Technical Report Documentation Page 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient s Catalog No.

Transcription

1 1. Report No. Technical Report Documentation Pae 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient s Catalo No. FHWA/TX-03/ Title and Subtitle DEVELOPMENT OF A TOOL FOR EXPEDITING HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION WHILE RETAINING QUALITY 7. Author(s) E. Simon, G. E. Gibson, C. T. Haas, J. T. O'Connor, B. Somali, Z. Zhan 9. Performin Oranization Name and Address Center for Transportation Research The University of Texas at Austin 3208 Red River, Suite 200 Austin, TX Sponsorin Aency Name and Address Texas Department of Transportation Research and Technoloy Implementation Office P.O. Box 5080 Austin, TX Report Date October Performin Oranization Code 8. Performin Oranization Report No Work Unit No. (TRAIS) 11. Contract or Grant No Type of Report and Period Covered Research Report September 2001 to Auust Sponsorin Aency Code 15. Supplementary Notes Project conducted in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Hihway Administration, and the Texas Department of Transportation. 16. Abstract Hihway construction imposes substantial costs on the travelin public. Because of this, pressures exist to build projects faster and more efficiently. To make the most efficient use of funds for hihway construction projects, and to minimize total road life cycle costs, a decision tool is needed for selectin the most appropriate methods to expedite hihway construction, while maintainin value and quality. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement No restrictions. This document is available to the expeditin, doability, positive impact public throuh the National Technical Information Service, Sprinfield, Virinia Security Classif. (of report) 20. Security Classif. (of this pae) 21. No. of paes 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 198 Form DOT F (8-72) Reproduction of completed pae authorized

2

3 Development of a Tool for Expeditin Hihway Construction While Retainin Quality E. Simon G. E. Gibson, Jr. C. T. Haas J. T. O Connor B. Somali Z. Zhan CTR Research Report: Report Date: October 2002 Research Project: Research Project Title: Expeditin Hihway Construction While Retainin Quality Conducted for the Texas Department of Transportation in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Hihway Administration by the Center for Transportation Research, Bureau of Enineerin Research, The University of Texas at Austin.

4 Center for Transportation Research The University of Texas at Austin 3208 Red River Austin, TX Copyriht 2003 Center for Transportation Research The University of Texas at Austin All rihts reserved Printed in the United States of America

5 Disclaimers Author s Disclaimer: The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies of the Federal Hihway Administration or the Texas Department of Transportation. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or reulation. Patent Disclaimer: There was no invention or discovery conceived or first actually reduced to practice in the course of or under this contract, includin any art, method, process, machine manufacture, desin or composition of matter, or any new useful improvement thereof, or any variety of plant, which is or may be patentable under the patent laws of the United States of America or any forein country. Enineerin Disclaimer: NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION, BIDDING, OR PERMIT PURPOSES. Project Enineer: Carl T. Haas Serial Number: Texas No P. E. Desination: Research Supervisor Acknowledments The authors express appreciation to the Project Coordinator, Mr. James Travis of the Federal Hihway Administration (FHWA), and Project Director, Mr. William Goodell of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), Dallas District. The authors would also like to acknowlede the sponsorship and assistance of the Texas Department of Transportation and specifically the personnel that participated in the workshops, both from TxDOT and other aencies such as the FHWA.

6

7 Table of Contents Implementation Recommendations...xiii 1. Introduction Backround Information Purpose of This Research Scope and Objectives Research Terminoloies Report Structure Research Methodoloy Literature Review and Synthesis of Results from Literature Review Develop Interim Workshop Approach Interim Workshops Gather More Detailed Data Analysis of Data Expeditin Methods Project Plannin Phase Project Desin Phase Contractin and Procurement Phase Construction Phase Other/Multiple Phase Summary of Expeditin Methods Data Analysis Data Analysis Process Step 1: Tallyin of Votes Step 2: Calculation of Raw Scores Step 3: Classification of Methods Step 4: Overall Score Cateorization of Methods Based on Scores Data Analysis Results - Hih Positive Impact Methods Project Plannin Phase Project Desin Phase Contractin and Procurement Phase Construction Phase Other/Multiple Phase Lessons from Others Multi-Votin Results Top 25 Methods Based on Overall Score Top Ten Methods Based on Overall Score for Each Workshop Presentation of Interim Results Methods Requirin Policy Chanes Summary of Data Analysis/Workshop Findins...78 vii

8 TABLE OF CONTENTS 5. Manaement Action for Key Methods Prorammatic (Corridor) Approach Desinate a Sinle Individual as Project Manaer Methods for Expeditin Riht-of-Way Acquisition Methods for Expeditin Utility Relocation Work Methods for Improvin Environmental Assessment Pre-Qualify Bidders on Past Schedule Performance Desin Build Approach Conclusions and Recommendations A Overview of the Research Effort Summary of Research Objectives Summary of How the Research Objectives Were Met Conclusions Recommendations Recommendations to TxDOT Manaement Recommendations for Decision Tool Recommendations for Future Research...91 Biblioraphy...93 Appendix A...99 Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G Appendix H Appendix I Appendix J Appendix K Appendix L Appendix M Appendix N Appendix O viii

