Res No 024-22-15777RESOLUTION NO.: 024-22-15777
A Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a professional service work order
to Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., to provide an independent peer review (lPR) for the
City of South Miami proposed Pedestrian Overpass at US-1 and SW 71st Street.
WHEREAS, the City Mayor and Commission wish to hire an independent peer review (IPR) for the
City of South Miami proposed Pedestrian Overpass at US-1 and SW 71st Street; and
WHEREAS, this project was approved by Commission in the Capital Improvement Work Program;
and
WHEREAS, Stantec Consulting Services Inc., is one of four firms selected by Resolution No. 060-
17-14861, to provide professional service agreement for engineering services on as needed basis in
accordance with Florida Statute 287.055, "Consultants Competitive Negotiation Act"; and
WHEREAS, Stantec Consulting Services Inc., submitted a revised proposal for professional
engineering services; and
WHEREAS, the scope of services, staff allocation and man-hours were negotiated; and
WHEREAS, the amount of $116,249 was found to be comprehensive and cost effective in its design
approach; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission desire to authorize the City Manager to execute a
professional service work order with Stantec Consulting Services Inc., to provide an independent peer
review (IPR) for the City of South Miami proposed Pedestrian Overpass at US-1 and SW 71st Street for a
total amount not to exceed $116,239.
WHEREAS, the expenditure shall be charged to the to the Capital Improvement Program Fund
Account number 301-1790-519-6450 which has a balance of $1,189,927.57 before this request was made.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby ratified and confirmed as being true and they are
incorporated into this resolution by reference as if set forth in full herein.
Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a professional service work order
with Stantec Consulting Services Inc., to provide an independent peer review (IPR) for the City of South
Miami proposed Pedestrian Overpass at US-1 and SW 71st Street for a total amount not to exceed
$116,239. The expenditure is to be charged to the Capital Improvement Program Fund Account number
301-1790-519-6450 which has a balance of $1,189,927.57 before this request was made.
Section 3. Corrections. Conforming language or technical scrivener-type corrections may be
made by the City Attorney for any conforming amendments to be incorporated into the final resolution
for Signature.
Page 1 of 2
Res . No. 024-22-1 5777
Section 4: Severability. If any section , clau se, sentence, or phrase of t hi s resolution is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, the holding shall not affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution .
Section 5: Effective Date: Thi s re solution shall become effective immediately upon adoption.
PASSED AND A DOPTED thi s 1st day of March, 2022 .
ATTEST: APPROVE~~ U
MAYOR ;;l
COMMISSION VOTE : 5-0
Mayor Philips: Yea
Commi ssio n e r Harris: Yea
Commissio n er Gil : Yea
Commi ssio n er Liebman : Yea
Commiss ion e r Corey: Yea
Page 2 of 2
Agenda Item No:5.
City Commission Agenda Item Report
Meeting Date: March 1, 2022
Submitted by: Aurelio Carmenates
Submitting Department: Public Works & Engineering
Item Type: Resolution
Agenda Section:
Subject:
A Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a professional service work order to Stantec Consulting
Services, Inc., to provide an independent peer review (IPR) for the City of South Miami proposed Pedestrian
Overpass at US-1 and SW 71st Street. 3/5 (City Manager-Public Works & Engineering Dept.)
Suggested Action:
Attachments:
Memo Peer Rev Serv Stantec for Ped Brdg.docx
Reso Peer Rev Serv Stantec for Ped Brdg.docx
south_miami_US1_PedestrianBridgePark_IPR_WorksheetRev.pdf
2021FDM Chapter 121 Bridge Project Dev.pdf
2018fdm103forms.pdf
1
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:The Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Commission
FROM:Shari Kamali, City Manager
DATE:March 1, 2022
SUBJECT:A Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a professional service work order
to StantecConsulting Services,Inc., to providean independent peer review(IPR)for the
City of South Miami proposed Pedestrian Overpass at US-1 and SW 71st Street.
BACKGROUND:The City of South Miami is currently working with a Consultant as Engineer of Record
(EOR) to provide a design for the proposed Pedestrian Overpass at US-1 and SW 71st
Street. TheFlorida Department of Transportation (FDOT) is requiring for Transportation
Application grants class A project, that theCity hire an independent firm in accordance
with FDOT Design Manual Section 121.12. The designated IPR firm will have no
involvement with the project other than conducting the IPRat 90% and 100%. The peer
review is intended to be a comprehensive, thorough independent verification of the
original design. An IPR includes check of the EOR’s plans and calculations; it is an
independent verification of the design using different programs and independent
processes than what was used by the EOR. A certification letter will be issued following
the format presented in Form 121-C (see FDM 103) signed and sealed by the
independent review engineer stating that all review comments have been adequately
addressed and that the design is in compliance with all Department and FHWA
requirements.
In order to meet the aforementioned requirement, Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.,
was requested to provide a cost proposal as the next City’s rotation list consultant. On
February 20, 2022, Stantec Consulting Services Inc., submitted a revised proposal that
is comprehensive and cost effective for the services requested.
Stantec Consulting Services Inc., is one of four firms selected by Resolution No. 060-17-
14861, to provide professional service agreement for engineering services on as needed
basis in accordance with Florida Statute 287.055, “Consultants Competitive Negotiation
Act.
AMOUNT:Amount not to exceed $ 116,249. Please refer to the consultant contract and fee
schedule.
FUND &ACCOUNT:The expenditure shall be charged $116,249 to the to the Capital Improvement Program
FundAccount number 301-1790-519-6450which has a balance of $1,189,927.57 before
this request was made.
ATTACHMENTS:Resolution
Resolution #060-17-14861
2
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Professional Service Agreement
Stantec Consulting Services Inc., proposal dated February 20, 2022
FDOT Design Manual – FDM Section 121.12
FDOT Design Manual – FDM Section 103
3
Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 900
Coral Gables, Florida 33134
Tel: (305) 445-2900
February 22, 2020
City of South Miami
Public Works Engineering & Construction Division
6130 Sunset Drive
Miami, Fl 33143
Main: (305)-403-2072
Fax: (305)-668-7208
Attention: Aurelio J. Carmenates, P.E.
Capital Improvement Program Project Manager
Reference: CSM US1 PEDESTIAN BRIDGE
City of South Miami, Florida
Dear Mr. Carmenates:
We are pleased to present this proposal for the independent peer review (IDR) for the CSM US1 PEDESTIAN
BRIDGE. Independent Peer Reviews are used to validate the design of Bridge Structures
SCOPE OF SERVICES:
IPR will be performed at 90%, and 100% design development phase in accordance with FDOT Design Manual
Section 121.2 as follows:
• Bridge Structure
• Bridge cladding components and attachments
The peer review is intended to be a comprehensive, thorough independent verification of the
original work. An independent peer review includes check of the EOR’s plans and
calculations; it is an independent verification of the design using different programs and
independent processes than what was used by the EOR.
TASK 1 – IPR – 90%:
90% Plan Submittals
• A tabulated list of all review comments.
• A standard peer review certification letter following the format presented in Form 121-
B (see FDM 103) signed by the independent review engineer. All outstanding and
unresolved comments and issues presented in this letter are required to be resolved
and implemented prior to the 100% plan submittal.
TASK 2 – IPR – 100%:
6
November 5, 2020
Page 2 of 2
100% Plan Submittals
• A certification letter following the format presented in Form 121-C (see FDM 103)
signed and sealed by the independent review engineer stating that all review
comments have been adequately addressed and that the design is in compliance with
all Department and FHWA requirements.
Exclusions
• Geotechnical Review
• Post Design Services
• Revisions
Terms and Conditions:
All terms and conditions shall be per our Professional Service Agreement for Professional General
Engineering and Architectural Services as authorized by Resolution 060-17-14861. Our fees shall be as
follows.
Task 1 (Lump Sum) ....................................................................... $77,074
Task 2 (Lump Sum) ....................................................................... $39,174
TOTAL: $116,249
We are ready to begin working on this assignment upon your authorization to proceed. If acceptable to you,
we will accept a signed copy of this form as your written authorization to proceed.
Thank you,
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Mohit Soni, P.E., PMP, P.Eng
Principal
Tel: 305-445-2900
mohit.soni@stantec.com
City of South Miami
Approved by:
____________________ ______________________ ______________
Signature Print Name Date
V:\2156\active\215600966\management\Proposal Design Phase\south_miami_Ludlam Glades Park Design phase.docx
7
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.Fee Worksheet - Page 1
DATE:02/18/2022
PROJECT:CSM US1 PEDESTIAN BRIDGE
TASK 1 – IDR – 90%Principal
Senior Project
Manager Sr. Engineer
Engineer
Intern
Senior CAD
Tech Clerical
IDR-90%4 20 180 270 0 0
Sub-Total Hours 4 20 180 270 0 0
Billing Rate 318.60$ 231.53$ 211.64$ 122.50$ 123.40$ 45.00$
Labor Cost $1,274 $4,631 $38,094 $33,075 $0 $0
$77,074
TASK 2 – IDR – 100%Principal
Senior Project
Manager
Senior
LA/Engineer
Engineer
Intern
Senior CAD
Tech Clerical
IDR-100%4 10 90 135 0 0
Sub-Total Hours 4 10 90 135 0 0
Billing Rate 318.60$ 231.53$ 211.64$ 122.50$ 123.40$ 45.00$
Labor Cost $1,274 $2,315 $19,047 $16,538 $0 $0
$39,174
$116,249
Total Fee:$116,249
FEE WORKSHEET
TASK 2 – IDR – 100%
TASK 1 – IDR – 90%
Sub-Total All Services:
8
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121 Bridge Project Development
121.1 General
Structural designs for new construction are developed under the direction of the
Structures Design Office (SDO) and the District Structures Design Offices (DSDO).
Designs are to be developed in accordance with:
•This manual,
•The Structures Manual (Topic No. 625-020-018) (which includes the Structures
Design Guidelines, the Structures Detailing Manual),
•The Standard Plans (Topic No. 625-010-003),
•The AASHTO-LRFD Bridge Design Specifications as referenced in the
Structures Manual,
•Applicable FHWA Directives, and
•Other criteria as specified by the Department.
Structural designs for repair or rehabilitation of bridges are generally developed under the
direction of the District Structures Maintenance Engineer (DSME) and may not include all
the submittal types discussed in this chapter.
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete the above paragraph.
Structure designs for other agencies or authorities such as the Jacksonville
Transportation Authority or various Expressway Authorities may meet the Department’s
criteria or additional criteria as specified by the authority.
For projects involving bridges over navigable water, notify the DSME a minimum of 90
days prior to engaging in any action in, on, or around the bridge. Refer to FDM 110.5.3
for further information.
January 1, 2021
1 9
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.2 Organization
The SDO is a subdivision of the Office of Design under the direction of the Chief Engineer
and the Assistant Secretary for Engineering and Operations. The SDO is under the
direction of the State Structures Design Engineer (SSDE). Each District, including the
Turnpike, has a staff of structural design engineers that comprise the DSDO, and which
is under the direction of the District Structures Design Engineer (DSDE).
121.3 Definitions
All structures are grouped into the following two categories based upon design difficulty,
structural complexity, type of construction materials used and history of use in Florida.
121.3.1 Category 1 Structures
The following structure types are classified as Category 1 Structures:
Box or three-sided culverts
Bridges with simple or continuous span reinforced concrete slab superstructures
Bridges with prestressed concrete slab superstructures
Bridges with simple span non-post-tensioned concrete beam or concrete girder
superstructures with cast in place decks
Widenings for the structure types listed above
Steel truss pedestrian bridges utilizing proprietary designs
Retaining walls
Roadway signing, signalization, and lighting supports
Overhead sign structures and toll gantries
Noise walls and perimeter walls
121.3.2 Category 2 Structures
All structure types not listed above are classified as Category 2 Structures unless
exempted by the SDO. In addition to, or in lieu of, the criteria listed above, a structure is
classified as a Category 2 Structure when any of the following are present:
January 1, 2021
2 10
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Bridge substructures containing any of the following:
(a) Post-tensioned components
(b) Straddle piers
(c) Integral caps
Bridges designed for vessel collision or bridges with superstructures subject to
application of wave loads
Bridges with non-redundant foundations or bridges with micropile foundations
Any component designed using Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composite materials
except precast elements included in the Standard Plans
Braided underpass structures where the beams or flat slab superstructure element is
not oriented parallel to traffic of the overlying roadway and a portion of the
superstructure and substructure extends beyond the limits of the overlying traffic
barriers
Design concepts, components, elements, details, or construction techniques not
normally used by Florida DOT including but not limited to:
• New bridge types
• New materials used to construct bridge components
• New bridge construction methods
• Non-standard or unusual bridge component-to-component configurations
and connection details
• Department issued Developmental Standard Plans or modified versions
of Developmental Design Standards
• Items not covered by the Department's Standard Specifications
• All atypical precast structural elements (The following are not considered to
be atypical: AASHTO Beams, and precast elements included in the
Standard Plans.)
• Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems (PBES) not meeting all
requirements of Chapter 25 of the Structures Detailing Manual
The Department supports the use of accelerated project construction techniques
including the expanded use of precast/prefabricated bridge elements and systems as a
way to reduce costs, construction time, and user impacts; however, the use of
precast/prefabricated bridge elements can create long term durability and quality issues
depending on the details utilized. Therefore, the designs and details for these elements
must be approved by the Department prior to use.
January 1, 2021
3 11
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Items listed in numbers 4 through 6 above are not allowed unless they are specifically
permitted in the RFP or unless they are submitted and approved during the Alternative
Technical Concept (ATC) process.
121.4 Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in Structures
Design
Terminology used in the area of Structures Design is often written in the form of
abbreviations or acronyms. Following is a list of acronyms frequently encountered in this
manual and in other references used in structures design and include those commonly
used for offices, organizations, materials, systems, features, equipment, conditions, and
expertise:
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials
ACI American Concrete Institute
ACIA Assigned Commercial Inspection Agency
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
AISC American Institute of Steel Construction
ANSI American National Standards Institute
APL Approved Products List
AREMA American Railway Engineering and Maintenance Association
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
AWS American Welding Society
BBS Bulletin Board System
BDR Bridge Development Report
BHR Bridge Hydraulics Report
BHRS Bridge Hydraulics Recommendation Sheet
CADD Computer Aided Design and Drafting
CEI Construction Engineering and Inspection
C.I.P. (C-I-P) Cast-in-Place (Concrete)
CSIP Cost Savings Initiative Proposal
CPAM Construction Project Administration Manual
CVN Charpy V-Notch (Impact Testing)
DSDE District Structures Design Engineer
DSDO District Structures Design Office
DSME District Structures Maintenance Engineer
EOR Engineer of Record
January 1, 2021
4 12
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
FDOT Florida Department of Transportation
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
GRS Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil
LRS Low-relaxation Strands
LRFD Load and Resistance Factor Design
MHW Mean High Water
MSE Mechanically Stabilized Earth (Walls)
MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
NBR Nominal Bearing Resistance
NHS National Highway System
NHW Normal High Water
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
OEM Office of Environmental Management
OIS Office of Information Systems
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PDA Pile Driving Analyzer
PD&E Project Development and Environment
PPD Plans Production Date
RDR Required Driving Resistance
RFP Request For Proposal
SDO Structures Design Office
SIP (S-I-P) Stay-in-Place (Forms)
SRS Stress-relieved Strands
SSDE State Structures Design Engineer
TAG Technical Advisory Group (SDO and DSDEs)
TFE (PTFE) Polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon)
TRB Transportation Research Board
TTCP Temporary Traffic Control Plans
UBC Ultimate Bearing Capacity
UV Ultraviolet
121.5 Responsibility
The DSDO has total project development and review responsibility for projects involving
Category 1 Structures. The SDO has total project development and review responsibility
for projects involving Category 2 Structures. This responsibility for Category 2 Structures
extends to widening and rehabilitation projects and repairs of bridge components that
qualify the structure as a Category 2 Structure. For large projects with multiple bridges,
review responsibilities will be coordinated between the DSDO and the SDO based on the
category of the individual bridge, work load demands and project make-up.
