DRAFT - Work Product to aid in a
deliberate process-not for distribution
SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement
Project
(To be) August 2011
Federal Project Numbers: SAFETEA-LU HP-0099(095)
SAFETEA-LU PNRS-0099(096)
SAFETEA-LU
PNRS-0099(097)
Prepared for:
Randy Everett
Major Projects Oversight Manager
Federal Highway Administration
US Department of Transportation
711 South Capitol Way, Suite 501
Olympia, WA
98501-1284
Certified by:
Amy Arnis
Chief Financial Officer
Assistant Secretary, Strategic Planning and Finance
Washington State Department of Transportation
310 Maple Park
Olympia, WA 98501
Table of Contents
SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Program 1
3. Context & Overview: The SR 99 Alaskan Way Program and Its Components 9
Moving Forward Projects Summary and Status 12
4. Replacement Project Initial Financial Plan 14
FHWA Financial Plan Review and Approval 15
Project Historical Timeline and Current Schedule 22
Federal NEPA Document and Decision Document 23
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP/STIP) and Regional Transportation Plan 25
Public Outreach and Involvement 25
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) / Transit 26
FHWA Annual Update Requirements 26
Relationship of Financial Plan to Program/Project Management Plan 27
Management Tools to Monitor and Manage Risk 27
Project Delivery Methodology for the Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement 28
Pre-Construction Requirements 29
WSDOT Cost Development and Risk Assessment 34
Construction Cost Inflation Factors / Escalation 34
Cost Estimate by Construction Segment 35
Estimate by Major Project Element 36
7. Project Funding, Revenues, and Financing 38
State Funding — Transportation Partnership Account (TPA) and Nickel funds 38
Toll and Bond Authorization 39
9. Risk Identification, Mitigation, and Other Factors 44
10. Conclusions and Summary 49
Table of Figures
Figure 1: Alaskan Way Viaduct 1
Figure 2: Alaskan Way Viaduct Vicinity Map 2
Figure 3: AWV Program Summary Timeline 3
Figure 4: Estimated Alaskan Way Viaduct Program Costs 4
Figure 5: Funding for the Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program 5
Figure 6: Conceptual Bored Tunnel Cross-Section 6
Figure 7: Estimated Replacement Project Summary Costs 6
Figure 8: Replacement Project Funding 7
Figure 9: Alaskan Way Viaduct’s south end section 9
Figure 10: AWV Program Summary Timeline 11
Figure 11: Components that Comprise the Replacement Project 14
Figure 12: Conceptual Bored Tunnel Cross-Section 16
Figure 13: North End Concept, including Tunnel Operations Building, 17
Figure 14: North Portal Design Concept 19
Figure 15: South Access Area of the Replacement Project 19
Figure 16: South Portal Design Concept 20
Figure 17: Battery Street Tunnel 21
Figure 18: Bored Tunnel Design-Build Contract Procurement Schedule 22
Figure 19: Right of Way (ROW) Certification Schedule 32
Figure 20: Estimated Replacement Project Summary Costs 33
Figure 21: Replacement Project Summary Cost Estimate by Segment 35
Figure 22: Bored Tunnel Contract Construction Phase Engineering Cost Estimate 36
Figure 23: Examples of Sources of Funds for the Replacement Project 38
Figure 24: Replacement Project Cash Flow by Source 42
Figure 25: Cap on Payments to the Design-Builder 43
Figure 26: Allocation of Risk/Inflation 46
Figure 27: Bored Tunnel Best
Value Determination 47
Appendices
| Appendix Page | ||
| A. | Delegation of Authority for WSDOT Chief Financial Officer to Certify Financial Plans | 1 |
| B. | WSDOT Secretary’s Executive Order E 1053.01, “Project Risk Management and Risk Based Estimating”, May 11, 2011. | 3 |
| C. | WSDOT Project Delivery memo 07-01, “Project Cost Estimate Creation, Update, Review and Approval Procedures”, July 1, 2008. | 8 |
| D. | WSDOT Secretary’s Executive Order E 1038.00, “Enterprise Risk Management”, September 4, 2007. | 15 |
| E. | WSDOT Secretary’s Executive Order E 1032.01, “Project Management”, July 1, 2008. | 19 |
| F. | WSDOT Secretary’s Executive Order E 1042.00, “Project Management and Reporting System (PMRS)”, July 1, 2008. | 25 |
| G. | Instructional Letter Number, IL 4071.01, “Risk-Based Project Estimates for Inflation Rates, Market Conditions, and Percentile Selection”, May 7, 2010. | 34 |
| H. | WSDOT Cost Component Distribution Technical Memorandum (CEVP® report), HDR, January 12, 2010 | 53 |
| I. | Updated SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Updated Cost and Tolling Summary Report to the Washington State Legislature, January 2010. | 71 |
| J. | WSDOT/FHWA Toll Agreement Documentation | 115 |
| K. | “Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project, 2010 Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation, Section 6, Construction Mitigation,” (FHWA9WA9EIS9049019DS2), September 24, 2010, pages 154-159. | 126 |
| L. | WSDOT’s Interpretation of 2011 – 13 Legislatively Approved Budget for AWV Program, May 2, 2011, (11DOTLFC from TEIS) | 133 |
| M. | Letter commemorating conditional approval for construction of Bored Tunnel from Puget Sound Regional Council, June 23, 2011. | 150 |
| N. | Summary of WSDOT Design-Build Methodology | 152 |
| O. | Summary of WSDOT Design-Bid-Build Methodology | 154 |
| P. | Memorandum of Agreement, funding commitment between WSDOT and Port of Seattle (GCA 6444) | 156 |
The Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has developed an
Initial Financial Plan for the SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement
Project (Replacement Project). The plan is in accordance with the
requirements of US Code Section 106, Title 23, and the Financial Plan guidance
issued by the Federal Highway Administration.
The cost data in the
Initial Financial Plan provides an accurate accounting of costs incurred to date
and includes a realistic estimate of future costs based on
engineers’ estimates, currently planned activities, and expected
construction cost escalation factors.
The Replacement Project
contains a mix of funding that includes direct sources, as well as toll
revenues. While the estimates of financial resources rely upon assumptions
regarding future economic conditions and demographic variables, they represent
realistic estimates of available monies to fully fund the Replacement
Project.
We believe the Initial
Financial Plan provides an accurate basis upon which to schedule and fund the
Replacement Project.
To the best of WSDOT’s
knowledge and belief, the Initial Financial Plan, fairly and accurately presents
the financial position of the Replacement Project, cash flows and expected
conditions for design and construction of the project. The financial forecasts
in this Initial Financial Plan are based on our judgment of the expected project
conditions and our expected course of action. We believe that the assumptions
underlying the Initial Financial Plan are reasonable and appropriate. Further,
we have made available all significant information that we believe is relevant
to the Initial Financial Plan and to the best of our knowledge and belief, the
documents and records supporting the assumptions are
appropriate.
_____________________________________ ______________________________
Amy Arnis Date
Chief Financial Officer
Assistant Secretary, Strategic Planning and Finance
Washington State Department of
Transportation
This document is the Initial Financial Plan for the State Route (SR) 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project (Replacement Project), which is part of a larger SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program (AWV Program), located in downtown Seattle in Washington State. This project level financial plan is required by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) because the total project size, including design, right of way, and construction exceeds $500 million and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) anticipates using future federal funds.
Given the integrated nature of individual projects within the SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program (AWV Program), this financial plan will begin by providing a program overview in Section 3. Sections 4 through 10 will then focus specifically on the scope, schedule, costs, and funding for the Replacement Project.
Figure 1: Alaskan Way Viaduct
2. Executive Summary
Built in the 1950s, the Alaskan Way
Viaduct is a north-south National Highway System freeway that carries more than
110,000 vehicles per day through downtown Seattle, Washington. In 2001 a 6.8
magnitude Nisqually earthquake damaged the Alaskan Way Viaduct and forced the
Viaduct to be closed for emergency repairs.
The Alaskan Way Viaduct is seismically
vulnerable and at the end of its useful life. To protect public safety and
provide essential vehicle capacity to and through downtown Seattle, the Viaduct
must be replaced. Because this facility is at risk of sudden and catastrophic
failure in an earthquake, FHWA, WSDOT, and the city of
Seattle seek to implement a replacement as soon as possible. Moving people and
goods to and through downtown Seattle is vital to maintaining local, regional,
and statewide economic health.
As part of the studies to evaluate
various solutions for the Viaduct, FHWA, WSDOT, and the city of
Seattle have identified the following purposes and needs that the solutions
should address. The purpose of the proposed action is to provide a replacement
transportation facility that will:
WSDOT has evaluated several
options for replacing the Viaduct since the 2001 Nisqually Earthquake. In 2006,
Governor Christine Gregoire called for an advisory vote to be held in Seattle to
determine the preferred alternative. The March 2007 ballot included an
elevated alternative and a surface-tunnel hybrid alternative. The citizens voted
down both alternatives.
After the March 2007 vote in Seattle,
Governor Gregoire, King County Executive Ron Sims and Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels
chose to “move forward” with critical safety and mobility improvement projects
and replace the south end of the Alaskan Way Viaduct between South Holgate and
South King streets. These Moving Forward Projects
could proceed while the executives worked together through a collaborative
public process to develop a replacement solution for the Viaduct’s central
waterfront section between South King Street and Battery Street, which will have
broad consensus among the lead agencies, cooperating agencies, tribes and the
public.
Figure 2: Alaskan Way Viaduct Vicinity Map
Replacement Project general area – including the central waterfront
Holgate to King Area
In January 2009, the Governor, County
Executive and Mayor recommended replacing the central waterfront portion of the
Alaskan Way Viaduct with a deep single-bore tunnel. In addition, they
recommended replacing the associated surface street, Alaskan Way, with a new
waterfront surface street and promenade, transit investments, a streetcar on
First Avenue, a restored seawall and downtown city street improvements. Their
recommendation was based on the potential for a bored tunnel and other
improvements to meet the six guiding principles established as part of the
Partnership Process; technical analysis; strong support of diverse interests;
and the willingness of the partners, with the support of the Port of Seattle, to
develop a funding program that supplements the State’s committed $2.8 billion.
