FINAL DESIGN REPORT APPENDIX I - VALUE ENGINEERING · 2017-01-11 · FINAL DESIGN REPORT APPENDIX I - VALUE ENGINEERING September 14, 2016 112 . Reconstruction Project PIN 0016.27.101

FINAL DESIGN REPORT

APPENDIX I - VALUE ENGINEERING

September 14, 2016

Reconstruction Project PIN 0016.27.101

NY 112 From I-495 to Granny Road

Town of Brookhaven Suffolk County

APPENDIX I:

VALUE ENGINEERING

I. Value Engineering Report I-2 II. Regional Disposition Forms I-80

I - 1

I. VALUE ENGINEERING REPORT

I - 2

New York State Department of Transportation

NY 112 from LIE to Granny RoadPIN 0016.27

Value Engineering Report

January 13-15, 2016

I - 3

New York State Department of Transportation NY 112 from LIE to Granny Road

Value Engineering Report January 13-15, 2016

Contents Page 1 Executive Brief .................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 General .................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Objectives .............................................................................................................. 1

1.3 Value Target Areas ................................................................................................ 2

1.4 Summary of Results ............................................................................................... 2

1.5 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................ 3

2 Value Engineering Alternatives & Design Suggestions ...................................................... 5

Appendix A: Function Analysis ..................................................................................................... 60

Appendix B: Pareto Cost Model .................................................................................................... 63

Appendix C: Creative Idea List with Evaluation Score and Action ............................................... 66

Appendix D: VE Presentation List of Attendees ........................................................................... 69

I - 4



Disclaimer This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for the Client’s information and use in relation to the NY 112 from LIE to Granny Road project. It should be understood that the cost figures quoted in this report represent Order of Magnitude only and are used to establish the viability of proposals and may not represent their exact value. Furthermore, the actual total impact on project cost is dependent on a detailed implementation analysis beyond the scope of the VE effort. VE Alternatives and Design Suggestions are provided to the Owner/Designer for their further evaluation and implementation at their exclusive discretion.

Faithful+Gould assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents.

I - 5



1 K:\2016\100047710_GPI\03Deliverables\NY112 VE Rpt Basis Of PDF-Rev.Docx

1 Executive Brief 1.1 General Faithful+Gould conducted a Value Engineering Study of the Draft Design Report dated October 2015 for the NY 112 from Long Island Expressway (LIE) to Granny Road project. The VE Study was under the auspices of the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Region 10 Office. The VE Study was held January 13 - 15, 2016 in the Babylon, NY, offices of Greenman-Pedersen, Inc. in compliance with the VE standards and procedures supported by SAVE International®. The $54 M project extends 1.6 miles along NY Route 112 from the LIE South Service Road to Granny Road, located approximately 1.3 mile north of CR 16, Horse Block Road. It includes localized improvements at the Horse Block Road intersection and two recharge basins on the east side of NY 112. Current conditions, highlighted during the design presentation, include:

Roadway flooding

Traffic congestion

Discontinuous sidewalks

No refuge for left turns

Discontinuous curbs

A function analysis of the current project design is presented in Appendix A and cost distributions of the project are highlighted by Pareto Cost Models in Appendix B. The independent VE team consisted of:

Name Discipline Organization

Linda DeSimone, PE Geotechnical / Structural Engineer

Greenman-Pedersen, Inc.

Frank Pearson, PE Transportation Safety Greenman-Pedersen, Inc.

Kevin Padden, PE Constructability Engineer Greenman-Pedersen, Inc.

Jason Stern, PE Structural Engineer Greenman-Pedersen, Inc.

Kurt Weiskotten Environmental Scientist Greenman-Pedersen, Inc.

Tom Wiggins, CVS CVS / VE Team Leader Faithful+Gould

To provide an objective perspective for the VE effort, the Greenman-Pedersen VE team was drawn from staff who had not been involved in the project design.

The final presentation for the VE workshop was held at the New York State Office Building (250 Veterans Highway, Hauppauge, NY). Appendix D has the list of attendees for the presentation.

1.2 Objectives The objectives of the NY 112 from Long Island Expressway (LIE) to Granny Road project, as stated in the Draft Design Report dated October 2015, include:

Improve overall traffic conditions using cost-effective methods to reduce delay and to provide an acceptable level of service for a design period of 20 years.

Correct identified pavement deficiencies that will extend the useful life of the highway and maintain it in a structurally sound condition using cost-effective pavement treatments which provide low life cycle costs.

Correct safety deficiencies using cost-effective accident reduction measures such that accident reduction benefits equal or exceed project costs attributable to safety work.

I - 6




Provide continuous, standardized accommodations for pedestrians and bicyclists in this corridor, and upgrade facilities to match adjacent sections of the roadway to the north and the south.

Upgrade the corridor to improve transit operations and service.

The main objective of the VE Study was to provide design options to increase value through improved functionality and/or capital and/or life cycle cost avoidance while maintaining a quality project that meets stakeholder needs and overall objectives of the project. In addition, the VE Study was held to meet FHWA VE requirements for federally funded projects over $50 M, in compliance with the standards and procedures of SAVE International®. Finally, the VE Team sought alternatives to:

Improve safety and operations for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists

Improve constructability of the project

Reduce ROW takings

Mitigate project risks.

1.3 Value Target Areas

The VE Team targeted project areas where value could be increased by either better performance and/or capital or life cycle cost avoidance while maintaining necessary functions, objectives and budget. The result was 32 creative ideas for the NY 112 from LIE to Granny Road project across the five value target areas shown in the table on the right. The abbreviations shown are used in the numbering of the creative ideas as presented in Appendix C. The numbering used for the ideas carries forward to the Alternative numbers.

1.4 Summary of Results The "Alternatives Summary" at the end of this Section, summarizes of the ideas put forward and evaluated and the Alternatives developed by the Value Team. After evaluation, the 32 ideas resulted in 4 Quantitative VE Alternatives (avoid cost), 1 Qualitative VE Alternatives (added value for added cost) and 10 Design Suggestions.

A “Summary of Alternatives and Design Suggestions” table, presented at the beginning of Section 2 of this report, lists the VE Alternatives and Design Suggestions along with their description, rationale and cost implications. The collective impact of the VE Team recommended VE Alternatives is:

A maximum additional capital cost of $158,000 for the value-added Qualitative Alternative

A maximum potential cost avoidance of $2,964,000 from the Qualitative Alternatives.

The costs do not include add-on costs, such as percentage items, contingency, mobilization and construction inspection. If all compatible value improvement or cost avoidance ideas are accepted. Acceptance of all recommended VE Alternatives would yield a net capital cost avoidance of $2,806,000. Of course, NYSDOT implementation decisions will determine the ultimate cost implications. None of the VE Alternatives are mutually exclusive by the Value Team, so all may be included in the summary of recommended VE Alternatives. This net capital cost avoidance of $2,806,000 represents an approximate 5.5% cost avoidance from the total construction cost of $54,205,848 in the Greenman-Pedersen, Inc. estimate, Alternative 2 with Option.

Value Target Area Abbreviation

Drain Roadway DR

Enable Multi-Modal EM

Miscellaneous M

Manage ROW MR

Reduce Congestion RC

I - 7




A couple of the Alternatives sought to reduce ROW takings by slightly reducing the overall ROW requirements:

Alternative MR-01 suggests reducing the median width from 14' to 12'. This is still within standards, but does not match the current work to the north of the project. This offers a savings of about $719,000.

Alternative MR-06 suggests reducing the sidewalk area width by 2' on each side of the roadway. The reduction would be to the snow storage area and area between sidewalk and Fee Acquisition line. The sidewalk and bike lane width would remain the same. This is still within standards, but does not match the current conditions to the north of NY 25. The potential savings estimate is about $1,096,000.

