newly grade-separated Colton Crossing allows trains on the UPRR and BNSF mainlines to operate more efficiently.

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

No Challenge Too GreatBuilding a flyover at Colton Crossing required creative solutions to physical, operational and phasing constraints as well as an aggressive design and construction schedule.

Schedule—The Colton Crossing project evolved into a public-private partnership (P3), with more than 20 stakeholders and funding provided by a combination of state bond money, a federal TIGER grant, investment by the railroads and Caltrans. This creative and collaborative funding approach required an accelerated schedule to meet construction milestones mandated by the various funding agreements. Specifically, the TIGER grant funding agreement required that the project be completed by March 2014. For that to happen, construction had to be finished by December 2013. Calculating the schedule backward from there, final design needed to be completed in nine months.

A number of key decisions went into achieving this goal. For example, the project team reached right-of-way approvals and utility agreements before advertising for construction. Also, HDR established separate teams to work on the design and project approval/environmental processes. We then performed these tasks concurrently and met the nine-month deadline for bid-ready documents.

Phasing—Typically, one of the new east/west tracks would be installed and the corresponding mainline shifted to the new alignment before proceeding with the second track. However, limited availability of the track laying machine, which is in high demand throughout the system, dictated that both tracks be constructed simultaneously. To address this issue, additional right-of-way was purchased from Caltrans and the new alignment was placed north of the existing alignment. The proposed alignment precluded the use of typical soil embankment side slopes for the flyover construction. Vertical sides would be required for the entire south side embankment and the north side embankment from Rancho Avenue to La Cadena Avenue. This would lead, in part, to an innovative design choice discussed later in this article.

Operational—A number of steps were taken to reduce impacts both to train operations and the construction schedule. For example, the tie-ins were designed to minimize the time required to connect the new and existing alignments. Also, because any work inside the 15-foot safety zone required construction to stop while trains passed, significant consideration was given to minimizing the amount of work that needed to take place within this zone. Physical—The Colton Crossing site is in a populated area of San Bernardino County, about 60 miles east of Los Angeles. It is bordered by Interstate 10 to the north, neighborhoods on the southwest and an existing rail yard to the southeast. I-10 limited the availability of right-of way to the north for the portion between Rancho Avenue and the BNSF crossing. All of these constraints factored into where the new alignment could be placed. Also, both Rancho Avenue at the west end and Mount Vernon Avenue at the east end have overhead roadway crossings that controlled the location of the new alignment tie-ins both vertically and horizontally.

Cellular Concrete Emerges as Design KeyThe Colton Crossing grade-separation required construction of an 8,150-foot flyover carrying the UPRR tracks above the BNSF tracks, with approach structures, three steel bridges to support two mainline tracks and an access road. The design had to address all of the challenges—it had to fit the site, minimize interruptions to train traffic, facilitate construction of the new tracks concurrently and allow construction within the prescribed timeframe.

Because maintaining rail service during construction was one of the most critical considerations, the flyover could not be constructed along the existing alignment. To minimize delays to train traffic during tie-in and fit within the physical constraints of the site, the team settled on an alignment between the existing UPRR mainlines to the south and Interstate 10 to the north.

The problem was that the limited footprint did not allow for typical sloped embankments for the approaches to the bridge. The design

[18]

would have added 40 percent to the estimated cost of the flyover structure. Furthermore, the site needed ground improvements to support the embankments. The top 15 feet of soil would have to be replaced due to poor soil quality and potential seismic activity.

As the design team worked to solve this puzzle, an innovative solution emerged that addressed the issues of cost and poor soil quality—cellular concrete. Though it had never been used in this quantity or at this height, cellular concrete offered the exact properties needed for this situation. Comprising a cement and water slurry infused with very small air bubbles, cellular concrete has roughly one-third the density of earth backfill.

The strong, yet lightweight nature of cellular concrete eliminated the need for conventional retaining structures because of the material’s self-supporting quality. As a result, the design no longer required replacement of underlying soils to support a heavier structure. The lightweight quality also reduced the impact of designing for an area high in seismic activity.

