Guide to Project Management Strategies for Complex Projects (2013)

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.

63 4 USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS 4.1 INTRODUCTION This guide provides a roadmap for managing complex projects that starts with a higher-order conceptualization of project complexity (the 5DPM model) and facili- tates understanding the scope and nature of project complexity through complexity scoring and mapping. Using the 5DPM methods, your team can select from the 13 project management tools to help achieve project success. The complex-project management process can be depicted as a funnel (Figure 4.1), with broad concepts at the top of the funnel and specifi c project management tools at the bottom. Tool Selection Process Selecting project management tools begins with defi ning the critical project success factors (Method 1) and continues throughout the process of using all fi ve project devel- opment methods. Using the tool selection checklist in Appendix E, you can update and amend project management tool selection and notes throughout the development of your complex-project management plan.

64 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS The 13 project management tools identified through the case studies completed in the R10 research project are listed in the far-left column of Table 4.1. Table 4.1 relates the tools to the typical project development phases by showing when your team will consider a given tool (C for consider), decide whether to use the tool (S for select), and implement the tool if it is selected (E for execute). The table pro- vides suggestions, but depending on your project or agency characteristics, you may consider, select, and execute tools in different phases than those shown. The list of 13 tools is not exhaustive, and project team members may identify other tools based on past experience and local requirements. As innovations in project deliv- ery, new forms of project financing, advancements in materials and construction meth- ods, and social, demographic, political, and legislative changes work their way into the transportation industry, new tools will become available for use on complex projects. Figure 4.2 provides a flowchart that illustrates the tool selection process. Figure 4.1. 5DPM conceptual process funnel for tool selection. Figure 4.1. 5DPM conceptu Project M Complexity Scoring and Mapping al process f anagement Project Development Methods 5DPM Framew unnel for to Tools ok Conc Vi In Imp ol selection eptualization sualization tegration lementation . or

65 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS TABLE 4.1. TOOL SELECTION AND EXECUTION PROCESS ACROSS THE TYPICAL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE Tool Typical Project Development Process Phase Planning Programming and Scoping Preliminary Engineering Final Engineering Construction Operation, Monitoring, and Maintenance 1. Incentivize critical project outcomes C S E E E E 2. Develop dispute resolution plans C S E E 3. Perform comprehensive risk analysis C S, E E E E E 4. Identify critical permit issues C S, E 5. Evaluate applications of off-site fabrication C, S, E E 6. Determine involvement in ROW and utilities C S, E E E 7. Determine work packages and sequencing C S, E E 8. Design to budget C, S E E 9. Colocate team C S E 10. Establish flexible design criteria C, S, E E 11. Evaluate flexible financing C, S, E E E 12. Develop finance expenditure model C, S, E E 13. Establish public involvement plans C, S, E E Note: C, S, and E refer to project team actions: C = consider use; S = select; and E = execute. ROW = right-of-way.

66 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS Figure 4.2. Tool selection process. Figure 4.2. Tool selection process.

67 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS Figure 4.2 shows the process starting with the complexity map and the output from the five 5DPM methods, as well as information from both internal and external sources (and recall that you do not wait to begin exploring tools until all five methods are completed). An internal source might be your agency’s ROW group describing constraints on project alignment, and an external source could be a community desire to have an iconic design for a bridge. Depending on the phase of the project life cycle in which you are conducting this selection process, your team can make decisions on the use of each tool shown in Table 4.1. As shown in Figure 4.2, this process can be iterative, occurring periodi- cally throughout your complex-project delivery period and each time you complete or revisit a method. For example, given all the necessary input and the action plans devel- oped using Method 5, you might find it helpful to revisit the tool selection checklist in Appendix E. With that checklist, your project team can discuss the potential for using each tool in the context of your project action plans and identify the tools that may be appropriate for use on your project in an iterative manner. Once you select and use a tool, be sure to revisit your project complexity map, update it, and reiterate the process as appropriate. Your team will also need to revise any of your project action plans that might interact as you implement use of each tool. The tools as described represent simplified scenarios. Outcomes from implementa- tion of individual tools may interact with outcomes or implementation of several other tools and methods. The guide descriptions attempt to capture the major interactions, but specific complex projects may have interactions not described here. Project leaders should trust their knowledge and experience: if they think there is an interaction, they should address it. Figure 4.3 shows the tool graphic used throughout this chapter. Figure 4.3. Tool graphic. Figure 4.3. Tool graphic.