In fall 2009, the city of Seattle and the State executed a policy agreement
formally aligning policies through ordinance with their action earlier in
January. This agreement was further supported by an agreement between the city
of Seattle and the State clarifying administrative procedures and practices for
implementation of the preferred alternative.
The State’s
Alaskan Way Viaduct Program (AWV Program) is comprised of several distinct
efforts:
Work within the AWV Program started in 2007 with safety repairs on
columns between Columbia and Yesler Streets, followed by advance utility work.
Much of the Program’s heavy construction will occur between 2010 and 2016 with
construction in the south end on the Holgate to King Project and bored tunnel to
replace the central and northern portions of the Viaduct. Construction and
demolition work for the Replacement Project is anticipated to be completed by
2016.
Figure 3: AWV Program Summary
Timeline
The State’s total AWV Program cost is
approximately $3.15 billion, with the Replacement Project making up the largest
effort within the Program. Figure 4 outlines estimated AWV Program costs. As
seen in the call-out boxes, separating the items belonging to separate projects
and lead agencies is sometimes a challenge in this overview due to the weave of
environmental documentation, funding, and contracting structures that make up
the AWV Program.
Figure 4: Estimated Alaskan Way Viaduct Program Costs
(Year of Expenditure, Millions of Dollars)
Replacement Project Components include:
$2,010.7 M for Central Waterfront, $50 M for the Battery Street Decommissioning and Viaduct Removal, and $100 M for city of Seattle Mercer St. West (not featured in this figure, See Fig. 6), for a total of $2,160.7 M.
The Replacement Project EIS only included $50 M in scope for the Battery Street Decommissioning and Viaduct Removal. The remainder of the Surface Street Restoration scope will be covered in a separate environmental document.
Source: WSDOT Cost Estimate to support WA State Legislature approved 2011-13 budget, 11LEGFIN
(1) Construction mitigation funds were established to offset the loss of short term parking under the existing viaduct.
The funding plan for the AWV Program is
made up a variety of sources including Washington State transportation funding,
federal SAFETEA-LU funding, and local funding contributions from the city of
Seattle, Port of Seattle, and toll funding. The total amounts of each specific
funding source are detailed in Figure 5.
Figure 5: Funding for the Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program
(Year of Expenditure, Millions of Dollars)
Source: WA State Legislature approved 2011-13 budget, 11LEGFIN
- Local Funds include re-imbursement from the city of Seattle for utility relocation work to be performed by the project’s design-builder.
- Use of this funding is dependent on a future federal authorization act. If this funding is not found to be applicable, WSDOT will use other eligible federal funds available.
With the work that WSDOT conducted in 2010, WSDOT identified all of the funding to complete the entire $3.15 billion Alaskan Way Viaduct Program. The program will use $2.75 billion in funding from state, federal, local, and Port of Seattle sources as means for financing all phases of work. The plan assumes tolling will provide up to $400 million.
The Replacement Project, located in the
middle and north end of the AWV Program area (Figure 2) will build a bored
tunnel (Figure 6), provide north and south access portals, demolish the
old viaduct structure that the tunnel will replace, and decommission the Battery
Street Tunnel that connects SR 99 to the current viaduct structure on the north
end. The Replacement Project is anticipated to be comprised of up to seven
separate construction contracts.
The Replacement Project includes what
many now refer to as “the Central Waterfront” at $2.01 billion, in addition to
other components of the environmental impact statement (EIS). When all the
components of the EIS are included, the total project cost and funding for the
Replacement Project is estimated at $2.16 billion (Figure 7 and Figure 8).
Figure 6: Conceptual Bored Tunnel Cross-Section
Figure 7: Estimated Replacement Project Summary Costs
($ in millions, year of expenditure)
Source: WSDOT Cost Estimate to support WA State Legislature approved 2011-13 budget, 11LEGFIN
- Viaduct Demolition and Battery Street Tunnel decommissioning are a subset of the $290 million Surface Street Restoration effort. The figures shown here are preliminary estimates that will be refined in subsequent financial plans.
- The Mercer Street West component, work to be performed by the city of Seattle, has been included in this report because it is also cleared by the EIS.
The Replacement Project will use $2.16
billion in funding from state, federal, local, and Port of Seattle sources. Of
the $2.16 billion, up to $400 million will come from bonds that will be paid
back by tolling the Bored Tunnel.
Figure 8: Replacement Project Funding
(Year of expenditure, dollars in millions)
Source: WA State Legislature approved 2011-13 budget, 11LEGFIN
(1) Local funding includes $50 million in reimbursements from the city of Seattle for utilities work performed by the project’s design-builder.
(2) This component covers two elements covered by the EIS – existing viaduct demolition and Battery Street Tunnel decommission.
(3) The Mercer Street West component, work to be performed by the city of Seattle, has been included in this report because it is also cleared by the EIS.
(4) Use of this funding is dependent on a future federal authorization act. If this funding is not found to be applicable, WSDOT will use other eligible federal funds available.
WSDOT has been studying
various options for toll methods and rates. Early studies evaluated a range of
toll rates for passenger vehicle depending on direction of travel and time of
day (Appendix I). Recent study has been targeted toward a $2.75 to $3.50 toll
per passenger vehicle for the peak period direction in 2008
dollars.1
Traffic diversion is a point of interest
as well, with more evaluation to come. Additional study and refinement of toll
options will be developed prior to anticipated tolling in 2016 when the tunnel
is scheduled to open.
Construction on the Replacement Project
will be comprised on multiple components and is anticipated to start with
authorization to the Bored Tunnel design-builder (Seattle Tunnel Partners) in
fall 2011. The tunnel is scheduled to open in 2016, with the Project winding
down with final demolition of the old structures (Viaduct and Battery Street
Tunnel) in 2017 and 2018.
Acknowledging that large projects can be
risky, WSDOT has engaged
in a variety of efforts, studies, and processes to minimize, account for,
manage, and track risks that may affect project scope and schedule. See Section
9 for more detail.
As the body of this document demonstrates (sections 4 through 10), WSDOT is confident that the financial commitments for the Replacement Project are sufficient and that efforts to manage scope and schedule risks that affect cost and traffic movement in the city of Seattle will be adequately implemented.
This section of the initial finance plan discusses the background and history of the Alaskan Way Viaduct, and describes the Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program and its component projects.
Figure 9: Alaskan Way Viaduct’s south end section
The Alaskan Way Viaduct section of SR 99 has been a fixture of the downtown Seattle waterfront for over five decades. Today, SR 99 continues to be a main north-south route through the city, carrying one quarter of all north-south traffic (110,000 vehicles) through Seattle every day. However, its days are numbered. Time, daily wear and tear, salty marine air and some sizeable earthquakes have taken their toll on the structure.
Built in the 1950s, the Alaskan Way
Viaduct is nearing the end of its useful life and does not meet today’s seismic
design standards. The soils around the foundations of the structure consist of
former tidal flats covered with wet, loose fill material subject to
liquefaction. The Alaskan Way Seawall, which is also vulnerable to earthquakes,
holds these soils in place along the majority of the viaduct corridor. Built in
the 1930s, the Alaskan Way Seawall is in a state of disrepair and continuing
deterioration. It also does not meet current seismic design
standards.
In early 2001, a team of Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) design and seismic
experts began work to determine whether it was feasible and cost-effective to
strengthen the Viaduct by retrofitting it. In the midst of this investigation,
the 6.8 magnitude Nisqually earthquake shook the Puget Sound region. The
earthquake damaged the Viaduct, forcing WSDOT to temporarily shut it
down for emergency repairs.
Closure of the Viaduct following the 2001
Nisqually Earthquake resulted in extreme congestion on Interstate 5 (I-5) and in
the downtown city street grid. The closure demonstrated that SR 99 through
Seattle is a critical transportation link that needs to remain functional. WSDOT estimates that if the
Viaduct is no longer usable, travel time through the downtown Seattle area will
double.
Ongoing inspections have revealed the
Viaduct has moved and settled, and the seawall’s timber relieving platform has
been eaten away by tiny marine crustaceans called gribbles. The Nisqually
earthquake highlighted the fact that the viaduct and seawall are nearing the end
of their useful lives, and it is time to replace them.
The 2006 Supplemental Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) analyzed two alternatives—a refined
cut-and-cover “Tunnel Alternative” and a modified rebuild alternative called the
“Elevated Structure Alternative.” Since 2006, additional study and evaluation of
other alternatives have taken place.
After continued public and agency debate
over the alternatives included in the 2006 SDEIS, Governor Christine Gregoire
called for an advisory vote to be held in the city of Seattle. The March 2007 ballot included an
elevated alternative and a surface-tunnel hybrid alternative. The citizens voted
against both alternatives.
After the March 2007 Seattle vote, Governor
Gregoire, King County Executive Ron Sims, and city of Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels
chose to “move forward” with critical safety and mobility improvement projects
at the north and south ends of the Alaskan Way Viaduct, which included replacing
the structure’s southern mile. These Moving Forward Projects
could proceed while the executives worked together through a collaborative
public process to develop a replacement solution for the Viaduct’ central
waterfront section that will have broad consensus among the lead agencies,
cooperating agencies, tribes and the public.
The Moving Forward Projects included:
In December 2007, Governor Gregoire,
King County Executive Sims, and Seattle Mayor Nickels committed to a
collaborative effort, called the Partnership Process, to forge a solution for
the viaduct’s central waterfront section that could be broadly supported and
implemented. The Partnership Process included input from a 29-member Stakeholder
Advisory Committee and Project Management Team.