This novel approach not only benefited the design, it also aided construction within the restricted site footprint by reducing the amount and size of equipment needed to construct the approaches. The cellular concrete could be pumped hundreds of feet from the batch plant, which consisted of just two or three semi-trailers taking up very little space.

By contrast, replacing the top 15 feet of soil and building earthen embankments would have required several thousand truckloads of imported fill material. Contractors would need bulldozers to spread the imported fill and compaction equipment to compact the material. Cellular concrete played a critical role in meeting the operational demands of the projects. Rail service continued during construction as placement of cellular concrete occurred only 15 feet from the centerline of a mainline track.

Innovation Equals BenefitsUsing approximately 200,000 cubic yards of cellular concrete

reaching a peak height of 39 feet, the Colton Crossing Flyover sets records for use of the material. Those numbers translated into even more meaningful numbers for UPRR and the more than 20 other stakeholders involved. Cellular concrete lowered the project cost by $45 million compared to building conventional retaining structures on top of earth backfill. Combined with other cost-saving measures, the final budget came in at less than half of the original estimate.

The use of cellular concrete also led to substantial time savings. The contractors could place the material much more quickly than in traditional retaining structure construction, allowing them to deliver the project eight months ahead of schedule.

There are considerable economic and community benefits associated with this project. The Colton Crossing Flyover generated a positive public perception by substantially mitigating delays that impacted freight and passenger operations as well as vehicular traffic. The grade separation is projected to save $241 million in travel time annually and reduce idling time for locomotives and vehicles, improving air quality within the surrounding community.

The Colton Crossing Flyover also significantly reduced noise levels in Colton. Trains on the UPRR mainline are no longer required to sound their horns as they enter the crossing. The project established quiet zones in Colton, with new train gates and an electronic signal system so trains do not have to sound their horns at other crossings. Horn use at the crossing is expected to decrease by 50 percent immediately, followed by additional decreases as the quiet zones are finalized. Eliminating the crossing diamond, which made a loud impact sound with every wheel set of the train that passed, further reduces noise levels.

The Colton Crossing Flyover was completed in August 2013. The project team is confident even Virgil Earp would have approved. ->


> The cellular concrete used to construct Colton Crossing was pumped hundreds of feet from the batch plant, significantly reducing the need to have equipment on site.

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

[19]

One of the most exciting trends in transportation and

community development in the United States is the

resurgence of streetcars. There are many factors that go into

planning, designing and implementing modern streetcar systems.

This article discusses some of the basic “must do” items, based

on lessons learned from HDR’s success in helping communities

across the country initiate and deliver streetcar projects.

What are Modern Streetcars?

From the Industrial Revolution through the mid-20th century,

many American cities grew around a network of streetcars or

trolleys. Some of the new light rail systems introduced during the

1980s and ’90s included street-running rail transit service, similar

to the trolleys of old, but they are not what we would define as

modern streetcars.

The term “modern streetcar” refers to a rail transit vehicle operating

in mixed traffic on the street. It serves as an urban circulator

offering short routes of a couple miles with frequent stops and

level boarding to accommodate quick ons and offs. It could be

described as a “pedestrian accelerator,” serving trips ranging from

a few blocks to over a mile, typically in a downtown or adjoining

neighborhoods. In addition to serving urban circulation and

mobility needs, cities are implementing the modern streetcar to

infuse the infrastructure investment with a catalyst for focused

economic development and sustainable growth.

A Step-by-Step Look at

> Testing is an important step in streetcar program development and needs to be accounted for in the project schedule.

[20]

Program DevelopmentStreetcar

By David Vozzolo and Luke Olson, P.E.