January 1, 2021
5 13
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
The District Project Manager must coordinate with the DSDE who will review and concur
with the bridge aspect of all projects during the PD&E process in accordance with Part 2,
Chapter 3 of the PD&E Manual.
The DSDE or the SSDE, as appropriate, must concur/approve all bridge related work after
location design approval is granted.
To assure a uniform approach to a project, the Engineer of Record must coordinate with
the appropriate structures design office (i.e., DSDO or SDO) to discuss structures related
phase review comments and get concurrence on how to proceed.
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.5 and replace with the following:
121.5 Responsibility
Submit RFP’s on those projects where it is anticipated that Category 2 bridges will
be designed and constructed to the SSDE for review and approval. Submit RFP’s
on those projects where it is anticipated that Category 1 bridges will be designed and
constructed to the DSDE for review and approval.
The DSDO has total component structure plan review responsibility for projects
involving Category 1 Structures. The SDO has total component structure plan review
responsibility for projects involving Category 2 Structures. This responsibility for
Category 2 Structures extends to widening and rehabilitation projects and repairs of
bridge components that qualify the structure as a Category 2 Structure. The DSDE
or the SSDE, as appropriate, determine when structure component plans should be
“Released for Construction.”
The District Project Manager must coordinate with the DSDE who will review and
concur with the bridge aspect of all projects during the PD&E process in accordance
with Part 2, Chapter 3 of the PD&E Manual.
January 1, 2021
6 14
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.6 Projects of Division Interest
See FDM 128 for FHWA requirements.
121.7 Bridge Project Development
The following sections will define, clarify and list the information necessary to produce an
acceptable and reproducible set of contract documents (special provisions, bridge
contract drawings) ready for advertisement and construction.
Bridge project development normally includes five phases of development. The first
phase of development, bridge analysis, occurs during the Project Development and
Environment (PD&E) process. After location design approval is granted, the second
phase, Bridge Development Report/30% Structures Plans, is initiated. After approval of
the BDR, the final phases of work will begin. The third phase is the 60% Structures Plans
that consists of the substructure foundation submittal for all projects and 60% Structures
Plans for most Category 2 Structures. The fourth phase includes the 90% Structures
Plans and specifications. The fifth phase includes the 100% Structures Plans and
specifications. For efficiency, one engineering firm (one design team) should be
responsible for the BDR and the final plans and specifications.
For Category 2 bridges and some Category 1 bridges, step negotiations are suggested.
Step negotiations are desirable because the final bridge type cannot be determined until
the BDR is complete. Utilizing this scenario, the first step of the negotiations would
include the BDR/30% Structures Plans. After submittal of the BDR/30% Structures Plans,
negotiations for final three phases of work (60% Structures Plans, 90% Structures Plans
and 100% Structures Plans) would begin. Negotiations should not be finalized until the
BDR/30% Structures Plans are approved by the DSDO or the SDO as appropriate.
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.7 and replace with the following:
121.7 Bridge Project Development
Bridge project development normally includes four phases of development. The first
phase of development, bridge analysis, occurs during the Project Development and
Environment (PD&E) process. The second phase includes the development of the
bridge related project constraints based on project specific requirements and
development of the bridge concept plans for inclusion into the RFP. A series of pre-
January 1, 2021
7 15
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
scoping questions has been compiled and are available on the Office of Construction
website to aid in the development of project specific constraints. Depending on the
complexity of the project and at the discretion of the Department,
this second phase may include a Bridge Feasibility Assessment for the purpose of
developing the structures concept plans. The third phase involves the project
procurement process. See Procurement and Administration Procedure (Topic
No. 625-020-010) for specific requirements. The fourth phase includes component
structure plan reviews in accordance with the requirements of the RFP.
121.8 Bridge Analysis
121.8.1 General
The Bridge Analysis is performed during the PD&E phase by qualified bridge engineers.
The findings of the bridge analysis must be approved by the District Structures Design
Office or the State Structures Design Office, as applicable, in accordance with the
responsible review authority specified in FDM 121.5. The function of the bridge analysis
is to determine the general attributes for the recommended bridge. The specific attributes
of the bridge will be defined in the BDR.
For bridges over water, a location Hydraulics Report will be prepared in conjunction with
the bridge analysis. General site geotechnical knowledge is also required (usually from
existing bridge plans) or, in some cases, it may be desirable to obtain borings.
121.8.2 Contents
The bridge analysis provides conceptual guidance for the bridge design consultant.
Conceptual guidance on how the bridge should fit into the uniqueness of the site should
be provided. Bridge design and structure type should be left to the design team in the
later phases of work. Include the following in the bridge analysis:
Environmental and site considerations, including the need for wildlife connectivity
(see FDM 110.5.4).
Vertical and horizontal clearances (existing and proposed).
Load Rating of existing bridge, if any portion is retained.
January 1, 2021
8 16
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Disposition of existing structure. (Final disposition of demolished bridge debris will
depend on whether or not a local, State or Federal agency has agreed to receive
the debris. See FDM 110.5.2.3).
Vertical and horizontal geometry.
Typical section.
Conceptual ship/barge impact data (sample of recreational and commercial traffic).
Identification of historical significance of bridge and surrounding structures.
Aesthetic level for bridge and bridge approaches.
Location Hydraulics Report.
Bridge deck drainage considerations.
Stream bottom profile.
Conceptual geotechnical data.
For sites with movable bridge options, a life cycle cost comparison will be prepared
and compared to fixed bridge options (Ref: AASHTO Movable Bridge Inspection,
Evaluation, and Maintenance Manual, 2nd Edition).
Phase Construction Impacts.
Construction time.
121.9 Bridge Development Report (BDR)/30% Structures Plans
The BDR is intended to establish all the basic parameters that will affect the work done
in the Design and Plans Preparation phase. Initiate the BDR after location design
approval (For those sites not requiring location design approval, a categorical exclusion
will be required before initiation of the BDR). Once approved, the BDR will define the
continuing work by the Engineer of Record (EOR). It is mandatory that the EOR obtain
and coordinate the information and requirements of the offices and engineering
disciplines whose input is essential to the preparation of an effective BDR. Changes to
the parameters after the BDR is approved could result in schedule delays and
supplemental agreements; therefore, it is critical that District Offices, FHWA (if involved),
the SDO and other involved agencies recognize the purpose and importance of the BDR.
The BDR phase of work will contain sufficient detail for the justification of the proposed
bridge type. For most projects, the 30% Structures Plans will be included as an appendix
to the BDR. The BDR is developed from information outlined on the Bridge Development
Report Submittal Checklist shown in Form 121-A (see
FDM 103). This information is often provided by others; however, the EOR is responsible
for ensuring that all of the information is adequate and appropriate. If the data is not
January 1, 2021
9 17
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
sufficient, the EOR must obtain the required information before the BDR can be
completed and submitted.
When alternate designs are considered, consistency between the alternates is essential
in ensuring equitable competition and optimum cost-effectiveness. This consistency
includes uniformity of design criteria, material requirements and development of unit
costs.
The BDR should contain only supportable and defendable statements. Subjective
opinions or unsubstantiated statements are not acceptable. All arguments are to be
clearly and logically defensible with calculations, sketches or other technical data.
The quantity of work necessary to prepare the BDR depends upon the project's
complexity; however, the usual work effort for bridge types normally encountered is:
Minor Bridge Widenings: The BDR will be a minor work effort; however, viable
structural possibilities and economical options should be thoroughly investigated
to determine if replacement of the bridge would be more appropriate than its
widening. This is particularly true at sites where the existing bridge condition is
marginal, where there has been a record of serious flooding or scouring, when the
widening is part of a route improvement with a high potential for attracting traffic, if
the existing bridge has a history of structural problems (including vessel collision),
or if the inventory rating is less than required by AASHTO and cannot be improved.
Load rating considerations that are to be included in the BDR recommendations
are provided in Section 7.1.1 of the Structures Design Guidelines.
Minor Grade Separations or Small Water Crossings: The BDR will be a thorough
document that adequately addresses all viable structure types; however, the BDR
will not usually be an extensive document since the viable types of superstructure
and substructure are generally limited. The report is to consider scour, vessel
collision, and wildlife connectivity.
Major Bridges (including Movable) and Major Interchanges: The BDR will be an
extensive and comprehensive document that thoroughly considers all viable
structure types and considers all design parameters (such as scour, vessel
collision and wildlife connectivity).
January 1, 2021
10 18
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.9.1 Contents
The major items to be considered in the BDR are:
General: The bridge length, height and pier locations are subject to vertical and
horizontal design clearance requirements such as those for clear zone, navigation,
wildlife connectivity, and hydrology. After these considerations are met, span
lengths are governed by economics and aesthetic considerations. Superstructure
depths (grade separation structures in particular) are to be kept to the minimum
that is consistent with good engineering practice. Recommended span/depth
ratios for steel superstructures are shown in AASHTO.
The length of the bridge will be affected by:
• Opening required by the Bridge Hydraulic Report.
• Environmental Considerations, including wildlife connectivity (see
FDM 110.5.4).
• Railroad clearances and cross sections.
• Width of waterway or width of cross section of roadway being spanned
including the use of retaining walls, or fender systems.
Statical System: Address the economic and engineering advantages of both
simple span and continuous spans.
Superstructure: Some superstructure types that could be considered are
prestressed concrete girders, inverted-tee sections, reinforced or prestressed
concrete slabs, steel rolled sections or plate girders, steel or concrete box girders,
and post tensioned slabs, bulb-tees or boxes.
Substructures: Some substructure types that could be considered are pile bents
and multi-column or hammerhead piers. Variations of column shapes may be
appropriate for aesthetic or economical requirements.
Foundations: Some foundation types that could be considered are steel and
concrete piles, drilled shafts, geosynthetic reinforced soil (GRS) abutments and
spread footings. Assess GRS abutments to determine feasibility for all new
bridges. If GRS abutments are determined not to be the most suitable alternative
for the project, provide a statement in the BDR indicating so and the reasons why
(e.g. sinkhole-prone area or differential settlement limit exceeded).
Vessel Collision: Vessel collision forces will often have a major effect on the
structural configuration and overall economics. See vessel collision requirements
in the Structures Design Guidelines.
January 1, 2021
11 19
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Scour: The 100 year and 500 year predicted scour elevations will often have a
major effect on the foundation design. See the foundations and geotechnical
requirements in the Structures Design Guidelines.
Temporary Traffic Control: Show how traffic will be maintained during construction
for each of the bridge alternates considered. Assess the impacts of the traffic
carried on the structures as well as under the structures being constructed.
Consider all major overhead work items such as bridge demolition and girder
placement. Show stability towers locations, phased construction sequences,
girder splice locations, for each alternate being considered. Compare traffic user
impacts for each of the alternates.
(See FDM 240.4 for additional requirements)
Precast Feasibility Assessment: Investigate the use of either partial or full precast
bridge alternate(s) with the specific purpose of accelerating bridge construction
and reducing user impacts. As part of this investigation:
• Conduct a feasibility assessment responding to questions similar to those
listed in FDM 121.19.
• Based on responses to the feasibility questions, explain whether a precast
alternate should be considered an advantage on the project or what site
constraints, economic impacts, or other factors (e.g., haul distance from
precast yard, project variability) precluded or limited its application. If
precasting is determined not to be applicable for the project, provide a
statement in the BDR indicating so and the reasons why. This statement
fulfills the requirements of this section.
• Only if precasting is found to be viable, evaluate preliminary precast
alternates and associated MOT schemes against conventional methods
using the assessment matrix and referenced links given in FDM 121.19.
Provide enough detail in the preliminary evaluation in order to estimate total
direct and indirect costs. Indirect costs, typically referred to as road user
costs, include fuel use and man-hour losses resulting from detours,
anticipated traffic flow reduction, and reduced speed limits. Determine
indirect costs using the Department’s software at the following link:
http://infonet.dot.state.fl.us/tlconstruction/SchedulingEng/AddSoftwareS
cheduling.htm
At this stage, a meeting with the District Structures Design Engineer is
recommended to discuss the preliminary evaluation and cost estimates
before finalizing the alternates for inclusion in the BDR.
January 1, 2021
12 20
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
• See Chapter 25 of the Structures Detailing Manual for design
considerations as it relates to Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems
(PBES).
• Report the estimated total direct costs and estimated total indirect costs, as
well as the sum of both, for each alternate as three separate dollar amounts
in a summary table in the same section as the completed assessment
matrix (see Table 121.19.2).
The SDO has developed several training videos for the purpose of
educating designers on factors for consideration related to use of
Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems (PBES) for Accelerated Bridge
Construction (ABC). The main emphasis of the training videos is to
demonstrate the sort of factors and project constraints that influence
whether bridge components should be used. Also discussed are overall
prefabricated ABC strategies and implications, including examples showing
how labor, material, and equipment costs are considered.
These training videos have been posted on a website along with notification
of upcoming developments and helpful links to related external websites.
The Department’s SDO website for Every Day Counts can be viewed at:
https://www.fdot.gov/structures/edc/.
Providing both the direct and indirect costs of the project in the BDR enables
Department management to make informed decisions to maximize construction
dollars while at the same time minimizing construction time and economic impacts
to Florida’s traveling public.
Also, demonstrate in the BDR text that consideration was given to identify and employ
other innovative techniques aimed at reducing costs, shortening project delivery time,
enhancing safety during construction, and protecting the environment.
Quantity estimates: For minor bridges rough quantities (such as reinforcing steel
based on weight per volume of concrete) may be sufficient. For major and complex
bridges the degree of accuracy may require more exact calculations keeping in
mind that the intent is to establish relative and equitable costs between alternates
and not necessarily to require the accuracy of the Final Estimate. For major and
complex structures it may be necessary to develop unit costs from an analysis of
fabrication, storage, delivery and erection costs of the different components.
Provide calculated debris volume quantities for projects involving the demolition of
bridges.
Unit costs: Data available from the Department or contractors and suppliers
should be used to arrive at unit costs. Record the sources of all price data for later
January 1, 2021
13 21
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
reference. Base cost should be obtained from the BDR Estimating Section of
the Structures Manual.
Develop cost curves: For each alternative establish the most economical span
arrangement, i.e., minimum combined superstructure and substructure cost.
Retaining Wall Study: If retaining walls are present, include a retaining wall study
in the BDR. This study will conform to the work as specified in FDM 262 and the
Structures Manual.
Movable Bridges: Include information in the BDR on the type of equipment for the
machinery and electrical drive systems, together with a general description of the
control system to be utilized. Include a written description and preliminary layouts
of system components. Utilize acronyms and terminology as defined in AASHTO
Movable Bridge Inspection, Evaluation, and Maintenance Manual, 2nd
Edition.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Describe in the BDR the facilities to be provided
and the means to be used to comply with ADA requirements and FDM 222, 223,
and 224.
For rehabilitation project plans, include the BDR stage in the plans and written
descriptions of those system components to be modified from the existing configuration,
along with plans of the existing configuration. Submittal of information described in the
previous paragraph is not required unless the electrical and mechanical configuration is
modified from the existing configuration.