9 List of Fiures Fiure 1.1 Accumulation of Hihway User Costs Durin Construction...3 Fiure 1.2 Conceptual Cash Flow Diaram Showin Impact of Expeditin Techniques for Early Start-up on Net Present Benefit (NPB)...3 Fiure 2.1 Methodoloy Flow Chart...9 Fiure 2.2 Sample Pae of Workshop Assessment Sheet...13 Fiure 2.3 Sample Votin Sheet...18 Fiure 2.4 Summary of Workshop Participants Alon with Years of Experience...19 Fiure 4.1 Participants Votin Sample (Raw Data), Project Plannin Phase...54 Fiure 4.2 Calculated Scores Sample, Project Plannin Phase...56 Fiure 4.3 Classification Sample, Project Plannin Phase...58 Fiure 4.4 Relevancy to TxDOT vs. Positive Impact Criteria for the 50 Expeditin Methods...59 Fiure 4.5 Project Plannin Phase Cateorization...62 Fiure 4.6 Project Desin Phase Cateorization...64 Fiure 4.7 Contractin and Procurement Phase Cateorization...66 Fiure 4.8 Construction Phase Cateorization...68 Fiure 4.9 Other/Multiple Phase Cateorization...69 Fiure 4.10 Multi-Votin Results for the Three Workshops Held...74 ix

10

11 List of Tables Table 2.1 Summary of Expeditin Methods...12 Table 3.1 Table of the Applicability/Limitations and the Pros/Cons for Plannin Phase Expeditin Methods...27 Table 3.2 Table of the Applicability/Limitations and the Pros/Cons for Desin Phase Expeditin Methods...33 Table 3.3 Table of the Applicability/Limitations and the Pros/Cons for Contractin and Procurement Phase Expeditin Methods...40 Table 3.4 Table of the Applicability/Limitations and the Pros/Cons for Construction Phase Expeditin Methods...46 Table 3.5 Table of the Applicability/Limitations and the Pros/Cons for Other/Multiple Phase Expeditin Methods...51 Table 4.1 Hih Impact Methods...71 Table 4.2 Multi-Votin Sinle Vote Results...73 Table 4.3 Top 25 Methods Based on Overall Score (n = 62 for most methods)...76 Table 4.4 Top 10 Methods Based on Overall Score for Each Workshop...77 xi

12

13 Implementation Recommendations Hihway construction projects impose real costs on drivers who are delayed, on local businesses which may be interrupted, and on the environment. At the same time, drivers demand ood roads. As a result, tremendous political and public pressure exists for DOTs to build hihway projects better and faster. This pressure will continue to increase as traffic volumes row and road user costs become hiher owin to delays. To deliver hihway construction projects faster, to make the most efficient use of the available funds for these projects, and to minimize total road life cycle cost, DOTs need a system for selectin the most appropriate state of the practice methods to expedite construction. Concurrently, value and quality must be maintained. This report provides an overview of the process chosen to identify those methods with the reatest impact on expeditin hihway construction. Fifty (50) expeditin methods were identified, of which twenty six (26) were assessed as havin a hih potential impact for expeditin hihway projects by the participatin TxDOT and construction industry personnel who attended the workshops. Many of these methods are already used in some form by TxDOT, but their use is not as extensive as could be to obtain the full benefits of the method, or there may be limitin constraints that prevent TxDOT from usin the method to its full potential. The followin seven methods can and should be implemented throuhout the state of Texas immediately, because of the potentially hih impact and ease of implementation usin currently available resources. These methods include the followin: Formal partnerin with desin consultants, contractors, local authorities, and reulatory aencies; Precast/Modular components of construction; A+B contractin; Use of contractor milestone incentives; Increasin amount of liquidated damaes; No Excuse incentives; and Calendar day project schedulin. xiii

14 IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS Immediate implementation of the followin five expeditin methods may not be possible because of lon-term policy and/or leislative need. Their tremendous potential should be addressed by TxDOT with actions to increase ease of implementation. These methods include the followin: Methods for expeditin riht-of-way (ROW) acquisition; Methods for expeditin utility relocation work; Methods for improvin environmental assessment durin plannin; Pre-qualification of bidders on the basis of past schedule performance; and Usin the Desin-Build approach as a contract delivery method. This report outlines details of these expeditin methods and others identified durin the first year of this investiation. The results of this report will be used to develop a decision support tool to select appropriate expeditin methods iven type of project and its overarchin features. xiv

15 1. Introduction It is control of project time, alon with cost and quality, which comprise the basic oals for project manaement. The phrase "time is of the essence" is often found in the contract documents of many facility owners and is intended as a stron reminder to the enineer and/or constructor that the time milestones in the project have economic sinificance for the owner and that control of time is expected. Time control is important for the contractors as well, since time savins can improve profits and loss of time is costly. Both proactive and reactive methods to expeditin construction exist. The proactive methods are enerally part of plannin, which includes how the project stakeholders should oranize their efforts to reduce the time required to achieve the enineerin and construction objectives. Every planner must constantly challene historical schedule performance on similar work with the objective of reducin time without sacrificin other project objectives. These proactive efforts have the potential to yield the reatest return. The reactive methods of expeditin occur durin the execution stae, when neative time variances threaten or bein to appear, and actions must be taken to overcome those variances. In both the proactive and reactive modes, the manaers seek ways to reduce the total project time. Thus, knowlede of methods that can be used to expedite project delivery should be part of the skills and knowlede base of the professional project manaer. Much research has been conducted to identify methods to reduce the time of project delivery. The Construction Industry Institute (CII), for example, has conducted extensive research in this area, identifyin methods that can be used for expeditin (CII 1988). As used in this report, the term "expeditin hihway construction" refers to the shortenin of the required time for accomplishin one or more plannin, desin, contractin and procurement, construction, or startup tasks (or a total project) to serve one of three purposes: (1) reducin total desin-construct time from that considered normal; (2) acceleratin a schedule to reduce road user cost and business cost impact; and (3) recoverin lost time after fallin behind schedule (CII 1988). 1