In Alternative EM-03, which suggests elevating the sidewalk and bike route under the I-495 bridge, the Value Team sought to improve pedestrian and bike safety and mitigate construction risks. There is a modest increase in cost of about $158,000 for the alternative.

All of the VE Alternatives and developed Design Suggestions, as prepared during the VE Workshop, are included in Section 2 following the summary table.

1.5 Acknowledgements Faithful+Gould wishes to thank NYSDOT Region 10 personnel and the Greenman-Pedersen design team for their cooperation and support in preparation for this VE Study, and especially for Greenman-Pedersen's presentation of the design to the VE Team at the start of the VE workshop. The thoughtful reception of the VE Team’s Alternatives during the Presentation Phase from NYSDOT and design team personnel was also much appreciated. In addition, we thank the personnel of Greenman-Pedersen for their expertise and active participation on the VE Team. Finally, we thank Greenman-Pedersen for hosting the VE Workshop in their Babylon offices.

I - 8

ALTERNATIVES SUMMARYNY 112 from LIE to Granny RoadLong Island, NY

Study Dates: January 13-15, 2016

Creative and Evaluation Phase Results

Ideas As: No. of Ideas

Alternative (Quantitative or Qualitative) 7 Manage ROW (MR)

Design Suggestion 8 Reduce Congestion (RC)

Estimate Correction 0 Enable Multi-Modal (EM)

Cost Reduction 0 Drain Roadway (DR)

Already Being Done 1 Miscellaneous (M)

Eliminated by Evaluation 16

Total Creative Ideas 32

Development Phase Results

Alternatives As: DevelopedIncluded In

TotalFirst Costs

(Capital Costs)Present Worth (of

Future Costs)Life Cycle

Costs

Design Suggestion 10

Quantitative 4 4 2,964,000$ -$ 2,964,000$

Qualitative 1 1 (158,000)$ -$ (158,000)$

Subtotal 15 5 2,806,000$ -$ 2,806,000$

Estimate Correction 0 0 -$ -$ -$

Cost Reduction 0 0 -$ -$ -$

Total 15 5 2,806,000$ -$ 2,806,000$

Legend - Alternative Types

Alternative TypesQnt(+) Quantitative

Qlt(-) Qualitative

DS Design Suggestion

EC Estimate Correction

CR Cost Reduction

An alternative to identify the cost impact of a significant issue discovered with the cost estimate during the workshop.

An alternative that results in reduced costs without improving value.

Description

Value Target Functions

An alternative that results in a positive capital and/or life cycle cost avoidance while maintaining required functionality and performance, i.e. improved value.

An alternative that results in additional capital and/or life cycle costs (negative cost avoidance) while improving required functionality and performance, i.e. improved value.

An alternative for which the team cannot define a reasonable cost impact during the workshop or that may simply be a suggestion to consider as design proceeds.

4Version B3.0.1, 1/4/2016 I - 9




2 Value Engineering Alternatives & Design Suggestions

A “Summary of Alternatives and Design Suggestions” spreadsheet on the following pages summarizes the results of the VE workshop, identifying the Alternative Number, Title, Rationale, Alternative Category, Mutual Exclusivity, Inclusion in the Section 1.4 cost implications (i), and estimated cost avoidance or addition of First Costs (Capital), Present Worth (of future costs) and Life Cycle Costs.

The 4 Quantitative VE Alternatives, the 1 Qualitative VE Alternatives and the 10 Design Suggestions prepared during the VE Workshop are presented in their entirety on the pages following the summary spreadsheet, in order of their appearance in the spreadsheet.

I - 10

SU

MM

AR

Y O

F A

LT

ER

NA

TIV

ES

AN

D D

ES

IGN

SU

GG

ES

TIO

NS

NY

112

fro

m L

IE t

o G

ran

ny

Ro

adL

on

g I

slan

d,

NY

Jan

uar

y 13

-15,

201

6

Alte

r. No

.De

scrip

tive A

ltern

ative

Titl

e (V

ette

d by

Fac

ilitat

or)

Ratio

nale

(Sum

mar

ized)

Alte

r. Ca

t.Mu

tual.

Ex

cl.In

cl. (i

)Fi

rst C

osts

(Cap

ital

Cost

s)Pr

esen

t Wor

th (o

f Fu

ture

Cos

ts)

Life

Cyc

le Co

sts

DR

-00

Dra

in R

oad

way

#TT

DR

-03

Con

stru

ct r

echa

rge

basi

n(s)

alo

ng M

iddl

e Is

land

Roa

dU

ndev

elop

ed la

nd p

arce

ls a

djac

ent

to N

Y

112

(and

clo

sest

to

the

proj

ect)

are

tho

ught

to

hav

e hi

gher

pro

pert

y va

lues

tha

n la

nd

alon

g su

rrou

ndin

g se

cond

ary

urba

n hi

ghw

ay c

orrid

ors.

The

nea

rby

Mid

dle

Isla

nd R

oad

corr

idor

may

incl

ude

unde

velo

ped

land

s th

at a

re s

uita

ble

for

esta

blis

hing

sto

rmw

ater

rec

harg

e ba

sins

at

a re

duce

d ta

king

fee

cos

t.

DS

-$

-

$

-$

DR

-04

Inco

rpor

ate

alte

rnat

ive

stor

mw

ater

tr

eatm

ents

to

redu

ce s

ize

of r

echa

rge

basi

n

Bio

swal

es,

filte

r st

rips,

sto

rmw

ater

pla

nter

s,

and

perm

eabl

e pa

vem

ent

and

pave

rs a

re

usua

lly a

par

t of

a la

rger

sto

rmw

ater

dr

aina

ge s

yste

m,

and

in t

he c

ase

of t

his

proj

ect

(a c

lose

d pi

pe s

yste

m e

ndin

g in

re

char

ge b

asin

s) a

dditi

onal

tre

atm

ents

al

ong

the

flow

pat

h of

run

off

can

impr

ove

over

all w

ater

qua

lity

and

redu

ce o

vera

ll w

ater

qua

ntity

tre

atm

ent

volu

me

requ

ired.

S

ince

the

pur

chas

e of

a la

rge

parc

el o

f un

deve

lope

d la

nd a

long

NY

112

is r

equi

red

to a

ccom

mod

ate

the

rech

arge

bas

ins,

a

cost

sav

ings

is p

ossi

ble

if a

smal

ler

parc

el

is r

equi

red

resu

lting

fro

m a

red

uced

st

orm

wat

er t

reat

men

t vo

lum

e.

DS

-$

-

$

-$

DR

-06

Use

late

rals

to

tie in

to t

runk

line

on

one

side

Red

uce

cost

of

drai

nage

to

the

proj

ect

by

reco

nsid

erin

g tr

unk

line

arra

ngem

ent.

Qnt

(+)

i49

1,00

0$

-

$

491,

000

$

EM

-00

En

able

Mu

lti-

Mo

dal

#TT

EM

-01

Com

bine

sid

ewal

k an

d bi

kew

ay s

outh

of

nort

h se

rvic

e ro

adT

he c

ombi

natio

n of

the

bik

e la

ne a

nd

side

wal

k so

uth

of t

he N

orth

Ser

vice

Roa

d to

the

Sou

ther

n P

roje

ct li

mit

wou

ld a

llow

ex

tend

ing

the

exis

ting

left

tur

n la

nes

on

Rou

te 1

12.

Thi

s w

ould

in t

urn

help

red

uce

cong

estio

n at

the

Nor

th a

nd S

outh

Ser

vice

R

oad

inte

rsec

tions

.

DS

-$

-

$

-$

6V

ersi

on B

3.0.

1, 1

/4/2

016

I - 11

SU

MM

AR

Y O

F A

LT

ER

NA

TIV

ES

AN

D D

ES

IGN

SU

GG

ES

TIO

NS

NY

112

fro

m L

IE t

o G

ran

ny

Ro

adL

on

g I

slan

d,

NY

Jan

uar

y 13

-15,

201

6

Alte

r. No

.De

scrip

tive A

ltern

ative

Titl

e (V

ette

d by

Fac

ilitat

or)

Ratio

nale

(Sum

mar

ized)

Alte

r. Ca

t.Mu

tual.