68 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS The intention of the graphic is to help relate the use of each of the 13 tools to managing project complexity in each of the 5DPM dimensions. The graphic contains the name of the tool at the top and boxes across the bottom for each of the five dimen- sions. If a box across the bottom is not shaded, the specified tool may not be appropri- ate for addressing complexity in that dimension. Readiness Assessments Some 5DPM methods and tools might be new to your agency yet potentially powerful to improve your capability to manage any given complex project. At the same time, an existing method or tool that you use may be equivalent or superior to one of the 5DPM methods or tools. We include a brief question with multiple-choice answers for each of the 13 tools in this chapter to help you quickly assess the competency or matu- rity level of your organization in using each of the tools on any given project. These quick assessments may help you to identify your current use of the tools and your ability to use any particular tool on a project and to determine additional resources and organizational changes to consider in addition to use of this guide, as outlined in Section 2.2 (Assessing 5DPM Readiness). 4.2 TOOL 1: INCENTIVIZE CRITICAL PROJECT OUTCOMES Overview Given the previously identified outcomes, you may consider and create incentives, disincentives, or both for the project designers and contractors to meet project goals. Incentives range from traditional schedule, cost, and safety incentives to performance areas from various external factors, such as social issues, environmental issues, public involvement, and traffic mobility. Use the outputs from the complexity identification and mapping process, as well as each of the project development methods, to identify key performance metrics to monitor for project success. Include these perfor- mance metrics specifically in individual contracts with incentive language for exceeding minimum performance. Although traditional incentives focus on cost and schedule performance, you can write targeted contract incentives for most performance criteria, including public involvement and public relations, maintenance of traffic volumes, teamwork, design innovations, safety, and environmental perfor- mance. You can also write them for financing, construction, and/or employment con- tracts. Incentives and disincentives can be quite effective for complex projects. As Figure 4.4 shows, the use of incentives can apply to complexity management for any of the five dimensions or for interactions among any of the dimensions. “The use of incentives needs to be used carefully so that the focus of the parties is bearing the shared risks.” M. Hertogh et al. (2008)

69 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS When to Incentivize Critical Project Outcomes Implement use of incentives and disincentives as early as possible in the planning pro- cess and always consider it as part of the complex-project procurement plan. Develop- ment of performance metrics and incentive language may take place multiple times on a project, particularly when partners join the team at different stages, which is frequently the case with design–bid–build. You can make the decision to use incentives early in the planning process. How- ever, if contract awards are made strictly on low cost (single-parameter award), the effectiveness of incentives will be diminished. The more project owners can reward value-adding activities, the more project partners are likely to align their interests with the owner organization. Readiness to Incentivize Critical Project Outcomes How does your organization create incentive and disincentive plans to encourage project designers, engineers, and contractors to meet critical project success factors, including schedule, cost, safety, social, environmental, public involvement, and traffic mobility? o We do not consider in any of the project development phases (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment on an ad hoc basis or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to incentivize critical project outcomes, but it is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in developing plans to incen- tivize critical project outcomes (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Figure 4.4. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 1, incentivize critical project outcomes. Figure 4.4. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 1, incentivize c ritical project outcomes.

70 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS Steps in Incentivizing Critical Project Outcomes After evaluating and mapping project complexity and developing a clear understand- ing of the sources of complexity on the project, perform the following steps to develop contract incentives to align the interests of contracted parties with those of the overall project, the project owner, the public at large, or a combination of them: 1. Identify critical success factors from Method 1. 2. Identify project team from Method 2. 3. Identify project arrangements from Method 3. 4. Develop performance metrics matching critical success factors. Performance met- rics are used to determine if adequate or satisfactory performance is met. 5. Negotiate contracts with key team members that include performance metrics from Step 4. 6. Include incentives for exceeding minimum contract performance. Be sure to tie incentives and disincentives to performance metrics. Examples of Incentivizing Critical Project Outcomes Doyle Drive For the Doyle Drive, or Presidio Parkway, project, which is a gateway to the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, California, incentive clauses were included on two of eight contracts to accelerate traffic shift. Contractors submitted a cost-reduction incen- tive proposal that cost savings would be halved between contractors and the California Department of Transportation. InterCounty Connector An environmental incentive pool was set aside for each contract on the InterCounty Connector project in Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties in Maryland to provide contractors with incentives to reduce environmental impacts. As a result, wetlands im- pacts were reduced by 40% and streams impacts were reduced by 10%. Cost incentives were issued on the basis of weekly pass–fail ratings of erosion and sediment control, and disincentives were given for failure (must pass all quarterly ratings for incentives). New Mississippi River Bridge On the New Mississippi River Bridge project between St. Louis, Missouri, and East St. Louis, Illinois, incentives were awarded to the railroad to complete required design work in accordance with the overall project schedule. The incentive money allowed the railroad to hire additional staff to complete required design work. Texas State Highway 161 The schedule of construction on Texas State Highway 161 between Dallas and Fort Worth was crucial to the project. It was vitally important that the phases of the project be opened on time. Therefore, incentives, disincentives, and liquidated damages were a part of the construction contract. The contractor was able to complete the work ahead of schedule and was awarded a substantial incentive payment.