16 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Backround Information Hihway construction imposes real cost on drivers who are delayed, on local businesses which may be interrupted, and on the environment. At the same time, drivers demand ood roads. As a result, tremendous political and public pressure exists for DOTs to build hihway projects better and faster. This pressure will continue to increase as traffic volumes row and road user costs become hiher due to delays. To deliver hihway construction projects faster, to make the most efficient use of the available funds for these projects, and to minimize total road life cycle cost, DOTs need a system for selectin the most appropriate state of the practice methods to expedite construction. Concurrently, value and quality must be maintained. To minimize cost while maintainin quality and value, total life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) must be used (Memmott and Durek 1982; Peterson 1985). Life cycle cost analysis considers such factors as the followin: 1. Construction costs, 2. User delay costs, 3. Expected accidents cost, 4. Business impact cost, 5. Environmental impact cost such as pollutants and run-off, 6. Maintenance and rehabilitation cost, and 7. Minimum performance levels. Althouh construction costs can be estimated with relative accuracy, the remainin costs are more difficult to estimate, and their present values are affected by such factors as the discount rate used and driver delay cost rates. Fiures 1.1 and 1.2 conceptually illustrate the potential savins to the hihway user that are achieved throuh the use of construction phase expeditin techniques (Lon 1991). Fiure 1.2 illustrates potential savins (benefits) from earlier project startup owin to early phase expeditin techniques. 2

17 1.1 Backround Information CUMULATIVE HIGHWAY USER COSTS Normal Construction Period Reduced Construction Period TIME Fiure 1.1 Accumulation of Hihway User Costs Durin Construction $ Project benefit stream after start-up Larer NPB Time Fiure 1.2 Conceptual Cash Flow Diaram Showin Impact of Expeditin Techniques for Early Start-up on Net Present Benefit (NPB) TxDOT has souht to place reater emphasis on the use of accelerated construction strateies on many of its projects in order to expedite plannin, desin, and construction 3

18 1. INTRODUCTION completion. The subject of expeditin hihway has lon been an issue with TxDOT, the leislature, and the public and has enerated many efforts to address the subject. The information in these documents is available to provide uidance to reduce project delivery time from conception throuh the end of construction. The followin are some of these documents. TxDOT s Form Rev. 9/2001, Attachment A, Alternative Contractin Procedures (TxDOT 2001). Texas Transportation Partnerships...connectin you to the World, a report for the citizens of Texas. 8/2001 (TxDOT 2001). Quicker & Cheaper. Review of cost and time savins on hihway construction and maintenance contracts. As required by Senate Bill 370, 75th Texas Leislature, 11/1998 (TxDOT 2001). Construction Contract Completion. Memorandum from Robert L.Wilson, Director, Desin Division, 5/08/2001 (TxDOT 2001). Senate Bill 370 Section Travel Delay Cost (Road User Cost). Memorandum from Charles W. Heald, Executive Director, 7/14/1998 (TxDOT 2001). 1.2 Purpose of This Research This research study will seek to identify, describe, and discuss proven expeditin methods that can be used in hihway construction to lessen the impact on users and property owners. This will be done throuh a comprehensive literature review. With the findins from the literature and with the aid of workshops conducted with key Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) personnel, a decision tool will be developed that ives TxDOT s Area Enineers and their subordinates uidance in choosin specific expeditin methods for a particular project. This system will be developed with input from the TxDOT research committee and Project Director. The system will consist of an overall decision framework includin the followin: 1. uidin principles; 2. procedures; 3. decision tables; 4

19 1.3 Scope and Objectives 4. support material such as relevant case studies, sample contract lanuae, data on past performance of expeditin methods, as well as their advantaes and disadvantaes; and 5. instructions for the use of analysis support software. Procedures for implementation will also be drafted and will include hih-level procedures, tasks, and user skills needed. This report, as part of the research study, will cover the identification of the expeditin methods and the interim workshops held for the purpose of rankin the expeditin approaches that will have the most merit for TxDOT projects and for atherin feedback on applicability, anticipated ease of implementation, and participant support. The workshops were attended by key TxDOT district and division personnel alon with some selected desin consultant and contractor personnel. The prioritizin of the expeditin methods and determination of subsequent research sets are considered. The followin are some additional questions that were addressed in the workshops: Which methods require more effort or attention with respect to output performance impact measurements? What methods may require chane of policy prior to implementation? What case studies are needed in order to better publicize the benefits and implementation details of hih-priority methods? 1.3 Scope and Objectives The first-year objectives of this two-year study for the Texas Department of Transportation by University of Texas at Austin/Center for Transportation Research are covered in this report. The objective is to present the findins from the literature search and workshops about the most appropriate expeditin construction methods and also to serve as a startin point to determine areas where further research should be tareted. Specific objectives include the followin: 1. Identify, describe, and catalo best practice methods for expeditin schedules. 5