121.9.2 Format
The report is to use standard, letter-size pages with any larger sheets or drawings folded
to fit the report size. The report is to be neatly written and the contents presented in a
logical sequence with narrative, as required, to explain the section contents. Provide an
Executive Summary to compare the relative features and costs of the alternates
considered and recommend alternate(s) to be carried forward into the Final Structures
Plans Preparation phase.
The BDR is to be as self-contained as possible by including all arguments that establish,
justify, support, or prove the conclusions. It is acceptable to make reference to other
documents that will be included in the final submittal package; however, include any
documentation that will help emphasize a point, support a statement, or clarify a
conclusion. Such documentation may include drawings, clear and concise views, or other
such illustrated information.
January 1, 2021
14 22
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Address construction time requirements in the BDR and the effect that components,
systems, site constraints and conditions, or other site characteristics or criteria have upon
the construction time, whether additive or deductive.
For most projects, the 30% Plans must be an appendix to the BDR.
121.9.3 Aesthetics
General: Integrate three basic elements in any bridge design: efficiency, economy
and elegance. Regardless of size and location, the quality of the structure, its
aesthetic attributes and the resulting impact on its surroundings is to be carefully
considered. Achieving the desired results involves:
• Full integration of the three basic elements listed previously.
• The EOR's willingness to accept the challenge and opportunity presented.
A successful bridge design will then be elegant or aesthetically pleasing in
and of itself and will be compatible with the site by proper attention to form,
shapes and proportions. Attention to details is of primary importance in
achieving a continuity of line and form. Use the rule of "form following
function."
Consider the totality of the structure as well as its individual components and the
environment of its surroundings. A disregard for continuity or lack of attention to
detail can negate the best intent. Formulas cannot be established; however, ACI's
Aesthetic Considerations for Concrete Bridges and TRB's Bridge Aesthetics
Around the World, as well as authors such as David P. Billington can guide the
designer. A book developed by the Maryland Department of Transportation
entitled Aesthetic Bridges provides excellent guidance. In bridge aesthetics the
designer is dealing with the basic structure itself; not with enhancement, additions
or other superficial touches. The EOR is expected to be well read on the subject
of bridge aesthetics and committed to fulfilling both the structural and aesthetic
needs of the site.
The challenge differs for major and minor structures. Indeed, the challenge may
be greater the smaller the project. Major structures, because of their longer spans,
taller piers, or curving geometry often offer inherent opportunities not available for
minor bridges.
Some basic guidelines where aesthetics may play a more important role are:
(a) Bridges highly visible to large numbers of users (maritime and motorists).
January 1, 2021
15 23
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
(b) Bridges located in or adjacent to parks, recreational areas, or other major
public gathering points.
(c) Pedestrian bridges.
(d) Bridges in urban areas in or adjacent to commercial and residential areas.
(e) Multi-bridge projects, such as interchanges, or corridors should attain
conformity of theme and unifying appearance. Avoid abrupt changes in
structural features.
Considering these guidelines, the District will determine the level of aesthetic effort
warranted on a project early in its development. When significant aesthetic
expense is proposed, such as is the case with Level Three (Level of Aesthetics),
Federally funded projects require legitimate written justification.
Levels of Aesthetics:
Normally the District will establish one of the following three general levels of
aesthetic consideration and effort at each structure's site:
• Level One: Consists of cosmetic improvements to conventional
Department bridge types, such as the use of color pigments in the concrete,
texturing the surfaces, modifications to fascia walls, beams, and surfaces,
or more pleasing shapes for columns and caps.
• Level Two: The emphasis is on full integration of efficiency, economy and
elegance in all bridge components and the structure as a whole.
Consideration should be given to structural systems that are inherently
more pleasing, such as hammerhead or "T" shaped piers, oval or polygonal
shaped columns, integral caps, piers in lieu of bents, smooth transitions at
superstructure depth change locations, box-type superstructures,
concealed drain pipes, conduits and utilities.
• Level Three: The emphasis in this level applies more to the overall
aesthetics when passing through or under an interchange or at other sites
such as historic or highly urbanized areas where landscaping or unique
neighborhood features are to be considered. The bridge itself must comply
with Level Two requirements. This level of work may require, at the
District's option, a sub-consultant (architect to consider adjacent building
styles, and landscape themes) with the necessary expertise and credentials
to perform the desired work.
These aesthetic levels are not exclusive. For example, where the EOR believes a
specific landscape feature might significantly enhance bridge site elegance, even
on a Level 1 design, the recommendation should be offered for the Department's
January 1, 2021
16 24
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
consideration. For aesthetic Levels 2 and 3, public input into this issue may be
appropriate. The EOR may recommend particular public involvement to the
Department for consideration or the district might specify such efforts at specific
times during the BDR and final plan development phase of the project.
Include a summary of aesthetic considerations for the structure and the site in the
BDR. The summary consists of sketches or drawings of recommended treatment
as well as the options considered in the aesthetic study but not recommended as
appropriate. Also include an estimate of cost to implement the recommended
aesthetic treatment in the summary.
The default condition for new steel bridges is uncoated weathering steel where site
conditions permit (See SDG 1.3.2). Use an Inorganic Zinc Coating System where
site conditions preclude uncoated weathering steel and may be used elsewhere
with approval of the Chief Engineer. Use of a High Performance Coating System
to any extent for Steel bridges requires written approval from the Chief Engineer.
121.9.4 Construction and Maintenance Considerations
Evaluate all viable structure concepts for constructability. Consider items such as
member sizes, handling, fabricating, and transporting members as well as maintenance
of traffic, construction staging, equipment access, equipment requirements. Perform a
special evaluation to insure against potential problems that may occur in obtaining permits
and equipment to transport long and heavy members from point of manufacture to the
project site. Contact the Department's Road Use Permits Office for questions concerning
the feasibility of transporting long and heavy structural components. Also, take into
account considerations for future maintenance inspection in the structure's design.
Include those considerations described in FDM 121.15 and the requirements of the
Structures Manual. All special construction and maintenance requirements should be
identified and appropriately considered in any concepts recommended for design. A
design is able to be inspected properly when it permits safe inspector access to all
portions of the structure using equipment available to District Structures Maintenance
personnel.
121.9.5 Historical Significance Considerations
When an older bridge is considered for rehabilitation or replacement, the Environmental
Management Office will evaluate the historical significance of the structure. A structure
may be historically significant due to some of the following characteristics:
January 1, 2021
17 25
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
The structure may be an historic example in the development of engineering.
The crossing may be historically significant.
The bridge may be associated with an historical property or area.
The bridge might be associated with significant events or circumstances.
National Register of Historic Places or on a state or local historical register. If it is
determined that the structure is historically significant, then the project should be
developed to preserve the historic character of the structure.
121.9.6 Bridge Security
Perform a refined evaluation of all new Category 2 bridges identified in a PD&E study as
critical, landmark or signature bridges to determine if anti-terrorist countermeasures are
to be included as part of the design. Contact the SDO and the State Maintenance Office
for guidance and assistance. Minimize the bridge vulnerability through alternative
designs developed in the BDR. Design countermeasures to minimize the effectiveness
of explosives. Minimize vulnerability to shape charges and vehicle bombs. Maximize the
use of structural redundancy and continuity to limit structural damage.
Countermeasures designed into the bridge alternatives must meet one or more of the
following objectives:
Protect structure from blast effects,
Maximizing explosive standoff distance,
Denial of access,
Minimizing time-on-target,
Selective protection of the structural integrity of key members, or
Structural redundancy.
Use one or more of the following countermeasure strategies in the design:
Deter attacks by the possibility of exposure, capture or failure of the attacker due
to visible countermeasures,
Detect potential attacks before they occur and provide the appropriate response force,
Defend the bridge by delaying and distancing the attacker from the bridge and
protecting the bridge from the effects of weapons, fire and vehicle and vessel impacts,
or
January 1, 2021
18 26
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Design the bridge to minimize the potential effects of Weapons of Mass
Destruction (WMDs) and conventional explosives, fire and vehicle and vessel
impacts.
Structural members that are fracture critical or are cable stays, cable stay pylons, hollow
boxes, single columns, twin wall columns and thin wall columns require design
modification to reduce the potential impact of explosions. Access into cable stay pylons,
box superstructures and movable bridge machinery require heavy doors with secure lock
systems. Bridges with essential communication utilities and or gas lines require the
design to minimize risk to the utility.
121.9.7 Alternative Designs
The use of alternative designs for some larger or complex projects may result in more
competitive bids and lower costs. Accordingly, the EOR is to evaluate benefits from
alternatives for the particular structure being developed and provide a recommendation
for or against preparing alternative designs. Support the alternative designs
recommended by the evaluations included in the BDR. As a guide, consider the following
in evaluating justification for alternative designs:
Alternative designs are to be considered for all structures that cost more than $25
Million and a difference in alternate material (steel versus concrete) construction
costs that are within twice the cost of producing the alternate plans. For example,
alternative designs would be warranted if the additional preliminary engineering
cost for final plans preparation is $1.5 million per alternate and the difference
between the construction cost estimates utilizing the Department estimating
practices in the BDR was less than $3 million.
For bridges that cost less than $25 million consider alternative designs when project
issues reflect possible advantages (i.e., TTCP, A+B) from competitive bids.
For bridges estimated to cost more than $10 million consider evaluation of
alternative designs whenever a unique design concept is proposed until such time
that a bid history is established for the unique design.
Projects containing multiple bridges with a reasonable mixture of concrete and
steel designs do not require alternate designs.
Steel box structures and steel plate girders should be evaluated including the differences
in corrosion potential. Box Girders are preferred over plate girders when located in
extremely aggressive environments.
January 1, 2021
19 27
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.9.8 Conclusions and Recommendations
With due consideration for all applicable data, the engineer is required to recommend the
final bridge design system for the site. Thorough justification for the selection will be
presented which examines each element of data, and the total estimated construction
cost of the recommended design must be indicated in the BDR. For most projects,
support the recommended design by thirty percent plans (preliminary) as an appendix to
the BDR.
The following sections will define, clarify and list the information necessary to produce an
acceptable and reproducible set of contract documents (special provisions, bridge
contract drawings) ready for advertisement and construction. The production of a bridge
project commences with the Bridge Development Report (BDR) and ends with complete
Contract Documents.
121.9.9 30% Structures Plans
The 30% Structures Plans should be submitted with the Bridge Development Report for
most structures. The consultant’s scope of services should clearly state at what point are
the 30% plans to be submitted. If the 30% Structures Plans are submitted separately, the
BDR is required to contain enough information and drawings to depict the information
needed to properly determine the type, size and location of the bridge. Include the Phase
1 Geotechnical Report and the Hydraulic Report with the submittal containing the BDR.
The 30% Structures Plans should show, as a minimum, the following information:
General Notes Sheet: As many general notes as possible should be included on
this sheet at this stage. Add subsequent notes, when necessary, as the design
progresses (for example of General Notes, see Chapter 5 of the Structures
Detailing Manual).
Plan and Elevation Sheet: provide contents as required by the Structures Detailing
Manual.
Substructures: For end bents, piers or intermediate bents, show substructure
elements and sizes including all deviations from the typical dimensions, foundation
type including element spacing and the arrangement of piles or drilled shafts.
Superstructure: Include cross section showing lanes, shoulders, railings, slab
thickness, beam type and spacing and web depth for steel girders. If applicable,
show geometric changes in shapes of various components. Also show
construction phases and maintenance of traffic data, outline of the existing
January 1, 2021
20 28
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
structure and portions to be removed, and utilities (existing and proposed
as available).
Retaining Walls: Submit preliminary control drawings when proprietary or standard
cast-in-place walls are proposed. Include control drawings for all critical temporary
walls.
Bridge Hydraulics Recommendation Sheet.
Report of core borings.
Proposed construction sequence and methods indicate construction easements
and methods of construction access.
Preliminary aesthetic details.
Preliminary post-tensioning layouts.
Preliminary foundation layouts and pile/shaft data table.
Sidewalks: If provided, show preliminary accessible elements.
Any other special details required by the Engineer or details which are not normally
used on Department projects.
In addition to these requirements, the following items will be included for moveable
bridges: preliminary electrical and mechanical equipment layouts in plan and elevation,
submarine cable routing, and single line electrical diagrams including service voltage.
Rough size all equipment and submit the supporting calculations.
Include requests for Design Exceptions and Design Variations for structural design criteria
in the 30% Structures Plans Submittal. Design Exceptions and Design Variations are
required to be approved in accordance with FDM 122 with concurrence of the DSDO or
SDO as appropriate.
January 1, 2021
21 29
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.9 and replace with the following.
121.9 Bridge Feasibility Assessment/Structures Concept Plans
At the discretion of the Department, a Bridge Feasibility Assessment may be
necessary during the RFP development phase for the purpose of developing the
structures concept plans. When required, the assessment must target specific
critical bridge components to ensure that the preliminary information presented in
the concept plans can meet all of the project constraints depicted in the RFP.
For aesthetic and wildlife connectivity requirements, see RFP.
121.10 Bridge Development Report (BDR) Submittal Checklist
The Bridge Development Report (BDR) Submittal Checklist (Form 121-A, see FDM 103)
contains a list of the key supporting elements that are required for the preparation,
submittal and review of a BDR. Include this Checklist with the BDR when submitted for
review. The BDR Checklist consists of the following items:
Typical Sections for Roadway and Bridge:
The approved typical sections for both the bridge and roadway are required.
Roadway Plans:
Preliminary roadway plans covering the bridge vicinity are required.
Maintenance of Traffic Requirements:
Show the number of required lanes and the lane widths of all affected roadways in
the Maintenance of Traffic Plan.
Bridge Hydraulics Report and Bridge Hydraulics Recommendation Sheet:
Prepare the Bridge Hydraulics Report (BHR) and Bridge Hydraulics
Recommendation Sheet (BHRS) in accordance with the Drainage Manual.
Concurrence of the BHR by the District Drainage Engineer with the District
Structures Design Engineer for Category 1 Structures and State Structures Design
Engineer for Category 2 Structures is required.
January 1, 2021
22 30
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Geotechnical Report:
Prepare the Bridge Geotechnical Report (Phase I) in accordance with Chapter 3
of the Structures Design Guidelines and the Department’s Soils and
Foundation Handbook. Document a thorough investigation of all viable
foundation types for the bridge and retaining walls. Concurrence of the District
Geotechnical Engineer is required for Category 1 Structures and of both the State
and District Geotechnical Engineers for Category 2 Structures.
Bridge Corrosion Environment Report:
Prepare a Bridge Corrosion Report to determine the environmental classifications
for the structure in accordance with the Structures Design Guidelines and
receive approval from the District Materials Office.
Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil (GRS) Feasibility Assessment:
Assess GRS abutments to determine feasibility for all new bridges.
Precast Feasibility Assessment:
Investigate the use of either partial or full precast prefabricated bridge alternate(s)
with the specific purpose of accelerating bridge construction and reducing user
impacts.
Existing Bridge Plans:
A set of prints of the existing (preferably as-built) bridge plans should be included
for replacement structures and widenings. This is of particular importance for
widenings and phase construction. These plans are not usually necessary for
completely separate alignments or new interchanges unless the existing structures
either will be used for new construction activities or will infringe upon the
Contractor's allowed work zone.
