Value Analysis. Engineering —Construction Manager identifies aspects of the design that either do not add value or whose value may be enhanced by changing them in some form or fashion. The change does not necessarily reduce the cost; it may actually decrease the life-cycle costs.
Value Analysis. Contractor shall conduct value analysis workshops at 100% Design Development stage. Contractor is responsible for confirming, at the end of each stage, in writing to the AOC, that all Project and construction costs have been identified. Contractor shall lead the activities of the AOC, Architect, and other project participants in a value analysis and verify the cost-effectiveness of the design. Contractor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the AOC and shall certify in writing to the AOC, that the Design Documents and/or Construction Documents, at the end of each of these stages, are in conformance with the requirements of the Project Program and quality standards set by the AOC, and that Contractor’s current total cost estimate for construction of the Project is equal to or less than the Construction Budget.
Value Analysis. Lessee shall lead the activities of the District, Architect, and other Project participants in a Value Analysis, and verify the cost- effectiveness of the design. Lessee shall actively evaluate the Project for value saving options and present all such options to the District and Architect for review and consideration. Xxxxxx is responsible for confirming, at the end of each stage, in writing to the District, that all Project and construction costs have been identified. Lessee shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the District and shall certify in writing to the District that the design documents and/or Construction Documents, at the end of each of these stages, are in conformance with the requirements of the Project program and quality standards set by the District, and that Lessee’s current total cost estimate for construction of the Project is equal to or less than the Construction Budget. Lessee shall conduct Value Analysis Workshops at the 100% Design Development Stage.
Value Analysis. (9-1-11) EDB1 G57 Value Engineering Proposals, as specified in Article 104-12 of the 2018 Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures, and as modified in the Standard Special Provision entitled “Value Engineering Proposals” will be accepted. Only proposals, which alter the requirements of the RFP issued by the Department, will be considered as Value Engineering Proposals. To minimize re-design efforts and costs, the Design-Build Team is encouraged to submit Preliminary Value Engineering Proposals that provide an estimate of cost or time savings, span layout, span lengths, foundation types, or other such general information and how they differ from that specified in this RFP. Therefore, full design packages for the proposed structure and that for the structure specified in this RFP are not required, but enough detail should be provided to clearly show the cost of both options (excluding design cost). The $10,000 threshold for consideration of a Value Engineering Proposal, as specified in Article 104-12 applies. Value Engineering Proposals will not be required or allowed for the sole purposes of reducing the depth of foundations or to shorten the bridge length unless a change to the foundation type (drilled piers versus piles) or a change to the superstructure type is proposed and accepted. Instead, such reduction in foundation depth or bridge length will result in an adjustment in partial payments to the Design-Build Team in accordance with the Project Special Provision entitled “Measurement and Payment.” However, as an incentive to the Design-Build Team to provide an economical structural design, the Design-Build Team will be paid a lump sum of 15% of the total partial payment adjustment attributable to the reduced pay item quantities for Foundation Depth and/or Bridge Length, as applicable. Said lump sum payment will be made upon approval of all design submittals, and receipt of all permits and FEMA compliance for a given bridge site. The 15% incentive will not apply to a bridge if the total partial payment adjustments noted above for that bridge are less than $5,000.00.
Value Analysis. 3.1 The CM shall, after a complete review of the Project Program, evaluate the designs available at the time of the CM’s commencement of Pre-Construction services, and obtain an understanding of the intent of the OWNER and the Project Designer, provide value analysis services and offer cost savings suggestions and best value recommendations to the OWNER. All recommendations shall be in writing and must be fully reviewed with the Project Designer and OWNER, and approved by the OWNER prior to implementation. It is anticipated that the value analysis will occur at the Pre-Schematic, Schematic and 60% design development, and 100% Construction Documents submission phases.
3.2 Value analysis efforts shall result in a design that is most effective in first costs as well as long term operational costs relative to issues of energy use and facility maintainability. The value analysis deliverable from the CM shall include life cycle cost analyses as may be required to assist the Project Designer to achieve an appropriate balance between costs, aesthetics and function for the building systems and materials being contemplated in the design.
3.3 Value analysis efforts shall also take into consideration applicable constructability issues.
3.4 The CM shall promptly notify the OWNER and Project Designers in writing upon observing any features in the design that appear to be ambiguous, confusing, conflicting or erroneous.
3.5 All value analysis studies must be provided on a timely basis within the design schedule.
Value Analysis. A. The CM/GC shall, after a complete review of the Project, evaluate the designs available at the time of the CM/GC’s commencement of pre-construction services, and obtain an understanding of the intent of the CITY and the Project Designer, provide value analysis services and offer cost savings suggestions and best value recommendations as to the consistency and appropriateness of the project and the project’s budget to the CITY. All recommendations must be fully reviewed with the Project Designer and CITY, and approved by the CITY prior to implementation. CITY and CM/GC shall identify acceptable time frame by which CM/GC shall provide initial program evaluation.
B. Value analysis efforts shall result in a design that is most effective in first costs as well as long term operational costs relative to issues of energy use and facility maintainability. Value analysis studies shall include life cycle cost analysis as may be required to assist the Project Designer to achieve an appropriate balance between costs, aesthetics and/or function.