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

[21]

The first modern streetcar system in the United States opened in Portland, Ore., in 2001, followed by new systems in Seattle and Tacoma, Wash. Encouraged by the successes of these early systems, cities across the country are planning and developing their own modern streetcar systems. There are now 20 streetcar projects funded, and five projects are scheduled to complete construction and open for service in 2013/2014, including Washington, D.C., Salt Lake City, Tucson, Seattle and Atlanta.

Key Components to Implementing a SuccessfulStreetcar System Before it can realize the benefits of streetcars, every community that is considering a new or expanded system must first address several key questions.

• Who will develop and/or operate the system? • How will the project be financed/funded?• What factors should be considered when planning the

corridor? What about design?• Are there environmental requirements that must be met? • How do we deal with construction impacts in an urban

environment?

These are complex questions, and each project is different, but the following information provides some basic guidance on what to expect when you launch your streetcar project.

Project Governance—There are many governance and organizational structures to choose from when it comes to designing, constructing and operating/maintaining transit infrastructure and service. Streetcars are unique in the transit world in that the projects often are driven by mayors and civic leaders. They commonly are implemented by city public works or transportation departments rather than regional public transit agencies. This can present a number of opportunities as well as challenges.

The ideal governance structure depends on a number of factors, including local institutional history, public and private sector funding sources, project delivery mechanisms and operating agreements. The key is to identify a public or private entity to take the role of owner responsible for the finished product, a sponsor to secure funding, an implementer to oversee design and construction, and the ultimate operator and maintainer of the system. One entity can play multiple roles.

Many projects establish a non-profit organization specifically to implement and operate the project, with technical support from the city and transit agency. Examples include Portland, St. Louis and Los Angeles. Projects in Seattle, Washington, D.C., Tucson and Cincinnati, on the other hand, are led by the city with varying levels of support from the transit agency. Kansas

Must Do• Put streetcars where

pedestrians will be• Connect maximum number of

existing destinations• Uncork development potential• Fit into street network• Follow an easily understood

route• Conduct preliminary utility

investigation• Identify maintenance site

Good to Do• Enable future expansions• Access development

and funding/financing opportunities

• Consider a starter line that is affordable and manageable

Corridor Planning Checklist

Must Do• Address issues affecting

feasibility/cost• Develop a reliable cost

estimate• Identify right-of-way needs• Identify sites for substations

and MSF

Good to Do• Identify vehicle technology• Detailed survey of utilities

Advanced Conceptual Engineering Checklist

Good to Do• Engage the public/businesses directly and early• Lock the alignment as soon as possible

Final Design Checklist

Must Do• Utility relocation — typically 4 to 8 weeks per 600 to 800 feet• Place track/civil/foundations — typically 3 to 4 weeks per

600 to 800 feet• Install OCS/traffic signals/punch list—schedule varies• Testing/Start-up — generally 4 to 6 months

Construction, Testing & Startup

Streetcar Program Development ChecklistsSuggested steps and tips for successful implementation of your streetcar program.

[22]

City is using a hybrid approach—the city is overseeing design and construction while a non-profit authority will operate the system. As you can see, there are many variations.

Corridor Planning—In many cases, the mayor and/or business community already have outlined a general route or corridor for the streetcar with the intent of serving specific destinations or maximizing economic development. Technical experts are engaged to define the logical corridor and provide decision support for the selection of the locally preferred alternative. Early planning defines optimal infrastructure and technologies and identifies the specific track alignment, stop locations and design, and one or more vehicle maintenance and storage sites. In addition to these traditional planning steps, we conduct ridership forecasting, capital and operating cost estimating, assessment of economic development benefits and financial planning to help stakeholders paint a more comprehensive picture of their planned streetcar system.

Environmental Review and Clearance—All projects pursuing federal funding must complete National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review. In most cases, project owners also must satisfy state and/or local environmental requirements. The majority of streetcar projects that have completed NEPA have conducted an Environmental Assessment (EA) and been issued a Finding

of No Significant Impact (FONSI). It is rare that a more extensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would be required. In 2011-2012, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) introduced a streamlined environmental practice, encouraging focused, short EA documentation for streetcar projects. A number of EAs have been completed following these procedures, including the Kansas City project, which FTA awarded with an Outstanding Achievement Award for Excellence in Environmental Document Preparation in 2013.