Existing Bridge Inspection Report:
A copy of the latest existing Bridge Inspection Report and Structures Inventory and
Appraisal Form is required for all widenings and rehabilitations and may be
required for new structures. Identify the existing paint system(s) on all significant
metal elements of existing structures. Clearly delineate the presence of lead-
based paint and asbestos.
Existing Bridge Load Rating:
A copy of the latest existing Bridge Load Rating is required for all widenings and
rehabilitations.
January 1, 2021
23 31
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Wildlife Connectivity:
Describe the decision to include or exclude wildlife connectivity features into the
design. The discussion for excluding a wildlife connectivity feature should
summarize coordination with the Environmental Management or Permit office (or
may be an attached summary memo from one of these offices). The discussion
for including wildlife connectivity should refer to the Wildlife Crossing Guidelines,
commitments made during PD&E and any other documentation regarding the
wildlife connectivity related to the bridge (or may be an attached summary memo
from the Environmental Management or Permit office).
Utility Requirements:
Identify proposed utility attachments to the structure as well as all existing and
proposed utilities in the vicinity of the structure. Follow the requirements of the
Department's Utility Accommodation Manual regarding attachments to the
structure.
Railroad Requirements:
Identify existing and future railroad requirements. This will include all clearances
and crash wall or other construction parameters. Include copies of
correspondence with the Railroad Agency.
Retaining Wall and Bulkhead Requirement:
Identify permanent and temporary retaining wall requirements, and show the
proposed type of wall. Also identify the type, location and extent of temporary walls
to accommodate phased construction and maintenance of traffic.
For water crossings where erosion and wave action is anticipated, identify the type,
location and extent of bulkhead production. Include the proposed tie-back and
anchor system in the submittal.
Lighting Requirements:
Identify proposed lighting on or under the structure.
ADA Access Requirements:
Identify ADA access requirements that affect the structure.
Other:
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.10.
January 1, 2021
24 32
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.11 Final Plans and Specifications Preparation
121.11.1 General
Within this phase of work, for both Category 1 and 2 Structures, there are three phases
of work; viz., 60% Substructure submittal or 60% Structure Plans, 90% Structure Plans
and 100% Structures Plans and Specifications. For projects where preapproved
proprietary wall systems cannot be used and fully designed proprietary wall plans are
required, submit approved control drawings to the appropriate proprietary wall companies
as soon as possible and no later than the 60% substructure submittal. Send a copy of
this submission to the DSDO or SDO as appropriate.
At any time during the project development, the reviewer may require submittal of design
calculations. All Electronic Review Comments (ERC) must be resolved to the
Department’s satisfaction.
121.11.2 60% Substructure Submittal / 60% Structures Plans
This submittal phase is divided into two distinct parts; viz., the 60% Substructure
Submittal (required for all projects) and the 60% Structures Plans for Category 2
Structures and some Category 1 Structures.
60% Substructure Submittal:
This submittal is required for every project and should be made a part of the 60%
Structures Plans phase when that phase is part of the project. The submission is
only a partial plans set. The purpose of this submittal is to communicate essential
project information to the Geotechnical and Hydraulic Engineers so that all
remaining calculations can be performed using actual structural shapes, loads, and
dimensions. Plan sheets required for this submittal include: Plan & Elevation,
Bridge Hydraulics Recommendation Sheet, Boring Logs, Foundation layout,
Substructure Plans, and draft technical specifications.
60% Substructure Submittal Contents:
• Foundation Layouts
• Foundation Installation Notes
• Pile/Drilled Shaft Installation Table
• Footing Concrete Outlines (All Variations)
January 1, 2021
25 33
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
• Pier Concrete Outline (All Variations)
• Wall Plans - Control Drawings
• Pile Details
• Lateral Stability Analysis Completed
• Phase II Geotechnical Report
• Draft Technical Specifications
• Reinforcement of Footing and Column
• Post-Tensioning Details
• Plan and Elevation Sheet
• Bridge Hydraulics Recommendation Sheet
• Boring Logs
60% Structures Plans:
When a 60% Structures Plans submittal is required, all comments from earlier
reviews will have been resolved. At this phase, the design should be 90%
complete and the plans, 60% complete. In addition to the documents required for
the 60% Substructure Submittal, the 60% Structures include the following details
as applicable in the plans: final concrete outlines of all individual components,
major reinforcing steel, final post-tensioning layouts, steel box/I-girder details,
segmental concrete box details, bearing details, seismic details, details of
congested areas, details of unique features, accessible pedestrian facilities details,
and other details as required. For moveable bridges the following additional
information is required: electrical calculations (for generator size, service voltage
drop, short circuit, service size, automatic transfer switch), single line diagram
showing equipment sizes and utilities, conduit and wire sizes, panelboard
schedules, and light fixture schedules.
121.11.3 90% Structures Plans
Upon approval of the BDR/30% Structures Plans or 60% Structures Plans, as applicable,
90% Structures Plans begin. At this stage of plans development, the EOR will have
resolved the 30% and 60% Structures Plans review comments and developed the plans
for completion. The design and plan production is required to be 100% complete. This
submittal will include prints of the completed plans, Estimated Quantities Report, design
calculations, Final Phase II Geotechnical Report, Addendums to Hydraulic Report and, if
January 1, 2021
26 34
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
appropriate, Technical Special Provisions. No sheet or detail should be missing at this
stage.
121.11.4 100% Structures Plans and Specifications
After resolution of the 90% Structures Plan comments, the EOR will make all authorized
changes necessary to complete the plans and Technical Special Provisions. The EOR
will provide a list of all changes made to the Plans or Specifications that were not directly
related to the 90% Structures Plans review comments. The intent is to help minimize the
Department's review time and to help the Department's review office to focus on only
those new items or details proposed by the EOR. This will, in turn, help to expedite the
project's authorization.
The 100% Structures Plans submittal is divided into two distinct phases. First, plans and
technical special provisions are submitted 30 days prior to the District's Plans Production
Date. Second, once notified by the Department, the plans and all other documents are
submitted to the District.
Within the 30-day period allotted, the EOR will receive notification either of additional
changes/corrections to be made or to submit the Final Plans as they are. If at any time
during the 30-day period the EOR finds additional changes/corrections that should be
made, the structures design office responsible for plans approval (either the DSDO) or
the SDO as appropriate) is required to be notified for discussion and resolution.
Once all changes/corrections are made, or if no changes/corrections are necessary, the
EOR will submit all work to the District prior to or on the Plans Production Date. Submittal
of this stage of the work will include the plans ,sealed in accordance with FDM 130, sealed
Technical Special Provisions (if required), and Estimated Quantities Report.
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.11. See the RFP for plans submittal requirements.
January 1, 2021
27 35
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.12 Independent Peer Review of Bridges
An Independent Peer Review (IPR) is used to validate the design of structures or portions
thereof as defined below. The designated IPR firm will have no involvement with the
project other than conducting the IPR and is required to be pre-qualified in accordance
with Rule 14-75 of the Florida Administrative Code.
The Department may require an IPR for conventional projects. Consult with the
SDO when determining the need for such reviews. Consideration of when to
require an IPR include, but is not limited to, the following:
• The introduction of new complex details or structure types.
• Work being performed that is outside the normal structure type designed
by the selected consultant.
• Structures using complex details within standard bridge types (e.g. integral
piers, straddle piers, skewed superstructures).
An IPR is required for Cost Savings Initiatives involving Category 2 Structures.
The IPR function must be performed by a single independent engineering firm
other than the engineer responsible for the design. The IPR must include:
• The superstructure and substructure for bridges consisting of Category 2
superstructures.
• Only the substructure for bridges where the superstructure is Category 1,
but the substructure is Category 2.
• The superstructure and substructure for bridges designed for vessel
collision. The IPR must include all spans or continuous units subject to
vessel collision.
• The superstructure and substructure on bridges for which the
superstructure is subject to application of wave loads. The IPR must
include all spans or continuous units for which the superstructure is subject
to application of wave loads.
An IPR is required for the following structures and components of non-Department-
owned projects constructed within, under or over State Road right-of-way,
regardless of funding source:
• Category 1 (excluding miscellaneous structures) or Category 2 Structures
• Existing bridge retrofits and modifications regardless of bridge category
• Bridge cladding components and attachments
January 1, 2021
28 36
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete the above paragraph and replace with the following:
An Independent Department Review (IDR) is required for all Category 2 Structures.
When a firm is designated by the Department to conduct the IDR, the firm will have no
other involvement with the project other than conducting the IDR.
The peer review is intended to be a comprehensive, thorough independent verification of
the original work. An independent peer review is not simply a check of the EOR’s plans
and calculations; it is an independent verification of the complete design, including but
not limited to an evaluation of all nodal forces, using different programs and independent
processes than what was used by the EOR. In addition, all independent peer reviews
must include but are not limited to the independent confirmation of the following when
applicable:
Compatibility of bridge geometry with roadway geometrics including typical
sections, horizontal alignment, and vertical alignment. Minimum lateral offsets and
vertical clearance requirements.
Compatibility of construction phasing with Traffic Control Plans.
Conflicts with underground and overhead utilities.
Compliance with AASHTO, Department and FHWA design requirements.
Conformity to Department Standard Plans.
Structural Analysis Methodology, design assumptions, and independent
confirmation of design results including verification of the design thru all phases of
construction.*
Global and local analyses including nodal forces, considering all structural
members, connections/nodes and boundary conditions consistent with the
structure type.*
Design results/recommendations (independent verification of the design).*
Completeness and accuracy of bridge plans.
Technical Special Provisions, and Modified Special Provisions where necessary.
Constructability assessment limited to looking at fatal flaws in design approach.
* When Category 2 elements are designed with software using refined analyses
(e.g. Grid, Finite Element Method), the peer review consultant is required to verify
the design results by a different program/method.
January 1, 2021
29 37
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
In addition to the requirements of FDM 121.11.3 and 121.11.4, include the following
documents with plan submittals for Category 2 bridges requiring an independent peer
review:
90% Plan Submittals
• A tabulated list of all review comments from the independent review
engineer and responses from the originator of the design.
• A standard peer review certification letter following the format presented in
Form 121-B (see FDM 103) signed by the independent review engineer.
All outstanding/unresolved comments and issues presented in this letter are
required to be resolved and implemented prior to the 100% plan submittal.
• A copy of the Department-issued Professional Services Qualification Letter,
Part 1, containing the Work Types in which the independent PEER review
firm has been qualified to work. The DSDE, for Category 1 bridge projects,
or the SSDE, for Category 2 bridge projects, will confirm with the
Procurement Office the independent PEER review firm’s prequalification
status of the appropriate Work Type.
100% Plan Submittals
• A certification letter following the format presented in Form 121-C (see FDM
103) signed and sealed by the independent review engineer stating that all
review comments have been adequately addressed and that the design is
in compliance with all Department and FHWA requirements.
• A copy of the Department-issued Professional Services Qualification Letter,
Part 1, containing the Work Types in which the independent PEER review
firm has been qualified to work. The DSDE, for Category 1 bridge projects,
or the SSDE, for Category 2 bridge projects, will confirm with the
Procurement Office the independent PEER review firm’s prequalification
status of the appropriate Work Type.
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.12 (2).
January 1, 2021
30 38
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.13 Plans Assembly
Consult the Structures Detailing Manual for plans assembly, materials, content of plans,
and other drafting information.
121.14 Plans Submittal
121.14.1 Schedule
The District Project Manager is responsible for establishing the schedule of submittals
with input from the EOR and either the DSDE for Category 1 or Structures Design Office
for Category 2 projects.
121.14.2 Submittal Schedule
BDR/30% Structures Plans
60% Substructure Submittal/60% Structures Plans
90% Structures Plans
100% Structures Plans
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.14.1 and 121.14.2. See the RFP for requirements.
121.14.3 Summary of Phase Submittals
Submittals made at various stages of project development are required to conform to a
uniform standard of completeness for each phase. Use Table 121.14.1 to prepare
deliverables for each stage of project development for fixed bridges. Use Table 121.14.1
and Table 121.14.2 to prepare deliverables for each stage of project development for
moveable bridges.
Table 121.14.1 and Table 121.14.2 give a listing of specific structure plan sheets to be
submitted at Bridge Development Report, 30%, 60%, 90% and 100% Plans stage. For
specific sheet content requirements, see Structures Detailing Manual Examples for
January 1, 2021
31 39
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Design-Bid-Build Projects. For sheets not covered by specific example, see general
description below for required level of completion.
Preliminary (P): Basic shapes, geometry and layout of specified members are
shown. Rebar and elevations are not required for Preliminary submittals. For
example, the outline drawing of an end bent with complete dimensions including
stationing, beam and pedestal layout but without pile layout dimensions or rebar.
Substantially Complete (S): Shapes, geometry and layout have been finalized.
Design is 90% complete with most rebar, plate sizes, bolt patterns, concrete
strengths finalized and incorporated into the plans. For example, an end bent
drawing with rebar, complete dimensions, pile and beam layout but without
elevations.
Complete but Subject to Change (C): The design, drawings and details are
complete for the specified component. Only reviewer-initiated changes should be
expected at this level. For example, an end bent drawing would be complete,
including all rebar callouts, elevations, dimensions.
Final (F): All drawings and designs are complete. No changes are expected at
this level. Plans are ready to be signed and sealed by the EOR.
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.14.3 and replace with the following:
121.14.3 Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals
Component Plan Submittals are required to conform to a uniform standard of
completeness for each submittal. Use Table 121.14.3 to prepare deliverables for
each component submittals for fixed bridges. Use Table 121.14.3 and Table
121.14.4 to prepare deliverables for component submittals for moveable bridges.
Unless otherwise shown in the RFP, Technical Proposals are required to include the
requirements of Table 121.14.3 and Table 121.14.4.
Submit component submittals per Table 121.14.3 and Table 121.14.4 (e.g.,
foundation, substructure and superstructure) for each bridge. Partial submittals of
individual elements within a bridge (e.g., End Bent 1, Pier 3, I-girder details) are not
permitted.
Table 121.14.3 and Table 121.14.4 give a listing of specific structure plan sheets to
be submitted at Technical Proposal, 90% and Final Plans stage. For specific sheet
content requirements, see Structures Detailing Manual Examples for Non-
January 1, 2021
32 40
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Conventional Projects. For sheets not covered by specific example, see general
description below for required level of completion.
Preliminary (P): Basic shapes, geometry and layout of specified members
are shown. Rebar and elevations are not required for Preliminary submittals.
For example, the outline drawing of an end bent with complete dimensions
including stationing, beam and pedestal layout but without pile layout
dimensions or rebar.
Substantially Complete (S): Shapes, geometry and layout have been
finalized. Design is 90% complete with most rebar, plate sizes, bolt patterns,
concrete strengths finalized and incorporated into the plans. For example,
an end bent drawing with rebar, complete dimensions, pile and beam layout
but without elevations.
Complete but Subject to Change (C): The design, drawings and details
are complete for the specified component. Only reviewer-initiated changes
should be expected at this level. For example, an end bent drawing would
be complete, including all rebar callouts, elevations, and dimensions.
Final (F): All drawings and designs are complete. No changes are expected at this
level. Plans are ready to be signed and sealed by the EOR.
January 1, 2021
33 41
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.1 Summary of Phase Submittals
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on structure type.
ITEM BDR 30%
60%
Substr.