20 1. INTRODUCTION 2. Characterize (and where possible, quantify) both the positive and neative aspects (e.., benefits, advantaes, limitations, etc.) for each method, considerin all life cycle cost. 3. Determine the applicability to and the impact on various types of projects performed by TxDOT throuh workshops conducted with TxDOT personnel for this purpose. 4. Develop a tool with which Area Enineers (and their subordinates) can easily determine the methods that are most appropriate iven different project conditions. (Note that this is the second year objective and will be addressed in the final report) This report includes the identification of concepts for expeditin hihway construction alon with their advantaes and limitations. The expeditin methods considered are by no means exhaustive but are methods that are believed to have the most impact on the expeditin process for hihway construction undertaken by TxDOT. The methods will all have different impacts. The main purpose of the workshops was to identify those with the reatest impact on expeditin hihway construction. 1.4 Research Terminoloies For the purpose of this research, unless otherwise stated, the followin definitions apply. Relevancy to TxDOT is defined as deree of relevancy of the method to TxDOT projects. Doabilit is defined as ease of implementation of the method with the available resources and under existin constraints. Positive Impact is defined as Usefulness of the method in terms of schedule acceleration. Pros is defined as positive effects of a method. Cons is defined as neative effects of a method. Limitations of methods refers to leal and administrative limitations. 6

21 1.5 Report Structure Description of methods refers to the description and/or explanation of the method. Applicability of methods is defined as circumstances where the method can be used. 1.5 Report Structure Followin Chapter 1 (Introduction), Chapter 2 describes the methodoloy employed in the research. Chapter 3 provides descriptions of the expeditin methods considered in the research. Chapter 4 describes the data analysis process. Chapter 5 presents the findins of the data analysis. Chapter 6 describes the possible path forward of the research effort. Chapter 7 presents conclusions and recommendations for the research. 7

22

23 2. Research Methodoloy Fiure 2.1 illustrates the methodoloy followed to accomplish the objectives of this research on expeditin hihway construction while retainin quality. The shaded areas are parts of the research that have not been completed as yet or are not covered in this report; the areas not shaded represents the areas covered in this report. In addition to the flow chart, the followin sections of this chapter explain the research process in more detail. Perform Literature Review Synthesize Results from Literature Review Develop Interim Workshop Approach Conduct Interim Workshops Gather More Detailed Data Analysis of Data Conclusions and Recommendations Synthesize Findins into a Draft Decision System Pilot Demonstration and Testin of Decision System Revise System and Implementation Procedures Identify Policy Implications and Further Recommendations for Implementation of Methods Project Reports Fiure 2.1 Methodoloy Flow Chart 2.2 Literature Review and Synthesis of Results from Literature Review An extensive literature review was conducted to investiate and describe proven methods for expeditin construction schedules. Sources for the review included Construction Industry Institute publications, industry journals and periodicals, conference 9

24 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY proceedins, trade publications, internet sources, books on specific methods, and other sources. The methods were tabulated, and the tabulation included descriptions of the methods, their applicability and/or limitations, and pros and cons associated with the use of these methods. Chapter 3 and Appendix C describe the methods for expeditin project schedules arraned by relevant project phase for implementation alon with their descriptions, limitations, and pros and cons. There are 50 methods listed in the final table. In developin this list, there were several evolutions in the presentation format: methods were added, and some methods were dropped or combined to form one method because of similarities. Concurrently, others were split into two or more methods to be more specific. 2.3 Develop Interim Workshop Approach The information athered throuh the literature review was synthesized into an assemblae of documents to form a workshop portfolio. The workshop portfolio included the followin: 1. A summary matrix of the 50 expeditin methods arraned by project phase. This first-level table is shown in Table An extended matrix of methods for expeditin project schedules arraned by relevant project phase for implementation. This matrix contains descriptions, applicability and or limitations, and the pros and cons related to schedule reductions (Appendix C). These methods will be described in more detailed in chapter Workshop assessment sheets listin all the methods accordin to project phase. These were used for the individual votin process durin the workshops. Three assessment areas were evaluated by the workshop participants for each of the methods, includin the followin: i. Relevancy to TxDOT. The deree of relevancy of the method to TxDOT projects. ii. Doability. The ease of implementation of the method with the available resources and under existin constraints for TxDOT projects. 10

25 2.3 Develop Interim Workshop Approach iii. Positive Impact. The usefulness of the method in terms of schedule acceleration to TxDOT projects. A section for comments was included in the assessment sheets to encourae participants to note any concerns they may have with the methods (Appendix P shows some of the concerns of the participants, hihlihted in the comments section). Also included was a form for participants to complete, ivin their name, title, district or oranization, phone number, address, number of years workin in TxDOT, and number of years workin in industry. The assessment sheets were returned at the end of the workshops. Fiure 2.2 shows a sample pae of the workshop assessment sheet. The complete assessment document is included in Appendix E. These documents, alon with an invitation letter (Appendix A), aenda, expected participant list, and participants of previous workshops (if applicable), made up the workshop portfolio. Appendices A throuh E contain elements of the workshop portfolio sent to each participant, includin the summary matrix of methods and the extended matrix. These documents were developed by the research team over a period of several months with input from the TxDOT/FHWA oversiht committee. 11