After examining numerous below-ground,
surface and above-ground options, WSDOT, King County, and the
city of Seattle released the I-5/surface/transit hybrid alternative and elevated
bypass hybrid alternative in December 2008 for public comment. These hybrids
were selected because they were the lower cost options and provided mobility for
people and goods, although in different ways. Based on support from the
Stakeholder Advisory Committee and public for the bored tunnel option, the
Governor, County Executive, and Mayor asked their departments of transportation
to complete further analysis of it.
In January 2009, the Governor, County
Executive, and Mayor recommended replacing the central waterfront portion of the
Alaskan Way Viaduct with a single large-diameter bored tunnel. The
recommendation also included a new waterfront surface street and promenade,
transit investments, a streetcar on First Avenue, a restored seawall and
downtown city street improvements. Their recommendation was grounded in the
potential for a bored tunnel and other improvements to meet the six guiding
principles established as part of the Partnership Process; technical analysis;
strong support of diverse interests; and the willingness of the partners, with
the support of the Port of Seattle, to develop a funding program that
supplements the State’s committed $2.8 billion. In fall 2009, the city of
Seattle and the State executed a policy agreement formally aligning policies
through ordinance with their action earlier in January. This agreement was
further supported by an agreement between the city of Seattle and the State
clarifying administrative procedures and practices for implementation of the
preferred alternative.
In September 2009, the Alaskan Way
Viaduct Replacement Project History Report was prepared to summarize the
alternatives that have been studied since the program began in 2001 and to focus
on the evaluation of alternatives through the Partnership Process and how the
Bored Tunnel Alternative emerged. A copy of this report is included in the
2010 updated Project Management Plan.
In addition to the bored tunnel, WSDOT is the lead for
removing the existing viaduct structure, decommissioning the Battery Street
Tunnel and completing the Moving Forward Projects.
King County is the lead for RapidRide enhancements, additional peak hour bus
service and transit speed and reliability improvements. The city of Seattle is
the lead for the utility relocations, the waterfront promenade, city street
improvements and the First Avenue Streetcar. The City is also responsible for
replacing the seawall and will lead independent environmental evaluations for
most of the City efforts. A timeline for the AWV Program is shown in Figure
10.
Figure 10: AWV Program Summary
Timeline
The Alaskan Way Viaduct is seismically
vulnerable and at the end of its useful life. To protect public safety and
provide essential vehicle capacity to and through downtown Seattle, the Viaduct
must be replaced. Because this facility is at risk of sudden and catastrophic
failure in an earthquake, FHWA, WSDOT, and the city of
Seattle seek to implement a replacement as soon as possible. Moving people and
goods through downtown Seattle is vital to maintaining local, regional, and
statewide economic health. FHWA, WSDOT, and the city of
Seattle have identified the following purposes and needs that the Project should
address.
The purpose of the proposed action is to
provide a replacement transportation facility that addresses the following
needs:
Column safety repairs on the existing viaduct in the Pioneer Square area between Columbia Street and Yesler Way were completed in April 2008. The Electrical Line Relocation Phase 1 construction contract along the viaduct’s South End was completed in December 2009. The Transit Enhancements and other improvements projects were established to mitigate traffic during construction of the Holgate to King Project as well as the Central Waterfront Traffic. These projects were managed by WSDOT, the city of Seattle, and King County. All of the projects are near completion and are functionally operational. These projects are shown in Figure 10.
The only “Major Project” (over $100 million) included in the Moving Forward Projects is the South End viaduct replacement between South Holgate Street and South King Street. The environmental assessment for Holgate to King was released in June 2008, and the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was signed by FHWA in February 2009.
A separate Project Management Plan and an Initial Financial Plan was prepared for Holgate to King Project. The Initial Financial Plan was approved by FHWA in June 2009. The first Annual Update was submitted to FHWA on December 1, 2010. However, because the total project cost fell substantially below $500 million, but is still higher than $100 million, WSDOT will continue to develop Annual Updates, but they do not need to be approved by FHWA.
The Stage 1 construction contract to relocate utilities was substantially complete on May 28, 2010. The Stage 2 Heavy Civil Construction contract was also awarded in May 2010 and construction is scheduled to be completed by mid-2013. The Stage 3, South Atlantic Street Bypass is still in preliminary engineering, and Stage 4, Landscaping and Completion Work is still under development. The Holgate to King Project will complete the South End of the viaduct replacement.
The Replacement Project is located in the middle and north end of the AWV Program area (Figure 11) and may be comprised of approximately seven components.
1. Bored Tunnel Design-Build
2. North Access
3. North Surface Streets
4. South Access
5. Viaduct demolition
6. Battery Street Tunnel decommissioning
7. Mercer Street West (city of Seattle
project)
The Replacement Project is the focus of
this Initial Financial Plan and described fully in Section
4.
Figure 11: Components that Comprise the Replacement Project
Starting with Section 4 and extending for
the rest of this document, this is the Initial Financial Plan for the
Replacement Project. The purpose of the Initial Financial Plan is to provide a
comprehensive document that reports the Replacement Project's cost estimate and
revenue structure and to provide a reasonable assurance that there will be
sufficient financial resources available to implement and complete the Project
as planned.
This Initial Financial Plan will describe Replacement Project:
The requirement for Major Project financial plans was established in 2005. Section 1904(a)(2) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy For Users (SAFETEA-LU) amended 23USC106(h). SAFETEA-LU identified that projects over $500 million in total project cost shall develop financial plans and submit them for approval to the Federal Highway Administration. Requirements are spelled out in the FHWA Financial Plan Guidance, January 2007.
The Initial Financial Plan for the
Replacement Project was prepared in accordance with the Financial Plans
Guidelines established by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The
Financial Plans Guidance presents an outline for the “Initial Financial Plan”
and for “Annual Updates.” SAFETEA-LU requires that the Initial Financial Plan be
based on detailed annual estimates of the cost to complete the remaining
elements of the project and on reasonable assumptions of future increases in the
cost to complete the project. The Initial Financial Plan provides information on
the immediate and longer-term financial implications at the time of project
initiation. The annual updates of the Initial Financial Plan will provide
information on actual expenditures in comparison to initial estimates, as well
as updated estimates of future year's obligations and expenditures.
Based on the need to replace the Viaduct
as quickly as possible and reduce impacts during construction, the State
proceeded with issuing a design-build contract in advance of the Record of
Decision (ROD). The contract was awarded with a limited Notice to Proceed (NTP
#1), which restricted work progress to producing preliminary engineering in
support of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) only. The full terms
of the contract, including final design and construction, through a Notice to
Proceed Number 2 (NTP #2) will take effect immediately after the ROD is issued,
this Initial Financial Plan is approved, and federal funding authorization is
granted.
With the contractor Notice to Proceed
split into two stages and with an expedited schedule supplied by the
Design-Build contractor to remove the existing viaduct, WSDOT committed to a few key
points with FHWA.
The Replacement Project is over $500 million in total project cost, this Initial Financial Plan and each annual update will be submitted to the FHWA Washington State Division Office for review and approval. The Division Office will coordinate with the FHWA headquarters Major Projects Team for review and concurrence. Review will include such items as the reasonableness of the cost projections, the viability of the identified funding sources including whether they are contained in the fiscally constrained Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)/Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP)/Long Range Plan, and the likelihood that the funding commitments will provide sufficient resources to complete the Project as planned. The FHWA review and a determination of acceptability are anticipated to be done within 30 to 60 days from the date that the document is received by the FHWA Division Office.
The Replacement Project may be comprised of approximately seven components that will connect with the other projects within the AWV Program described in Section 3 to form a connected roadway system through downtown Seattle, Washington. The seven components include:
1. Bored Tunnel Design-Build
2. North Portal/Access
3. North Surface Streets
4. South Portal/Access
5. Viaduct demolition
6. Battery Street Tunnel decommissioning
7. Mercer Street West (this component
to be funded and overseen by city of Seattle)
The Replacement Project has finalized its scope of work through the completion of its FEIS in July 2011. The bored tunnel will replace SR 99 between South Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street. The tunnel will have two lanes in each direction. Access to and from the tunnel will be provided via ramp connections at the southern end, located north of South Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison Street. Different from the existing structure, mid-town ramps were not considered for the bored tunnel alternative. In addition, the Project includes removal of the Viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and decommissioning of the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed and open to traffic.
This single contract Design-Build (D-B) procurement effort will consist of cut and cover structures at the north and south portals, a large diameter (interior diameter 51’-0”) bored tunnel, an interior concrete structure with stacked roadways for north and southbound traffic, tunnel operations buildings, and tunnel systems. The southern limit of the civil work will match with Contract SA (South Access) on SR 99 near South Royal Brougham Way, and the northern limit of the civil work will match with Contract NA (North Access) east of 6th Avenue near Harrison Street.
The bored tunnel will have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes will be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes will be located on the bottom (Figure 12). The basic configuration for the design build contract requires a minimum 30-foot roadway width and a minimum vertical clearance of 15 feet within the traveled way. Travel lanes will be 11 feet wide, with a 2-foot-wide shoulder on the east side and an 8-foot-wide shoulder on west side. The wider shoulder will provide emergency vehicle access and space for disabled vehicles to safely stop.
Figure 12: Conceptual Bored Tunnel Cross-Section
The wider shoulder will also provide access to emergency tunnel exits, which will be provided at least every 650 feet. In an emergency, travelers will walk along the shoulders to reach a doorway which leads into a secure waiting area called a refuge area. Staircases inside the refuge area will provide access between the roadway levels. Signs will point travelers to the nearest exit where they would either wait for assistance or walk out of the tunnel. Refuge areas will contain emergency telephones.
The tunnel will be equipped with ventilation, a fire detection/suppression system, and drainage. Video cameras will provide real-time information to the operators at WSDOT’s 24-hour tunnel control center and allow them to respond quickly to changing conditions and emergencies. The main tunnel control/operations center will be located with WSDOT’s Northwest Region Traffic Management Center. The back-up tunnel control/operations center will be incorporated into one of the tunnel ventilation buildings at the north tunnel portal between Thomas and Harrison Streets on the east side of Sixth Avenue North.