71 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS Where to Learn More About Incentivizing Critical Project Outcomes To learn more about using critical project outcome incentives, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP Web Document 38: Quality-Based Performance Rating of Contractors for Prequalification and Bidding Purposes. 2001. This study developed a comprehensive quality-based rating system for use in prequalification systems and bid evaluations. The rating system will help deter- mine qualification for construction contract awards or bidder responsibility in states that do not conduct prequalification procedures. • NCHRP 10-79: Guidelines for Quality-Related Pay Adjustment Factors for Pave- ments. 2011. This document includes the definition and purpose of quality-related pay adjust- ment factors. It is intended to be used by a midlevel materials or construction engineer who has an understanding of statistics and SpecRisk software. • NCHRP 20-24(06)A: Performance Measures for State Highway and Transporta- tion Agencies. 1993. This report evaluates the current practice in comparative program and system evaluation, the feasibility of making the comparisons, the characteristics of meth- odologies used to make such comparisons, and the purpose of appropriate actions. • Strategic Performance Measures for State Departments of Transportation: A Handbook for CEOs and Executives. AASHTO, 2003. This guide describes how to develop strategic performance measures that link or- ganizational strategic planning and performance measurements and turn them into a small group of measurable, meaningful, and accurate performance measures. • Incentive-Based Approaches for Environmental Stewardship. AASHTO, 2009. • Managing Highway Contract Claims: Analysis and Avoidance. Course Number FHWA-NHI-134037A. On completion of this two-and-a-half-day course, participants will be able to iden- tify key elements of a claim, measure impacts and cost of change, and identify the dispute resolution procedures available and other various elements involved with claims and dispute resolution. • Practical Conflict Management Skills for Environmental Issues. Course Number FHWA-NHI-142060. This three-day course teaches basic conflict management skills and examines op- portunities for applying these collaborative skills where there are environmental issues. • Performance-Based Contracting for Maintenance. Course Number FHWA- NHI-134079.

72 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS 4.3 TOOL 2: DEVELOP DISPUTE RESOLUTION PLANS Overview Development of dispute resolution plans early is important for complex projects. Realiz ing that complex projects offer a greater number of dispute points than simple projects, thoughtful dispute resolution plans can be crucial to project success. This section provides a discussion and examples of dispute resolution plans for complex projects. You will need to negotiate dispute resolution plans for neighborhood and com- munity groups, U.S. DOT Section 4(f) signatories, and other indirect stakeholders on any given project. You can integrate use of this tool into development of project action plans (Method 5) and stipulate plans contractu- ally in case scope agreement issues arise between designer and owner when selecting project arrange- ments (Method 3). Preparing a memorandum of agreement that all local jurisdictions are signatory to and that elabo- rates on the process for resolving disputes without increasing cost or schedule risk is a good practical idea. If considering new or innovative design solu- tions, cooperation with designers and city and local review agencies on flexible approval processes in advance is important. Mechanistic designs and nonstandard protocols can be effective solutions in resolving conflicts or disagreements. After identifying potential dispute areas from the complexity evaluation and use of Methods 1 through 5, the project team leaders should develop dispute resolution plans involving contracted team members, other direct stakeholders, and indirect stake holders. The goal of a dispute resolution plan should be to identify and manage conflicts proactively before they have a negative impact on cost, schedule, or risk. The key to any effective dispute resolution plan is to have decision makers who are empowered to bind their organizations to agreements involved in the process. Another key to effective dispute resolution is to create a project culture that respects disagree- ments, in that it is safe to discuss conflicts openly with the goal of quick resolution in the best interests of the project. As Figure 4.5 shows, the development of dispute resolution plans can apply to complexity management for any of the five dimensions or for interactions among any of the dimensions. “Contractually lacking a definitive chain of command for dispute resolution and implementing resolution plans has the ability to adversely affect the outcome of complex projects.” C. J. Schexnayder and R. E. Mayo (2004)

73 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS The use of dispute resolution plans can help in managing complexity and poten- tial setbacks in the cost, schedule, technical (quality), context (including stakeholder issues), and financing dimensions and is highly recommended for complex projects. When to Develop Dispute Resolution Plans Establish your dispute resolution methods for each major project partner or stakeholder as soon as they are identified and invited (or contracted) to participate in the project. Dispute resolution methods should be agreed on before the partner’s or stakeholder’s formal engagement or involvement in the project if possible. Readiness to Develop Dispute Resolution Plans Does your organization develop dispute resolution plans involving contracted team members and direct and indirect stakeholders to identify and manage conflicts proactively? o We do not consider in any of the project development phases (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment on an ad hoc basis or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to develop dispute resolution plans, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in developing dispute resolu- tion plans (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Figure 4.5. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 2, develop di spute resolution plans. Figure 4.5. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 2, develop dispute resolution plans.