26 Table 2.1 Summary of Expeditin Methods Pro-Active Methods for Expeditin Project Schedules Arraned by Relevant Project Phase for Implementation I. Project Plannin II. Project Desin III. Contractin & Procurement IV. Construction V. Other/Multiple 1. Standardize Plannin Approach; use comprehensive standard tools ensurin all areas are covered; 2. Prorammatic (Corridor) approach to Plannin, Desin, and Construction; 3. Alternative Fundin Methods; 4. Desinate a sinle individual as Project Manaer (PM) from early plannin to construction; empower & equip PM with needed tools & data to select appropriate expeditin methods; 5. Desin-Build approach in various forms (Desin-Build- Warrant, Desin-Build-Maintain, etc.); 6. Formal partnerin with desin consultants, contractors, local authorities, and reulatory aencies; 7. Methods for expeditin Riht of Way (ROW) acquisition; 8. Methods for expeditin utility relocation work; 9. Methods for improvin environmental assessment durin plannin; 10. Intellient Transportation Systems (ITS) & work-zone traffic control; 11. Public input on phasin of construction Note: * denotes Reactive Methods 1. Pavement type selection decisions; 2. Precast/Modular components; 3. Generate and evaluate multiple approaches to Traffic Control Plans (TCPs); 4. Develop a descriptive catalo of construction technoloies that facilitate expedited schedules; 5. Phased-desin to support phasedconstruction; 6. Develop Traffic Control Plans throuh partnerin between TxDOT desin & field oranizations; 7. Increase levels of desin component standardization; 8. Have Contactor prepare the Traffic Control Plan based on minimum requirements; 9. Usin Linear Schedulin Method (LSM) & accurate productivity rate data to establish project taret duration 1. A+B contractin; 2. Use of contractor milestone incentives; 3. Packaed multiple-primes approach to contractin; 4. Pre-qualify bidders on basis of past schedule performance; 5. Incentivize Traffic Control Plan development with a contractor Value Enineerin cost-savins sharin provision; 6. Incentivize contractor work proress with a lane-rental approach; 7. Exploit e-commerce systems for procurement, employment, etc.; 8. Tools and best practices for implementin multiple work shifts and/or niht work; 9. Increase amount of liquidated damaes and routinely enforce; 10. Warranty Performance Biddin; 11. No Excuse incentives; 12. Chane manaement practices* 13. Project-level dispute review board* 14. Alternative dispute resolution methods* 1. Exploit web-based team collaboration system for project communications throuh all phases of the project; 2. Encourae use of automated construction technoloies; 3. Employ methods for continuous work zones; 4. Use of windowed milestones; 5. Schedule Calendar Day projects; 6. Crash schedules with use of the Linear Schedulin Method;* 7. Shorten construction time by full closure instead of partial closure of roadway; 8. Maturity Testin 1. Measure & track project schedule performance; use as basis for employee reward proram as well as input to project duration database; 2. Track duration & productivity effects associated with different technoloies; 3. Use pilot demonstration projects for introducin new methods for expeditin schedules; 4. Create a smart database of activity productivity rates; 5. Study optimal approaches to crew shifts & schedulin; 6. Train all field personnel in schedulin methods and schedule claims; 7. Create a lessons-learned database on ways to expedite schedules; 8. Incentive-based pay for retainin key TxDOT personnel 12

27 WORKSHOP ASSESSMENT SHEET NAME: DISTRICT / ORG: I. PROJECT PLANNING Methods Relevancy to TxDOT Doability Positive Impact Low Medium Hih Low Medium Hih Low Medium Hih Comments 1. Standardize Plannin Approach 2.Corridor Plannin 3. Alternative Fundin Methods 4. Desinate a PM for Entire Life-Cycle 5. Desin-Build Approach 6.Formal Partnerin 7. Expeditin ROW Acquisition 8. Expeditin Utility Relocation 9. Improvin Environmental Assessment 10. ITS & Work-zone Traffic Control 11. Public Input on Construction Methods Fiure 2.2 Sample Pae of Workshop Assessment Sheet 13

28 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 2.4 Interim Workshops This phase of the project involved ettin practitioner s input into the methods by usin interim workshops. Workshops are particularly useful for smaller roups of people who want to participate intensively, and the informality encouraes discussion and iveand-take. A total of three workshops were conducted, and the objectives included the followin: 1. To rank expeditin methods on the basis of participants opinions. 2. To ather feedback on applicability and ease of implementation of the expeditin methods. 3. To encourae participant support and ain buy-in for the methods eventually chosen and deployed to TxDOT. 4. To reveal new information and practices used in specific districts to the participants. The workshops were carefully planned to enhance effectiveness. Because of the size of the workshops, breakout roups were used for part of the sessions. Smaller roups met in separate rooms. Each roup had a facilitator, and each participant had a chance to express an opinion. Afterward, roups reported back to the lare meetin. A few perceived benefits of conductin the workshops were the followin: Obtainin constructive alternatives for expeditin processes and input on expeditin methods, Gettin maximum participation from the attendees, Brainstormin of ideas, Combined expertise, Wisdom and real-life experience of workshop participants, and A comfortable settin where participants could share ideas and learn from each other. The first workshop was held on February 8, 2002, at the Dallas District Office. The second workshop was held in Austin because of its central location, in an attempt to accommodate as many of the district offices as possible. This workshop was held on March 8, 2002, at the Thompson Conference Center, University of Texas at Austin. The Austin workshop was expected to be the last workshop, but because of concerns that all the 14