Advanced Conceptual Engineering—Tied to the environmental/NEPA reviews is advanced conceptual engineering (ACE). During ACE, the project team begins substantial engineering to address key issues that affect feasibility and cost. It is important to provide sufficient engineering definition to set a realistic budget with an appropriate contingency and inflation that will stand the test of time. Engineering efforts should focus on big ticket items and issues, not fine details that don’t have a substantial effect on the scope of the project.

For example, defining right-of-way becomes a key focus during this phase. Despite the streetcar generally operating within the existing streets, locations for substations and a maintenance and storage facility (MSF) need to be identified and may require additional right-of-way. It is better to include multiple alternatives

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

> Reach out to stakeholders early and often. By the time you reach design, stakeholders should be fully engaged in your project.

[23]

to avoid supplemental environmental reviews if you do not already own the preferred site or if the site has potential issues. If your project is fast-tracked, this might be a good time to identify a specific vehicle technology and start the early phases of procurement. Procurement timeframes typically run around two to three years, but can be longer. Get the process started early or you’ll risk standing at the finish line without a vehicle.

Also, if your ACE budget allows, get a detailed survey of existing utilities and start identifying conflicts and resolutions. Utilities typically are the greatest unknown variable of a streetcar project.

Preliminary Engineering—This phase usually involves taking a project to the 30 percent design level and provides a transition between ACE and final design. It may not be formally required, but preliminary engineering is an ideal opportunity to engage stakeholders and refine project details such as alignment, stop locations, utility impacts, parking, etc. At this stage, you’re starting to get into the details and refining the capital cost estimate. Make sure to include adequate contingencies, since there are remaining uncertainties and risks.

Final Design—Now is the time when use of the phrase “we’ll solve that issue in the next phase” comes to an end. Any major open issues affecting scope should be addressed early during final design. Stakeholders should be fully engaged by this point, and decision milestones should be clearly defined.

The Kansas City streetcar project is a great example of accomplishing these goals. We kicked off final design with a walk-through of the corridor and brought the discussion to key stakeholders to help facilitate decision making. It gave us a head start on refining our design by addressing their concerns up front and avoiding rework later in the process. We also set an actual date to “lock” the alignment. This encouraged stakeholders with an interest in the alignment and stop locations to come to the table much earlier in the process, avoiding delays and potentially costly changes later.

Construction—One of the major concerns we hear at public meetings is construction impacts. Nearly everyone has had a bad experience with construction of a transportation project near their home or business, so they tend to expect the worst. But the fact is these impacts can be minimized with effective outreach and by working with businesses and residents to develop a staging strategy.

When construction begins, one of the first and most significant activities is utility relocation. With the unknowns that always seem to come with this phase, there is potential for schedule delays. Because it often is the first step in any streetcar construction project, it also represents the first impression and affects how the public perceives the progress of the rest of the project. A simple strategy such as segmenting the work into smaller “chunks” can

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Y E A R SFe

dera

lly Fu

nded

Pro

ject

TraditionalSchedule

Accelerated Schedule

Non-FederalProject

Corridor Planning

ACE/NEPA

Preliminary Engineering

Final Design

Construction

Testing & Startup

Project Development

Figure 1. General schedule samples for projects with and without federal funding assistance.

© Ke

ith Ph

ilpot

t

> Segmenting construction reduces the time spent in a particular location and helps stakeholders see the project is progressing.

[24]

help reduce the time a contractor spends in front of a particular business. As the contractor moves from one segment to the next, it shows that the project is progressing. Frequent and effective communication is critical at this point.

Testing and Start-up—Here is where the “steel meets the rail.” This is an important step and needs to be accounted for in the project schedule. Generally, you should plan on allowing four to six months to test your vehicles and system elements.