Figure 13: North End Concept, including Tunnel Operations Building,
North Portal, North Access, and Mercer Street
This Design-Bid-Build Contract constructs the SR 99 mainline and ramps starting at the North Tunnel Portal area in the vicinity of Harrison Street and extends north to where it joins Aurora Avenue at Mercer Street. This contract also includes on and off ramps in the vicinity of Republican Street that connect the mainline to the City streets and an extension of 6th Avenue from Harrison Street to Mercer Street. Other items of work include stormwater controls, ITS, signing, structures, retaining walls, traffic control, and roadside restoration. The installation of the advance signing and ITS extends north of Mercer Street.
Utility conflicts not associated with the north tunnel operations building and north cut and cover activities will be incorporated in to the North Access design and construction. Relocation of utilities will be funded by the city of Seattle or private utility providers.
The depressed to at-grade roadway extending north from the tunnel portal at Harrison Street to the existing alignment of Aurora Avenue North will comprise the bulk of the North Access contract. There will also be surface roadway modifications to work with the new on- and off-ramps leading to and from the tunnel that connects to 6th Avenue and Republican Street as well the mainline merge with Aurora Avenue North.
At the north portal area, Sixth Avenue North will be extended from Harrison Street to Mercer Street. The new on-ramp to southbound SR 99 will intersect with the new Sixth Avenue North alignment midway between Harrison Street and Mercer Street. The new off-ramp from northbound SR 99 will connect to the intersection of Republican Street and Dexter Avenue. Northbound on- and southbound off-ramps to and from the intersection of Aurora Avenue and Harrison Street will also be constructed.
This Design-Bid-Build contract includes roadway work at the conclusion of the construction of the main roadway. This contract includes the reconstruction of 6th Avenue and Harrison Street over the north portal cut and cover constructed in Contract TU, backfilling the north portal of the Battery Street Tunnel, reconnecting John, Thomas, and Harrison Streets across Aurora Avenue North, improvements to the Aurora Avenue surface street between Denny Way and Harrison Street, and completes minor restoration work, landscaping and sidewalks.
Figure 14: North Portal Design Concept
(also showing part of North Access and Mercer)
This
Design-Bid-Build contract provides the permanent connection of Southbound SR 99
from the U-Section of the bored tunnel, on Alaskan Way in the vicinity of South
Royal Brougham Way, to the Holgate to King Project, south of Royal Brougham Way.
The South Access contract will construct the southerly 600 feet of the
southbound off-ramp to the South Royal Brougham Way intersection. This contract
will also construct the southbound on-ramp and the northbound off-ramp, which
will include a bridge over the bored tunnel southbound off- / northbound on-ramp
construction.
Vicinity of the South Access
This contract will remove the residual portions of the WOSCA detour not reconfigured and removed by the Bored Tunnel Design-Builder, and provide the permanent connection from SR 99 to the southern end of the tunnel.
This contract includes the reconstruction
of surface streets at both the Royal Brougham Way and Dearborn Street ramp
terminals, and over the south portal cut and cover constructed by the Bored
Tunnel Contractor. The surface street reconstruction includes Alaskan Way
Boulevard, Dearborn Street, 1st Avenue South after removal of the
WOSCA detour structures, and the East Frontage Road. This portion of the
Replacement Project will construct the South Operations Building parking
structure. It will also complete stormwater control, ITS, signing, structures,
retaining walls, traffic control, and roadside restoration.
Figure 16: South Portal Design Concept
The Battery Street Tunnel connects the
existing SR 99 / Aurora Boulevard in the north end of downtown Seattle to the
existing Alaskan Way Viaduct structure.
The Battery Street Tunnel will be decommissioned and closed after the bored tunnel is open to traffic. As part of the Battery Street Tunnel decommissioning process, the tunnel may require remediation to remove soot containing high levels of lead and to remove asbestos within the
Figure 17: Battery Street Tunnel
tunnel. Decommissioning will also include disconnecting power, water, and drainage lines. The necessary utilities that run through the tunnel will be relocated, and materials such as lighting fixtures will be removed. Then the tunnel will be filled with suitable material (such as the concrete rubble from viaduct demolition), and all street access vents and both portals will be sealed. The rubble will be solidified with a concrete mix. The Battery Street Tunnel portals will be sealed with concrete and barricaded.
Demolition of the existing central and
northern portions of the Alaskan Way Viaduct from just south of South King
Street to the Battery Street Tunnel will start after the bored tunnel is open to
traffic in 2016. The removal process is anticipated to take nine months.
Viaduct demolition will generate
approximately 107,000 cubic yards of material, primarily broken concrete and
reinforcing steel that will need to be hauled away and disposed of. Utilities
attached to the viaduct will be relocated before the viaduct is demolished.
Utilities will be relocated underground, which will require excavation under the
existing viaduct.
Most utilities buried beneath the viaduct are not expected to be affected by viaduct demolition or removal of the viaduct columns to a depth of 5 feet below the existing grade. Soil disturbances more than five feet below the existing grade have the potential to disturb deeper utilities. Mitigation measures, such as timber mats or gravel beds, will be used to ensure that utilities buried beneath the viaduct will not be damaged during viaduct demolition.
The Mercer West Project includes improvements on Mercer Street between Fifth Avenue North and Elliott Avenue West. The improvements include reconfiguring Mercer and Roy Streets west of Fifth Avenue North to accommodate two-way traffic. Mercer Street will become a two-way street and will be widened from Ninth Avenue North to Fifth Avenue North. The rebuilt Mercer Street will have three lanes in each direction with left-hand turn pockets. Broad Street will be filled and closed between Ninth Avenue North and Taylor Avenue North.
The proposed improvements will improve access from SR 99 for drivers traveling to Uptown (Lower Queen Anne), Ballard, Interbay, and Magnolia neighborhoods. Although this component is under the EIS for the Replacement Project, it will be administered and funded by the city of Seattle as part of a larger package of surface street improvements.
In response to several large earthquakes
in other parts of the world, WSDOT began to study the
viaduct in the mid-1990s. These studies showed that the 1950s-era viaduct was
vulnerable to earthquakes and nearing the end of its useful life. In early 2001,
a team of structural design and seismic experts began work to determine what to
do about the viaduct. In the midst of this investigation, the 6.8-magnitude
Nisqually earthquake shook the Puget Sound region on February 28,
2001.
In 2002 conceptual engineering for the
replacement of the Viaduct began. Between 2002 and 2006, the numbers of
alternatives were reduced from 176 down to a cut-and-cover tunnel and elevated
structure alternative. In July 2011 the Alaskan Way Viaduct Program selected the
preferred alternative for the replacement of the Central Waterfront section with
a bored tunnel as part of the Replacement Project.
The Replacement Project remains in the
preliminary engineering phase until the ROD is anticipated to be signed by FHWA
in August 2011.
Figure 18 highlights important decisions and construction activity
regarding the Bored Tunnel Design-Build Contract.
Figure 18: Bored Tunnel Design-Build Contract Procurement Schedule
| Action | Dates |
| Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Issue Date | September 15, 2009 |
| RFQ Voluntary Meeting | October 7, 2009 |
| SOQ Due Date Proposers | November 16, 2009 |
| Voluntary Proposers Meetings | March 1- September 15, 2010 |
| Issue Final RFP | May 26, 2010 |
| ATC Submittal Deadline | August 31, 2010 |
| Deadline for Submitting Proposer’s Questions | September 15, 2010 |
| Deadline for WSDOT’s Response to Proposer’s Questions | September 30, 2010 |
| Proposals Date | October 28, 2010 |
| WSDOT Requests for Information (RFIs) to Proposers | November 12, 2010 |
| Proposer Presentations | November 15-19, 2010 |
| Announce Apparent Best Value Proposer | December 9, 2010 |
| Contract Award Date | January 6, 2011 |
| 1st Notice to Proceed (NTP 1) (start design-build contract, allowed planning and preliminary engineering only) | February 7, 2011 |
| Anticipated FHWA Signed Record of Decision (ROD) | August 15, 2011 |
| Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Concurrence | August 15, 2011 (est.) |
| 2nd Notice to Proceed (NTP # 2) (Begin Construction) | August 17, 2011 |
| Substantial Completion | December 2015 |
| Facility Open to Traffic | January 2016 |
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Project filed a Notice of Intent (NOI) for studying the replacement in the Federal Register in July 2001. Preliminary engineering and the environmental process began soon after that time. The Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) was signed by the lead agencies that included FHWA, WSDOT and the city of Seattle in March 2004.
The environmental review process for the Bored Tunnel Alternative built on the five alternatives evaluated in the 2004 Draft EIS and cut-and-cover tunnel and elevated structure alternatives in the 2006 SDEIS. In June 2009, an updated NOI was published informing the public that an additional SDEIS would be prepared to evaluate the bored tunnel alternative as the recommended solution from the Partnership Process for replacing the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront.
The SDEIS for the Bored Tunnel Alternative was published for public review in October 2010. After publication and the opportunity for the public, agencies and tribes to comment on the 2010 SDEIS, FHWA, WSDOT and the city of Seattle prepared and published the Final EIS in July 2011. FHWA is anticipated to issue a ROD in August 2011, which is the NEPA decision document for the Replacement Project.
The Washington State Legislature has
identified that tolling can “provide a source of transportation funding and to
encourage effective use of the transportation system”.2 In this dual
role, it can be a means of revenue generation, it can be part of a
facility-specific or regional demand management program, or it can be used for a
combination of both. The implementation strategy, toll rates, variability of
toll rates, and locations of collection (e.g., mainline only or mainline and
ramps) depend on the ultimate purpose of the tolling. In the case of the
Replacement Project, tolling will be implemented to both manage traffic and
generate revenue. The location of electronic toll collection equipment is
anticipated to be on the north end of the project area.