Submittal
60%
Structures
Plans*
90% 100%
Cover Sheet P S S C F
Key Sheet P S S C F
Sheet Index P S S C F
General Notes P S S C F
Standard Plans Index Sheets F F
Surface Finish Details S S C F
Riprap Details S S C F
Slope Protection Details S S C F
Plan and Elevation S S C C C F
Typical Section S S C C C F
Hydraulics Recommendation P P S S C F
Construction Sequence S S C C F
Borings C C C C F
Foundation Layout S S S C F
Pile/Shaft Data Table P S S C F
End Bent P S S C F
End Bent Details S S C F
Wing Wall Details S S C F
Pier P P S S C F
Pier Details P S S C F
Footing P S S C F
Intermediate Bent P P S S C F
Intermediate Bent Details S S C F
Drilled Shaft Details P S S C F
Finish Grade Elevations C C F
Camber/Build-up/Deflection Diagrams C C F
Framing Plan P S C F
Superstructure Plan S C F
Superstructure Details S C F
Erection Sequence P P S S C F
P/S Beam Data Tables S C F
Cross Frames/Diaphragm Details S C F
Steel Girder Details P S C F
P/T Systems P S C F
Bearing Details S C F
Expansion Joint Details S C F
Approach Slab Details S C F
Reinforcing Bar List C F
Conduit and Inspection Lighting
Details P C F
Vermin Guard S C F
Wall Control Drawings P*** S S C F
Wall Details P S S C F
Temporary Critical Wall Drawings P P S S C F
Wall Data Tables S S C F
Temp. Bridge Plan and Elevation P P C F
Temp. Bridge Foundation Layout P P C F
January 1, 2021
34 42
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.1 Summary of Phase Submittals (continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on structure type.
ITEM BDR 30%
60%
Substr.
Submittal
60%
Structures
Plans*
90% 100%
Segment Joint Coordinates/Deck
Elev. S C F
Segment Layout P S C F
Typical Segment Dimensions P P C C F
Typical Segment Reinforcing S C F
Pier Segment Dimensions P P C C F
Pier Segment Reinforcing ** S C F
Abutment Segment Dimensions P P C C F
Abutment Segment Reinforcing ** S C F
Expansion Joint Segment
Dimensions P S C F
Expansion Joint Segment
Reinforcing ** S C F
Deviation Segment Dimensions P C C F
Deviation Segment Reinforcing ** S C F
Post Tensioning Layout P C C F
P/T Details P P S C F
Transverse P/T Details P C C F
Bulkhead Details P S C F
Drainage Layout P S C F
Drainage Details P S C F
Load Rating Summary Sheet C F
Developmental Standard Plans C C C F F
Existing Bridge Plans F ‡‡ F ‡‡ F ‡‡ F F
Status Key:
P – Preliminary
S – Substantially Complete
C – Complete but subject to change
F – Final
* – 60% Structures Plan submittals are required for all Category 2 and some Category 1 bridges. See FDM 121.11.2 for
additional information
** – May require integrated drawings
*** – Control Plans only showing geometry, stationing, and offsets
‡ – Where required for project
‡‡ – Widenings and projects with phased construction
January 1, 2021
35 43
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.2 Summary of Phase Submittals - Movable Bridges
For approach span requirements, see Table 121.14.1.
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
ITEM BDR 30%
60%
Structures
Plans*
90% 100%
Bascule Pier Notes P S C F
Bascule Span Elevation P S S C F
Leaf Clearance Diagrams P S C F
Bridge Railing Clearance Diagrams P S C F
Bascule Pier North Elevation View P S S C F
Bascule Pier South Elevation View P S S C F
Bascule Pier East Elevation View P S S C F
Bascule Pier West Elevation View P S S C F
Bascule Pier Deck Plan P S S C F
Bascule Pier Deck Elevations P S S C F
Bascule Pier Trunnion Level Plan P S S C F
Bascule Pier Machinery Level Plan P S S C F
Bascule Pier Pit Plan P S S C F
Bascule Pier Footing Plan P S S C F
Bascule Pier Longitudinal Sections P S S C F
Bascule Pier Transverse Sections P S S C F
Bascule Pier Railing Details P C F
Bascule Pier Stair Details P C F
Bascule Pier Trunnion Access Platform Details ‡ ‡ S C F
Bascule Pier Finger Joints P C F
Bascule Pier Deck Level Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier Trunnion Level Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier Machinery Level Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier Pit Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier Footing Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier North Elevation Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier South Elevation Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier East Elevation Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier West Elevation Reinforcing P C F
January 1, 2021
36 44
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.2 Summary of Phase Submittals - Movable Bridges (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
ITEM BDR 30%
60%
Structures
Plans*
90% 100%
Bascule Pier Longitudinal Section Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier Transverse Section Reinforcing P C F
Bascule Pier Reinforcing Bar List P C F
Control House General Notes P C F
Control house Reflected Ceiling Plan P C F
Control House Access Bridge Dimensions ‡ ‡ S C F
Control House Access Bridge Reinforcing ‡ ‡ S C F
Control House Access Bridge Bar List ‡ ‡ S C F
Control Tower Floor Plans P S S C F
Control Tower Sections P S S C F
Control Tower Reinforcing Plans P C F
Control Tower Reinforcing Elevations P C F
Control Tower Section Reinforcing P C F
Control Tower Bar List P C F
Control Tower Schedules P C F
Control Tower Elevations P S S C F
Control Tower Building Sections P C F
Control Tower Details P C F
Control Tower Stair Plans P C F
Control Tower Stair Sections P C F
Control Tower Roof P C F
Control Tower Door and Window Types and
Details P C F
Control Tower Architectural Details P C F
Control Tower HVAC Notes P C F
Control Tower HVAC and Plumbing Floor Plans P C F
Control Tower HVAC and Plumbing Elevations P C F
Bascule Leaf Notes S C F
Bascule Leaf Framing Plan and Longitudinal
Section P S S C F
Bascule Leaf Transverse Sections at Floorbeams P S S C F
Bascule Leaf Transverse Sections at Trunnion P S S C F
January 1, 2021
37 45
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.2 Summary of Phase Submittals - Movable Bridges (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
ITEM BDR 30%
60%
Structures
Plans*
90% 100%
Bascule Leaf Transverse Sections at
Counterweight Girders P S S C F
Main Girder Elevation P S S C F
Main Girder Details P C F
Main Girder Web Geometry and Camber Details P C F
Main Girder Force Diagrams P C F
Main Girder Reaction Influence Lines P C F
Main Girder Moment Influence Lines P C F
Floorbeam Details P C F
Counterweight Girder Details P C F
Stringer Details P C F
Lateral Bracing Details P C F
Counterweight Bracing Plan and Details P C F
Counterweight Bracing Sections and Details P C F
Counterweight Plan P C F
Counterweight Longitudinal Sections P C F
Counterweight Transverse Sections P C F
Counterweight Details and Reinforcing Bar List P C F
Bridge Deck Panel Layout P C F
Bridge Deck Panel Sections P C F
Bridge Deck Panel Details P C F
Armored Joint Details P C F
Span Lock Housing Details P C F
Bascule Leaf Jacking Details and Notes P C F
Mechanical General Notes P S C F
Mechanical Equipment Schedules P S C F
Drive Machinery Layout P S C F
Machinery Support Details S C F
Trunnion Assembly Details P S C F
Open Gearing Details P S C F
January 1, 2021
38 46
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.2 Summary of Phase Submittals - Movable Bridges (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
ITEM BDR 30%
60%
Structures
Plans*
90% 100%
Rack/Rack Frames and Rack Pinion Details P S C F
Mechanical Bearing Details P S C F
Drive Hydraulic Cylinders Details P S C F
Hydraulic System Layout/Piping Details P S C F
Hydraulic Cylinder Support Assemblies P S C F
Hydraulic System Details P S C F
Live Load Shoe Details P S C F
Centering Device Details S C F
Span Lock Assembly Details P S C F
Control Tower – Control Console and Operator’s
Visualization Geometry Analysis Including CCTV
Locations
P S C F
Electrical General Notes P S C F
Electrical Site Plan P S C F
Conduit Riser Diagram P S C F
Single Line Diagram P S C F
Electrical Symbol Legend P S C F
Lighting and Equipment Plan (Including Control
Tower Lighting, Fire Detection and Lighting Panel
Schedules)
P S C F
Lightning Protection, Bonding, and Grounding
Plan P S C F
Navigation Lighting Plan P S C F
Communication Equipment Plan P S C F
Control Panel Details P S C F
Control Console Details P S C F
Block Diagram of Operating Sequence
Control System Architecture Diagram P
P
S
S
C
C
F
F
Schematic Diagrams of all Control Systems and
Interlocks P S C F
Control System I/O Points P S C F
Ladder Logic for PLC P C F
Submarine Cable/Submarine Cable Termination
Cabinet Details P S C F
January 1, 2021
39 47
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.2 Summary of Phase Submittals - Movable Bridges (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
ITEM BDR 30%
60%
Structures
Plans*
90% 100%
Fire and Security Panel Schematic Diagram P C C F
CCTV Plan and Elevation P C C F
Limit Switch Development P C C F
Conduit and Cable Schedule P C C F
Electrical Equipment Layout - Including but not
limited to Generators, Motors, Control Console,
Control Panels, and Motor Control Center.
P C C F
CCTV Layout P S F
Status Key:
P – Preliminary
S – Substantially Complete
C – Complete but subject to change
F – Final
* – 60% Structures Plan submittals are required for all movable bridges. See FDM 121.11.2 for additional information
‡ – Where required for project
January 1, 2021
40 48
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.3 Summary of Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based structure type.
Foundation Submittal
ITEM Technical
Proposal 90% Final
Cover Sheet C F
Key Sheet C F
Sheet Index C F
General Notes S C F
Standard Plans Index Sheets F F
Surface Finish Details C F
Riprap Details C F
Slope Protection Details C F
Plan and Elevation P C F
Typical Section P C F
Hydraulics Recommendation P C F
Construction Sequence P C F
Borings C F
Foundation Layout P C F
Pile/Shaft Data Table C F
Drilled Shaft Details C F
Temp. Bridge Foundation Layout P C F
Existing Bridge Plans F‡‡ F
Foundation Related Temporary Critical Wall Drawings P C F
Include in all submittals additional details and backup information necessary to substantiate the loading on the
foundations. Include a copy of the Geotechnical Report in all submittals.
‡‡ – Widenings and projects with phased construction
90% and Final submittals for category 2 bridges require an Independent Department Review.
January 1, 2021
41 49
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.3 Summary of Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based structure type.
Substructure Submittal
ITEM Technical
Proposal 90% Final
End Bent P C F
End Bent Details C F
Wing Wall Details C F
Pier P C F
Pier Details C F
Footing P C F
Intermediate Bent P C F
Intermediate Bent Details C F
Reinforcing Bar List C F
90% and Final submittals for category 2 bridges require an Independent Department Review.
January 1, 2021
42 50
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.3 Summary of Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based structure type.
Superstructure Submittal
ITEM Technical
Proposal 90% Final
Finish Grade Elevations C F
Camber/Build-up/Deflection Diagrams C F
Framing Plan C F
Superstructure Plan C F
Superstructure Details C F
Erection Sequence P‡ C F
P/S Beam Data Tables C F
Cross Frames/Diaphragm Details C F
Steel Girder Details P C F
P/T Systems P C F
Bearing Details C F
Expansion Joint Details C F
Approach Slab Details C F
Reinforcing Bar List C F
Conduit and Inspection Lighting Details C F
Vermin Guard C F
Wall Control Drawings P C F
Wall Details C F
Non-Foundation Related Temporary Critical Wall Drawings P C F
Wall Data Tables C F
Temp. Bridge Plan and Elevation P C F
Segment Joint Coordinates/Deck Elev. C F
Segment Layout P C F
Typical Segment Dimensions P C F
Typical Segment Reinforcing C F
Pier Segment Dimensions P C F
Pier Segment Reinforcing ** C F
Abutment Segment Dimensions P C F
Abutment Segment Reinforcing ** C F
Expansion Joint Segment Dimensions P C F
Expansion Joint Segment Reinforcing ** C F
Deviation Segment Dimensions P C F
Deviation Segment Reinforcing ** C F
Post Tensioning Layout P C F
January 1, 2021
43 51
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.3 Summary of Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based structure type.
Superstructure Submittal (Continued)
ITEM Technical
Proposal 90% Final
P/T Details P C F
Transverse P/T Details C F
Bulkhead Details C F
Drainage Layout C F
Drainage Details C F
Load Rating Summary Sheet C F
Developmental Standard Plans F F
Existing Bridge Plans F‡‡ F
90% and Final submittals for category 2 bridges require an Independent Department Review.
Status Key:
P – Preliminary
S – Substantially Complete
C – Complete but subject to change
F – Final
** – May require integrated drawings
‡ – For geometrically constrained sites, show temporary stability towers in the vicinity of the underlying roadways
consistent with the Traffic Control Plans. Also show temporary stability towers within navigable waterways.
‡‡ – Widenings and projects with phased construction
January 1, 2021
44 52
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.4 Summary of Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals – Movable Bridges
For approach span and foundation submittal requirements see Table 121.14.3.
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
Substructure Submittal
ITEM Technical
Proposal 90% Final
Bascule Pier Notes C F
Bascule Span Elevation P C F
Leaf Clearance Diagrams C F
Bridge Railing Clearance Diagrams C F
Bascule Pier North Elevation View P C F
Bascule Pier South Elevation View P C F
Bascule Pier East Elevation View P C F
Bascule Pier West Elevation View P C F
Bascule Pier Deck Plan P C F
Bascule Pier Deck Elevations P C F
Bascule Pier Trunnion Level Plan P C F
Bascule Pier Machinery Level Plan P C F
Bascule Pier Pit Plan P C F
Bascule Pier Footing Plan P C F
Bascule Pier Longitudinal Sections P C F
Bascule Pier Transverse Sections P C F
Bascule Pier Railing Details C F
Bascule Pier Stair Details C F
Bascule Pier Trunnion Access Platform Details ‡ C F
Bascule Pier Finger Joints C F
Bascule Pier Deck Level Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier Trunnion Level Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier Machinery Level Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier Pit Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier Footing Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier North Elevation Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier South Elevation Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier East Elevation Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier West Elevation Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier Longitudinal Section Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier Transverse Section Reinforcing C F
Bascule Pier Reinforcing Bar List C F
90% and Final submittals for category 2 bridges require an Independent Department Review.