74 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS Steps in Developing Dispute Resolution Plans Follow these steps in developing dispute resolution plans: 1. Identify key decision makers with each major project partner or stakeholder. 2. To the degree possible, have each partner or stakeholder organization provide written empowerment to its project representative. 3. Establish a hierarchy of dispute resolution actions and procedures and a time frame for moving disputes to the next level of the hierarchy if they remain unresolved. 4. Establish a multipartner communication protocol for sharing potential dispute issues early. 5. Clearly identify a project leader who is responsible for managing disputes and fol- lowing up on resolution agreements. 6. Identify potential third-party facilitators that can be called on if needed. Examples of Using Dispute Resolution Plans Detroit River International Crossing On the Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC) project, the Michigan DOT estab lished a governance structure that was agreed on by the project partners. The Canada-U.S.-Ontario-Michigan Border Transportation Partnership consisted of FHWA, Transport Canada, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, and the Michigan DOT. A four-member project steering committee was established for escalation of issues (with one member from each of the entities). The goals of the project team were to resolve issues early and avoid issue escalation. The project charter and organizational framework established a dispute resolution ladder and a communication and decision-making protocol. This framework included a procedure for project issue resolution. The project team maintained a key issue and task log database to track issues and their resolution. InterCounty Connector With help from an outside expert facilitator, executive or extreme partnering was promoted on the InterCounty Connector projects in Maryland. A five-tiered dispute resolution process was used. Issue-tracking methods were used to identify potential problems ahead of time. Methods included “white-listed” issues, quarterly facilitation, and a monthly form that identified potential issues. James River Bridge/I-95 Richmond The Virginia DOT created a downtown (Richmond) stakeholder council whose au- thority was to mediate specific needs for access to the Richmond central business dis- trict during construction and the need to complete the construction of the I-95 James River Bridge expeditiously.

75 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS The stakeholder council acted as a mechanism for individual business owners to present specific disputes and gain resolution without resorting to legal or extralegal means. The council decided the best course of action, and Virginia DOT then worked with its contractor to create a solution that minimized impacts on both the project and the community. North Carolina Tollway The North Carolina Tollway project has a dispute resolution board composed of three people. One person is selected by the North Carolina Turnpike Authority, one is se- lected by the design-builder, and a third is selected by the other two members of the board. This board meets every quarter even if there is no dispute. In addition, the board receives meeting minutes and other documents to keep up-to-date on the project. Where to Learn More About Developing Dispute Resolution Plans To learn more about developing dispute resolution plans, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP 8-68: Citizen’s Guide and Discipline-Specific Professionals’ Guide for Context-Sensitive Solutions in Transportation. 2010. • NCHRP 15-19: Application of Context-Sensitive Design Principles. 2002. • NCHRP Legal Research Digest 50: Current Practices in the Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution. 2008. • NCHRP Project 20-68A, Scan 07-01: Best Practices in Project Delivery Manage- ment. 2009. The findings of this scan were that the best practices could be divided into four focus areas: (1) project management, (2) performance measures, (3) contracting practices, and (4) community involvement. The scan provides detailed information in each of the four areas. • NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 214: Resolution of Disputes to Avoid Construction Claims. 1995. This synthesis provides state-of-the-practice procedures for resolving disputes to avoid construction claims. It also emphasizes ways to settle disputes at their incep- tion, before they become formal claims or lawsuits. • NCHRP Web-Only Document 184: Going the Distance Together: Citizen’s Guide to Context-Sensitive Solutions for Better Transportation. 2001. This web-only document covers topics such as (1) transportation and the qual- ity of life; (2) community context, vision, values, and plans: the foundation of context-sensitive solutions; (3) shaping transportation decisions; (4) understand- ing professional responsibility and flexibility in project design; and (5) going the distance together: partnership through collaboration.

76 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS • NCHRP Report 480: A Guide to Best Practices for Achieving Context-Sensitive Solutions. 2002. This report covers topics such as (1) a multidisciplinary approach to context- sensitive design, (2) effective decision making, (3) reflecting community values, (4) achieving environmental sensitivity, (5) ensuring safe and feasible solutions, and (6) organizational needs. • NCHRP Legal Research Digest 50: Current Practices in the Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution. 2008. • This report details the current practices in various state transportation depart- ments in the areas of environment, contracts, ROW, and torts. 4.4 TOOL 3: PERFORM COMPREHENSIVE RISK ANALYSIS Overview Implementation of risk analysis and mitigation plans, whether formal or informal, at early stages of the project is critical to project success. Risk analysis must include clear and concise assignment of responsibilities and designated resources. Risk analysis must also include not only traditional cost and schedule issues but also context and financing issues, such as those related to railroads, utilities, U.S. DOT Section 4(f), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), appropriations, capital bill allocation (use it or lose it funding), and the effect of delays on private equity viability. You can use risk analysis outcomes to develop aggressive mitigation plans that include the possibility of reallocating contingency within project segments or phases to prevent delays or cost increases. Early involvement from contractor groups or con- struction specialty review boards can be effective for input on means, methods, and material supply issues. Use evaluation of risk probabilities (qualitative or quantitative) for potential loss events from expert panels and historical records in your prioritization and mitiga- tion strategies. After these strategies are established, integrate your risk analysis and mitigation plan with the critical success factors for the project. Several analysis tools, software products, and spreadsheet applications are available that are a good option in helping to establish project contingencies. As Figure 4.6 shows, performing comprehensive risk analysis can apply to com- plexity management for any of the five dimensions or for interactions among any of the dimensions. Use comprehensive risk analysis to help manage direct risks from complexity in cost, schedule, scope, and quality control and indirect risks in cost, schedule, and scope arising from the potential impact of context and stakeholder issues and risks associated with project financing. Comprehensive risk analysis is highly recommended for complex projects.