Most tolling projects in the state of
Washington have been implemented in locations where there were very few, if any,
alternate routes. The Hood Canal Bridge, Tacoma Narrows Bridge, and the SR 520
Bridge are examples of facilities that have been tolled where use of an
alternate route requires a significant change in travel patterns and travel
time. The SR 99 corridor has multiple parallel routes in proximity of the
facility that can serve as alternate route for the tolled
facility.
The primary factors affecting route
choice are travel time and cost. Modeling travel behavior in a system requires
an estimation of travel time for multiple routes and the amount of diversion
from the tolled facility, which flows from an understanding of the value of time
for all modes of transportation using the facility. In the case of modeling for
the Replacement Project, tolling scenarios were developed that varied the price
of a trip by direction and time of day. Preliminary evaluation looked at seven
different tolling levels applied to the facility by direction during five
separate time periods (some tolls were the same for both directions) for
single-occupant, HOV 2+, and HOV 3+ vehicles.3 (Appendix I) These
rates are discussed in the Updated Cost and Tolling Summary Report to the
Washington State Legislature prepared in January 2010 (Appendix I). More recent
traffic analysis has focused on toll rates closer to the approximate $2.75 -
$3.50 peak period level in 2008 dollars ($3.50 - $4.00 peak period level in
2015-level dollars).
Medium- and
large-truck categories pay tolls based on the number of axles (Appendix I).
Truck toll levels were also adjusted for time of day and direction of
travel.
Travel models assume that drivers will
understand the fastest route to their destination and adjust their route based
on congestion levels and trip purpose. With tolling introduced to the system,
drivers will also take into account the value of their time versus the cost of a
toll and choose their routes accordingly. For example, commute trips are likely
to correspond to times when most drivers value their time highly, and evening
trips much less so. In order to capture revenue in the most effective way, toll
systems are typically implemented with toll rates varying throughout the course
of the day.
Tolling may cause vehicles to divert from SR 99 to other nearby roadways. The extent of the diversion and the travel patterns associated with the diversions is sensitive to the configuration of the facility, the available capacity on alternative routes, and the tolling implementation strategy. The percentage of diversion will differ throughout the day based on the level of the toll for that time period and the average value of time of drivers during that time period. It is not accurate to assume that a daily diversion percentage can be applied directly to a specific time period.
Project approval in the Regional TIP by
the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) is one of the approvals needed to move
forward toward construction authorization for the Replacement Project. Since the
ROD is not yet complete, PSRC gave conditional approval for the design phase of
the design build tunnel RFP on April 22, 2010. This update was approved for
adoption into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) on May 4,
2010.
The PSRC Executive Board has stipulated that the Replacement Project cannot begin construction until the ROD has been signed by FHWA. The Replacement Project was included Metropolitan Transportation Plan (Transportation 2040) on June 23, 2011 (Appendix M). It will be administratively updated in the TIP and STIP in July 2011, with the ROD anticipated to be issued in August 2011.
To gain input and to keep interested
parties up to date with project development, the WSDOT project team developed
and implemented a comprehensive, ongoing public involvement program at the onset
of the decision-making and environmental analysis process. The public
involvement effort identified specific goals and activities for outreach to the
general public and elected officials, and incorporated outreach to minority and
low-income populations. Public involvement is an ongoing effort that will
continue through the life of the Project.
WSDOT received comments from
the public through a range of outreach activities and tools that encourage
public participation, including the following:
• Community and agency briefings
• Project website
• Media outreach
• Public meetings
• Briefings to local organizations,
such as business, labor, and environmental groups
Input from agencies and the public play
an important role in the decision-making and evaluation process for this
Project. It influenced the Project’s scope, design choices, and range of
alternatives that have been advanced for further study in the environmental
review process.
WSDOT will provide future public involvement opportunities as we move into construction. WSDOT will maintain the Project website and hotline so the public can easily get the most current information about project status. Individuals can also sign up on the website for e-mail updates. The public can continue to submit comments and questions to WSDOT via the project hotline, e-mail, or mail. After the Record of Decision is issued, WSDOT will continue to inform the public about employment opportunities and construction activities through outreach activities such as community open houses. WSDOT will continue to respond to public questions, concerns and information requests for the duration of the Project.
The Replacement Project is anticipated to
have a considerable effect on local roadway traffic in King County and has
developed a specific TDM plan for the area under the Moving Forward Program
utilizing Active Traffic Management on Interstate 5 in the Downtown Seattle
vicinity. WSDOT and the Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) are working
together to keep traffic and freight moving during construction of the Alaskan
Way Viaduct replacement. Several Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)
projects around the city will provide real time traffic information to drivers.
Drivers will see benefits from new traffic cameras and overhead electronic
message signs when backups and incidents occur along SR 99 and
I-5.
With the tolled bored tunnel, the
Columbia and Seneca Street ramps on SR 99 will be removed, and all transit
vehicles currently operating on SR 99 will need to exit and enter
SR 99 in the stadium area. This change in transit service coverage will
increase the number of buses traveling through south downtown Seattle by
approximately 520 buses per day. Northbound buses traveling on SR 99 from
West Seattle and South King County will instead use the new ramps located in the
stadium area, and then travel on arterials in Pioneer Square to Third and Fourth
Avenues to access downtown Seattle.
While added transit travel time will be
incurred with the new stadium area ramps, transit vehicles traveling on SR 99 to
the south end of downtown Seattle will have improved access to locations in
SODO, Pioneer Square and other locations.4 These markets
traditionally have had transit access only via local streets.
A measurable shift to transit by users avoiding tolls on SR 99 is not expected. Both transit users and general-purpose travel will experience higher travel times but not necessarily in equal amounts. However, any resulting variations in travel times will not result in measurable shifts from general-purpose travel to transit. Also, since transit service is oriented to users traveling to and from downtown, no transit service is expected to operate in the bored tunnel.
The Replacement Project Annual Update to
the initial finance plan will be based on data collected from March to February
over the course of a year and submitted to the Federal Highway Administration by
June 1st of each construction year starting in 2012. Each update will reflect
any changes in scope, risk, total and remaining project cost, and/or available
funding. The last annual report in 2016 will cover completion of the
contract.
Data for the annual updates will specifically cover the following time periods:
Program/Project Management Plans (PMPs)
and Financial Plans have some overlapping areas of interest. Both plan types
describe timing, anticipated risk, and estimated costs. However, PMPs have a
greater focus on project scope and schedule, while Financial Plans have a
greater focus on balancing project funding/budget and cash
flows.
In relation to the Replacement Project,
WSDOT has developed a “program” management plan based on Washington State and
FHWA guidelines for major projects that covers the entire AWV corridor. The
Replacement Project is covered by several major sections of this PMP. The PMP
was submitted to FHWA September 2010 and was approved in December
2010.
WSDOT has determined that the AWV Program
Management Plan and the Replacement Project Financial Plan are consistent and
compatible.
This section, a summary of the information provided in the Project Management Plan, discusses how WSDOT will deliver the $2.01 billion Central Waterfront as a component of the Replacement Project and will include discussion of the following:
On July 1, 2008, the Washington State
Secretary of Transportation issued Executive Orders 1032.01 and 1042.00
(Appendices E and F). In addition to the Executive Orders, Instructional Letter,
IL4071.01 provides guidance for developing risk based estimating and how to
manage risk reserves. These executive orders provide guidance to project offices
on managing projects and using Project Management and Reporting Systems (PMRS).
The PMRS includes the project Electronic Content Management (ECM) system to
manage and report the status of transportation projects. The PMRS integrates
schedule, contract management, ECM, cost control/earned value, and cost
estimating with existing WSDOT legacy systems to better support management and
delivery of capital projects. ECM is the electronic system used to satisfy
document filing and retrieval, business process management (workflow), records
management, and retention requirements. WSDOT is in the process of implementing
new and revised programs and systems for PMRS and ECM and the AWV office is
incorporating the new systems as they are implemented.
Currently the Alaskan Way Viaduct Program Office uses Primavera Scheduler (contract and schedule management), PRISM (earned value/cost control), and tracking workbooks with bottom-up cost estimates. The Bored Tunnel Design-Builder is required to provide price-loaded schedules. An analysis of those schedules will be used as the basis for progress payments to the design-builder.
WSDOT traditional methods of delivering
transportation improvements projects typically use the Design Bid Build. This
entails completing all of the design and right of way procurement before a
construction project is advertised for bid. However, projects that are complex
in scope and cost are evaluated to determine the best method for delivering a
successful project.
The key benefits for employing design-build methodology for this construction segment include:
To speed delivery, promote innovative
approaches, and secure early price certainty, WSDOT employs a design-build
method to design and construct a project. This process is described in WSDOT
guidebook for design-build projects:
In design-build methodology, WSDOT
focuses on describing performance rather than on how to obtain that performance.
WSDOT identifies a conceptual plan and completes the preliminary design. This
conceptual plan is put out for development of a design-build proposal. Each
design-build team value engineers the preliminary plan and develops a cost
estimate for their proposal. Each proposal reflects the product that the
design-builder intends to deliver to meet WSDOT’s objectives. WSDOT then chooses
the design-builder with the best combination of elements, technical proposal,
and price.
The contract is a single contract between
WSDOT and the design-builder for design and construction services to provide a
finished product. The design-builder completes the design, with WSDOT
involvement in the design process. Because each bidder will have a different
design proposal to address the identified project need, this Initial Financial
Plan will not discuss the cost of specific design
components.
After selection of a design-builder and
execution of the contract, WSDOT performs administrative functions and the
design-builder performs design, construction, quality control (QC), and quality
assurance (QA) functions. WSDOT’s quality verification (QV) role during contract
execution assures that the products being developed by the design-builder are in
conformance with the contract requirements.
The QC/QA Program is a critical component of the design and construction of the Project. The focus of WSDOT’s quality assurance program is on product compliance with contract documents, verification of the design-builder’s quality control measures, and meeting Federal quality requirements. Quality assurance activities focus on monitoring contract execution with respect to a negotiated Quality Control Plan. WSDOT provides the quality verification and independent testing. The Contract Provisions require that the QC/QA Program submitted with the proposal be brought into conformance prior to execution of the contract.