January 1, 2021
45 53
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.4 Summary of Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals – Movable Bridges (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
Superstructure Submittal
ITEM Technical
Proposal 90% Final
Control House General Notes C F
Control house Reflected Ceiling Plan C F
Control House Access Bridge Dimensions ‡ C F
Control House Access Bridge Reinforcing C F
Control House Access Bridge Bar List C F
Control Tower Floor Plans P C F
Control Tower Sections P C F
Control Tower Reinforcing Plans C F
Control Tower Reinforcing Elevations C F
Control Tower Section Reinforcing C F
Control Tower Bar List C F
Control Tower Schedules C F
Control Tower Elevations P C F
Control Tower Building Sections C F
Control Tower Details C F
Control Tower Stair Plans C F
Control Tower Stair Sections C F
Control Tower Roof C F
Control Tower Door and Window Types and Details C F
Control Tower Architectural Details C F
Control Tower HVAC Notes C F
Control Tower HVAC and Plumbing Floor Plans C F
Control Tower HVAC and Plumbing Elevations C F
Bascule Leaf Notes C F
Bascule Leaf Framing Plan and Longitudinal Section P C F
January 1, 2021
46 54
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.4 Summary of Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals – Movable Bridges (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
Superstructure Submittal (Continued)
ITEM Technical
Proposal 90% Final
Bascule Leaf Transverse Sections at Floorbeams P C F
Bascule Leaf Transverse Sections at Trunnion P C F
Bascule Leaf Transverse Sections at Counterweight Girders P C F
Main Girder Elevation P C F
Main Girder Details C F
Main Girder Web Geometry and Camber Details C F
Main Girder Force Diagrams C F
Main Girder Reaction Influence Lines C F
Main Girder Moment Influence Lines C F
Floorbeam Details C F
Counterweight Girder Details C F
Stringer Details C F
Lateral Bracing Details C F
Counterweight Bracing Plan and Details C F
Counterweight Bracing Sections and Details C F
Counterweight Plan C F
Counterweight Longitudinal Sections C F
Counterweight Transverse Sections C F
Counterweight Details and Reinforcing Bar List C F
Bridge Deck Panel Layout C F
Bridge Deck Panel Sections C F
Bridge Deck Panel Details C F
Armored Joint Details C F
Span Lock Housing Details C F
Bascule Leaf Jacking Details and Notes C F
Mechanical General Notes P C F
Mechanical Equipment Schedules P C F
Drive Machinery Layout P C F
Machinery Support Details C F
January 1, 2021
47 55
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.4 Summary of Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals – Movable Bridges (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
Superstructure Submittal (Continued)
ITEM Technical
Proposal 90% Final
Trunnion Assembly Details P C F
Open Gearing Details P C F
Rack/Rack Frames and Rack Pinion Details P C F
Mechanical Bearing Details P C F
Drive Hydraulic Cylinders Details P C F
Hydraulic System Layout/Piping Details P C F
Hydraulic Cylinder Support Assemblies P C F
Hydraulic System Details P C F
Live Load Shoe Details P C F
Centering Device Details C F
Span Lock Assembly Details P C F
Control Tower – Control Console and Operator’s Visualization Geometry
Analysis Including CCTV Locations P C F
Electrical General Notes P C F
Electrical Site Plan P C F
Conduit Riser Diagram P C F
Single Line Diagram P C F
Electrical Symbol Legend P C F
Lighting and Equipment Plan (Including Control Tower Lighting, Fire
Detection and Lighting Panel Schedules) P C F
Lightning Protection, Bonding, and Grounding Plan P C F
Navigation Lighting Plan P C F
Communication Equipment Plan P C F
Control Panel Details P C F
Control Console Details P C F
Block Diagram of Operating Sequence P C F
Control System Architecture Diagram P C F
Schematic Diagrams of all Control Systems and Interlocks P C F
January 1, 2021
48 56
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.14.4 Summary of Design-Build Technical Proposal and Component
Plan Submittals – Movable Bridges (Continued)
Provide the sheets listed as applicable based on machinery and electrical components utilized.
Superstructure Submittal (Continued)
ITEM Technical
Proposal 90% Final
Control System I/O Points P C F
Ladder Logic for PLC C F
Submarine Cable/Submarine Cable Termination Cabinet Details P C F
Fire and Security Panel Schematic Diagram P C F
CCTV Plan and Elevation P C F
Limit Switch Development P C F
Conduit and Cable Schedule P C F
Electrical Equipment Layout - Including but not limited to Generators, Motors,
Control Console, Control Panels, and Motor Control Center. P C F
CCTV Layout S F
Status Key:
P – Preliminary
S – Substantially Complete
C – Complete but subject to change
F – Final
‡ – Where required for project.
January 1, 2021
49 57
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.15 Review for Constructability and Maintainability
121.15.1 Purpose
The purpose of this review is to provide reasonable and practical use of fabrication and
construction techniques and equipment without overloading and overstressing
components, provide for proper material handling and transportation, provide safe
maintenance of traffic and provide an appropriate construction sequence. Additionally,
provide features which will retard bridge deterioration, permit reasonable access to all
parts of the bridge for inspection and performance evaluation and provide features to
facilitate replacement of damaged and deteriorated bridge components.
121.15.2 Responsibility
For Category 1 and 2 Structures, it will be the responsibility of the District Project
Manager, or his/her designee, to coordinate a review of both the 30% and 90% Structures
Plans submittals by the appropriate District Construction and Maintenance personnel for
constructability and maintainability. For Category 1 Structures, technical issues will be
resolved to the satisfaction of the appropriate DSDE. For Category 2 Structures, technical
issues will be resolved to the satisfaction of the SDO.
The Construction and Maintenance Offices should be given adequate time to perform
these reviews. All comments from these reviews will be addressed prior to the next
submittal and its subsequent review.
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.15 and see the RFP for requirements.
121.16 Review for Biddability
121.16.1 Purpose
To prevent construction problems, the District Construction Office will review the plans to
make certain the plans are clearly understandable and contain all pertinent notes. During
the biddability review, the Construction Office will check for the interface with the roadway
segment of the project, utility agreements and environmental permits.
January 1, 2021
50 58
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.16.2 Responsibility
For Category 1 and 2 Structures, it will be the responsibility of the District Project Manager
to coordinate a review of the 90% Structures Plan submittal. This review should occur at
the same time as the Phase III Plans submittal for the roadway segments of the project.
Additionally, for Category 2 Structures, it will be the responsibility of the SDO to coordinate
a review of the 90% Structures Plans submittal.
The Construction Offices should be given adequate time to perform these reviews. All
comments from these reviews are required to be addressed prior to the 100% Structures
Plans Stage submittal.
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.16.
121.17 Bridge Load Rating
Perform load rating analysis of new or existing bridges in accordance with the AASHTO
Manual for Bridge Evaluation as amended by the Structures Manual, Volume 1 and
the Bridge Load Rating Manual (Topic 850-010-035).
For new bridges the Engineer of Record is required to load rate the bridge(s) and submit
the calculations with the 90% plan submittal.
Prior to developing the scope-of-work for bridge widening or rehabilitation projects, the
Department or their consultant will determine the suitability of the bridge project using the
load rating. If the existing load rating is inaccurate or was performed using older methods
(e.g., load factor), perform a new load rating using the procedures outlined in the
Structures Manual, Volume 1 - Structures Design Guidelines, Chapter 7. Submit load
rating calculations for the entire structure (existing and new) with the 90% plan submittal
for the project.
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.17 and see the RFP for requirements.
January 1, 2021
51 59
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.18 Review of Non-Department-Owned Projects (New
Construction)
For portions of transportation projects on, under or over a Department-owned right-of-
way, regardless of funding source or owner, a Department review will be required. FHWA
review will be required whenever a privately funded or LAP structure crosses over an
interstate route, or when such work otherwise affects such a route; i.e., lane closures,
access, R/W changes. The extent of the Department and FHWA review is that:
Plans will meet all current clearance requirements (vertical and horizontal).
Review and approve the maintenance of traffic scheme for construction.
Securely fasten all attachments to the structure over the highway.
Design will be sealed by a licensed professional engineer employed by a
Department prequalified engineering firm.
Designs will be in accordance with applicable Department publications.
Plans will meet all District permit requirements and procedures.
Submit to FHWA for approval only projects over or affecting a NHS facility.
Department review for these structures will be performed by the DSDO for Category 1
and the SDO for Category 2 Structures. Structural reviews will be performed to the
same extent as reviews performed on Department projects to assure compliance with
the Department’s design criteria.
January 1, 2021
52 60
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.19 Precast Alternate Development
Modification for Non-Conventional Projects:
Delete FDM 121.19.
121.19.1 Precast Feasibility Assessment Questions:
Several negative responses to the following questions may indicate precasting is not
feasible for the project. In this case, provide a statement in the BDR stating that
precasting is not feasible and indicate the reasons why in order to satisfy the requirements
of FDM 121.9.1, #9.
Will precasting reduce traffic impacts? Factors may include: average traffic
volumes being affected, detour lengths and durations, lane reductions and
duration.
Is this structure likely to be on the critical path for construction of the project or is
this structure on a hurricane evacuation route which requires accelerated delivery?
Is the size of the project large enough to benefit from economy of scale, assembly
line construction processes, and is it large enough to capitalize on a construction
learning curve?
Is precasting practical given the project aesthetics when component lifting weights
are considered?
Is precasting practical given project variability? Factors may include: formwork
reuse, multiple construction methods and steps, and variable equipment
requirements.
Does the project site have space within FDOT R/W to use as a near-site casting
yard and can precast elements be hauled from likely near-site casting yard
locations to the site?
Can precast elements be hauled from likely off-site prestressed yard locations to
the site?
Are the lifting weights practical given the assumed equipment, construction
access, and construction methods?
Can connection details be developed with the following characteristics:
• Durable?
January 1, 2021
53 61
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
• Easily inspected during construction?
• Accommodates shaft/pile placement tolerances?
• Accommodates fit up?
• Accommodates differential camber (full-depth deck panels)?
121.19.2 Assessment Matrix
Table 121.19.1 is a tool that may be used in documenting the decision making process
for evaluation of precast construction versus conventional cast-in-place construction.
Table 121.19.2 is a sample Alternate Cost Summary Table indicating how to summarize
the component cost estimates and their sum.
Table 121.19.1 Sample Assessment Matrix
- example values in italics - PRECAST CONVENTIONAL
Selection Factor Factor
Weight (%)
Score
(0 to 5)
Weighted
Score*
Score
(0 to 5)
Weighted
Score*
Total Direct Costs 40 4 160 5 200
Total Indirect Costs 10 5 50 4 40
Factor 3 - Constructability 25 3 75 4 100
Factor 4 – Traffic Impacts 0
Factor 5 - Construction Duration 0
Factor 6 - Durability 0
Factor 7 – Environmental Impacts 10 5 50 2 20
Factor 8– Aesthetics 15 5 75 3 45
Factor 9 – Other 0
Factor 10 – Other 0
TOTAL (∑ Factor Weights = 100%) 100 410 405
TOTAL (Excluding Indirect Cost
Factor)** 90 360 365
*Weighted Score = Factor Weight x Score **See following explanation, Instructions “6.”
121.19.3 Assessment Matrix Instructions
List Selection Factors to be used to evaluate the applicability of alternates to
meet the goals of the project. Factors are project specific and always include Total
Direct Costs and Total Indirect Costs (road user costs) and may include some of
the following: Constructability, Traffic Impacts (e.g., Maintenance of Traffic,
January 1, 2021
54 62
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Detours, Traffic Delays), Construction Duration, Durability, Environmental Impacts,
and Aesthetics. Include other Factors as required to capture any unique project
characteristics that are not otherwise addressed. Note that as many or as few
criteria may be used in the assessment matrix as deemed appropriate by the
designer; though, a sufficient number of Selection Factors (i.e., criteria) are
required to provide a thorough evaluation of the alternates being considered to
meet the objectives of the project. When choosing selection factors and applying
factor weights avoid double counting benefits. For instance, indirect costs and
traffic impacts may be related selection factors.
Costs of precast versus conventional may be affected by:
Savings associated with labor rates and insurance costs for reduced time
working from a barge on a large water project.
Savings associated with structural efficiencies resulting from precasting
(e.g., composite dead loads in the case of shored deck casting).
Savings associated with simultaneous substructure and superstructure
component construction.
Savings associated with increased productivity rates of precasting.
Construct a two-dimensional table allowing one row for each Selection Factor and
two columns for each alternate, one for Score and one for Weighted Score.
Factor Weights to distinguish the level of importance of each criterion relative to
the other criteria in achieving the project objectives. Weighting the various factors
will usually require Department/District input. Distribute the Factor Weights such
that their sum is equal to 100%.
Score the relative difference between alternates. Range of scores can vary for a
given project (e.g., 0 to 5 or 0 to 10). Scoring may be accomplished by a committee
and then the average score for each Selection Factor entered into the matrix.
Calculate the Weighted Score by multiplying the Factor Weight by Score for each
alternate.
Total the Weighted Score columns: (1) Provide the absolute total of each column,
which includes the Indirect Costs Score and, (2) Provide the column total excluding
the contribution from the “Total Indirect Costs.” It is useful for management to
compare the impacts, both relative and in hard dollar amounts, of indirect costs on
bridge construction projects when making their decisions. The column with the
largest total weighted score theoretically indicates the alternate which most closely
meets the project objectives as implicated by the matrix construct.
January 1, 2021
55 63
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
Table 121.19.2 Sample Alternate Cost Summary
Alternate
Direct
Costs*
($)
Indirect Costs** Sum:
Direct +
∑Indirect
($)
Lane Closures Detour Time Facility Closure ∑Indirect
($) Days
(#) $/Day Days
(#) $/Day Days
(#) $/Day
Precast 1
Precast 2
Conventional
1
Conventional
2
* In calculation of Direct Costs, give specific consideration to factors that will:
Increase the cost of the bridge, as necessary to accommodate:
• Self-propelled modular transporters (SPMTs)
• Large capacity cranes
• Special erection equipment
• Casting yard setup
Decrease the cost of the bridge, as necessary to accommodate:
• Reduced labor rates (e.g., work from barges)
• Reduced maintenance of traffic (MOT) work restrictions
• Reduced worker compensation insurance rates (e.g., work from barges)
• Increased production rates due to assembly line processes.
• Increased production rates due to multiple crews working simultaneously
** Use engineering judgment and knowledge of construction processes to estimate the
number of days required for each lane closure, detour, or facility closure for each
alternate. Coordinate this estimate with the preliminary construction schedule and
MOT scheme.
January 1, 2021
56 64
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
121-Bridge Project Development
121.19.4 Referenced Links
Connection Details for Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/prefab/if09010/
Manual on Use of Self-Propelled Modular Transporters to Remove and Replace
Bridges
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/pubs/07022/
Framework for Decision-Making
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/prefab/framework.cfm
Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems Cost Study: Accelerated Bridge
Construction Success Stories
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/prefab/successstories/091104/index.cfm
FDOT RUC (Road User Cost) software (only available through infonet)
http://infonet.dot.state.fl.us/tlconstruction/SchedulingEng/AddSoftwareSchedul
ing.htm
January 1, 2021
57 65
Topic #625-000-002
FDOT Design Manual
103-Standard Forms
103 Standard Forms
103.1 General
This chapter contains fillable portable document format (PDF) of the standard forms found
in the FDOT Design Manual (FDM). The form number assigned to each form corresponds
to the FDM chapter in which it is discussed. Refer to the related chapter for instruction
on the use of each form.
1
January 1, 2018
66
FORM 121-A
BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT REPORT SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
Project Name __________________________________________________________
Financial Project ID______________________________________________________
FA No. ____________________ Projects of Division Interest yes no
NHS yes no
Date ______________________ FDOT Project Manager _______________________
ITEMS STATUS(b)
1.Typical Sections for Roadway and Bridge (a) ...........................
2.Roadway Plans in Vicinity of Bridge (a) ...................................
3.Maintenance of Traffic Requirements (a) .................................
4.Bridge Hydraulics Report (c) ....................................................
5.Geotechnical Report (c) ...........................................................
6.Bridge Corrosion Environmental Report (c) .............................
7.Existing Bridge Plans ..............................................................
8.Existing Bridge Inspection Report ...........................................
9.Utility Requirements ................................................................
10.Railroad Requirements ...........................................................
11.Retaining Wall and Bulkhead Requirements ...........................
12.Lighting Requirements ............................................................
13.ADA Access Requirements .....................................................
14.Other .......................................................................................
(a) Must be approved by District before BDR submittal.
(b) Select appropriate status: Provided, Not Applicable, Comments Attached
(c) See approval requirements for these documents elsewhere in this chapter.