Ex

cl.In

cl. (i

)Fi

rst C

osts

(Cap

ital

Cost

s)Pr

esen

t Wor

th (o

f Fu

ture

Cos

ts)

Life

Cyc

le Co

sts

EM

-02

Use

gab

ion

or m

odul

ar r

etai

ning

wal

l in

lieu

of c

ast

in p

lace

con

cret

e w

all

Usi

ng g

abio

n or

mod

ular

typ

e w

alls

in li

eu

of c

ast-

in-p

lace

con

cret

e w

alls

for

the

se lo

w

heig

ht w

alls

will

res

ult

in e

asie

r an

d qu

icke

r co

nstr

uctio

n, le

ss in

tric

ate

exca

vatio

n su

ppor

t sy

stem

and

will

be

cost

eff

ectiv

e.

DS

-$

-

$

-$

EM

-03

Ele

vate

the

sid

ewal

k an

d bi

ke la

ne u

nder

th

e br

idge

Ele

vate

the

sid

ewal

k, o

r si

dew

alk

and

bike

ro

ute

on N

Y11

2, u

nder

the

I-4

95 M

ainl

ine

Brid

ge;

so a

s to

pro

vide

a s

afer

pe

dest

rian/

bike

pat

h an

d to

min

imiz

e di

srup

tion

to t

he p

aved

slo

pe in

fro

nt o

f th

e st

ub a

butm

ent.

Qlt(

-)i

(158

,000

)$

-$

(1

58,0

00)

$

M-0

0M

isce

llan

eou

s#T

T

M-0

2R

epla

ce F

itch

barr

els

with

impa

ct

atte

nuat

or a

t LI

E b

ridge

The

exi

stin

g F

itch

barr

els

appe

ar t

o be

in

poor

con

ditio

n an

d m

ay n

ot f

unct

ion

as

orig

inal

ly in

tend

ed.

In o

rder

to

impr

ove

mot

oris

t sa

fety

, w

e re

com

men

d th

at t

hey

be r

epla

ced

with

an

impr

oved

impa

ct

atte

nuat

or s

yste

m.

DS

-$

-

$

-$

MR

-00

Man

age

RO

W

#TT

MR

-01

Red

uce

wid

th o

f m

edia

n fr

om 1

4' t

o 12

'In

ord

er t

o re

duce

the

am

ount

of

RO

W

taki

ng,

it is

pro

pose

d to

red

uce

the

two

way

tu

rn la

ne f

rom

14'

to

12'.

In a

dditi

on,

ther

e w

ould

be

a co

st s

avin

gs f

or a

spha

lt co

ncre

te,

subb

ase,

exc

avat

ion

and

emba

nkm

ent.

Thi

s w

ill a

lso

redu

ce a

mou

nt

of w

ater

tha

t ha

s to

be

colle

cted

.

Qnt

(+)

i71

9,00

0$

-

$

719,

000

$

MR

-05

Red

uce

desi

gn s

peed

of

road

to

redu

ce

lane

wid

ths

The

obs

erve

d tr

avel

spe

eds

in t

he P

M P

eak

Hou

r ra

nge

from

10

mph

to

50 m

ph a

s sh

own

belo

w w

ith t

he m

ajor

ity o

f th

e sp

eeds

und

er 4

0 m

ph.

The

red

uctio

n of

the

de

sign

spe

ed w

ould

just

ify t

he r

educ

tion

of

the

prop

osed

tra

vel l

anes

and

min

imiz

e th

e R

OW

acq

uisi

tion

cost

s.

DS

-$

-

$

-$

7V

ersi

on B

3.0.

1, 1

/4/2

016

I - 12

SU

MM

AR

Y O

F A

LT

ER

NA

TIV

ES

AN

D D

ES

IGN

SU

GG

ES

TIO

NS

NY

112

fro

m L

IE t

o G

ran

ny

Ro

adL

on

g I

slan

d,

NY

Jan

uar

y 13

-15,

201

6

Alte

r. No

.De

scrip

tive A

ltern

ative

Titl

e (V

ette

d by

Fac

ilitat

or)

Ratio

nale

(Sum

mar

ized)

Alte

r. Ca

t.Mu

tual.

Ex

cl.In

cl. (i

)Fi

rst C

osts

(Cap

ital

Cost

s)Pr

esen

t Wor

th (o

f Fu

ture

Cos

ts)

Life

Cyc

le Co

sts

MR

-06

Red

uce

side

wal

k ar

ea w

idth

fro

m 1

3' t

o 11

'R

educ

ing

the

side

wal

k ar

ea w

idth

by

2 fe

et

on e

ach

side

of

Rou

te 1

12 w

ill s

ave

on

RO

W a

cqui

sitio

n co

sts,

incl

udin

g bo

th F

ee

acqu

isito

n an

d te

mpo

rary

eas

emen

ts.

Thi

s re

duct

ion

will

not

aff

ect

the

over

sid

ewal

k w

idth

, bu

t ra

ther

the

sno

w s

tora

ge a

rea

adja

cent

to

the

bike

lane

and

the

are

a be

twee

n th

e si

dew

alk

and

the

Fee

A

cqui

sitio

n lin

e.

Qnt

(+)

i1,

096,

000

$

-$

1,

096,

000

$

MR

-09

Elim

inat

e no

rthb

ound

rig

ht t

urn

lane

at

Cou

ntry

Fai

r E

nter

tain

men

t P

ark

The

rig

ht h

and

turn

lane

is n

ot h

eavi

ly u

sed

acco

rdin

g to

the

tra

ffic

stu

dy.

Elim

inat

e rig

ht h

and

turn

ing

lane

so

as t

o re

duce

the

R

OW

and

ass

ocia

ted

cost

.

DS

-$

-

$

-$

MR

-10

Sho

rten

nor

thbo

und

right

tur

n la

ne a

t C

omm

erci

al D

rive

Red

uce

cost

of

prop

erty

tak

ings

, an

d m

inor

sa

ving

s in

roa

dway

con

stru

ctio

n.D

S-

$

-$

-

$

MR

-11

Mov

e R

OW

tak

ing

to v

acan

t si

de

whe

neve

r po

ssib

leR

educ

e nu

mbe

r of

pro

pert

ies

affe

cted

by

prop

erty

tak

ings

and

pot

entia

lly r

educ

e th

e co

st o

f pr

oper

ty a

cqui

sitio

n.

DS

-$

-

$

-$

MR

-12

Elim

inat

e su

pere

leva

tion

of n

orth

boun

d N

Y

112

betw

een

LIE

NS

R a

nd H

orse

Blo

ck

Rd.

In a

n ef

fort

to

redu

ce R

OW

cos

ts f

or

tem

pora

ry e

asem

ents

and

impr

ove

cons

truc

tabi

lity,

con

side

r el

imin

atin

g th

e pr

opos

ed s

uper

elev

atio

n al

ong

nort

hbou

nd

NY

112

. D

ata

show

s th

is is

not

a f

acto

r co

ntrib

utin

g to

acc

iden

ts.

Qnt

(+)

i65

8,00

0$

-

$

658,

000

$

RC

-00

Red

uce

Co

ng

esti

on

#TT

RC

-07

Add

IT

SA

ddin

g IT

S a

long

the

Lon

g Is

land

E

xpre

ssw

ay,

Nor

thbo

und

Rou

te 1

12

(bet

wee

n th

e N

orth

Ser

vice

Roa

d an

d H

orse

Blo

ck R

oad)

and

Sou

thbo

und

Rou

te

112

(Nor

th o

f H

orse

Blo

ck R

oad)

wou

ld

prov

ide

driv

ers

with

tra

ffic

info

rmat

ion

and

trav

el t

imes

for

the

m t

o ex

plor

e a

ltern

ate

rout

es.