29 2.4 Interim Workshops districts were not covered and because the project team wanted to have as much representation from throuhout the state as possible, a third workshop was planned to accommodate personnel and districts that were unable to attend previously held workshops. Austin was aain chosen because of its central location for the third workshop, held on July 26, The workshop packaes were mailed in advance of the workshops for the participants to familiarize themselves with the expeditin methods and the workshop processes. The detailed workshop aenda for the interim is iven in Appendix D. The aenda used in all three workshops was the same and followed this format: Welcome & Introductions Review of Expeditin Methods & Individual Evaluations I Review of Expeditin Methods & Individual Evaluations II Breakout Sessions Results from Breakout & Individual Evaluations Multi-Votin on Expeditin Methods Wrap-up Durin the welcome and introductions, the participants were iven some backround information about the research, introductions were made, and their contributions welcomed. The Review of Expeditin Methods and Individual Evaluations utilized most of the time. Each of the 50 expeditin methods was reviewed, ivin its description, applicability and/or limitations, and the pros and cons with respect to expeditin (Appendix C). The participants were then asked to vote low, medium, or hih for each of the three cateories of (1) Relevancy to TxDOT, (2) Doability, and (3) Positive Impact, as previously discussed. The participants were also encouraed to make any comments or note any concerns they had about each method in the Comments section of the table (Fiure 2.2). In the breakout sessions, the participants were divided into two roups and were iven specific methods to discuss. Care was taken to divide participants from the same district or division amon the two breakouts. The followin questions were posed to the participants durin the breakouts: 15

30 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Are there any editorial comments that you would like to propose for the methods as iven? Do you have any additional methods that you think should be added? Do you have any suestions in terms of content or form for the proposed Decision Tool? While the breakouts were bein conducted, the results from the individual votin on the expeditin methods were compiled to ive the participants immediate feedback on their assessment of the methods. The total number of votes (lows, mediums, and hihs) for each of the cateories (relevancy, doability, and positive impact) were recorded for each expeditin method on lare wall-mounted assessment sheets similar to that shown in Fiure 2.2. The results of the individual votin were then discussed. The multi-votin process which followed made the overall workshop similar to a Delphi process, in which where the first cycle of votin was summarized before the next cycle bean (Linstone and Turoff 1975). A participant could chane his/her opinion in the direction of an emerin consensus. The workshop participants were instructed to vote on the methods that they thouht, in a perfect world, would have the most value for expeditin the construction process. Fiure 2.3 shows a sample of the lare sheets used for this process. The followin rules overned the multi-votin process: 1. Each participant was iven a number of votes for each of the phases of expeditin construction methods, namely project plannin, project desin, contractin and procurement, contractin, and other/multiple. Each participant was iven sticky dots to vote with. 2. The number of votes corresponded to the number of methods in each phase. The total number of votes was a half the number of methods in the phase plus one. For example, if there were ten methods in a phase, each participant was iven six votes for that phase. 3. There were restrictions on how many votes could be iven to a particular method within a phase. Participants could ive up to approximately 50 percent of their votes to any method. For example, in the plannin phase, in which participants were iven seven votes, a maximum of four votes could be iven to any one method within the phase. Participants were expected to ive 16

31 2.4 Interim Workshops the most votes to the method that they believed that, in a perfect world, would have the most benefit to TxDOT. How each person distributed his/her vote was up to the individual. The results of the multi-votin process were then discussed and compared with the results of the individual votin process. Each workshop participant was then iven one last vote (a sinle vote) to vote on the one method they thouht would be the most beneficial for project expeditin (results discussed later in Table 4.2). The workshop was then wrapped up. 17

32 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Methods I. PROJECT PLANNING Votes 1.f Standardize Plannin Approach 2.f Corridor Plannin 3.f Alternative Fundin Methods 4.f Desinate a PM for Entire Life- Cycle 5.f Desin-Build Approach 6.f Formal Partnerin 7.f Expeditin ROW Acquisition 8.f Expeditin Utility Relocation 9.f Improvin Environmental Assessment 10. f 11. f ITS & Work-zone Traffic Control Public Input on Construction Methods Fiure 2.3 Sample Votin Sheet Each participant was asked to complete a sheet detailin his/her backround and experience. A summary of the backrounds of the individuals who attended the three interim workshops is iven in Fiure 2.4. Appendix F contains a list of all the interim workshop participants. 18