67
FORM 121-B
Standard Peer Review Certification Letter
Florida Department of Transportation
District ___
Attn:
Reference: Independent Peer Review Category 2 Structures
Financial Project ID:
Federal Aid Number:
Contract Number:
Submittal: 90% Bridge Plans
Submittal
Bridge Number(s):
Dear ,
Pursuant to the requirements of the Contract Documents,
hereby certifies that an independent peer review of the above-referenced
submittal has been conducted in accordance with FDM 121 and all other governing regulations.
Component plans that were included in the peer review are as follows:
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Outstanding / Unresolved Comments and Issues:
68
FORM 121-B
Certification Statement:
I certify that the component plans listed in this letter have been verified by independent review
and are in compliance with all requirements presented in the Contract Documents. Independent
Peer Review comments and comment resolutions have been included in this submittal under
separate cover.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
Name of Independent Peer Review Firm
Name of Independent Peer Reviewer
Title
Signature
Florida Professional Engineer Lic. No.
_____________________________________
_____________________________________
_____________________________________
_____________________________________
_____________________________________
69
Form 121-C
Certification Letter
Florida Department of Transportation
District U___
Attn:
Reference: Independent Peer Review Category 2 Structures
Financial Project ID:
Federal Aid Number:
Contract Number:
Submittal: 100% Bridge Plans
Submittal
Bridge Number(s):
Dear ,
Pursuant to the requirements of the Contract Documents,
hereby certifies that an independent peer review of the above-referenced
submittal has been conducted in accordance with FDM 121 and all other governing
regulations. Component plans that were included in the peer review are as follows:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Certification Statement:
I certify that the component plans listed in this letter have been verified by independent review,
that all review comments have been adequately resolved, and that the plans are in compliance
with all Department and FHWA requirements presented in the Contract Documents.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
Name of Independent Peer Review Firm
Name of Independent Peer Reviewer
Title
Florida Professional Engineer Lic. No.
[Insert Signature,
Date and Seal
here.]
70
SUBMITTAL/APPROVAL LETTER
To: Date:
District or Turnpike Design Engineer
Financial Project ID: _________________ New Const. RRR
Federal Aid Number: _________________
Project Name: _________________________________________________
State Road Number: _________________ Co./Sec./Sub. ________________
Begin Project MP: _________________ End Project MP: ________________
FHWA Project of Division Interest: Yes No
Request for: Design Exception Design Variation
Community Aesthetic Feature: Conceptual Final
Re-submittal: Yes No Original Ref# ________ - ____ - _____
Requested for the following element(s):
Design Speed Lane Width
Design Loading Structural Capacity Vertical Clearance
Superelevation Horizontal Curve Radius
Shoulder Width Cross Slope
Maximum Grade Stopping Sight Distance
Other __________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Recommended by:
_____________________________Date _____________
Approvals:
_____________________________Date _____________ ______________________________Date ______________
_____________________________Date _____________ ______________________________Date ______________
_____________________________Date _____________ ______________________________Date ______________
FORM 122-A
71
Form 125-A
Design Plans Phase Review
DATE: ____________
TO: ____________________
FROM: ____________________
COPIES: ____________________
SUBJECT: Response to ____________ Phase Review
REF: Financial Project ID __________________________
FA Project Number __________________________
County __________________________
APPROVED: CONCURRENCE:
________________________ ________________________
Responsible Professional Eng. * District Design Engineer
(Name of Consultant Firm) * District Structures Design Engineer
*District Project Management Engineer
* As appropriate
72
Form 125-B
Design Plans Component Review
DATE: ____________
TO: ____________________
FROM: ____________________
COPIES: ____________________
SUBJECT: Response to ____________Component Review
REF: Financial Project ID __________________________
FA Project Number __________________________
County __________________________
APPROVED: CONCURRENCE:
________________________ ________________________
Responsible Professional Eng. * District Design Engineer
(Name of Consultant Firm) * District Structures Design Engineer
*District Project Management Engineer
* As appropriate
73
Form 125-C
Special Provisions
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
COPIES:
SUBJECT:
REF: Financial Project ID
FA Project Number
County
APPROVED: CONCURRENCE:
Responsible Professional Eng. * District Design Engineer
(Name of Consultant Firm) * District Structures Design Engineer
* District Project Management Engineer
* As appropriate
74
Form 126-A
INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST
Basic information about the project
Project Location
Project Limits
Project Length
Project Purpose
Jurisdiction(s) in which the Project is Located
Proposed Change in Lane Configuration
Project Schedule
This is a list of items that the Applicant should be prepared to discuss at the Initial Meeting:
Conceptual plan (including transitions to
and from the lane elimination section)
Existing and long-range future AADT (the
latter based on historical growth and/or
the regional travel demand model)
Consistency of the proposed project with
the applicable Long-Range Transportation
Plan (LRTP), Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP), Transit Development Plan
(TDP), comprehensive plan, and any
applicable master plans, visions, and
Complete Streets initiatives
Status of the roadway as an Evacuation
Route, freight route, and/or part of the
Strategic Intermodal System (SIS)
Status of the roadway as a major transit
corridor per the LRTP or TDP
Proposed use(s) for the right-of-way after
lanes are eliminated (e.g., widened
sidewalks, bicycle lanes, landscaping,
on-street parking, transit lanes)
Existing right-of-way width and any
proposed changes to the right-of-way
width
Anticipated changes (if any) in
jurisdictional responsibility for ownership
or maintenance of the roadway
Anticipated changes (if any) in functional
classification and access management
classification
Anticipated changes (if any) in posted
speed limits
Need for design variations or design
exceptions to support the lane elimination
project
Plan for obtaining input and review from
businesses, residents, and other stakeholders
Plan for receiving endorsement from
elected officials
Ideas for funding sources
Potential implementation strategy and
partner commitments
75
Methodology Checklist
This is an illustrative list of items that the District Review Team might require the
Applicant to address in a Concept Report:
Conceptual design plans (including
proposed typical sections) that meet
FDOT design standards for all
transportation modes
Need for any design
variations or exceptions
Size of impact area
Near- and long-range level of
service (LOS) and queuing analysis
for intersections and segments in
the impact area under the build and
no-build scenarios
LOS analyses may be
daily or peak hour
analyses at the District
Review Team’s
discretion.
The District Review
Team and the Applicant
should agree on an
analysis methodology.
Mitigation to address significant and
adverse LOS impacts on State
roads and the regional
transportation system resulting from
the lane elimination
Crash data summary and analysis,
which may include identification of
high-crash locations (by crash type)
and locations on FDOT’s 5% lists
(i.e., the lists of the 5% of segments
and intersections with the highest
number of crashes) and/or
estimation of the potential increase
or decrease in crashes using Crash
Modification Factors (CMFs) from
the Highway Safety Manual, CMFs
from the Federal Highway
Administration CMF website, or
other appropriate methodologies
Impact on pedestrian and bicycle
infrastructure (e.g., sidewalks,
bicycle lanes, and multi-use paths)
and connectivity
Impact on transit routes and/or
transit stops locations (including
appropriateness of turn radii and
lane widths)
Impact on trucks and designated
truck routes (including
appropriateness of turn radii and
lane widths and possible relocation
of designated truck routes)
Impact on evacuations routes and
emergency response
Conceptual funding plan (includes
cost estimates and funding sources)
Conceptual implementation plan
(including an implementation
schedule and a list of the
commitments that the applicant will
make in support of the lane
elimination project)
Existing posted speed and desired
posted speed after the lane
elimination
The need to add, remove, or modify
traffic signals
Impacts on school crossing locations
and/or midblock pedestrian crossing
locations
Impact on parking supply
Case-specific special considerations
to be determined (e.g., railroad
crossing improvements)
Near- and long-range traffic
forecasts with and without
the proposed (with changes
in travel patterns clearly
shown)
FORM 126-B
76
Lane Elimination
Initial Notice to Central Office
To: _______________________From: _______________________ Date: _____________
Systems Management Manager
The intent of this message is to inform Central Office that District ______________ has
received a request for lane elimination on a State Highway.
PROJECT INFORMATION
State Road:__________________________________________________________
Project Location:__________________________________________________________
Project Limits (MP): From _________________________ to _________________________
Applicant:__________________________________________________________
Project Description: __________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
Project Purpose:__________________________________________________________
Proposed Change in Cross Section: From _______________lanes to _______________lanes
☐ SIS ☐ NHS
ACTIONS AND OUTCOMES TO DATE
District staff participated in a meeting with _________________________________________
on ________________ to formally commence the lane elimination review process. At that
meeting, District staff provided an overview of the lane elimination review process and the
Applicant shared initial information about the lane elimination project. The District determined
the specific review process and analysis methodology for the lane elimination request.
NEXT STEPS
The Applicant will submit a Draft Concept Report (containing a proposed typical section) as the
lane elimination review process proceeds. If the District reviewers find the Draft Concept Report
acceptable, the District will recommend that the Applicant submit a formal Application Package
(including the Final Concept Report). If the Application Package is complete and acceptable, the
District will approve the lane elimination request with the concurrence of Central Office.
Concurrence:
__________________________________ Date: __________________
District Design Engineer
__________________________________ Date: __________________
District Traffic Operations Engineer
FORM 126-C
77
Lane Elimination
Final Review and Approval Notice to Central Office
The intent of this message is to inform Central Office that District ______________ has
received a request for lane elimination on a State Highway.
PROJECT INFORMATION
State Road: __________________________________________________________
Project Location: __________________________________________________________
Project Limits (MP): From _________________________ to _________________________
Applicant: __________________________________________________________
Project Description: __________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
Project Purpose: __________________________________________________________
Proposed Change in Cross Section: From _______________ lanes to _______________lanes
☐ SIS ☐ NHS
District Approvals:
__________________________________ Date: __________________
District Design Engineer
__________________________________ Date: __________________
District Traffic Operations Engineer
Concurrence:
__________________________________ Date: __________________
Chief Planner
Final Approval:
Date: ___________________________________________________
Chief Engineer
FORM 126-D
78
18 KIP Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL)
Financial Project ID
State Road No.
County
I have reviewed the 18 KIP Equivalent Single Axle Loads to be used for pavement design
on this project. I hereby attest that these have been developed in accordance with the
FDOT Project Traffic Forecasting Procedure using historical traffic data and other
available information.
Name
Signature
Title
Organizational Unit
Date
Form 130-A
79
Project Traffic
Financial Project ID
State Road No.
County
I have reviewed the Project Traffic to be used for design on this project. I hereby attest
that it has been developed in accordance with the FDOT Project Traffic Forecasting
Procedure using historical traffic data and other available information.
Name
Signature
Title
Organizational Unit
Date
Form 130-B
80
TRANSMITTAL OF PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES PACKAGE
Date:___________________ 30 Day AD 60 Day AD
Proposal/Contract ID: Letting Date: Re-Let: No Yes
Financial Project ID(s):
County:State Road No.:
Federal Funds: No Yes Federal Aid No.:
Total Roadway Length:Total Bridge Length:
Total Project Length: ______________________ Total Project Length Verified by: ______________
Project Manager Name and Phone Number:
E.O.R. Name, Firm and Phone Number:
Work Mix No. ____ Work Mix Description:____________________________________________
On , the District Director of Transportation Development (Production) certified that the Plans,
Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) Package is complete, has no known errors or omissions, has been
reviewed for constructability and biddability, and is ready to be advertised for construction.
The following items transmitted as noted:
SEALED PLANS SET ( SHEETS), SPECIFICATIONS PACKAGE (PAGES): The Electronic Bid
Set was reviewed by and posted to the server on ).
ESTIMATES OFFICE INFORMATION:
The Authorization Estimate, will be reviewed by District Estimates and posted to the server by the PS&E
submittal due date. At the time of posting, transfer control of the project files to Central Office.
FEDERAL AID OFFICE INFORMATION:
Federal Aid Oversight: No Yes
FHWA: Approved by Date:
Print Name of FHWA Engineer
CONTRACTS OFFICE INFORMATION:
Contract Time: Calendar Days
Select One:
Standard Acquisition Time: 15 Days
Other Acquisition Time: Days (Approval required if more than 120 Days)
Flexible Start Time: Days (Approval required if more than 120 Days)
Special Start Date: (Approval required for SP0080303B and SP0080303C)
Wage Rate(s)
Business Development Initiative Project: No Yes
Alternative Contracting: No Yes
(If yes, Type:
Pre-Bid Conference Mandatory?No Yes (Date:Time:A.M./P.M.)
(Contact Person and Phone:)
(Location of Conference:
)
SPECIAL NOTES and REQUIREMENTS (List/Explain):
If any items are missing please contact
Contact Name and Phone Number
Form 131-A
81
Transmittal of Plans, Specifications and Estimates Package Sheet 2 of 2
REMINDER
1.Check that all components of the Contract Plans are included as listed on the lead key
sheet.
2.Check that all sheets are included according to key sheet indices.
3.Check that all sheets have the correct Financial Project ID.
4.Check that all sheets are legible and reproducible.
5.On strung projects, check that all Summary of Pay Item sheets from the Proposal/Contract
ID go in the lead project and the Financial Project ID of the strung project is shown on the
lead key sheet.
6.Check that bridge pay item sheets show bridge numbers and the quantity breakdowns.
7.E-mail the Transmittal Memo, Contract File Index and attachments to the group “CO-
CPKG” and copy the FDOT Project Manager.
8.Verify the accuracy, in the FM system, of the Description, Project Limits, Mileage and
Structures. Initial Total Project Length Verification.
Special Notes and Requirements:
A. Provide the Roadway, Bridge, and Project Lengths in miles, rounded to three decimal
places as follows:
Total Roadway Length = End Project - Begin Project - Exceptions - Bridges (not
including bridge culverts) adjusted for Equations
Total Bridge Length = Sum of all End Bridge – Begin Bridge (not including bridge
culverts)
Total Project Length = Roadway + Bridges
B. Include the Work Mix Number and Work Mix Description corresponding to the information
as shown in the Financial Management System on the WP01 Screen
C. Anything that affects the advertisement, bidding and award that is not listed above such
as:
a.Railroad Insurance
b.Developmental Specifications
c.Alternative Contracting items such as Scope Alternates
d.Budgetary Ceilings
e.Additional Insured Endorsement parties
For A+B projects, include the User Cost Per Day $____ and Maximum Days ____.
Form 131-A
82
Form 131-B
CONTRACT FILE INDEX
Financial Project ID Proposal/Contract ID
ATTACHMENTS (check if included or list expected date of transmittal to Central Office)
Calendar Days Recommendation
Preliminary Engineering Certification*
Utility Certification
Status of Environmental Certification Form
Permit Transmittal Memo**
Railroad Clear Letter
FDOT/FGT Encroachment Agreement
Certificate for Construction (Form 575-095-05)
Executed copy of MMOA for Projects with Patterned Pavement
Approval if SP0080701B Computation of Contract Time is used.
Landscape Exception Approval per Engineering and Operations Memorandum 13-1
No Yes Project is Project of Division Interest under agreement dated August 20, 2015*
No Yes Right of Way Certification was mailed to State R/W Administrator
No Yes N/A Local Funds Agreement sent to Office of Comptroller
No Yes N/A Local Funds Sent to Office of Comptroller
No Yes N/A Project is Federally Funded off the State Highway System, requiring a
Maintenance Agreement.
If yes, a Maintenance Agreement (Number ________) was executed on
_________________. A copy is available upon request.
* Include if federally funded.
** Must have District Secretary Approval if Permits are not received by Authorization to Advertise
(Federally Funded Projects Only).
Note: If project is federally funded and has a state funded “Goes With”, please provide the
same documentation as required for a federally funded project.