DS

-$

-

$

-$

8V

ersi

on B

3.0.

1, 1

/4/2

016

I - 13

January 13-15, 2016Page 1 of 4

Title Alter. No. DR-03

Cost Summary First Costs (Capital Costs)

Present Worth (of Future Costs)

Life Cycle Cost(Total LCC)

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

Key ContactsProject Mgr: William Stroh

Team Leader: Tom Wiggins, CVS

Description of Original Concept (Brief)The project corridor needs a uniform closed drainage system with adequate stormwater capacity for the proposed roadway improvements and to alleviate a current site flooding condition. A positive drainage system is proposed that will tie in to the system under construction to the north under Contract D262794. This system will accommodate stormwater runoff from the high point north of Granny Road south to Horse Block Road. Stormwater from this closed system will outlet into a proposed recharge basin located on undeveloped land on the east side of NY 112 approximately 1500 feet north of the NY 112/Horse Block Road intersection.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Instead of locating the recharge basin designed to collect stormwater from the northern portion of the project along the east side of NY 112, the recharge basin would be relocated to available lands along Middle Island Road, running parallel and a short distance to the east of NY 112.

Design SuggestionNY 112 from LIE to Granny Road, Long Island, NY

Construct recharge basin(s) along Middle Island Road

RationaleUndeveloped land parcels adjacent to NY 112 (and closest to the project) are thought to have higher property values than land along surrounding secondary urban highway corridors. The nearby Middle Island Road corridor may include undeveloped lands that are suitable for establishing stormwater recharge basins at a reduced taking fee cost.

Disadvantages of Alternative Concept (Brief)

Further away from project corridor

Requires longer distance of piping for stormwater to reach site (additional construction cost)

Uncertainty of availability of site

Apparent more densely wooded lots, requiring environmental review

Advantages of Alternative Concept (Brief)

Possible overall cost reduction, though uncertain at this time

Releases proposed location(s) along NY 112 for other uses by others

Removes potential "eyesore" of detention basin from NY 112 corridor

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

9 I - 14

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 4

Alter. No. DR-03

NY 112 from LIE to Granny Road, Long Island, NY

Title

Design Suggestion

Since ROW costs are a large proportion of the total cost of this project (30%), purchasing lands along NY 112 itself may be contributing to the overall high cost. Any remaining undeveloped lands along the ultra-urban, high demand NY 112, are at a premium for purchase and use. This will drive up costs and will play out during ROW fee taking negotiations. In contrast, along nearby Middle Island Road, where business, traffic, and access are far less in demand, land would likely be available at a reduced rate, and through easier ROW negotiations.

Although this may be a viable options for reducing costs of overall ROW activities, there is uncertainly as to where the pipeline for stormwater conveyance would pass through. As proposed the recharge basins would be adjacent to mainline drainage pipes, and outlet connector pipes would be minimal. A likely route for getting stormwater to the Middle Island Road site(s) could be along or through the Medford Fire District property, which would allow for potential streamlined processing.


Discussion (Elaborate)

10 I - 15

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 4

Alter. No. DR-03


Title

Design Suggestion


Exhibits - Original Concept

11 I - 16

January 13-15, 2016

Page 4 of 4

Alter. No. DR-03


Title


Exhibits - Alternative Concept

12 I - 17






-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)Currently, there is no effective control of stormwater run-off from Granny Road to the LIE South Service Road. The proposed project will address stormwater runoff by development of a positive closed drainage system culminating in two constructed recharge basins to handle collected water from the site.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)In exchange of a total closed pipe drainage system, with all conveyed water ending in large recharge basins, it is suggested that alternative bioengineered stormwater treatment practices be incorporated into the overall designed drainage solution. This could include narrow bioswales and filter strips, permeable pavement, and drainage inlet practices.


Incorporate alternative stormwater treatments to reduce size of recharge basin

RationaleBioswales, filter strips, stormwater planters, and permeable pavement and pavers are usually a part of a larger stormwater drainage system, and in the case of this project (a closed pipe system ending in recharge basins) additional treatments along the flow path of runoff can improve overall water quality and reduce overall water quantity treatment volume required. Since the purchase of a large parcel of undeveloped land along NY 112 is required to accommodate the recharge basins, a cost savings is possible if a smaller parcel is required resulting from a reduced stormwater treatment volume.


Lack of opportunities (and space) within NY 112 corridor to implement practices

Higher maintenance required for additional installed practices

Possible negative opinion from traveling public of areas where practices are located

Possible lack of substantial reduction in treatment volume from added practices


Improves water quality treatment during first flush

Reduces stormwater treatment volume required, resulting in smaller recharge basins needed

Reduces cost from reduced ROW takings

Community support for incorporating green concepts into public projects

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

13 I - 18

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 10

Alter. No. DR-04


Title

Design Suggestion

Although this project will increase impervious surfaces, and will disturb more than one acre of soil cumulatively, the runoff will not drain directly into any protected waters of the United States. Under these circumstances, the project is not subject to the State Pollution Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) general permit. Therefore, no formal quantity and quality treatment facilities for stormwater management are required. However, since there are limited stormwater facilities throughout the corridor from Granny Road to the LIE and there is a recurring flooding problem in the vicinity of Horse Block Road, a designed collection and treatment of stormwater is warranted.

The proposed closed drainage system will be constructed to expand the system being built to the north under Contract D262794. Some initial analyses has been conducted to determine the size of recharge basins needed to accommodate total runoff collected from the closed system. Further analyses will fine tune treatment facility needs. The alternative treatment practices suggested here should be considered for and incorporated into this detailed analysis.

It is likely that flooding occurs on this project from a lack of infiltration opportunity (too much pavement and no drainage channels) and the addition of locations for infiltration will help elevate the problem. In addition to, and along the route of the piped positive drainage system, infiltration systems can be added whenever possible to aid in lessening peak flows and increasing runoff detention. These systems can intercept sheet flow before getting to the closed system, or can be placed along the conduit to a single point of discharge at a recharge basin for added infiltration. Perforated pipe can be placed at the base of facilities to aid in collection of the treated runoff and connect to the closed system.

Bioswales are vegetated, shallow depressions designed to capture, treat, and infiltrate stormwater runoff as it moves offsite. They are typically sized to treat the water quality event, or “first flush,” which is the first and often most polluted volume of water resulting from a storm event. Bioswales are the most effective type of green infrastructure facility in slowing runoff velocity and cleansing water. They have flexible siting requirements, allowing them to be integrated with medians, cul-de-sacs, bulb outs, and other public space or traffic calming strategies.

A vegetated filter strip is a level facility that receives runoff in a distributed fashion along the length of one side and treats stormwater by settling out solids. More flat grades and dense vegetation across the top surface will encourage infiltration into the planting soil and improve treatment.

A stormwater planter is a structural container with soil and plants built to collect and slow runoff. Runoff is ponded and then treated as it passes through plants, roots, and soil. Treatment is provided through physical settling & filtration.

Pervious pavement effectively treats, detains, and infiltrates stormwater runoff where landscape-based strategies are restricted or less desired. Pervious pavements have multiple applications, including sidewalks, street furniture zones, bike paths, and entire roadways (or just their parking lane or gutter strip portions). An underdrain system can be used to convey remaining runoff to the closed drainage system.



14 I - 19

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 10

Alter. No. DR-04


Title

Design Suggestion

Pervious strips are long, linear landscaped areas or linear areas of pervious pavement that capture and slow runoff. Depending on the underlying subsurface soil condition, pervious strips can provide some infiltration, but to a much lesser extent than bioswales. Pervious strips offer an inexpensive initial step in urban stormwater management, but are unlikely to provide enough capacity for treatment of a street’s full water quality event.