77 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS When to Perform Comprehensive Risk Analysis Begin risk management planning in the very early stages of the project. The adequacy of risk management will be improved by following this advice: • Start the process early. • Include all major project team members in the process (owner, designer, financier, builder). • Continually monitor the plan and update as needed. • Have a two-way communication and informa- tion-sharing system that promotes consistent scanning for new and emerging risks. Use of the comprehensive risk management tool should be considered in con- junction with incentivizing outcomes (Tool 1), dispute resolution planning (Tool 2), critical permit issue identification (Tool 4), off-site fabrication evaluation (Tool 5), determining involvement in ROW and utilities (Tool 6), designing to budget (Tool 8), establishing flexible design criteria (Tool 10), finance expenditure model development (Tool 12), and public involvement planning (Tool 13). Readiness to Perform Comprehensive Risk Analysis Does your organization perform a comprehensive risk analysis and develop mitigation strategies from traditional cost and schedule issues to context and financing issues? o We do not perform a comprehensive risk analysis in any of the project develop- ment phases (novice). o The project team may perform a risk analysis and develop mitigation strategies using its own experience and judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team may perform a risk analysis and develop mitigation strategies, but they may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). Figure 4.6. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 3, perform com prehensive risk analysis. Figure 4.6. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 3, perform comprehensive risk analysis. “Identifying uncertainties using project workshops is acceptable, but risk analysis should be ongoing and not be based solely on preliminary checklists and risk registers.” Edwards et al. (2009)

78 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS o We have a standard and documented process or tool in performing comprehensive risk analyses and developing mitigation strategies (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we also have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to con- tinuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Steps in Performing Comprehensive Risk Analysis Follow these steps in performing comprehensive risk analysis: 1. Assemble a project team with broad representation and expertise. Incorporate indi viduals with local knowledge, as well as those with organizational knowledge. Consider dedicated time for developing risk management plans. Consider using an outside facilitator. 2. Have the team brainstorm potential risk factors. 3. Have the team rank each potential risk factor by considering both likelihood and severity of the risk and the impact it will have on achieving project outcomes. Include discussions of both potentially negative and positive risks. 4. Develop mitigation strategies for each critical risk factor. Assign responsibility for tracking risk to a specific team member. 5. Identify project partners and other stakeholders that will have any impact on the issue or that can be influenced by the issue. The objective is to make sure the team is not trading one risk for another. 6. Allocate resources needed to support mitigation strategies. Also, consider con- tract language, incentives, and partnership agreements that reduce resistance to the mitigation strategy. 7. Have the project team meet frequently to update the risk management plan. 8. Integrate risk management decisions into cost estimates, project schedules, design scopes, the communication plan, and so forth. Examples of Using Comprehensive Risk Analysis Green Street Risk analysis was important in the planning stage for the Green Street program for the City of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, as well as in the design and construction phases. Overall, the risks were managed through innovation testing and mechanistic design and analysis. I-40 Crosstown Relocation On the I-40 Crosstown Relocation project in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, a formal risk analysis was executed in the cost, schedule, and technical areas. The 2007 edition of the annual FHWA cost validation study found that everything was fairly close.

79 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS During this project, rapid inflation of construction material costs occurred over a period of about one year. During this period of inflation, new estimates were created every month to try to stay ahead of the rising costs. I-95 James River Bridge Formal risk analysis areas included cost, schedule, technical, and public opinion on the I-95 James River Bridge project in Richmond, Virginia. A risk register and public outreach were the risk identification techniques used. New Mississippi River Bridge On the New Mississippi River Bridge project, a formal risk analysis and mitigation process was in place that was effective in managing the cost, schedule, technical, and context dimensions. The risk management plan was developed early in the process and was reviewed weekly, which forced the team to identify potential problems early and to develop solutions before cost or schedule was affected. Use of this tool allowed the team to get started early with railroad and utility issues that could have influenced design, increased costs, and delayed the schedule. North Carolina Tollway Risk analysis was part of the bonding process on the North Carolina Tollway. The project needed an AA rating on the bond market to get a better interest rate and to be a low-risk project. The North Carolina Turnpike Authority bought bond insurance against the toll revenue, which originally had a medium to moderate risk. The toll revenue was not shown to cover the total cost of the project, so legislation provided gap funding that gave the project the low-risk AA rating. If the gap funding had not been provided, the project would not have gone through. Where to Learn More About Performing Comprehensive Risk Analysis To learn more about performing comprehensive risk analysis, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • SHRP 2 R09: Guide for the Process of Managing Risk on Rapid Renewal Projects. 2011. This guide outlines a formal risk management process that helps optimize perfor- mance for accelerated reconstruction projects. It also includes practical methods for identifying, assessing, mitigating, allocating, and monitoring risk. • SHRP 2 R16: Strategies for Improving the Project Agreement Process Between Highway Agencies and Railroads. 2010. This project includes model legal agreements, recommended practices, sample contracts, and training material to resolve underlying sources of conflicts and streamline review and agreement processes.