Name: Date:
Print Name of Project Manager/Other Title
83
Form 131-B
REMINDER
PROCESS:
1.Organize attachments in the order listed.
2.Show the number of Maintenance Agreements (Federal funds – off the State
Highway System).
3.Show anticipated date of arrival on any item not included in package.
4.The Status of Environmental Certification must be completed on all federally
and state funded projects. For federally funded projects, use the Status of
Environmental Certification for Federal Project, Form #650-050-13. For state
funded only, non-federal eligible (NFE) projects, use the Status of Environmental
Certification for State Funded Project, Form #650-050-14. The District
Environmental Office must use the StateWide Environmental Project Tracker
(SWEPT) to complete the Status of Environmental Certification Form.
When a federally funded project is strung with a NFE project, the entire project
contract becomes federalized; i.e., both the state funded project and the federally
funded project must comply with all applicable federal laws, rules, and regulations
related to the federalized contract. In addition, the federally funded project is to be
the lead project.
Regarding federal environmental compliance under NEPA, the project limits of the
approved final environmental document will control the scope of compliance with
NEPA requirements. NEPA requirements (including staging areas and
Contractors’ off-site activities) must only be met for that portion of the project
included within the “logical termini” as described in the NEPA document associated
with the federally funded portion of the federalized contract.
NOTE: The Contract File Index is an integral part of the Transmittal of Plans,
Specifications and Estimates Package.
84
Form 131-C
REVISION MEMO
DATE:
TO: Final Plans (CO-FINALPLANS)
FROM: , Project Manager
COPIES: DDE, DCPME
SUBJECT: Revision Number - Letting (mo./yr.)
Financial Project ID (Lead number only)
Proposal/Contract ID
Federal Funds: No Yes Federal Aid No.
County State Road No.
Mandatory Only: No Yes (*If Yes, Signatures Not Required.)
*Concurred by:Date:
Signature of Director of Transportation Development or Designee
I have reviewed for effects on the Specifications Package and a package revision is
is not required. *Approved By: Date:
Signature of District Specifications Engineer
If Projects of Division Interest ,
*Authorized By:Date:
Print Name of FHWA Engineer
REVISIONS RECEIVED IN THE FINAL PLANS OFFICE WITHIN 15 WORK DAYS
OF THE LETTING MUST BE APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT SECRETARY.
NO REVISIONS ALLOWED WITHIN 5 WORK DAYS OF THE LETTING
WITHOUT APPROVAL.
*Approved By: Date:
Signature of District Secretary
SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATIONS PACKAGE NUMBER ( Pages).
REISSUED SPECIFICATIONS PACKAGE ( Pages).
PLANS REVISION NUMBER ( Sheets).
CONTRACT TIME REVISED: No Yes(If yes, Total Calendar Days)
85
Form 131-C
DATE:
Financial Project ID (Lead number only)
Proposal/Contract ID
PLANS REVISION NUMBER
Sheet No(s). Rev. Date Description
SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATIONS PACKAGE NUMBER
Sheet No(s). Rev. Date Description
Summary of Quantities
Pay Item Sheet No. Add. / Del. / Rev. Old Quantity New Quantity
86
Form 131-C
REMINDER
PROCESS:
1. Fill out headings.
2. Mandatory Only revisions must not have other revisions included to remain exempt
from signature requirement.
3. On Projects of Division Interest, get FHWA concurrence as applicable. Print name
of FHWA Engineer and date. (Not required for Mandatory Only Revisions)
4. Get concurrence signature from the District Director of Transportation
Development or designee. (Not required for Mandatory Only Revisions)
5. Get signature of the District Specifications Engineer. (Not required for Mandatory
Only Revisions)
6. Revisions received in the Final Plans Office within 15 work days of the letting must
be approved by the District Secretary. (Not required for Mandatory Only
Revisions.) Notify Final Plans. Revisions within five working days of the letting
are not allowed without final approval from the Director of the Office of Design.
Since there is no assurance that all prospective contractors will get these
documents on time to be considered in their bids, approvals for a revision within
five working days of the letting will be rare. If the revision is not approved, the
project will either be let as is, or be withdrawn from letting. Withdrawing or moving
the project to a later letting after advertisement requires approval by the District
Secretary and the Chief Engineer.
7. For Supplemental Specification Packages, fill in the Rev. Date, number of pages
and a brief description.
8. Enter the sheet number and:
Describe new pay item number, Rev. Date with old quantity and new quantity,
deleted pay item number only, or revised quantities; by entering pay item number
with old and new quantities.
9. On bridges indicate “each bridge number” with corrected changes.
10. If a revision will impact the utility plans, adjustments or schedules, provide a copy of
the revision memo and affected plan sheets to the District Utilities Engineer.
11. Any change to any pay item, requires replacement of the entire Proposal Summary
of Pay Items.
12. Email the Revision approval to Final Plans Section (CO-FINALPLANS) to unlock
the summary of pay items.
13. Email Revision Memo to Final Plans.
REVISED DOCUMENTS:
1. Revised sealed plans sheets including Summary of Pay Items and Summary of
Quantities sheets.
2. Revised District Cost Estimate if federally funded.
3. Revised sealed Supplemental Specifications Package.
87
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO: , Federal Aid Programs Manager
FROM: , Design Project Manager
COPIES:
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING CERTIFICATION (Federal Aid Projects Only)
Financial Project ID
Proposal/Contract ID
Federal Aid No.
County
Project Description
Preliminary Engineering (design) was funded with:
State Funds under
Financial Project ID
Federal Funds authorized under,
Federal Aid No.
Financial Project ID
The following projects, designed with the same Preliminary Engineering funds, will
be strung to (awarded with) the subject project:
Federal Aid No. , Financial Project ID ,
Federal Aid No. , Financial Project ID .
The Preliminary Engineering for the subject project is open/ closed. If open,
it will be closed after PS&E authorization, or
it is a district wide project. Task order number for this project is closed.
The financial number will be open for other projects.
it will remain open for additional charges, as follows:
The FDOT Project Manager may be contacted at (phone):
Form 131-D
88
REMINDER
Under “Preliminary Engineering (design) was funded with:”
The Financial Project ID should always have a 3X phase in it. 3X is for
Preliminary Engineering (design). Example: 415211-1-32 01
or 415211-1-31 01
Preliminary Engineering Certification is required if Federal Funds are used for either
Design or Construction phases.
Form 131-D
89
Agency Maintenance Agreement
for Work Performed by the Department
Sheet 1 of 3
Financial Project ID:
Federal Aid No.
Local Agency:
Project Description:
Bridge No.:
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this ______ day of ______,
20____, by and between the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (hereinafter called “DEPARTMENT”), and
____________________, Florida (hereinafter called “LOCAL AGENCY”);
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the DEPARTMENT is preparing to undertake a project within the
LOCAL AGENCY and LOCAL AGENCY identified and known to the parties by Financial
Project I.D. ____________ which will be of benefit to the LOCAL AGENCY; and
WHEREAS, approval of federal aid necessary to the project requires agreement
by the LOCAL AGENCY to maintain the project;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the parties hereby agree
as follows:
1.The DEPARTMENT will undertake the project and obtain approval of the
Federal Highway Administration for federal participation.
2.Upon completion and acceptance, the LOCAL AGENCY will assume
responsibility for maintenance of the project and will conduct such maintenance
in accordance with approved state standards.
3.To the extent permitted by law, LOCAL AGENCY must indemnify, defend, and
hold harmless the DEPARTMENT and all of its officers, agents, and employees
from any claim, loss, damage, cost, charge, or expense arising out of any act,
error, omission or negligent act by LOCAL AGENCY, its agents, or employees,
during the performance of the Agreement, except that neither LOCAL AGENCY,
its agents, or its employees will be liable under this paragraph for any claim, loss,
damage, cost, charge, or expense arising out of any act, error, omission, or
negligent act by the DEPARTMENT or any of its officers, agents, or employees
during the performance of the Agreement. Nothing herein must waive the rights
of sovereign immunity of either party.
Form 131-E
90
Sample Local Agency Maintenance Agreement
For Work Performed by the Department
Sheet 2 of 3
4.In the event there are cost overruns, supplemental agreements (specifically
incurred in the areas located off the State Highway System), and or liquidated
damages not eligible to be paid for by federal funds due to the Federal Highway
Administration determining that said costs are non-participating costs, the
LOCAL AGENCY must be responsible for one-hundred percent (100%) of the
funds required to make up the shortfall not paid by federal funds. The Project is
off of the “State Highway System,” therefore, in accordance with Section
339.08(1), Florida Statutes, State funding cannot be used for payments of non-
participating costs on this Project. (Examples of non-participating items could
be fishing piers; premium costs due to design or CEI errors or omissions;
material or equipment called in for the plans but not used in the construction, as
referenced in the Federal Aid Policy Guide 23, CFR Section 635.120).
a.Should such shortfalls occur, due to a determination that said
costs are non-participating, the LOCAL AGENCY agrees to
provide, without delay, a deposit within fourteen (14) calendar
days of notification from the Department, to ensure that cash on
deposit with the Department is sufficient to fully fund the shortfall.
The Department must notify the LOCAL AGENCY as soon as it
becomes apparent there is a shortfall; however, failure of the
Department to so notify the LOCAL AGENCY must not relieve
the LOCAL AGENCY its obligation to pay for its full participation
of non-participating costs during the Project and on final
accounting, as provided herein below. If the LOCAL AGENCY
cannot provide the deposit within fourteen (14) days, a letter
must be submitted to and approved by the Department’s project
manager indicating when the deposit will be made. The LOCAL
AGENCY understands the request and approval of the additional
time could delay the project, and additional non-participating
costs may be incurred due to the delay of the project.
5.The DEPARTMENT intends to have its final and complete accounting of all costs
incurred in connection with the work performed hereunder within three hundred
sixty days (360) of final payment to the Contractor. The Department considers
the Project complete when the final payment has been made to the Contractor,
not when the construction work is complete. All non-participating Project cost
records and accounts must be subject to audit by a representative of the LOCAL
AGENCY for a period of three (3) years after final close out of the Project. The
LOCAL AGENCY will be notified of the final non-participating cost of the project.
Both parties agree that in the event the final accounting of total non-participating
costs pursuant to the terms of this Agreement is less than the total deposits to
Form 131-E
91
date, a refund of the excess will be made by the Department to the LOCAL
AGENCY. If the final accounting is not performed within three hundred and sixty
(360) days, the LOCAL AGENCY is not relieved from its obligation to pay.
6.In the event the final accounting of total non-participating costs are greater than
the total deposits to date, the LOCAL AGENCY will pay the additional amount
within forty (40) calendar days from the date of the invoice from the Department.
The LOCAL AGENCY agrees to pay interest at a rate as established pursuant
to Section 55.03, Florida Statutes, on any invoice not paid within forty (40)
calendar days until the invoice is paid.
7.Any payment of funds under this Agreement provision will be made directly to
the Department for deposit.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals on the
day and year first above written.
, STATE OF FLORIDA
LOCAL AGENCY OFFICIAL DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By:___________________________ By:___________________________
Title:__________________________ District Secretary
__________________________
(Type Name)
ATTEST: ATTEST:
______________________________ ______________________________
Clerk (Seal) Executive Secretary (Seal)
LEGAL APPROVAL: LEGAL APPROVAL:
______________________________ ______________________________
LOCAL AGENCY Attorney Senior Attorney
______________________________
(Type Name)
Form 131-E
92
DATE:
TO: , District Specifications
FROM: , Project Manager
COPIES TO:
SUBJECT: ITEMS OF WORK
Financial Project ID: (GOES WITH )
County (Section):
* Project Description:
The plans package for the above referenced project includes the following items of work
to be performed:
Milling & Resurfacing Highway Signing
Base Work Guardrail
Shoulder Treatment Landscaping
Drainage Improvements Box or Three-sided Culverts
Curb & Gutter Bridges
Traffic Signals MSE Walls
Lighting Sidewalks/Shared Use Path
Other (Please Specify)
Please include the county, project description and all items of work that apply in the Intent
and Scope so they may be added to the advertisement description.
*The project description should only include the road number and the limits or location
of the project.
Items of Work Checklist
Form 140-A
93
PORTABLE CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGNS WORKSHEET
Location of board:
Used: from at
to at
Message programmed by:
MESSAGE 1
MESSAGE 2
Timing:
Message 1 will run: seconds.
Message 2 will run: seconds.
Form 243-A
94
STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS FOR USE
ON CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGNS
Standard abbreviations easily understood are:
WORD ABBREV. WORD ABBREV.
Boulevard BLVD Normal NORM
Center CNTR Parking PKING
Emergency EMER Road RD
Entrance, Enter ENT Service SERV
Expressway EXPWY Shoulder SHLDR
Freeway FRWY, FWY Slippery SLIP
Highway HWY Speed SPD
Information INFO Traffic TRAF
Left LFT Travelers TRVLRS
Maintenance MAINT Warning WARN
Other abbreviations are easily understood whenever they appear in conjunction with a particular
word commonly associated with it. These words and abbreviations are as follows:
WORD ABBREV. PROMPT
Access ACCS Road
Ahead AHD Fog*
Blocked BLKD Lane*
Bridge BRDG [Name]*
Chemical CHEM Spill
Construction CONST Ahead
Exit EX, EXT Next*
Express EXP Lane
Hazardous HAZ Driving
Interstate I [Number]
Major MAJ Accident
Mile MI [Number]*
Minor MNR Accident
Minute(s) MIN [Number]*
Oversized OVRSZ Load
Prepare PREP To Stop
Pavement PVMT Wet*
Quality QLTY Air*
Route RT Best*
Turnpike TRNPK [Name]*
Vehicle VEH Stalled*
Cardinal Directions N, E, S, W [Number]
Upper, Lower UPR, LWR Level
* = Prompt word given first
Form 243-A
95
The following abbreviations are understood with a prompt word by about 75% of the drivers.
These abbreviations may require some public education prior to usage.
WORD ABBREV. PROMPT
Condition COND Traffic*
Congested CONG Traffic
Downtown DWNTN Traffic
Frontage FRNTG Road
Local LOC Traffic
Northbound N-BND Traffic
Roadwork RDWK Ahead [Distance]
Temporary TEMP Route
Township TWNNSHP Limits
* = Prompt word given first
Certain abbreviations are prone to inviting confusion because another word is abbreviated or
could be abbreviated in the same way. DO NOT USE THESE ABBREVIATIONS:
ABBREV. INTENDED WORD WORD ERRONEOUSLY GIVEN
WRNG Warning Wrong
ACC Accident Access (Road)
DLY Delay Daily
LT Light (Traffic) Left
STAD Stadium Standard
L Left Lane (Merge)
PARK Parking Park
RED Reduce Red
POLL Pollution (Index) Poll
FDR Feeder Federal
LOC Local Location
TEMP Temporary Temperature
CLRS Clears Color
Form 243-A
96
RECORD SHOP DRAWING TRANSMITTAL
Date
TO:
FROM:
(Final Review Office)
PROJECT NAME
FINANCIAL PROJECT ID
FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO.
CONTRACT ID NUMBER
COUNTY (SECTION)
STATE ROAD NUMBER
BRIDGE NUMBER
CONTRACTOR
ENGINEER OF RECORD
We are transmitting herewith the following Record Shop Drawings for archiving:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
For the Final Review Office:
(Signature) (Date)
For the Receiving Office:
(Signature) (Date)
Record Shop Drawing ransmittal Form 260-A
Form 267-A
97