15 I - 20

January 13-15, 2016

Page 4 of 10

Alter. No. DR-04


Title



16 I - 21

January 13-15, 2016

Page 5 of 10

Alter. No. DR-04

Design Suggestion




Title

17 I - 22

January 13-15, 2016

Page 6 of 10

Alter. No. DR-04

Design Suggestion




Title

18 I - 23

January 13-15, 2016

Page 7 of 10

Alter. No. DR-04

Design Suggestion




Title

19 I - 24

January 13-15, 2016

Page 8 of 10

Alter. No. DR-04Title




20 I - 25

January 13-15, 2016

Page 9 of 10





21 I - 26

January 13-15, 2016

Page 10 of 10





22 I - 27






5,692,000$ -$ 5,692,000$

5,201,000$ -$ 5,201,000$

491,000$ -$ 491,000$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)For the majority of the project, there are two distinct drainage trunk lines, one each on the southbound and northbound curb lines of Route 112. These eventually drain into recharge basin(s). As they approach the recharge basins, each of these two systems get progressively deeper due to the required slope of the drainage pipes,

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Use laterals to tie into one trunk line on the northbound side of NY 112. In areas where drainage structures are closely space on the southbound side, three or more basins can be joined together before the lateral crosses to the trunk line on the northbound side.

Quantitative Value AlternativeNY 112 from LIE to Granny Road, Long Island, NY

Use laterals to tie into trunk line on one side

RationaleReduce cost of drainage to the project by reconsidering trunk line arrangement.

Disadvantages of Alternative Concept (Brief)Trunk line will require larger piping of to accommodate the additional flow on the northbound side.This will require piping up to 60" which has equivalent flow capacity of two 42" pipes,Laterals will have to be constructed in stages as they will cross both sides of the anticipated construction staging.Incremental growth of the size of manholes on the northbound side. (but no depth increase)

Requires on-going involvement of the drainage subcontractor during the project

Advantages of Alternative Concept (Brief)Most of the drainage piping on the southbound side would utilize smaller diameter pipe at shallower depths reducing overall costs and ease of installation with smaller equipmentOverall reduction in length of piping, reducing maintenance

Reduces size and depth of numerous drainage manholes on the southbound side of the roadway

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

23 I - 28

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 4

Alter. No. DR-06


Title

Quantitative Value Alternative

Each 50 l.f. Lateral crossing replaces 200 l.f of Trunk Line Drainage.We have assumed n overall reduction of 60% of piping from the southbound side due to varying locations where that pipe will be required.



24 I - 29

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 4

Alter. No. DR-06


Title

Following Chart was utilized to determine required pipe size for single Trunk Drainage Line which would accommodate flow from both northbound and southbound drainage structures.



25 I - 30

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 4

Alter. No. DR-06

Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Total

15" Drainage Pipe LF 2370 $105.00 $248,85018" Drainage Pipe LF 2370 $121.56 $288,08724" Drainage Pipe LF 3160 $230.44 $728,20430" Drainage Pipe LF 3950 $282.67 $1,116,53336" Drainage Pipe LF 2370 $326.96 $774,90242" Drainage Pipe LF 1580 $454.00 $717,320Drainage Structures Each 101 $18,000.00 $1,818,000

Subtotal: $5,691,897Project Markup: -$

Total Cost (Rounded): 5,692,000$

Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Total15" Drainage Trunk Pipe LF 600 $105.00 $63,00021" Drainage Trunk Pipe LF 1185 $128.00 $151,68024" Drainage Trunk Pipe LF 1585 $230.44 $365,24736" Drainage Trunk Pipe LF 2180 $326.96 $712,77342" Drainage Trunk Pipe LF 2400 $454.00 $1,089,60054" Drainage Trunk Pipe LF 1200 $500.00 $600,00060" Drainage Trunk Pipe LF 800 $552.00 $441,60015" Drainage Lateral Pipe LF 1500 $105.00 $157,500Trunk Drainage Structures Each 51 $20,000.00 $1,020,000Lateral Drainage Structures Each 50 $12,000.00 $600,000

Subtotal: 5,201,400$

Project Markup: -$


Cost Difference: 491,000$


Title


Estimated Cost of Original Concept


Estimated Cost of Alternative Concept Proposed

26 I - 31


Title Alter. No. EM-01




-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)South of the North Service Road to the southern project limit, the typical section includes the 6-foot bike lane and an 8-foot sidewalk.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Combine the 6-foot bike lane and 8-foot sidewalk into a 10-foot combined sidewalk/bikeway shared use path. This combination along with a reduction of 1-foot in the right lane would extend the left turn lanes on Route 112 (Northbound and Southbound) between the North and South Service Roads.Combining the pedestrian and bicycle path functions for this section reduces some functionality, but the potential for increased storage capacity for left turn vehicles may be a greater priority.


Combine sidewalk and bikeway south of north service road

RationaleThe combination of the bike lane and sidewalk south of the North Service Road to the Southern Project limit would allow extending the existing left turn lanes on Route 112. This would in turn help reduce congestion at the North and South Service Road intersections.


Combines Sidewalk/Bikeway to shared use path


Extends the Route 112 left turn lanes

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

27 I - 32

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 4

Alter. No. EM-01


Title

Design Suggestion

The cost associated with this design suggestion would be minimal compared to the benefit of extending the left turn lane to reduce the congestion through the intersections. There would be slightly higher quantities of concrete for the combined sidewalk and bikeway while slightly less full depth asphalt concrete pavement on subbase for the reduction in roadway width.



28 I - 33

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 4

Alter. No. EM-01

Design Suggestion




Title

Proposed Cross Sections South of North Service RoadDraft Design Report dated October 2015

29 I - 34

January 13-15, 2016

Page 4 of 4

Alter. No. EM-01

Design Suggestion




Title

30 I - 35






-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)Between the LIE South Service Road and LIE North Service Road, NY112 will be widened along the right side in each direction to accommodate a bicycle lane. Behind the reconstructed and realigned curbs, the sidewalks will be reconstructed and small retaining walls will be built for segments under the bridge. Typical Section Sheet No.A-13 depicts this wall as being a precast concrete wall with approximately 4 foot exposed height .

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Consider a reinforced concrete modular block wall or gabion wall in lieu of the precast concrete wall.The base of the foundation for a modular or gabion type wall may be placed approximately 2 foot below grade where as the base of footing for a rigid wall such as a cast in place concrete wall will require a minimum of 4 foot below grade.


Use gabion or modular retaining wall in lieu of cast in place concrete wall

RationaleUsing gabion or modular type walls in lieu of cast-in-place concrete walls for these low height walls will result in easier and quicker construction, less intricate excavation support system and will be cost effective.

Disadvantages of Alternative Concept (Brief)Aesthetically, the caged gabion walls may not be as pleasing as a modular wall system or cast in place concrete system

Original Concept


Reduces excavation depth and excavation support system requirements. There may be inadequate head room to install a simple steel sheet piling system under the overhead bridge structure.

Due to the location and low wall height required, gabion walls and precast modular walls should be cost effective.

Reduces construction time

Alternative Concept

Difference

31 I - 36

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 3

Alter. No. EM-02


Title

Design Suggestion

Cast-in-Place Concrete Retaining Wall-Note required amount of excavation and height of excavation support system



32 I - 37

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 3

Alter. No. EM-02


Title

Design Suggestion

Precasr Modular Concrete Retaining Wall-Note required amount of excavation and height of excavation support



33 I - 38






42,000$ -$ 42,000$

200,000$ -$ 200,000$

(158,000)$ -$ (158,000)$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)Between the LIE South Service Road and LIE North Service Road, NY112 will be widened along the right side in each direction to accommodate a bicycle lane. The bike lane and sidewalk will be at the same elevation as the vehicular traffic lanes. Behind the reconstructed and realigned curbs, the sidewalks will be reconstructed and small retaining walls will be built for segments under the bridge.