33 2.6 Analysis of Data Sixty two (62) total participants 42 district personnel 9 division personnel 11 non-txdot (selected consultants, FWHA and other aencies) 1223 total years of experience 1042 years workin for TxDOT 181 years workin in industry (non-txdot) 24 districts represented 5 divisions represented 5 non-txdot aencies Fiure 2.4 Summary of Workshop Participants Alon with Years of Experience 2.5 Gather More Detailed Data Gatherin more detailed data concernin the 50 expeditin methods has been an onoin process durin the research and has been accomplished by atherin information throuh various means from TxDOT s leadership, other state DOTs, experts from the construction industry, and others to further characterize selected expeditin method. The workshops also served to identify individuals within TxDOT who can be contacted to further characterize the methods to be implemented in the decision tool and to obtain existin project performance data associated with the methods, if available. 2.6 Analysis of Data The results collected from the workshops were analyzed to determine the expeditin methods that should be incorporated into the draft decision tool. This was done by tallyin up the number of votes received for each method in the interim workshops indicatin low, medium, or hih relevancy, doability, and potential positive impact of each. These data were then used to cateorize the expeditin methods on the basis of (i) how doable they were, and (ii) how positively they impacted TxDOT projects. Because of the hih correlation in the votes for the relevancy and positive impact in the analysis, it was decided to use only doability and positive impact to cateorize the methods (Albriht 2002). The 19

34 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY results of these analyses were based on the workshop participants knowlede and experience. The analysis of the data athered in the interim workshops is presented in detail in Chapter 4. 20

35 3. Expeditin Methods From the literature review and in research team brainstormin activities, many approaches for expeditin construction and contractin procedures were identified (see Table 2.1). These procedures can best be implemented at various staes of a project and are applicable dependin on the specific project characteristics. These procedures may also be classified as proactive (usually implemented in the early staes of the project) or reactive (usually implemented after project has fallen below schedule) dependin on the situation in which it is implemented. Many of the methods considered in this research have been studied and used before. Some of these methods are described in the documents referenced in this report (CII 1988; Arditi 1997; Arditi, 1998; FHWA 1998a; FHWA 1998b; Gendell 1987; Geoffroy 1996; Herbsman 1995; Molenaar 1998; Sidney 1997; TRB 1987) whereas others are not as well documented and the literature available on their use for expeditin is limited. This chapter investiates the expeditin methods that have been found in the literature review, their limitations, and their pros and cons. The methods are cateorized by project phases as mentioned earlier, includin project plannin, project desin, contractin and procurement, construction, and other/multiple. 3.1 Project Plannin Phase This phase has been shown by research to have tremendous impact on project success. Research has indicated that increased levels of pre-project plannin efforts yield reater project success with the followin results: (Gibson and Dumont 1995) Increased predictability of cost and schedule. Reduced probability of financial disaster. Improved operational performance. The eleven (11) expeditin methods identified for this phase and their descriptions follow. 21

36 3. EXPEDITING METHODS 1. Standardize plannin approach; use comprehensive standard tools ensurin all areas are covered. Research has shown that oranizations with a standardized front-end plannin approach have better capital effectiveness. The methodoloy focuses on the ateways and required steps, which in turn ensure that the proper plannin issues have been addressed. Overall, the workshop participants felt that there was much room for improvement on the process that exists. Selected comments from the workshops included TxDOT plannin is more or less standardized, probably not done as well as could be, uniformity in all districts is very important, and the need the build flexibility to address the different applications (Appendix O). 2. Prorammatic (Corridor) approach to plannin, desin, and construction. A prorammatic approach looks at an entire road corridor, rather than breakin the corridor into sements that are tied to yearly fundin limitations. Since the project can be pursued usin larer multi-year contracts, the procurement steps are minimized, and the speed to delivery can be increased (TxDOT 2002b). The workshop participants felt that fundin problems would limit the applicability of this method. Their comments included fundin restrictions in specified area is an applicability/limitation issue, fundin would be an issue statewide, leislative limitation and financin, and TxDOT is tryin to use this method on some corridors with the Texas Mobility Fund (Appendix O). 3. Alternative fundin methods. Alternative fundin methods such as Texas Mobility Funds, revenue bonds from toll roads, and Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) bonds are some of the innovative fundin mechanisms that are available to DOTs (e-texas 2000; OBA 2001). Most participants enerally thouht that this method could have some neative impact on future project fundin. Their comments included lonterm impact needs to be investiated. North Carolina has some experience, 22

37 3.1 Project Plannin Phase reduces amount of funds available in the future, loss funds due to interest, and I believe it s a quick fix but could cause fundin problems later (Appendix O). 4. Desinate a sinle individual as Project Manaer (PM) from early plannin to completion of construction; empower & equip PM with needed tools & data to select appropriate expeditin methods. This method entails the selection of a project manaer who possesses leadership qualities and the ability to effectively handle intricate interpersonal relationships within the oranization, while maintainin continuity throuhout the project from initiation to end of construction. Motivation of the PM can be ranted with the use of incentives such as salary bonuses, future assinments, etc. (Griffith 2001). The participants felt that this method would be difficult to implement for a variety of reasons includin would mean many chanes in approach, selection of and keepin of PM critical, and difficult. An experienced PM may retire before project is completed, and not practical, decisions must be made on levels of authority based on experience of executive level (Appendix O). 5. Desin-Build approach in various forms (Desin-Build-Warrant, Desin- Build-Maintain, etc.). Desin-Build (D-B) is an alternative to the traditional Desin-Bid-Build system, with the difference bein that the desin and construction duties are performed by the same company (Molenaar 1998; Molenaar 1999; Gibson and Walewski 2001a). Variations to the Desin-Build Concept: Bridin: The owner develops preliminary project desin to the percent level. Turnkey: When the owner requires outside expertise and then allows the entity to turn over the keys at project completion. Desin-Build-Warranty (D-B-W): Combines a warranty provision with Desin-Build. 23