80 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS • NCHRP 20-24(74): Executive Strategies for Risk Management Practices by State Departments of Transportation. 2011. This is a currently active project. The objective is to develop a guide for the use of risk management to support (1) early identification of key issues that may signifi- cantly slow or block successful project delivery, (2) effective application of man- agement action and other resources to avoid or mitigate the delays these issues represent, and (3) better decision making in project planning and programming. • NCHRP 20-59(17): Guide to Risk Management of Multimodal Transportation Infrastructure. 2008. The objective was to create a guide that provided agencies with a risk manage- ment methodology that can be used to conduct threat, vulnerability, and criticality assessments of facilities. This guide also found cost-effective countermeasures to prevent, detect, and reduce threats to assets on a multimodal basis. • NCHRP Report 658: Guidebook on Risk Analysis Tools and Management Prac- tices to Control Transportation Project Costs. 2010. This report contains topics such as (1) project cost estimation and management, (2) an overview of risk management, (3) guide to the planning phase, (4) guide to the programming phase, (5) guide to the design phase, and (6) implementation. • NCHRP Report 574: Guidance for Cost Estimation and Management for High- way Projects During Planning, Programming, and Preconstruction. 2007. This report contains topics such as (1) agency cost estimation practice and cost esti mation management processes, (2) factors and strategies, (3) guide for plan- ning phase, (4) guide for programming and preliminary design phase, (5) guide for final design phase, and (6) implementation. • NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 402: Construction Manager-at-Risk Project Delivery for Highway Programs. 2010. This synthesis offers an overview of the various techniques used by transportation agencies when implementing the construction manager-at-risk project delivery method. • Guide to Risk Assessment and Allocation for Highway Construction Manage- ment. FHWA, 2006. • Risk Management. Course Number FHWA-NHI-134065. This two-day course provides participants with an understanding of risk manage- ment concepts and processes. • Risk Management Executive Summary. Course Number FHWA-NHI-134065A.

81 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS 4.5 TOOL 4: IDENTIFY CRITICAL PERMIT ISSUES Overview Development of timelines for environmental, U.S. DOT Section 4(f), and other critical regulatory reviews very early in the project life cycle is critical for successful projects. For complex-project success, develop flexible re- sponse mechanisms for permit issues and look at flexible planning and design for minimal impact from permit issues, particularly when uncertainty is high (e.g., geotechnical and subsurface conditions, State Historic Preservation Office sites). As Figure 4.7 shows, identifying critical permit issues can apply to complexity management for any of the five dimensions or for interactions among any of the dimensions. Critical permit issues can control the cost, schedule, and scope impacts arising from context and stakeholder issues, and availability of financing may be dependent on minimizing schedule and cost growth related to permit issues. Identification of criti- cal permit issues is highly recommended for complex projects. Figure 4.7. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 4, identify critical permit issues. Figure 4.7. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 4, identify c ritical permit issues. When to Identify Critical Permit Issues To be effective, this tool should be implemented in the very early stages of planning, preferably before alignments have been finalized and irreversible design decisions have been made. You need to evaluate critical permit issues as soon as possible. If permits cannot be obtained immediately, make sure the design is flexible enough to be changed if necessary. “Environmental limitations need to be compared with other factors such as cost, safety, and technical decisions to determine the best solution and the ideal trade-off scenario.” Trapani and Beal (1983)