Along NY 112, between the I-495 Eastbound Mainline bridge south fascia and the I-495 Westbound Mainline Bridge north fascia, elevate either just the sidewalk or the sidewalk and the bicycle path. The north and south sidewalk / bicycle approaches along NY112 to this area will gradually ramp up to meet this elevated section. Provide bicycle rails are to be provided and the ramped approaches will be ADA compliant.

Qualitative Value AlternativeNY 112 from LIE to Granny Road, Long Island, NY

Elevate the sidewalk and bike lane under the bridge

RationaleElevate the sidewalk, or sidewalk and bike route on NY112, under the I-495 Mainline Bridge; so as to provide a safer pedestrian/bike path and to minimize disruption to the paved slope in front of the stub abutment.

Improves safety of the bicycle riders in this confined area under the bridge


The cost along the approach sidewalks/bike path will be higher due to the addition of rampsAdditional granular fill will be required at the approach ramps and at the elevated sections in the expressway bridge areas


Proposed retaining wall will require less excavation and will be placed further from the stem of the stub abutment, beyond the base of the slope thus resulting in minimal disturbance to the slopeBicycle riders and/or pedestrians will feel more comfortable elevated from the main traffic line since the area under the bridge is a more confined spaceConstructability will be easier due to a reduction in excavation depth and the elimination of a complex excavation support system

Cost of adding elevated walkways is minimal compared to the benefit provided

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

34Version B3.0.1, 1/4/2016 I - 39

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 4

Alter. No. EM-03


Title

Qualitative Value Alternative



35Version B3.0.1, 1/4/2016 I - 40

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 4

Alter. No. EM-03

Qualitative Value AlternativeNY 112 from LIE to Granny Road, Long Island, NY

Title

Example of similar sidewalk ramp, L.I.E. over Deer Park Ave., Dix Hills, NY



36Version B3.0.1, 1/4/2016 I - 41

January 13-15, 2016

Page 4 of 4

Alter. No. EM-03


Retaining Walls LS 1 $41,500.00 $41,500

It was assumed that the pavement would remain the same for both alternatives.

Subtotal: 41,500$

Project Markup: -$

Total Cost (Rounded): 42,000$


Elevated Bike/Pedestrian Path LS 2 $100,000.00 $200,000

Subtotal: 200,000$

Project Markup: -$


Cost Difference: (158,000)$


Title



Qualitative Value Alternative


37Version B3.0.1, 1/4/2016 I - 42


Title Alter. No. M-02




-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)This was not addressed in the original design report.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Replace the existing Fitch barrels that protect motorists from striking the center pier in both the northbound and southbound directions with standard impact attenuators.


Replace Fitch barrels with impact attenuator at LIE bridge

RationaleThe existing Fitch barrels appear to be in poor condition and may not function as originally intended. In order to improve motorist safety, we recommend that they be replaced with an improved impact attenuator system.


Increases construction cost


Replaces old system that is difficult to maintain

Provides better protection for motorists

Easier to maintain

Narrower width which should reduce likelihood of being struck.

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

38 I - 43

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 2

Alter. No. M-02


Title

Design Suggestion

Replace Fitch barrels with impact attenuator at LIE bridge


39 I - 44


Title Alter. No. MR-01




6,032,000$ -$ 6,032,000$

5,313,000$ -$ 5,313,000$

719,000$ -$ 719,000$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)A 14' wide median is proposed to be installed within most of the project limits. The median will typically be used as two-way turn lane or a planted median.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)It is proposed to reduce the median width to 12' in order reduce construction costs and ROW taking.


Reduce width of median from 14' to 12'

RationaleIn order to reduce the amount of ROW taking, it is proposed to reduce the two way turn lane from 14' to 12'. In addition, there would be a cost savings for asphalt concrete, subbase, excavation and embankment. This will also reduce amount of water that has to be collected.


Reduces separation between northbound and southbound roadways

Less room for turning vehicles to wait for gaps


Reduces construction and ROW costs

May reduce impacts to adjacent properties

Reduces runoff that has to be collected in drainage system.

12' width meets design criteria

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

40 I - 45

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 4

Alter. No. MR-01


Title




41 I - 46

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 4

Alter. No. MR-01


Title



42 I - 47

January 13-15, 2016

Page 4 of 4

Alter. No. MR-01

Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost TotalAsphalt Concrete TONS 30150 $115.00 $3,467,250

Subbase CY 26000 $45.00 $1,170,000

Excavation CY 27258 $30.00 $817,740

Embankment CY 2328 $20.00 $46,560

ROW Acquisition Cost SF 13250 $40.00 $530,000


Project Markup: -$


Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost TotalAsphalt Concrete TONS 29200 $115.00 $3,358,000

Subbase CY 25000 $45.00 $1,125,000

Excavation CY 26167.68 $30.00 $785,030

Embankment CY 2234.88 $20.00 $44,698


Project Markup: -$




Title





43 I - 48






-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)According to Section 3.2.3.1 from the Draft Design Report dated October 2015, the design speed of 55 mph is consistent with the anticipated off-peak 85th percentile speed within the range of the functional class speeds for terrain and volume.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Reduce the design speed along Route 112 to 45 mph. The minimum lane width for a Low Speed (<50 mph) Urban Arterial is 11-foot minimum.


Reduce design speed of road to reduce lane widths

RationaleThe observed travel speeds in the PM Peak Hour range from 10 mph to 50 mph as shown below with the majority of the speeds under 40 mph. The reduction of the design speed would justify the reduction of the proposed travel lanes and minimize the ROW acquisition costs.


Reduced design speed.


Reduces travel lanes and 2-feet of ROW acquisition on each side of Route 112.

Reduces project cost

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

44 I - 49

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 2

Alter. No. MR-05


Title

Design Suggestion

Reduce design speed of road to reduce lane widths


Observed Travel Speeds, PM Peak Hour

10 – 20 mph

20 – 30 mph

30 – 40 mph

40 – 50 mph

45 I - 50






1,096,000$ -$ 1,096,000$

-$ -$ -$

1,096,000$ -$ 1,096,000$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)Proposed sidewalk area width is 13-feet. This area is make up of a 5-foot strip adjacent to the bike lane, a 5-foot sidewalk and a 3-foot strip between the sidwalk and the Fee Acquistion line.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Reduce the sidewalk area width to 11-feet. The sidewalk width would remain constant while the 3-foot and 5-foot strips on either side of the sidewalk would be reduced 1-foot each.The ROW acquisitions costs were calculated using the total ROW costs divided by the total acre of FEE and TE takings.


Reduce sidewalk area width from 13' to 11'

RationaleReducing the sidewalk area width by 2 feet on each side of Route 112 will save on ROW acquisition costs, including both Fee acquisiton and temporary easements. This reduction will not affect the over sidewalk width, but rather the snow storage area adjacent to the bike lane and the area between the sidewalk and the Fee Acquisition line.