38 3. EXPEDITING METHODS Desin-Build-Maintain (D-B-M): Combines maintenance provisions with Desin-Build. Privatization: When a private entity desins, builds, and maintains a section of roadway in return for a toll or fee. The views of the participants on the implementation of this method were mixed, but most areed on its expeditin potential. Their comments included should dramatically accelerate construction but will cost more, quality of work is likely to suffer in the lon term. Also cost will be hiher, frees up TxDOT personnel to work on other items, and must watch quality of product not as many checks and balances (Appendix O). 6. Formal partnerin with desin consultants, contractors, local authorities, and reulatory aencies. Partnerin is a formal manaement process in which all parties to a project voluntarily aree at the outset to adopt a cooperative, teambased approach to project development and problem resolution. Many mechanisms (e.. meetins) can be used to promote partnerin concepts, includin project concept conferences, desin concept conferences, and postconstruction meetins (Grajek 2000; Thompson 1996; CII 1988). The views of the participants on this method were also mixed; for the most part, they thouht it was already bein implemented. Their comments included already in place in metropolitan districts, already doin to a lare extent, and it is best to partner additionally with utility companies, city and community aencies, major businesses and/or business associations (Appendix O). 7. Methods for expeditin Riht of Way (ROW) acquisition. When private real estate is required for a Department of Transportation project, the Department must follow specific state and federal procedures in order to acquire the property. Initially, all affected owners will receive a written notice explainin the Department's need for the property. This notice will also explain the acquisition process as well as the owner's rihts. Neotiations for sale follow. New approaches to speed the process may be developed. 24

39 3.1 Project Plannin Phase 8. Methods for expeditin utility relocation work. Relocation of utilities such as telephone, electric power, water and as, and so forth can reatly affect project delivery times. Methods should be implemented to expedite this process (FWHA 2002a; FWHA 2002b). 9. Methods for improvin environmental assessment durin plannin. Adequate environmental assessment meetin NEPA requirements in a timely manner will help improve delivery speed. Standardizin the process and ettin more local input will improve this process. Early identification of environmental and archeoloical concerns is important (TxDOT 2002). 10. Intellient Transportation Systems (ITS) & work-zone traffic control. A variety of evolvin technoloies that offer new solutions to improvin transportation conditions. These systems, based on electronic technoloies, communications, information processin, and naviation technoloies, are revolutionizin the interfaces between the driver, vehicle, and roadway to control traffic, thus facilitatin more efficient construction (USDOT 2000). The participants had some concerns about this method. Several comments capture these concerns, such as hih cost and maintenance, how does this expedite? and some elements of it are already in place on Dallas Hih 5 Project (Appendix O). 11. Public input on phasin of construction. This method entails havin the community more involved in hihway construction projects, includin choosin construction options that may allow a jurisdiction to close complete hihways, which could lead to faster completion. Input should come from both local concerns and commuters. The participants comments on this method included, Some form of public involvement is already in place, while we value the opinions of citizens, it is difficult at times to deal with uninformed or unreasonable citizens, need to implement more than is presently and if we vote we will never et anythin built (Appendix O). 25

40 3. EXPEDITING METHODS Each of the above mentioned expeditin methods could be very effective for expeditin hihway construction. Table 3.1 shows the applicability, limitations, and the pros and cons of each of the methods. 26

41 3.1 Project Plannin Phase Table 3.1 Table of the Applicability/Limitations and the Pros/Cons for Plannin Phase Expeditin Methods Expeditin Method 1. Standardize plannin approach 2. Prorammatic (Corridor) approach 3. Alternative fundin methods 4. Desinate a sinle individual as PM 5. Desin-Build approach in various forms Applicability/Limitations Lare owner oranizations such as TxDOT benefit from a standard plannin process Requires top manaement support Multi-year fundin and common contractor usae is standard procedure in the private sector This would require lon-term plannin Leislative limitations restrict this method GARVEE bonds or other methods are applicable to major hihway projects where financin is not immediately available Leislative limitations restrict this method This method is probably most applicable for lare and complex projects Leislation controls may preclude payment for bonuses Althouh it is bein used by almost half the states, D-B is not allowed leally in Texas Primarily, D-B is used when there are opportunities for the owner or aency to save time by havin construction bein before the final desin has been completed Not applicable to all projects; should be used on projects that have time constraints or have complex/ innovative project needs Leislative limitations restrict this method Pros(+)/Cons(-) + Better decision makin process + More consistent approach + More predictable project outcomes + Cost and schedule savins - Less flexibility + Faster delivery of project - Financin + Faster project completion due to adequate financin + Advancin completion dates saves money + Allows for prorammatic (corridor) plannin - Can over commit a state resultin in future fundin restrictions + Incentives encourae PMs to develop more economical means and methods + Less formal documentation and communication improvement would shorten the project execution + Reduction of executive personnel + More continuity durin project - Selection of PM is hihly critical - Independent enineers may be needed to check PM s work - Must overcome specialist mindset of oranization + Time Savins + Reduced cost due to accelerated schedules + Reduced administration and inspection costs + Eliminates conflicts between desiner and contractor + Reduced number of in-house desin personnel needed in TxDOT + Reduced chane orders and claims + Increased final product quality by allowin innovations and new approaches - Sinular responsibility - Reduces competitiveness of small companies 27