A Guidebook for Selecting Airport Capital Project Delivery Methods (2009)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Introduction and Purpose The objective of this guidebook is to help airports evaluate and choose the most appropriate project delivery method for their projects. Another important objective of this guidebook is to help airports document the process of decision-making and the outcome in a Project Delivery Decision Report. The project delivery method is the process by which a project is comprehensively designed and constructed for an owner—including project scope definition; organization of designers, construc- tors, and various consultants; sequencing of design and construction operations; execution of design and construction; and closeout and start-up. In some cases, the project delivery method may encompass operation and maintenance. Currently available project delivery methods have moved far beyond the traditional design-bid-build (DBB) method. With the change in procurement laws, public entities now share the ability of their private-sector counterparts to acquire construction services via alternative project delivery methods such as construction management, design-build, and other hybrid systems. The researchers’ approach to developing the project delivery method selection system was to review and analyze relevant literature on project delivery methods and previous work in developing decision support systems for project delivery selection. The research team recently completed a similar guidebook for transit projects (Touran et al. 2009). Experience and knowl- edge gained from that research helped in streamlining the research approach used in this project. In addition, an extensive questionnaire was developed for face-to-face, structured interviews with several airports. A list of airports was developed and approved by the project oversight panel (see Table 1-1). It was decided to consider only airports that had used alterna- tive project delivery methods. Also, the team considered the geographical and capacity diver- sity of the airports to ensure that a representative sample was selected. The researchers traveled to the selected airports and interviewed persons in charge of selecting project delivery meth- ods. In almost all of the interviews, the airport was represented by a team of individuals with planning, finance, and construction responsibilities for the capital programs at the airport. The results of the interviews were then analyzed and summarized (citations to the airport interviews are given in brackets throughout this guidebook). Based on the outcome of the liter- ature search and the structured interviews, a set of pertinent issues was identified and studied. These pertinent issues are thought to have a profound effect on the choice of project delivery method. These issues in turn were used to develop the project delivery selection system described in this guidebook. 3 C H A P T E R 1 Overview

Selection System Framework Selecting a project delivery method is a decision that is based on a multitude of factors. In this guidebook, these factors are called “pertinent issues” and have been categorized as project-level issues, airport-level issues, public policy/regulatory issues, and other issues. The research team has identified and verified these pertinent issues through a literature search, extensive interviews with various airports across the United States, and discussions between the project team and the proj- ect oversight panel. Based on these pertinent issues, the team has developed a two-tiered project delivery selection system that consists of the following: Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach and Tier 2— Weighted-Matrix Delivery Decision Approach. The Tier 1—Analytical Delivery Decision Approach (Tier 1 approach) provides a framework that can be used to define project goals and examine the advantages and disadvantages of each delivery method within the context of these goals. The motivation for this approach is to help users understand project delivery method attributes and determine whether their specific project goals align with the attributes of a particular delivery method. The Tier 1 approach also provides a “go/no-go” review to determine whether one or more project delivery methods should be excluded from the examination. At the completion of the Tier 1 approach, the user may not have a single, clear, and logical choice for a project delivery method. If this is the case, the user is advised to move to the Tier 2— Weighted-Matrix Delivery Decision Approach (Tier 2 approach) with the delivery methods that survived the Tier 1 approach and create a more detailed analysis to select the final project delivery method. The Tier 1 approach is designed to be a simple and straightforward selection method. The Tier 2 approach provides a means for the user to further examine and document a proj- ect delivery decision for an individual project. If a project delivery method is not found using the Tier 1 approach, the Tier 2 approach can be used to select a delivery method by prioritizing proj- 4 A Guidebook for Selecting Airport Capital Project Delivery Methods Table 1-1. Airports interviewed. Cas e # Airport (Three-Letter Code) Project Delivery Method Experience* Project Size Range Low/High (Typical) 1 Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Int’l (ATL) DBB, CMR, DB $1.0M/$1.2B ($10M–$20M) 2 Logan Int’l (BOS) DBB, CMR $10K/$165M ($2.0M) 3 Port Columbus Int’l (CMH) DBB, CMR, DB $50K/$165M ($1.5M) 4 Colorado Springs (COS ) DBB, DB $200K/$36M (<$1M or $5–$9M) 5 Dallas/Fort Worth Int’l (DFW) DBB, CMR, DB $8.0K/$100M+ ($2M–$5M) 6 Denver Int’l (DEN) DBB, CMR, DB $500K/$150M ($2.5M) 7 Memphis Int’l (MEM) DBB, CMR, DB $100K/$20M ($5.5M) 8 Norman Y. Mineta San Jose Int’l (SJC) DBB, DB $2.0K/$185M ($4.9M) 9 Tampa Int’l (TPA) DBB, CMR, DB $50K/$80M ($2.5M) * Project delivery method acronyms are the following: DBB = design-bid-build, CMR = construction manager at risk, DB = design-build.

ect objectives and selecting the delivery method that best aligns with these objectives. The Tier 2 approach is based on successful delivery decision tools developed by academics and profession- als over the past 20 years. With the Tier 2 approach, the user concentrates on a few key param- eters that affect the choice of project delivery method, assigns appropriate weights to each parameter, and calculates a score for each competing delivery method. Organization of the Guidebook This first chapter of this guidebook provides an overview of the work accomplished and a road map for the guidebook user. Chapter 2 describes the characteristics of airport projects, presents the results of the literature search, and provides definitions of various delivery methods. Also, a summary of the existing methodologies for selection of an appropriate project delivery method is provided. In addition, recommendations are made for the appropriate point in a project lifecycle to adopt various delivery methods. Chapter 3 describes pertinent issues affecting the choice of project delivery method and the advantages/disadvantages of each project delivery method in relation to these issues. There are numerous issues that airports need to consider when deciding to select a project delivery method. In this research, issues were identified through a literature search, personal experience, case studies, and interviews with airports. Pertinent issues are categorized as follows: • Project-level issues, • Airport-level issues, • Public policy/regulatory issues, and • Other issues. These influencing issues and their interactions with different project delivery methods are pre- sented in Chapter 3 in the form of a descriptive pro-con analysis. The analysis is based on trends found in the interviews conducted by the team with directors and executives at various airports and is supported by quotations from relevant literature. Chapters 4 and 5 describe the Tier 1 and Tier 2 approaches, respectively. In order to facilitate and streamline the application of these approaches, blank versions of the tables from these chap- ters are provided in Appendices C, D, and E. The user can download these tables and go through the two tiers in sequential order (to find Appendices C through F for this report, go to www.trb.org and search for “ACRP Report 21”). Appendix A contains a list of sources that are referenced in this guidebook. Appendix B contains a glossary of important terms used in the guidebook (Appen- dices A and B can be found following the reference section of this guidebook). Appendix F pro- vides a case study example of a major airport project for which the delivery selection system was used. It is the report authors’ belief that this guidebook is a comprehensive resource that can help airports select the most appropriate project delivery method and document their decision in a concise and easy-to-understand format. It is recommended that airports use outside industry pro- fessionals to facilitate implementation of the methodology contained in this guidebook. These professionals should have a thorough understanding of and experience with the type of project the airport is evaluating, the various project delivery methods the airport is considering, and the potential risks associated with the type of project and the project delivery methods under consid- eration. The use of such professionals will ensure that the appropriate expertise and experience is incorporated into the process. Facilitation of the process by outside professionals will also foster an objective selection of the most appropriate project delivery method, thereby minimizing the likelihood of a predetermined outcome. Overview 5