82 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS Readiness to Identify Critical Permit Issues How does your organization identify critical permit issues to minimize their negative impacts on cost, schedule, technical scope, context, or financing in the scoping and programming and preliminary engineering phases of project development? o We do not consider in the scoping and programming or preliminary engineering phases of project development (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to identify critical permit issues, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in identifying critical permit issues (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Steps in Identifying Critical Permit Issues Information from the complexity evaluation and mapping process and the definition of critical success factors (Method 1) provide insight into critical permit issues that may have a potential negative impact on cost, schedule, technical scope, context, or financing. In addition, permit issues may be identified in comprehensive risk analysis (Tool 3). Follow the steps for use of this tool to minimize critical permit issue impacts on the schedule and to assign design and planning activities as needed to fast-track aspects of the work. Early identification of critical permit issues can also act as “due diligence” in establishing working relationships with permitting agencies. It can be very beneficial to have a dialogue on how separate agencies can work together to minimize the nega- tive impact the permitting process might have on the project, while at the same time allowing the permitting agency to share its primary concerns with the project team. The steps in this process are as follows: 1. From the complexity mapping process and the outcomes of Methods 1 through 5, identify the critical permit issues that must be resolved before design can be com- pleted and construction can begin. 2. Discuss potential major regulatory issues with responsible agencies and use flex- ible designs to minimize the impact of potential points of conflict with permitting agencies (i.e., be responsive to their concerns). 3. Make early contact with regulatory agencies responsible for permits to communi- cate and coordinate submittal and approval schedules. Investigate the potential for phased permitting, simultaneous reviews, fast-tracking, and so forth. 4. Ensure that submittal packages are coordinated, complete, and timely.

83 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS Examples of Critical Permit Issue Identification Detroit River International Crossing The DRIC project was monitored at the U.S. DOT level because it was included on then-President Bush’s list of the top 10 projects requiring streamlining. This stream- lining required senior leadership support from various federal agencies and the com- mitment to reduce or eliminate barriers and to work cooperatively. The team created a “green sheet” from the Record of Decision that identified the required mitigation measures. The sheet provided a simple summary of the mitigation requirements to assist with monitoring and accountability. I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor Improvement On the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor (NHHCC) project, the Connecti- cut DOT held biweekly program manager meetings to ensure that permits and ROW were acquired on time. Lewis and Clark Bridge The project team for the Lewis and Clark Bridge, which spans the state line between Washington and Oregon, developed a protocol plan to manage critical permit issues. The plan clarified timing of action, responsible personnel to act, the back-up plan, and things to do first. Louisville–Southern Indiana Ohio River Bridges On the Louisville–Southern Indiana Ohio River Bridges project, which addresses long- term, cross-river transportation needs in southern Indiana and Louisville, Kentucky, thorough preparation and background documentation for the environmental impact statement and U.S. DOT Section 4(f) processes were critical, and managing them si- multaneously was useful in keeping the project moving forward. Where to Learn More About Identifying Critical Permit Issues To learn more about identifying critical permit issues, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP 8-68: Citizen’s Guide and Discipline-Specific Professionals’ Guide for Context-Sensitive Solutions in Transportation. 2010. This report covers topics such as (1) transportation and the quality of life; (2) com- munity context, vision, values, and plans: the foundation of context-sensitive solutions; (3) shaping transportation decisions; (4) understanding professional responsibility and flexibility in project design; and (5) going the distance together: partnership through collaboration. • NCHRP 20-24(71): Expediting NEPA Decisions and Other Practitioner Strate- gies for Addressing High-Risk Issues in Project Delivery. 2010. This is a currently active project. The objective is to develop a guide for the use of risk management to support (1) early identification of key issues that may sig- nificantly slow or block successful project delivery, (2) effective application of

84 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS management action and other resources to avoid or mitigate the delays these issues represent, and (3) better decision making in project planning and programming. • NCHRP Report 351: Hazardous Wastes in Highway Rights-of-Way. 1993. • NCHRP Report 379: Guidelines for the Development of Wetland Replacement Areas. 1996. This project outlines a well-defined wetland replacement process. It also includes guidelines for the creation of wetland banks that could be used for trade at a later date when no other option is applicable. • NCHRP Report 474: Assessment of Impacts of Bridge Deck Runoff Contami- nants on Receiving Waters, Vols. 1 and 2. 2001. This project included a review of literature, a survey of highway agencies, develop- ment and testing of biological studies, and the design of a process to evaluate the impact of bridges on water quality. • NCHRP Report 565: Evaluation of Best Management Practices for Highway Runoff Control. 2006. This report provides background information on typical storm water best manage- ment practices and application of low-impact development in the highway envi- ronment, the treatment processes for storm water, the influences of highway and hydrologic characteristics, and institutional and regional influences. It also dis- cusses performance evaluation, and an overall evaluation strategy is outlined. • NCHRP Technologies to Improve Consideration of Environmental Concerns in Transportation Decisions (CD-ROM). 2001. This phase of the project identified and critiqued 26 technology applications used to improve the consideration of environmental concerns in transportation proj- ects. It uses a fictional case study to demonstrate these applications. • NCHRP Research Results Digest 304: Technologies to Improve Consideration of Environmental Concerns in Transportation Decisions. 2006. This phase of the project, which is a continuation of the NCHRP 25-22 project, uses the findings of the first phase and identifies, profiles, and demonstrates eight of the existing technology applications through coordination with state DOTs. • All of AASHTO Practitioner’s Handbooks. A variety of handbooks covering topics such as maintaining a project file and pre- paring an administrative record for a NEPA study, responding to comments on an environmental impact statement, complying with Section 4(f) of the U.S. DOT Act of 1966, developing and implementing a storm water management program in a transportation agency, and many more. • NEPA and Transportation Decisionmaking. Course Number FHWA-NHI-142005. This three-day course teaches participants about NEPA principles and the umbrella concept in transportation decision making. It also explains each participant’s roles and responsibilities and the importance of a collaborative process when evaluating alternatives. It lists the milestones and describes documentation requirements and how to manage the NEPA process.