The project delivery methods applied to
the Alaskan Way Viaduct Program are design-bid-build and design-build. All of
the projects associated with the Moving Forward Projects, including the
Holgate-to-King Project will be delivered using the design-bid-build method. The
Replacement Project, excluding the Bored Tunnel contract will use the
design-bid-build project delivery model. The Bored Tunnel is the only
design-build contract within the program. See Appendices N and O for more
information on design-build and design-bid-build
methodologies.
By employing a design-build contract on
the Bored Tunnel, the effort will benefit by:
The Alaskan Way Viaduct Program is defined as a mega project due to its size and cost to replace it. Before any construction can begin on any of the projects, the Federal NEPA process must be signed off by the FHWA. A project must also acquire the impacted right-of-way before construction can occur. A project also has to meet regional transportation guidelines before construction funding can be approved for use.
The Environmental process for the
replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct began in early 2001 after the Nisqually
Earthquake damaged the aging structure. Over the next six years several
alternatives were studied to replace the viaduct. During that period one
Environmental Impact Statement covered the entire Alaskan Way Viaduct corridor.
As the alternatives were narrowed down to two, a Cut/Cover Tunnel and Elevated
Structure, the citizens of Seattle voted in early 2007 to select a preferred
alternative. The vote by the citizens was no for both alternatives. As a result
of the no/no vote,
the Governor, Mayor, and King County Executive unveiled the “Moving Forward
Projects”. These projects would keep
advancing the replacement of the viaduct by concentrating on the removal of the
southern mile of the viaduct, while the central waterfront section went under
further study.
The environmental process for “Moving
Forward Projects” was centered on the Holgate to King Project. This Project
was granted by FHWA as being independent of any alterative that was chosen in
the central waterfront section. An Environmental Assessment was conducted for
the Holgate to King Projects and the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI),
was signed by FHWA on February 11, 2009 and published on February 25, 2009. All
four stages of the Holgate to King Project are covered under the Environmental
Assessment (EA). No non-mitigable environmental concerns were highlighted in the
EA and FONSI.
An environmental re-evaluation covering
the removal of the undercrossing and replacement with the “little
h” overpass was prepared and approved in February 2010. This is the scope
that was a result of the VE study in November 2009. The Stage 2 contract was
changed with the issuance of its fifth addendum.6
The remaining other “Moving Forward
Projects” are either Categorical Exclusions (CE) or Documented CEs, which
have been signed by FHWA.
The environmental process in the Central
Waterfront component has continued on and changed in January 2009 when the
Governor, Mayor, and King County Council Executive chose to replace the central
waterfront viaduct section with a bored tunnel.
The 2010 Draft SDEIS analyzed the Bored
Tunnel Alternative and compared its effects against other alternatives that were
studied previously. The Design-Build contractor for the Bored Tunnel continued
working on the preliminary engineering effort from late January 2011 until the
ROD is anticipated to be obtained in August 2011. Final Design and Construction
is estimated to commence once the ROD is issued by FHWA. The timeline for
achieving the environmental approvals is listed below:
Federal
State
Local
WSDOT is responsible for completing the
purchase of needed properties for the Project. Major right-of-way acquisition
was completed in the south end of the project area as part of the Holgate to
King Street Project. Property acquisition activities have been initiated for the
Design-Build SR 99 King Street to Roy Street – Viaduct Replacement (Bored
Tunnel). The acquisition schedule is divided into four Right of Way (ROW)
Certification dates. Additional ROW Certifications have been established for the
North Access and South Access Design-Bid-Build contracts. Figure 19 indicates the construction stage for each certification
date.
Figure 19: Right of Way (ROW) Certification Schedule
| ROW Certification Number | Project Component Covered by Certification | Description | Date |
| 1 | Bored Tunnel | Terminal 46 Temporary tieback Easement; two staging area leases | 08/1/11
08/30/11 (F/C)(1) |
| 2 | Bored Tunnel | Tunnel Settlement Mitigation -11 Temporary Easements | 03/30/12 |
| 2 | Bored Tunnel | Tunnel Monitoring- 134 Rights of Entry | 03/30/12 |
| 3 | North Portal | Acquisition of two parcels; Temporary access and Tie-Back Easements | 02/29/12 |
| 4 | Bored Tunnel | 55 Subsurface Parcels | 10/31/12 |
| 5 | Not Used | ||
| 6 | North Access | Three partial/full acquisitions; Limited Access rights from seven parcels | 07/31/12 |
| 7 | South Access | Two Partial Acquisitions | 12/31/13 |
F/C = Forecast
This section of the report outlines the
Replacement Project cost estimate and the process for developing estimates. The
sections that are discussed are:
The Replacement Project is anticipated to
cost $2.16 billion ($2.01 billion for the Central Waterfront and $150 million
additional components in the Replacement Project EIS (see notes below Figure 20). A summary of the Replacement Project cost estimate is
shown in Figure 20. Additional subsections provide detail on the estimated
costs broken out by phase, state biennia and fiscal years, as well as by
construction contract. First, however, is a description of WSDOT’s methodology
for developing costs and risks as background on how WSDOT developed its cost
estimate.
Figure 20: Estimated Replacement Project Summary Costs
($ in millions, year of expenditure)
Source: WSDOT Cost Estimate to support WA State Legislature approved 2011-13 budget, 11LEGFIN
- Viaduct Demolition and Battery Street Tunnel decommissioning are a subset of the $290 million Surface will be refined in subsequent financial plans.
- The Mercer Street West component, work to be performed by the city of Seattle, has been included in this report because it is also cleared by the EIS
The Alaskan Way Viaduct Program followed
the standard WSDOT design and construction procedures for all modes of project
delivery, whether the Project is a design-build project or a traditional
design-bid-build project. WSDOT conducts Value Engineering (VE) studies at
appropriate stages of design, as required by the Federal Highway Administration,
and incorporates the results of those studies in the design process. To lower
risk for design choices and project costs WSDOT employs a process called Cost
Estimate Validation Process® (CEVP®) as part of its
program and project level cost risk assessment. This process is identified in
WSDOT project management and cost risk documents included as Appendices B
through G.
WSDOT has conducted CEVP®, Cost Risk Assessment (CRA), and VE studies to document cost estimates for the Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program. The Holgate to King Projects and the bored tunnel efforts have undergone these types of workshops in the past to estimate costs.
Cost estimates for highway capital projects are developed based on current prices from recent bidding experience. This approach is used to estimate the various elements of the project. The project estimate is the sum of these individual elements or work items. The cost estimates are entered into the Capital Program Management System (CPMS) in current year dollars to support development of the capital budget. CPMS calculates year of expenditure dollars by applying inflation forecast assumptions to the estimates based on the project delivery schedule. The Alaskan Way Viaduct Program forecast is not inflated by CPMS. All forecasts are assumed to be year of expenditure values for this program.
The Escalation Input Assumptions were based upon WSDOT-mandated inflation tables in effect at the time of the CEVP®. These tables are based upon the cost indices in effect for preliminary engineering, right-of-way and construction phases and are then applied to the base estimates and risks developed for each of these phases in order to provide a year-of-expenditure (YOE) forecast. This risk-based estimating process then provides WSDOT a range of probability (from 10 percent to 90 percent) of costs. For projects over $10 million, it is WSDOT policy to use the 60th percentile as the high end of the probability range (Appendix G).
As a tolled section of roadway, once completed, the AWV Viaduct Replacement Project will be operated and maintained by WSDOT’s standard processes and budget with funding coming from gross toll revenues. WSDOT takes full responsibility for the ownership, operation, and maintenance of the facility. The overall WSDOT budget, which includes provisions for operational and maintenance activities, is enacted biennially by the state legislature and the Governor. Interim year supplemental budgets may also be enacted. Per the SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement updated Cost and Tolling Summary Report (Appendix I), the tunnel annual operation and maintenance costs are estimated at $5 million.
The Replacement Project cost estimate
information is detailed in this section. The $2.01 billion cost to replace the
Central Waterfront portion of the Replacement Project was established by holding
CEVP® and Value Engineering (VE) workshops that focused on the Holgate to King
Project and the Bored Tunnel section of the corridor. These workshops that were
held in late October of 2009 validated the current $2.01 billion Central
Waterfront cost. Since then, the team has worked on refining the cost estimates
for both of the Holgate to King and Bored Tunnel efforts. Detailed estimates for
the Holgate to King Project can be found in the 2010 Finance Plan update that
was submitted to FHWA in December 2010. Figure 21 shows the $2.01 Central Waterfront work by phase and
section, as well as the full $2.16 billion dollar estimate that includes Surface
Street and Mercer Street West components.
Figure 21: Replacement Project Summary Cost Estimate by Segment
($ in millions, year of expenditure)
Source: WSDOT Cost Estimate to support WA State Legislature approved 2011-13 budget, 11LEGFIN
The cost estimate information used in
this report is the basis for the development of the 2011 Legislative
Budget.8 The total estimated cost to complete the state’s
responsibility is $2.01 billion, plus an additional $150 million for the
remaining components included in the EIS.
The $2.01 billion estimate is broken down into major project elements. A project element is a category of work which will be conducted on some or all of the segments (i.e., design, construction, etc.). Figure 21 summarizes the Replacement Project costs aggregated together by project phase and date. This data is based on cost estimates developed for the recently passed transportation budget referred to as 11LEGFIN (Appendix L).
The proposed bored tunnel segment includes the following major construction elements, with associated construction costs identified in Figure 22.
Figure 22: Bored Tunnel Contract Construction Phase Engineering Cost Estimate
($ in millions, Year of Expenditure)
Source: Ebase Construction Estimate, version 99. January 2011
The North Access segment includes the following major construction:
The North Surface Streets segment includes the following major construction:
The South Access segment includes the following major construction:
Combined these contracts are anticipated to cost about $103.5 million. The scope of work for these contracts is not fully developed and therefore detailed construction phase estimates are not available at this time. The detailed estimates will be included in future Replacement Project Financial Plan Annual Updates when they are available.