Is a Streetcar System Right for My City?Interest in streetcars is certainly increasing, and many communities already have projects underway. If you are considering initiating a streetcar project, it’s important to know that there is no traditional or typical city type for streetcars. You can find projects at some stage of planning, development or delivery in cities of all sizes and regions.

Of course, the key to getting any project underway is identifying where the money will come from. Many of the communities building streetcar systems are doing so with the assistance of some level of federal funding. HDR helped seven of the 14 cities that have obtained TIGER and Urban Circulator grant awards so

far, representing about 70 percent of the funding awarded for streetcar projects. Most recently, we prepared the application for the $20 million TIGER 2013 grant award for the Kansas City Streetcar. HDR also supported Fort Lauderdale and Tempe—the only modern streetcar projects to have been approved by FTA for the Small Starts Project Development phase.

Implementing a successful modern streetcar program requires creativity, careful planning and a coordinated effort by the consultants, owners and other stakeholders. Taking the time to address key considerations early in the process and determining the best approach for your community will help you develop a system that energizes the corridor and drives economic growth. When it comes to streetcars, HDR has established itself as the make-it-happen team. Our experts will guide you through the process and help you develop a legacy project your whole community can be proud of. ->


> There are 20 funded streetcar projects in the United States, including

the KC Downtown Streetcar. This 2-mile starter line connects

Kansas City's River Market and Crown Center/

Union Station areas and includes a vehicle storage/

maintenance facility and four low-floor vehicles.

©HD

R En

gine

erin

g, In

c.

[25]

T he beauty of human ingenuity is our ability to develop tools that make tasks easier while improving the outcomes of those

tasks. For example, the advancement of 3D modeling technology gave us the ability to simulate how a structure might look and behave before construction even begins. This allows us to save time and money by identifying and correcting design flaws or conflicts between various design disciplines (clash detection) using what the industry is increasingly recognizing as virtual design and construction (VDC).

As powerful as this is, we refuse to limit ourselves to this 3D world. Today, we are working with clients to incorporate a fourth dimension (time) to the virtual design and construction environment. A fifth dimension (cost) is starting to see more use, and more dimensions are certainly on the horizon, but for now let’s explore the benefits and applications of 4D.

4D DefinedThe term 4D simulation, or simply 4D, is used to describe the linking of individual 3D components or assemblies in a design model with their related construction activities defined in project schedules. Time is considered the “fourth dimension” added to 3D models, hence the term 4D.

Using 4D enhances communication and collaboration among various project stakeholders as teams can now visualize in a 3D environment how each project element will fit in its construction sequence, based on the project schedule. Without 4D you might have a project meeting in which participants are reviewing a long list of schedule activities and trying to relate those to various drawing sheets. With 4D, your stakeholders can look at a specific schedule activity and the system takes them directly to the geometry of what is being built, and vice-versa. This eliminates doubt and allows more time to be used studying and improving both design and construction planning.

4D in ActionFor a real-world example of the benefits of 4D, let’s look at how the technology was applied for the Terminal 4 Apron Civil Works project at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport.

Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, operated by the Broward County Aviation Department (BCAD), is one of the fastest growing airports in the United States. In terms of passenger traffic, it ranked 21st in the nation in 2011. We are one of three teams providing general engineering services to support BCAD’s current development programs via a five-year, $9.3 million task order contract. Terminal 4 (T-4) Apron Civil Works project is part of the overall Airport Expansion Program. This project will modify the existing airport terminal utility infrastructure, and is required to facilitate the Terminal 4 Gate Replacement Project.

The major limiting factor for the project is that all proposed construction must be completed while maintaining operations to the existing terminal and concourse. This required development of a detailed Construction Safety and Phasing Plan for submittal to and approval by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and airlines. Using 4D simulation allowed the project team to optimize construction phasing and helped reduce construction costs.

