Udot Drainage Agreement

The information provided on this site will provide engineers with the requirements and design criteria for drainage that meetS UDOT standards. The CMGC process offers teams the unique opportunity to develop innovations that minimize risk and maximize construction efficiency. Unlike technical innovations, these process innovations often use standard solutions, but implementation of these solutions is done during design when time and cost agreements do not control the contract. Process innovations minimize construction assumptions and maximize construction efficiency. This makes the auctions very accurate. In this way, the CMGC design process is able to obtain a guaranteed maximum price (GMP). CMGC`s greatest achievements are the integration of technical innovations and processes into the project. Both FHWA and the State of Utah have made significant financial commitments to the CMGC program. This partnership has enabled ES UDOT to carry out many of its most ambitious projects. In return for FHWA`s support, UDOT makes this report available for compliance with the SEP-14 agreement.

It brings together UDOT`s knowledge of the benefits of CMGC, the performance of CMGC projects over traditional projects, the best CMGC applications and UDOT`s FORMAL CMGC process. For all deviations from the drainage planning criteria and procedures contained in the DMOI, an approved design deviation is required. Use the region-specific forms below to request a deviation. CMGC is the best way for the project team to seize opportunities to reduce the risks that may increase the cost of the project. Traditionally, UDOT has addressed risks through a process of identification and reduction that is not supported by rigorous analysis. However, better analytical efforts have been made with the implementation of large CMGC projects. Mountain view corridor; MP-0182 (6), (MVC) is a current government-funded project that illustrates the potential for CMGC`s risk analysis and mitigation. Figure 6 shows the opinion on probable construction costs (OPCC) at different stages of the project. OPCC1 represents the construction costs determined by the designers. OPCC2A indicates construction costs based on design costs with the contractor input. This shows that the awareness of the contractor offers real costs that have been overlooked by the designers.

For MVCs, these increased costs represent $38.7 million (a difference between a 50% probability of overruns). The underlying cost of the project is therefore $346.2 million. The potential for the cost of the baseline is $56.7 million (the difference between the OPCC2A curve and the 90% and 50% probability). Figure 3 Southern Parkway – With a washing cost at least adjacent to the shutdown of a competitively fixed cost project during the competitive process, UDOT allows UDOT to measure unit price infiltration. The dotted line in Figure 2 is the average of the cmGC projects shown in the table and shows that overall prices increase by 11% over the course of the design. Despite this average trend, one project was able to reduce supply prices during the design phase, reducing project risk and using innovation to improve efficiency. The virgin river trail project saw prices lower than those offered when selecting the contractor by 17%. Since 2007, price metrics have been used to determine the success of projects. CMGC`s pricing expectations can only be met if these expectations are determined in the selection process and measured in the design process.

CmGC achieves the largest savings through innovation that addresses risks, particularly the risks associated with construction time.