The Replacement Project will rely on a
variety of fund sources from State, Federal, and Local participants. State
secured funding comes from State Motor Vehicle gas tax and Toll funds. The toll
funds will be used by leveraging future toll revenues from tolling the Bored
Tunnel section of SR 99. Figure 23 diagrams the Replacement Project sources of funding, and
the following subsections describe the funding sources in more detail. Figure 23
is an illustration of the sources of Replacement Project
Funds.
Figure 23: Examples of Sources of Funds for the Replacement Project
Replacement Project
State Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax
Revenues
Transportation Partnership Account
(TPA)
Nickel
Account
Central Waterfront
Project
Toll Funds
Toll
Revenues
Toll Bond
Proceeds
Federal
Funds
Emergency
Repair
SAFETEA-LU
High Priority &
PNRS
Bridge
Local Funds
Port of
Seattle
City of Seattle
The Transportation Partnership Act was a
state funding package passed by the Washington State Legislature in 2005 to help
finance specific projects and created the Transportation Partnership Account.
The account is primarily funded by a 9 ½ cent motor fuel tax with a minor amount
coming from other vehicle-related fees. The TPA provides the majority of the
state funding for the SR 99 AWV Program, at $1.51 billion. In addition, the 2003
Nickel Package provided funding for various projects using a 5 cent motor fuel
tax. Collectively, the TPA and Nickel Package provide $1.71 billion to the SR 99
AWV Program, as described in Section 3. Of this amount, $1.17 billion has been
targeted for the Replacement Project.
Other State funding sources that are financing the Replacement Project come from the Multi-Modal Account and the Motor Vehicle Account. These amounts are $129.1 million and $34.7 million respectively.
The Washington State Legislature approved Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill (ESSB) 5768 during the 2009 session (RCW 47.01), which identified a deep bored tunnel as its preferred option for replacing the SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct. ESSB 57689 identified funding in the following manner.
ESSB 5768, Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 47.01 RCW…
(2) The state route number 99 Alaskan Way viaduct replacement project finance plan must include state funding not to exceed two billion four hundred million dollars and must also include no more than four hundred million dollars in toll revenue.
ESSB 5768 also directed WSDOT to prepare a traffic and revenue study to determine the potential for tolls to contribute to construction funding. On January 15, 2010, the team submitted the “SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Updated Cost and Tolling Summary Report” (Appendix I). Several tolling scenarios were analyzed and documented in the report to determine if enough revenue could be generated to meet the $400 million need. The study found that four of the five scenarios could approach or exceed the $400 million target for toll funding when the assumptions for tolling were to solely generate revenue. The technical question of whether WSDOT could generate sufficient toll revenue was confirmed by this study based on the cost, schedule, and financing assumptions at that time.
WSDOT is currently working with the city of Seattle to further evaluate traffic and revenue assumptions to coordinate other aspects of toll decisions and confirm the final goals of tolling. The traffic models show that maximizing toll revenue may create significant traffic diversion onto city streets. In 2011 to 2012 WSDOT and the City will conduct further study and negotiation on the goals of tolling to determine a balance between revenue generation and traffic effects.
In addition to the direction granted under ESSB 5768 the AWV Program will seek additional legislation during the Washington State 2012 legislative session. These include the authority to implement tolls on a defined section of roadway and the authority to issue debt repayable by future toll revenue. See appendix I for further information on tolling implementation.
On June 1, 2011, WSDOT provided FHWA with an expression of interest and draft toll agreement, requesting FHWA authorization of tolling on SR 99 in downtown Seattle. That request is pending FHWA approval in summer 2011 (Appendix J).
The Washington State Legislature has committed $2.8 billion of funding towards WSDOT’s portion of the AWV Program as part of ESSB 5768 and approved WSDOT’s award of the design-build contract to construct the bored tunnel with the understanding that bonding will be needed on the up to $400 million in toll revenues. Thus, through intent, the Washington State Legislature has provided WSDOT with the path forward to bond authorization in 2013.
Authorization to generate construction funding secured by future toll revenue requires bonding authority from the Washington State Legislature with a 60 percent majority vote. WSDOT does not anticipate the need for toll backed bonds until late in the construction schedule, around calendar year 2014, and tolling will not start until 2016. Therefore, the final investment grade studies to support bond issuance will not be developed until closer to the time when funding will be required.10
The current plan is for $400 million of the $2.8 billion to be provided by toll backed funding. The risk for not receiving legislative bond authorization appears low. However, if the authority to sell bonds paid by toll revenue is not granted, WSDOT will work with the legislature to find alternative sources of funding. Options may include a mix of the following: reducing or deferring other WSDOT projects within the state, alternative financing with private parties, perhaps pursuing other federal programs like the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA), revising use of other funding from Port or local sources, or perhaps using the capacity within WSDOT’s federal program.
Through dedicated federal funding
identified in SAFETEA-LU Section 1301, Projects of National and Regional
Significance (PNRS), the overall Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement corridor
received approximately $220 million ($199.3 million after the federal reduction)
which is counted as part of the overall $2.8 billion in corridor cost for the
state. The state plans to use $120 million in federal formula bridge funds, $51
million in Surface Transportation Program funds, $50 million of National Highway
System funds, $48 million in Emergency Relief funds, $10 million in High
Priority Program funds, and $4 million in Demonstration Project
funds.
Based on WSDOT’s current budget and estimates, the Replacement Project expects to use $228.6 million of the corridor’s federal funds for final design, right of way acquisition, and construction. These federal funds will be dispersed through the Washington State Motor Vehicle fund. This Project did not receive any federal stimulus funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA).
For background, Advance Construction is a
technique which allows a State to initiate a project using non-federal funds
while preserving the eligibility for future federal-aid funds. Under this
approach, the AWV Replacement program is authorized by FHWA without the
obligation of federal funds and with no commitment by FHWA that funds will be
available in the future. WSDOT will use its own funds to pay project costs. As
federal funds are available, WSDOT may decide to convert the Project and request
that federal funds be obligated. There is no obligation of federal funds until
the advance construction is converted, at which time the AWV may be reimbursed
for the federal share of costs incurred from the original date of
authorization.
FHWA allows the incremental conversion of
advance construction projects, providing WSDOT the opportunity to manage its
limited federal funding while potentially accelerating the delivery of the
Alaskan Way Viaduct through the most efficient use of the project’s various
funding sources.
Within the Alaskan Way Viaduct Program certain projects may warrant the use of Advance Construction funds. However, at this time the Replacement Project does not specifically plan to use Advance Construction.
The city of Seattle has committed up to
$50 million for utility relocations within the footprint of the Bored Tunnel.
These utilities will be relocated by the Design-Builder and billed to the WSDOT.
WSDOT will then recoup these costs from the city of Seattle. An agreement has
been executed between WSDOT and the city of Seattle for this
work.
A small amount of local funding has been provided by local private utility providers for relocation work performed on their behalf.
The State of Washington and the Port of
Seattle are committed to a replacement for the viaduct that will improve
transportation access to and through the waterfront, including access for over
eight million annual ferry riders, ensure connectivity between the Interbay,
Ballard and Duwamish industrial areas and Seattle-Tacoma International Airport,
including a corridor for oversized vehicles, provide access to port cargo,
fishing and cruise facilities, minimize construction disruption, and increase
opportunities for the public and freight to access the shoreline and waterfront.
To the extent feasible and authorized by the Port Commission, the Port shall
fund or procure funding within the life of the project not to exceed $300
million toward the state's program elements including Port contributions to
Moving Forward Projects, and AWV Program elements. Funding must be for elements
that will improve transportation access to and through the waterfront near the
Port of Seattle. The State acknowledges that contributions will be made during
the life of the AWV surface street efforts. It is understood that the majority
of the Port's contribution will occur in the years 2016 to 2018 (Appendix
P).
The specific schedule of payments for the
Replacement Project is a function of existing plans for design and right of way
along with the contractual commitments WSDOT entered into when it signed the
contract with Seattle Tunneling Partners (STP). Figure 24 shows the source of project funding by source and
biennium.
Figure 24: Replacement Project Cash Flow by Source
($ in millions, year of expenditure)
Source: WA State Legislature approved 2011-13 budget, 11LEGFIN
The construction estimates for the bored tunnel described
in Section 5 of the report reflect the base cost needed to deliver the Project.
The base cost does not address risk and escalation. The development of the upset
price for the Bored Tunnel Design-Build segment has a risk and escalation
component added to the base cost.
Section 10.4.1 of the RFP Design-Build
contract describes the maximum rate of payment to the design-builder. Due to the
rate that funding will become available to the project payments to the
design-builder shall not exceed the payment schedule shown in Figure 25.
Figure 25: Cap on Payments to the Design-Builder
($ in millions, Year of Expenditure)
Data obtained from Section 10.4.1 of the RFP.
Section 11 of the RFP Design-Build
contract governs changes in the contract. The design-builder is responsible for
errors in the design documents, errors in the schedule, actions of a
subcontractor, cost of materials, correction of nonconforming work, and failure
to comply with contract requirements. Change orders are submitted to and
evaluated by WSDOT. Change orders with an aggregate cost of $200,000 and greater
are also submitted to and evaluated by FHWA. For unforeseen requirements and
increases in construction costs the contingency for the design-build portion of
the Replacement Project is 17 percent (Figure
22).
WSDOT addresses risk through a systematic approach to project delivery. As mentioned in section 4 of this Initial Financial Plan, WSDOT employs a CRA-CEVP® process to lower risk for design choices and project costs. Starting with the CRA-CEVP® process early in design development, WSDOT identifies potentially challenging project issues so that when the design-build contract is awarded, there is less chance of surprise and subsequent cost overruns. WSDOT recognizes that not all risks can be avoided.