As shown in Figure 1, we designed the project and displayed aircraft movements in relationship to construction work zones in 3D. We then sought construction sequencing input from the construction project management team, led by Turner Construction Company, and added construction scheduling activities and milestones to the 3D environment, creating a 4D simulation. The team used this 4D simulation in several phasing workshops held with the client and stakeholders to determine a better construction phasing approach.

Combining 4D simulations with aircraft movement analysis allowed stakeholders to visualize aircraft movements in relationship to construction progress based on actual planned scheduled activities (see Figure 2). Stakeholders could easily see how everything would fit together during construction. Such communication approach was the key in gaining buy-in from stakeholders, including the airlines, the airport’s operations and maintenance departments, and the FAA.

The original phasing plan provided by the program management office called for 14 phases. The 4D simulation technology allowed

By Gustavo Couto, PMP

ENTERING A NEW DIMENSION: 4D SIMULATION ENHANCES COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION

P E R S P E C T I V E

[26]

P E R S P E C T I V EFigure 1As time progresses, construction and staging areas are highlighted in the 3D model environment based on the construction schedule.

1a. Terminal expansion begins, construction staging in yellow and plane ground routing to active gates in green.

1e. As construction progresses, staging areas are reduced and new gates and ground routes open.

1h. The terminal is complete.

1b. As construction progresses, staging area is reduced and new plane ground routes become available.

1c. Terminal complete, new gates open, construction staging moves to accommodate further terminal expansion and demolition of current structure.

1d. New gates opened, staging moving to the area on the right side of this rendering.

1a 1e

1b 1f

1c 1g

1d 1h

1f. Staging areas are adjusted as construction progresses per the schedule.

1g. Construction is nearly complete and ground routing approaches normal operating conditions.

[27]

the team to reduce that to eight phases, with many occurring concurrently. This resulted in a savings of approximately $5 million in construction cost, which BCAD was able to use to complete additional scope items.

Other Applications4D simulations may have many different applications; how you leverage a 4D environment will largely depend on specific project needs. The following are just a few examples of how we have applied 4D methodology to support decision-making on other projects:

• Study construction logistics for materials delivery and installation based on project’s geometry and construction timeline. This helps ensure the project can be constructed as designed and scheduled before you even break ground on the job site.

• Review and develop owner’s project environmental considerations relative to construction so that your project’s environmental impacts are properly mitigated.

• Review various proof of concepts and validate construction sequencing alternatives so you can select the most appropriate solution to building the project.

• Validate construction schedules based on project’s geometry and building restrictions so that you have certainty the project can be built as planned.

Proper use of 4D and other VDC techniques can help improve and optimize construction project delivery. That being said, technology alone is not the answer; HDR teams focus on defining and understanding the “big picture,” and after we successfully define the project’s needs, challenges and opportunities we can then apply the right technology solution to deliver value to you and your stakeholders.->

Timothy Fish, P.E., and Adam Joslin contributed to this article.


1 2

3

Figure 2. Elements of the 4D simulation.1. Construction schedule—A virtual timeline runs through

the schedule, and the 3D environment gets updated based on construction sequencing.

2. Terminal construction in progress—Construction staging (yellow) and plane routes (green) are updated as construction progresses.

3. Terminal finished—New plane routes open (blue) as construction (green area) and construction staging (yellow) move to a different terminal.

[28]

Picture this—you’re a parent of two busy children in a household with two

working parents. You spend most of your evenings attending personal and professional commitments. The major arterial road in your community is in disrepair, causing congestion to fill your mornings and late afternoons. The road needs to be improved, so when the local jurisdiction announces a public meeting for this road improvement you: a. Skip your child’s softball game and attend the full two-hour meeting. b. Leave a late afternoon work meeting and attend the public meeting. c. Don’t attend.

ON

LIN

ETaking Public InvolvementBy Theresa McClure, ENV SP, Laura Heilman and Michael Darbouze

What to Do When No One Shows Up

© iS

tock

.com

/HDR

[29]

In today’s ever-changing demographics—the growth of single-family homes, varying work shifts, access to technology and the Internet—the answer for most people is option “c.” People just don’t show up anymore.