Reduces snow storage area between the the bike lane and the sidewalk

Reduces sign and planting area between the sidewalk and the Fee Acquistion line


Reduces 2-feet of ROW acquistion on each side of Route 112

Reduces project cost

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

46 I - 51

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 5

Alter. No. MR-06





Title

Proposed Typical Section from Draft Design Report (October 2015)

47 I - 52

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 5

Alter. No. MR-06





Title

Revised Typical Section showing reduced Sidewalk Area

48 I - 53

January 13-15, 2016

Page 4 of 5

Alter. No. MR-06





Title

ROW Cost BreakdownTotal FEE Acquistion for Alternate with Option: 7.697 acresTotal TE for Alternate with Option: 3.105 acresTOTAL = 10.803 acresROW Cost Estimate = $16,750,000 (per S. Muchnick 7/20/15 Memo)Cost/Acre = $1,550,561 SAY $1,600,000/acreCost/SF = $35.50 SAY $40/SF

Reduction in Area due to Reduction of Sidewalk Area WidthFrom Horseblock Road (STA 231+00) to Granny Road (STA 297+50) = 6,650 feet (west side)From Horseblock Road to Granny Road = 6,650 - 50 = 6,600 feet (east side - reduction for Commercial Drive). TOTAL Length = 13,250 feet

Reduction of 2 feet on each side = 13,250 x 2 = 26,500 SF

Topsoil Reduction: 26,500 SF x 6-inches = 13,250 CF = 490 CY SAY 500 CY Seed Reduction: 26,500 SF = 2,944 SY SAY 3,000 SY

49 I - 54

January 13-15, 2016

Page 5 of 5

Alter. No. MR-06

Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost TotalROW Acquisition Cost SF 26500 $40.00 $1,060,000

Topsoil CY 500 $60.00 $30,000

Seed SY 3000 $2.00 $6,000

*Quantities reflect deductions based on the alternative shown


Project Markup: -$



Subtotal: -$

Project Markup: -$

Total Cost (Rounded): -$

Cost Difference: 1,096,000$


Title





50 I - 55






-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)A northbound turn lane from NY 112 to the Country Fair Amusement Park is currently incorporated into the proposed plans. (Dwg. No. 17-A3.)

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Eliminate this right hand turn lane.


Eliminate northbound right turn lane at Country Fair Entertainment Park

RationaleThe right hand turn lane is not heavily used according to the traffic study. Eliminate right hand turning lane so as to reduce the ROW and associated cost.


A right hand turn lane currently exists at this location, and the community is accustomed to it


Eliminating this right hand turn lane will reduce the amount of R.O.W taken

Reduces material and construction cost

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

51 I - 56






-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)The Design Plans currently show a right hand turning lane at Commercial Drive which begins to transition at approx. Station 267+70, and is full 11' width at Station 268+75. It then continues for roughly 200 l.f. to Station 270+70.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Consider modifying the design to shorten this turning lane to 100 l.f., which would then allow the transition to begin at Station 268+70.


Shorten northbound right turn lane at Commercial Drive

RationaleReduce cost of property takings, and minor savings in roadway construction.


Less room for right hand tuning vehicles to queue.


Reduces property takings where there is an active commercial property with numerous head in parking spots

Reduces roadway construction costs

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

52 I - 57

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 2

Alter. No. MR-10


Title

Design Suggestion

See multiple parking spaces that will be affected.

Shorten northbound right turn lane at Commercial Drive


53 I - 58






-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)The original Design Concept maintained the existing alignment which is virtually tangent north of the curve at Horse Block Road to the project terminus at Granny Road.Property takings are being executed on both the east and west side of NY 112, as required by the project improvements.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Consider modifying the roadway alignment to execute property takings on only one side of the ROW to accomplish the project goals where possible. The side would be dictated by the nature of the properties favoring unimproved lots.


Move ROW taking to vacant side whenever possible

RationaleReduce number of properties affected by property takings and potentially reduce the cost of property acquisition.


Introduces horizontal curves to the roadway alignment


Could reduce overall cost of property takings

Reduces the total number of owners affected by project

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

54 I - 59

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 2

Alter. No. MR-11


Title

Design Suggestion

After reviewing the project documents, we suggest there may be two general areas where the roadway could be shifted to allow for property takings on only one side of the ROW.

The fist being the vacant properties along the east side of the Northbound Travel Lane from just north of the Medford Fire Station to Lake Drive. This would mitigate the need to coordinate with the numerous existing commercial properties with driveways and parking spaces.

The second area would be on the west side of the Southbound Travel Lane. This would begin with a mild curve from Lake Drive around Station 261+00 to roughly Station 268+00 just past Burleson Reality. The takings would then continue on the west side of the southbound lane until the project termination at Granny Road. There are properties along both the eastern and western sides of the project in this area, however there are more properties on the eastern side and some of the western side properties appear to be residential with less impact.

Move ROW taking to vacant side whenever possible


55 I - 60






658,000$ -$ 658,000$

-$ -$ -$

658,000$ -$ 658,000$



Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference


Will not ameliorate a non-standard feature, but the design only improves and does not eliminate


Reduces amount of truing and leveling that has to be placed to correct banking on Route 112

Reduces the amount of truing and leveling required along Horse Block Rd to meet existing pavement gradesReduces need for and cost of Temporary Easements

Reduces the construction time and simplifies Work Zone control

Description of Original Concept (Brief)Improve banking / superelevation on northbound horizontal curve between LIE NSR and Horse Block Road to extent feasible to eliminate adverse banking of roadway. For widening on east side for right turn lane (DWG - 01, SH A - 11), it is proposed to excavate below existing subbase as per DOT Regional Pavement Mgmt. requirements resulting over two feet of excavation.

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Retain existing banking as exists today since a crash problem has not been identified per Design Report. In addition, widening for right lane should be constructed at same grade as existing sub-base.


Eliminate superelevation of northbound NY 112 between LIE NSR and Horse Block Rd.

RationaleIn an effort to reduce ROW costs for temporary easements and improve constructability, consider eliminating the proposed superelevation along northbound NY 112. Data shows this is not a factor contributing to accidents.

56 I - 61

January 13-15, 2016

Page 2 of 3

Alter. No. MR-12




Title

57 I - 62

January 13-15, 2016

Page 3 of 3

Alter. No. MR-12

Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost TotalTruing and leveling on NY 112 and Horse Block Rd

tons 5724 $115.00 $658,260

Subtotal: 658,260$

Project Markup: -$



Subtotal: -$

Project Markup: -$

Total Cost (Rounded): -$




Title




58 I - 63


Title Alter. No. RC-07




-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$



Description of Original Concept (Brief)According to Section 3.3.1.4 from the Draft Design Report dated October 2015, no new ITS measures are proposed and this project is considered "Exempt."

Description of Alternative Concept (Brief)Include ITS measures either on the Long Island Expressway, Northbound Route 112 (between the North Service Road and Horse Block Road) and Southbound Route 112 (before Horse Block Road). These additional measures would inform drivers with updated traffic and travel times so they could use alternate travel routes if there was congestion on Route 112 or the Long Island Expressway. There is an existing INFORM fiber-optic interconnect along the west side of NY 112 within the project limits that could be expanded.


Add ITS

RationaleAdding ITS along the Long Island Expressway, Northbound Route 112 (between the North Service Road and Horse Block Road) and Southbound Route 112 (North of Horse Block Road) would provide drivers with traffic information and travel times for them to explore alternate routes.


Adds cost to project

Location of potential VMS sign(s) on Route 112.


Provides information to drivers to use alternate routes

Reduces congestion by giving drivers choices

Original Concept

Alternative Concept

Difference

59 I - 64



60

Appendix A: Function Analysis

I - 65



61

Appendix A: Function Analysis The VE Team conducted a function analysis of the NY 112 from LIE to Granny Road project to help the workshop’s Creative Phase yield VE Alternatives to better meet function requirements of the project. For each item, the VE Team identified functions provided by the current design and classified those functions, as shown on the following page in a Project Function List.

To further analyze project functions, while further training in and understanding function analysis, the VE Team prepared a Customer Function Analysis Systems Technique (FAST) Diagram to demonstrate relationships of functions to one another and how they work together to satisfy project requirements. Customer FAST diagrams graphically illustrate interrelationships of project functions and are often invaluable in accomplishing an in-depth understanding of project issues and functional requirements. The resulting Customer FAST Diagram is presented on the following page.

1. The vertical dashed line, known as Scope Line, define the scope of the project and the VE Study. Functions to the right of the line are part of the scope. Functions to the left are the Task to be accomplished by project.

2. The FAST diagram has two distinct sections, Basic Functions and Supporting Functions.

3. In the Basic Function section of the diagram, Primary Basic Functions are directly to the right of the Scope Line. Secondary Basic Functions branch off to the right of the Primary Basic Functions.