CEVP® is a workshop format, followed up with mathematical modeling, typically conducted at key stages of design on very large ($100 million or more), very complex projects. These stages are triggered when costs or scope are completed during the preliminary design phase prior to release of the initial request for proposal for design-build projects. The Cost Risk Assessment (CRA) process follows the same format as the CEVP® process, but at a smaller scale. CRAs typically are performed on smaller ($25 million to $100 million), less complex projects.
The CRA-CEVP® process at WSDOT
combines national and local area subject matter experts and experienced staff.
Many of the participants have had extensive first-hand experience in large
project programming and delivery. The evaluation is enhanced by the application
of computer modeling that applies risks identified by experts in the workshop
and makes allowances for unknowns which are each assigned additional costs. The
models then run Monte Carlo simulations, with hundreds of iterations to
establish a robust probability curve. Each successive re-assessment allows for
the development of a tighter cost range as previously identified risks are
mitigated and more is known about the project. In depth details regarding the
CRA-CEVP® process, as well as the Value Engineering (VE) process may
be found on the WSDOT website:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/ProjectMgmt/RiskAssessment/
As required by Engrossed Substitute
Senate Bill (ESSB) 5768 (See Section 7, Project Funding, Revenues, and
Financing), in November and December of 2009, the project team held a series of
workshops that utilized Value Engineering (VE) to reduce cost and risk
associated with the Holgate to King Project and the Central Waterfront portion
of the Replacement Project. The focus of these workshops refined the base cost
estimate and associated risks. In total the VE team implemented several cost
savings measures, for a total of $310 million. The Holgate to King Project
accounted for $140 million of the savings and the remaining $170 million was
associated with the Central Waterfront portion of the Replacement Project. These
savings were used to adjust the base cost of the Central Waterfront that was
used in the January 2010 CEVP® run. Refer to Appendix H for more
details on VE recommendations and Risk Management.
The results of the January 2010
CEVP® showed that the overall cost of the bored tunnel was forecasted
to be $1.54 billion at the 10 percent probability; $1.80 billion at the 50
percent probability, and $2.25 billion at the 90 percent probability. The WSDOT
project management directed the team to use the 60th percentile
estimate of $1.96 billion, as required in WSDOT Instructional Letter IL 4071.01.
This estimate was $60 million more than the previous CEVP® results.
The net rise in the tunnel cost is due to moving the north and south portal
locations to lessen the amount of curvature in the tunnel. This change added
approximately 640 feet to the tunnel.
The savings gained from Holgate to King
Project offsets the increased cost of the bored tunnel and keeps the overall
cost of replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct with the $3.1 billion
budget.
Since that time, Cost Risk Assessments
(CRA) were performed for the South and North end Design-Bid-Build components of
the Replacement Project (excluding the city of Seattle Mercer St Widening
component) in June 2010. This series of CRAs resulted in establishing the
60th percentile base cost for the Central Waterfront portion of the
Replacement Project outside the bored tunnel and established the Risk Registers
and profiles for each effort.
Also in June 2010, “The Basis and Amounts
for Allocation of Risk” for the Central Waterfront component of the Replacement
Project was written to establish program guidelines for allocating risk to the
bored tunnel and portals. This document discusses four categories (A through D)
of risk with the last category being escalation.
Category A defines risk that the
Design-Builder has the most control over. Typical risk items include: design of
the Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM), jobsite accidents, constructability of the
bored tunnel, control of traffic, and the contract schedule.
Category B risk is shared between
the Design-Builder and WSDOT. Typical risk elements that require collaborative
management such as the protection of buildings and structures, TBM pressure head
conditions, and safety will be covered under this category.
Category C risk is all items that
are managed by WSDOT for the Central Waterfront portion of the Replacement
Project. Typical risk elements that require WSDOT management such as the
issuance of the Record of Decision (ROD), Third Party Agreements, Right of Way
acquisitions, differing site conditions, and risks associated with the South and
North Design-Build portions of the Replacement Project will follow under this
category.
Category D is the risks associated
with inflation. The inflation rates that were derived in section 4 of this
report will be consistent with the rates referenced in the June
document.
The risk budgets associated with the
bored tunnel is shown in Figure 26.
Figure 26: Allocation of Risk/Inflation
($ in millions, Year of Expenditure)
| Risk Categories | Amount |
| Categories A+B: Risk items (DB and WSDOT Shared Risks) | |
|
50.0 |
|
40.0 |
|
20.0 |
|
20.0 |
|
25.0 |
|
100.0 |
|
(50.0) |
|
205.0 |
| Category C: Unallocated Risk | 100.0 |
| Category D: Inflation/Escalation | 110.0 |
|
415.0 |
Source: WSDOT Cost Estimate to support WA State Legislature approved 2011-13 budget, 11LEGFIN
As a cost containment measure to preserve
planned transportation budgets, WSDOT establishes a ceiling price for
design-build contracts. This ceiling is called the “upset price”, and is set
based upon the most current estimate. If all proposals are above the upset
price, WSDOT will request Best and Final Offers (BAFOs). In this process WSDOT
will pull out parts of the scope and ask the proposers to re-bid the
reduced-scope project. After the BAFOs have been received, WSDOT will
re-evaluate and revise ratings.
Based on the January 2010
CEVP® estimate, WSDOT has set an upset price of $1.09 billion for the
design-build contract. The Cost Estimate by Construction Segment and Cost
Estimate by Major Project Element sections of the Initial Financial Plan detail
the expenses that make up the total of $1.09 billion.
The Apparent Best Value Score shown in
Figure 27 was determined by WSDOT on December 9, 2010. The Apparent Best Value
Score is determined by weighting the assigned technical credits and associated
proposal price. The lowest Apparent Best Value Score was given to the Seattle
Tunneling Partners (STP).
Figure 27: Bored Tunnel Best Value Determination
($ in Thousands, Year of Expenditure)
| Contract 7999
Proposer Name |
Apparent Best Value Score | Assigned Technical Credits | Proposal Price |
| Seattle Tunnel Group (STG)
2nd Best Value Design-Builder |
1,050,150 | 38,152 | 1,088,302 |
| Seattle Tunnel Partners
(STP)
Apparent Best Value Design-Builder |
1,018,123 | 71,577 | 1,089,700 |
| Upset Amount, $1,090
million. The successful proposal will be
the one calculated to have the lowest Apparent Best Value | |||
Data obtained from Section 10.4.1 of
the RFP.
The Best and Final Offer was less than
the upset price and therefore, the Bored Tunnel was awarded to STP for
completion.
To better handle project setbacks that
affect schedule and budget on a design-build contract, WSDOT project managers go
through several steps to minimize problem areas. These Best Practices are
written into the design-build request for qualifications and RFPs. Links to the
RFQ, RFP, Instructions to Proposers, Addenda, and other information for
design-build contractors who bid on the Bored Tunnel are on the web page at the
following link:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/biz/contaa/DESIGNBUILDCONTRACTS/SR99AWVBoredtunnel/DEFAULT.HTM
Bid scoring includes weighing how well
submitters minimize potential problems. Examples of best practices
include:
Section 2.14 of the RFP requires the design-builder to comply with all federal, state, and local laws and regulations governing water as well as to perform temporary water pollution and erosion control measures shown in the contract documents or required by WSDOT. The design-builder must also meet many environmental commitments that are outlined in Appendix K.
The contract specifies the scope to be
completed for the Project. The design-builder develops a baseline contract
schedule that is used to track progress of the Project. The design-builder’s
baseline schedule is required to be price loaded and is used to develop a
planned progress curve (dollars expended over time).
The design-builder plans their work
through more detailed schedules that cover durations varying from weekly to
90-day look-ahead schedules. These schedules are typically reviewed at daily
schedule meetings for crew supervisors and weekly meetings between WSDOT and
Design-Builder’s management staff. WSDOT and the design-builder will agree on
the specific review schedule.
WSDOT monitors the daily design and
construction activity through over-the-shoulder reviews and construction
compliance inspections. The design-builder submits schedule updates and invoices
to WSDOT on a monthly basis. Monthly schedule updates are reviewed with regard
to contract requirements, schedule management principles, and reasonable
progressing of the schedule activities. Once approved by WSDOT, the schedule
update becomes the basis of the monthly invoice.
Along with each invoice will be a
progress report, certification by design and construction quality assurance
managers, invoice data sheets and supporting documents based on the price loaded
contract schedule, and a monthly design exception report. The monthly progress
report includes a narrative that discusses the contract milestones and critical
path, and plans to achieve completion dates. The narrative includes discussion
of quality management, environmental protection, utility coordination, public
relations, cooperation with adjacent contractors, and safety
performance.
At this time the monitoring methods for the design-bid-build portions of the Replacement Project are not yet fully developed. They will be described more fully in future annual updates.
The design-build contract identifies the
scope that needs to be accomplished as well as incentives/disincentives and
liquidated damages.
Incentives
Up to $85 million in incentive awards can be earned by the Design-Builder after the physical completion of the work for:
Damages
The RFP (section 17) specifies liquidated
damages for each day of delay in achieving substantial completion beyond the
established deadline. The design-builder must pay liquidated damages
for:
The Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program is fully funded. Funding comes from:
The Replacement Project is fully funded and its funding breakout comes from:
WSDOT’s budget for the Replacement
Project includes a contingency amount for potential cost overruns. WSDOT is
confident that the financial commitments for the Replacement Project are
sufficient despite the impact the current economic downturn has had on motor
fuel tax revenue. As a high priority project in Washington State, the state is
committed to funding and building the Replacement Project as a critical
component of the Alaska Way Viaduct
program.
For further information, please contact:
Ron Paananen
SR99 Project Administrator
Alaskan Way Viaduct & Seawall Replacement Program
Washington State Department of Transportation
999 Third Avenue, Suite 2200
Seattle, WA
98104
Telephone: (206) 805-2858
e-mail: paananr@wsdot.wa.gov