The result is that we end up with valuable information and input on our projects, but only from those who typically are the loudest, the angriest and the most impacted. This input is good and ensures that most solutions are evaluated, but getting input from only one segment of your stakeholder population puts you and your project at risk for schedule delays and increased costs. You may miss the importance of a community asset or a community need. Most importantly, you miss the chance to educate all of your stakeholders on the opportunities you can maximize and the constraints you must work within. This, above all, risks your reputation because the decisions you make today have a big impact on the project you aim to complete tomorrow.

Today’s technologically savvy public requires innovative and creative approaches to public involvement that can no longer be fulfilled using only traditional outreach methods. Also, stakeholders demand transparency, brevity and a voice in the decision-making process. The public involvement process has evolved from formal public hearings to a more personal open-house format, but even this format is no longer enough. As our public meeting attendance goes down and resource costs go up, we constantly seek new ways to reach stakeholders so that our projects are not derailed by public or political contention. As a result, the next evolution in public involvement is strategic online engagement.

It’s an Online WorldThe foundation for effective online engagement is situating information within the context of your stakeholder’s life. People

enjoy access to an enormous amount of information, furthering their need to filter, aggregate and make sense of it all.

Simple and engaging online tools are the key. HDR has found that online public meetings take advantage of this hyper-connected society and have become a highly successful and widely used tool in a variety of public involvement campaigns. As a complement to traditional public meetings, online public meetings can present the same information and provide similar opportunities for comment. Rather than require a member of the public to physically be present at a particular time and place, online meetings can be accessible from a laptop, desktop or mobile device, for weeks or months, at any time of the day. In places such as Arizona, online pubic hearings for road improvement projects are even taking the place of in-person hearings, allowing more people to be engaged in the decision-making process, ultimately resulting in a more successful project.

Nowhere has this been tested more fully than with the Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT). In 2012, HDR helped Iowa DOT implement a strategic public involvement approach for the Chicago to Council Bluffs–Omaha Passenger Rail Study. A key outcome of the approach included working in partnership with the Federal Railroad Administration and Iowa DOT to hold online meetings and eliminate costly and timely in-person public scoping meetings. This resulted in more than 1,500 comments on the project and approximately 6,500 online meeting attendees.

“The addition of online meetings into the Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process allowed us to cost-effectively involve the 522 communities we needed to reach based on NEPA requirements,” said Amanda Martin with Iowa DOT. “Executing this strategy by taking advantage of online communications

EMAIL NOTIFICATIONS

EARNED MEDIA MENTIONS (ELIMINATING THE NEED FOR PAID ADS & SAVING NEARLY $13,000)55

247,091 REACHED ON TWITTER

1,006 FACEBOOK SHARES

37,400 VISITORS FOR ONLINE SCOPING MEETING

COST PER VISITOR IN PERSON$80.72

$2.39 COST PER VISITOR ONLINE

143 IN PERSON ATTENDEES

3,854

By the Numbers:Public Involvement for Chicago to Council Bluffs-Omaha Passenger Rail StudyUsing online tools generated value and increased outreach for the scoping phase of the project.

[30]

made it possible for us to effectively manage a condensed project schedule while minimizing public contention on the project decision-making process.”

The demand for a multi-platform public involvement process is not unique to one type of transportation project. The demand exists from simple road improvement projects, to transit, to complex interstate improvement programs. This shift in participation has been documented in the Transportation Research Board’s most recent case study, “Update on the State of the Practice: Public Involvement in the 21st Century.”1

Times Are ChangingWhile online engagement is a new and innovative tool for public involvement in the transportation industry, what it is teaching us about public and stakeholder participation is even more intriguing. For starters, people are participating in online meetings at a peak of 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon and 9:00 to 11:00 p.m. in the late evening. This type of participation is atypical of the traditional public meeting held anywhere from 4:00 to 8:00 p.m.

