Case Study: I-95 Express Lanes Extension, Miami – Design-Build Delivery Challenges (2017)
Project Overview
• Name: I-95 Express Lanes Extension
• Location: Miami, Florida
• Year: 2017
• Project Size: $615 million
• Scope: Extension of tolled express lanes using a Design-Build delivery approach
• Lead Agencies/Contractors: Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), Design-Build Contractor JV
Category of the Issue, Problem, or Challenge
• Project Delivery Method
• Design-Build
Summary of the Issue, Problem, or Challenge
During construction, unresolved scope changes and ambiguous contract terms regarding utility relocations caused delays and disputes. The fast-track Design-Build schedule intensified coordination challenges, leading to rework and increased costs.
Root Cause Analysis
- Insufficient early utility coordination and mapping.
- Ambiguity in contract terms concerning utility relocation responsibilities.
- Fast-track schedule limited time for design refinements.
- Inadequate risk sharing provisions for unforeseen utility conflicts.
Impacts Due to the Issue, Problem, or Challenge
• Schedule delays of 5 months.
• Cost overruns of approximately $30 million.
• Increased contractual disputes requiring mediation.
Corrective Actions Taken
- Clarified contract language on utility responsibilities in change orders.
- Implemented early utility coordination meetings with stakeholders.
- Added contingency time buffers for utility relocation in schedule updates.
- Enhanced risk management workshops focusing on utility-related risks.
Lessons Learned
- Early and thorough utility investigations are essential in Design-Build projects.
- Clear contract provisions for utility relocations reduce disputes.
- Fast-track schedules must balance speed with realistic design and coordination time.
- Collaborative risk management improves issue resolution.
Audit & Prevention: Project Control Questions to Ask on Future Projects to Help Control the Situation
- Are utility responsibilities clearly defined contractually?
- Has early utility coordination been performed?
- Is schedule realistic given utility relocation needs?
- Are risk sharing provisions adequate for utility conflicts?