C. Value analysis efforts shall also take into consideration applicable constructability issues.
D. The CM/GC shall promptly notify the CITY and Project Designer in writing upon observing any features in the design that appear to be ambiguous, confusing, conflicting or erroneous.
E. All value analysis studies must be provided on a timely basis within the design schedule.
F. Value analysis studies shall be continuous as the design is being developed.
G. The CM/GC shall conduct value analysis throughout the project and provide the CITY estimates as appropriate and shall conduct major value analysis at completion of the schematic design phase and at the design development phase (utilizing the Design Development documents), which analysis shall include, but not be limited to, the items noted below:
1. Develop value analysis concepts for consideration at the session noted in #2 below (it is anticipated that the Project Designer will be concurrently conducting a similar activity).
2. Brainstorming session(s) with the Project Team.
3. Written cost studies shall be produced and submitted to the CITY within two (2) weeks of the brainstorming session.
4. Written pro/con evaluation of the cost studies shall be provided with the cost studies.
5. Formal presentation of the written study to the Project Team shall be conducted by the CM/GC firm.
6. A final written value analysis study document including a summary of value analysis items, a...
Value Analysis. The Construction Manager shall make recommendations to the City and the Project Designers with respect to constructability, construction cost, sequence of construction, construction duration, possible means and methods of construction, time for construction and separation of the Project into contracts for various categories of the Work. Construction Manager shall evaluate all design options to provide value analysis services and cost savings recommendations to the City. The Construction Manager shall consider options most effective in first costs as well as long term operational costs and life cycle costs when evaluating each design option. The Construction Manager shall submit to the City and Project Designers (1) written cost studies, (2) cost-benefit evaluations of each cost studies, (3) a formal report to the design team, (4) a final written analysis study document and (5) a tracking report for the increases or decreases in Project cost due to value engineering or scope changes. The City will decide which alternatives will be incorporated into the Project. The Project Designers will have full responsibility for the incorporation of the alternatives into the Contract Documents. The Construction Manager will include the cost of the alternatives into the Cost Model and any GMP Proposals.
Value Analysis. A Value Analysis (VA) study was conducted from April 29 to May 2, 2019. The VA study analyzed the conceptual plans and ensured the compatibility with the surrounding conditions. The objectives of the VA study were to review the “base case” project for cost-effectiveness, function, and ability to meet objectives; and to provide VA proposals and design comments to increase project value through improved functionality, constructability, phaseability, coordination with other projects, and/or capital cost avoidance. The VA team generated 22 ideas, 9 VA proposals, and 2 design comments for which definitive VA proposals could not be made or quantified at the time of the study. Alameda CTC accepted three VA proposals to further evaluate and implement during the design phase: • VA-1: Allow for simultaneous construction staging of median and outside shoulder work to avoid deferring the structure work until late in the process, which would reduce the project construction time and subsequent cost. • VA-6: Construct the northbound roadway section in the median during Phase 1 instead of Phase 2, to reduce cost through more efficient staging and to reduce rework and subsequently minimize traffic impacts. • VA-7: Combine the proposed project with the I-680 Pavement Rehabilitation Project between Xxxxxxx Road and Alcosta Boulevard (04-ALA-680 PM M12.4/R21.9; EA 04-0J620), to reduce mobilization costs; project administration/construction management costs; COZEEP; time related overhead; multiple Resident Engineer offices; traffic staging; K-rail placement; cutting of new pavement for conduits/utilities; rework on the shoulders and the traffic lanes to place communication fiber, conduits, cabinets etc.; biological mitigation costs; and long-term lane closure time associated with project overlap. Alameda CTC designated the following proposal and comments as needing further study: • VA-2: Use cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) soldier pile walls instead of Type 1 Modified walls with piles for Retaining Walls (RW) 581 and RW-600, to simplify construction and eliminate footing conflicts with existing walls. • VA-3: Consolidate closely spaced overhead signs to use only one structure (pole and foundation), where feasible, to reduce the number of structures and associated visual clutter. • VA-4: Microgrid Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) at the end of the project to remove remnants of previous lane line striping and improve lane line visibility. • VA-5: Coordinate with Caltrans to avoid plac...
Value Analysis. A Value Analysis will be required for this project. It will be done in the beginning of the PS&E phase.
Value Analysis. The National Highway Systems Act and the Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) require a project with a total cost of $25 million or more to have a Value Analysis study prepared. The Value Analysis (VA) study was conducted in September 2020, and three VA alternatives were developed: Alternative 1.0: Construct the project with a 10-hour nighttime construction period in lieu of an 8-hour nighttime construction period. This alternative would reduce working days and project cost, however there will be inconveniences for motorists Alternative 2.0: Improve slope protection to avoid needing a 404 permit and save National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) cost. Alternative 3.0: Reduce the pavement replacement depth from 0.6 feet to 0.35 feet. This alternative would reduce project cost. Extending closure hours may not be feasible based on latest traffic operational trends, 404 permit requirements may not include slope protection conditions, and quality of pavement may not allow for a reduced replacement depth that can accommodate a 20- year pavement life. It was determined that additional analysis is required during PS&E phase to determine feasibility of these alternatives. Final determination is scheduled for February 2022. Current scope assumes these alternatives are not implemented.