4. Supporting Functions are extremely important in fostering stakeholder acceptance of the project. There are four primary Supporting Functions: Assure Convenience, Assure Dependability, Satisfy Stakeholders, and Attract Stakeholders. Supporting Functions branch off to the right of these primary Supporting Functions.

5. Proper arrangement and relationships of the functions in the FAST diagram can be confirmed with the how-why logic test as follows:

a. Ask the question of any function, "How do I verb-noun?" The answer should be the function to the immediate right.

b. Ask the question "Why do I verb-noun?" The answer should be the function to the immediate left i.e., "So that I can verb-noun."

c. A function that does not pass the how-why test is either described improperly or is in the wrong place. The answer must make sense.

6. Our prime concern when constructing a FAST diagram is the essential functions.

I - 66

HOW? WHY?FAST DIAGRAM

NY 112 from LIE to Granny Road

Bas

ic F

un

ctio

ns

Reduce Congestion

Improve SafetyDrain Roadway

Enable Multimodal

Reduce Delays

Upgrade Travelways

Extend Life

Enhance Appearance

Upgrade Traffic Control Devices

Minimize Disruption

Improve Mobility

Accommodate Utilities

Improve Maintainability

Protect Environment

Manage ROW

Improve Traffic Flow

Allow Emergncy Flow

Maintain Access

Reduce Maintence

Assure Dependability

Assure Convienence

Satisfy Stakeholders

Attract Stakeholders

Su

pp

ort

ing

Fu

nct

ion

s

Satisfy Motorist Expectations

Correct Deficiencies

Safeguard Motorist

Extend Pathways

Maintain Flow

Task

62 I - 67



63

Appendix B: Pareto Cost Model

I - 68

64

33

.9%

29

.8%

9.4

%

5.4

%

4.6

%

3.7

%

2.7

%

2.3

%

1.7

%

1.7

%

1.4

%

1.4

%

0.7

%

0.7

%

0.7

%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

$0

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

$10,000,000

$12,000,000

$14,000,000

$16,000,000

$18,000,000

$20,000,000B

ase

Co

nstr

uctio

n C

ost

RO

W C

osts

Co

ntin

genc

y

Co

nstr

uct

ion

Insp

ect

ion

Infla

tion

Bas

ic M

& P

of

Tra

ffic

Util

ities

Mo

biliz

atio

n

ITS

Fie

ld C

hang

e P

aym

ent

Land

scap

ing

Sur

vey

& S

take

out

Ero

sion

Con

tro

l Mea

sure

s

Ha

zMat

Re

me

dia

tion

637

Item

s

Cu

mu

lati

ve

Per

cen

tag

e

Co

st

Pareto Cost Model

NY 112 Reconstruction Cost, LIE to Granny Road Item: Total Cost

I - 69

65

33

.0%

30

.6%

16

.8%

5.4

%

4.0

%

3.8

%

2.3

%

1.5

%

1.5

%

0.6

%

0.2

%

0.2

%

0.0

%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

Dra

inag

e

Pav

eme

nt

Exc

avat

ion

Sid

ew

alk

Tra

ffic

Sig

nals

Cu

rb

Cle

arin

g &

Gru

bbin

g

Tur

f and

To

psoi

l

Em

bank

men

t

Pav

eme

nt M

arki

ngs

Re

tain

ing

Wal

ls

Sig

ns

Ligh

ting

Cu

mm

ula

tiv

e P

erce

nta

ge

Co

st

Pareto Cost Model

NY 112 Reconstruction Cost, LIE to Granny Road Item: Base Construction Cost

I - 70



66

Appendix C: Creative Idea List with Evaluation Score and Action

I - 71

LIST OF CREATIVE IDEASNY 112 from LIE to Granny RoadLong Island, NYJanuary 13-15, 2016

Alter. No. Creative Idea Description Rank ActionGrouped

With Comments / NotesMR-03 Use a multiuse path in lieu of separate

bikeway and sidewalk5

MR-04 Provide 2-way bikeway on one side only 1

DR-04 Use bio-swales and filter strips to reduce size of recharge basin

8 A

M-01 Defer all improvements under LIE until future project where all work will be performed

2

DR-06 Use laterals to tie into trunk line on one side 9 A

DR-01 Use pervious pavement in lieu of impervious to reduce run-off

1 Non-mainline travelways

EM-00 Enable Multi-Modal #T #T

EM-01 Combine sidewalk and bikeway south of north service road

8 A

RC-02 Elevate Horse Block Road at NY 112 1

DR-02 Raise elevation of NY 112 to reduce flooding 1

EM-02 Use gabion or modular retaining wall in lieu of cast in place concrete wall

8 DS

RC-03 Dead end Middle Island Road before Horse Block Road

1

RC-04 Make Middle Island Road one way in from Horse Block

5

EM-03 Elevate the sidewalk and bike lane under the bridge

8 A

M-00 Miscellaneous #T #T

M-02 Replace Fitch barrels with impact attenuator at LIE bridge

8 DS

MR-07 Construct separate shoulder 3 Take more ROW

MR-08 Combine bike route and shoulder 6 Do not designate as bike lane, use as both

RC-05 Provide turnouts for breakdowns 1

RC-06 Make Horse Block Road a roundabout 4 Could incorporate Middle Island Road

MR-00 Manage ROW #T #T

MR-01 Reduce width of median from 14' to 12' 9 A Center turn lane

MR-05 Reduce design speed of road to reduce lane widths

8 DS

DR-05 Switch out planted median with storm water bio-swales

3

RC-08 Make NY 112 a divided highway 2

MR-06 Reduce sidewalk area width from 13' to 11' 8 A

MR-09 Eliminate northbound right turn lane at Country Fair Entertainment Park

8 DS

MR-10 Shorten northbound right turn lane at Commercial Drive

8 DS

67Version B3.0.1, 1/4/2016 I - 72

LIST OF CREATIVE IDEASNY 112 from LIE to Granny RoadLong Island, NYJanuary 13-15, 2016

RC-09 Provide roundabouts at all signal intersections 5 Commercial and Executive

DR-07 Have design meeting with regulatory agencies to resolve stormwater issues

1 ABD

Action

A - Alternative (Quantitative or Qualitative)

DS - Design Suggestion

EC - Estimate Correction

CR - Cost Reduction

ABD - Already Being Done

X - Dropped during Development

68Version B3.0.1, 1/4/2016 I - 73



69

Appendix D: VE Presentation List of Attendees

I - 74

I - 75

I - 76

jheymach

Typewritten Text

[email protected]

I - 77

jheymach

Typewritten Text

Kurt Weiskotten

jheymach

Typewritten Text

GPI

jheymach

Typewritten Text

518-453-9431

jheymach

Typewritten Text

Joseph Brown

jheymach

Typewritten Text

DOT

jheymach

Typewritten Text

[email protected]

jheymach

Typewritten Text

631-952-6632 [email protected]

jheymach

Typewritten Text

Frank Pearson

jheymach

Typewritten Text

GPI

jheymach

Typewritten Text

631-761-7208

jheymach

Typewritten Text

[email protected]

AUTHORIZATION Faithful+Gould

Approved for issue:

Scot McClintock

One Midtown Plaza

1360 Peachtree Street

Suite 850

Job manager:

Tom Wiggins

Date: January 21, 2016

Atlanta, GA 30309

Telephone: 1 404.874.3638

Fax: 1 404.874.1473

I - 78

I - 79

II. REGIONAL DISPOSITION FORMS

I - 80

I - 81

I - 82

I - 83

I - 84

I - 85

I - 86

I - 87

I - 88

I - 89

I - 90

I - 91

I - 92

I - 93

I - 94

I - 95

Documents

FINAL DESIGN REPORT APPENDIX I - VALUE ENGINEERING · 2017-01-11 · FINAL DESIGN REPORT APPENDIX I - VALUE ENGINEERING September 14, 2016 112 . Reconstruction Project PIN 0016.27.101