In a recent test of participation during different times of day, HDR found that afternoon meetings from the 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. period are bringing in people at a 10 to 1 ratio compared to the traditional

evening meeting. This indicates that as participation declines during the standard time range, fewer resources are needed for meeting attendance. Therefore, an agency or municipality can take advantage of the increased input through online engagement and save time and resources for in-person engagement.

On a standard website an average user will spend anywhere from 4 to 30 seconds on a specific webpage. For online engagement that means your project information must be so compelling, concise and easy to understand that a user can walk away with the key points after 30 seconds of skimming the page. But, with enhanced features such as video, open platforms for dialog and infographics, HDR has found that users are willing to spend, on average, approximately 4.5 minutes on each page. This provides a unique opportunity to communicate project information in a way that each user can understand and process and become informed and engaged in project decision-making.

The Benefits of AdaptingWith online engagement you are using an innovative tool purposefully and garnering real results. Not only is it providing a new avenue for communicating to and engaging with stakeholders and the public, it also gives you access to real-time information about how to best involve the public in your decision-making process. As these tools evolve and the demand for these opportunities increases, online engagement on transportation projects will no longer be a consideration, but a requirement.->

Reference1. Transportation Research Board, Committee on Public Involvement, March 2013. “Update on the State of the Practice: Public Involvement in the 21st Century”


[ Today’s technologically savvy public requires

innovative and creative approaches to

public involvement... ]

> The level and times of participation in online meetings shows a need for alternatives to traditional public meetings.

[31]

FALL 2013

D E L I V E R E DTRANSPORTATION>

What Moves UsDelivering safe, reliable and efficient infrastructure day in and day out is hard work unless you’re seriously passionate about what you do. The passion our employees have for their families, communities and industry fuels their desire to develop innovative solutions to today’s transportation challenges.

KIMBERLY SLAUGHTER | CENTRAL REGION TRANSIT MARKET SECTOR DIRECTOR CHICAGO, IL

8404 Indian Hills Drive | Omaha, NE 68114-4049www.hdrinc.com

PRSRT STDUS POSTAGE

PAIDOMAHA, NE

PERMIT NO. 963

3487

1113

Tell us a little about yourself and your family.I was born and raised in Houston, and I am the youngest of five children. Both of my parents are native Texans, and my family has a neat history. I am very proud that there is a homestead for my mother’s family in Newton County, Texas, that is the site of the first black Methodist church and the first black school in the area and a family cemetery. My great grandfather was the oldest black son of his father and was given 3,000 acres of land to start a family and his future when blacks were first emancipated in Texas. In his interest to see others succeed, he donated land to have these facilities built.

I have been married for 20 years, and my husband, Wayne, is an attorney with United Airlines. We have two great kids, Marlene, 16, and Merritt, 9. We recently relocated our family to Chicago, and we are anticipating a very fun winter as the meteorologists predict a brutal winter here.

What inspired you to get into the transit industry? It really was by chance. My intent was to get into housing and community development and influence the design of low and middle income housing around the same community amenities that are expected by higher income consumers. My first job was with a consulting firm that did 80 percent of its work in transportation. One day, I used my computer programming skills to debug some source code, and suddenly I became a travel demand modeler. As I began to work with transportation clients, I quickly learned there was a great opportunity to touch and change people’s lives through transit.

What kind of work are you doing now? In addition to my role as Central Region Transit Director, I am working on projects in Austin, Kansas City and Boston, where I get to connect with clients as they develop financial plans, comply with FTA Buy America requirements, and select new transit options for their communities.

Is there a trend you see happening in transit that you are excited to be part of?I see communities that don’t want a cookie-cutter solution. They want to be heard and they want to be part of the decision-making process. They want an experienced consulting firm that can leverage experience, innovation and creativity to produce a sustainable solution.

What would you do if you could have a second career?If I were to choose another career path, I would compete on “Next Food Network Star” to host my own show. ->

Documents

Transportation Delivered Fall 2013