85 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS • Beyond Compliance: Historic Preservation in Transportation Project Develop- ment. Course Number FHWA-NHI-142049. This three-day course will help participants to identify historic preservation laws; describe the Section 106 process, the roles and responsibilities of all parties involved in the process, and how it relates to NEPA project development and Section 4(f); describe the NEPA decision-making process; and identify opportuni- ties for environmental streamlining and stewardship. • Introduction to NEPA and Transportation Decisionmaking. Course Number FHWA-NHI-142052. This four-hour course offers an introduction to NEPA that includes the origin and intent of NEPA; the umbrella concept; NEPA principles, roles, and responsibilities; and the documentation requirement of the NEPA process. • Practical Conflict Management Skills for Environmental Issues. Course Number FHWA-NHI-142060. This three-day course will teach basic conflict management skills and will examine opportunities for applying these collaborative skills when there are environmental issues. 4.6 TOOL 5: EVALUATE APPLICATIONS OF OFF-SITE FABRICATION Overview Consider off-site fabrication not only for cost or schedule control purposes, but also for quality (technical) control, minimal public disruption (such as noise and loss of access), and environmental impact control. Considering that complexity on projects may come from context issues, off-site fabrication can be a good solution for external issues in minimizing road closures, disruption to local business, traffic delays, detour lengths, and public inconvenience. As Figure 4.8 shows, the need to evaluate off-site fabrication applications arises primarily from complexity in the cost, schedule, technical, and context dimensions or from the interactions among them. Figure 4.8. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 5, evaluate applications of off-site fabrication. Fig ure 4.8. Relationship of dimensio fa ns to Tool 5 brication. , evaluate a pplications of off-site

86 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS Schedule complexity may be created by con- text issues, such as high-volume traffic and lack of suitable detours, but the use of off-site fabrication will be determined by an analysis of the trade-offs in cost, schedule, and design quality and service- ability. Therefore, at least within the context of the 5DPM framework in this guide, off-site fabrication can help manage cost, schedule, and technical com- plexity, which in turn may be a solution for context and stakeholder constraints. Evaluation of off-site fabrication applications is recommended for complex projects that need cost, schedule, and serviceability optimized to facilitate project success. When to Evaluate Off-Site Fabrication Applications Evaluate off-site fabrication options in the planning stages before design is finalized. A final commitment to off-site fabrication must be rendered early in the design phase. Readiness to Evaluate Off-Site Fabrication Applications How does your organization consider the possibility of off-site fabrication applica- tions to control schedule and quality or minimize public disruption (such as noise and road closures) in the scoping and programming and preliminary engineering phases of project development? o We do not consider in the scoping and programming or preliminary engineering phases of project development (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to evaluate application of off-site fabrication, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in evaluating application of off-site fabrication (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Steps in Evaluating Off-Site Fabrication Applications Follow these steps to evaluate off-site fabrication applications: 1. Identify road-user costs, feasibility of detours, alternate routes for emergency response vehicles, and other factors to determine if construction must proceed under traffic. “Prefabricated bridge elements and systems offer bridge designers and contractors significant advantages in terms of construction time, safety, environmental impact, constructability, and cost.” Fowler (2006)

87 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS 2. If construction must proceed under traffic, determine the impact of the project on capacity and mobility through the work zone. 3. Analyze design options that incorporate off-site fabrication of project elements (e.g., substructure, superstructure, deck). 4. Compare the total cost (including road-user costs), quality, and schedule benefits to any potential increases in construction costs, decrease in functionality, or both. 5. Identify capabilities of local sourcing options and contracting requirements for securing sufficient, timely supply. Examples of Evaluating Off-Site Fabrication Applications I-40 Crosstown Relocation The I-40 Crosstown Relocation project manager in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, cred- its an FHWA Accelerated Construction Technology Transfer workshop with identify- ing the idea to base all bridge designs on a standard set of precast structural members. I-95 James River Bridge The system of prefabricated bridge elements was seen as very efficient for the I-95 James River Bridge project in Richmond, Virginia. The benefits of using prefabricated bridge elements are to “increase construction zone safety, minimize the traffic impacts of bridge construction projects, make construction less disruptive for the environment, and improve constructability. Safety is improved and traffic impacts are lessened be- cause some of the construction is moved from the roadway to a remote site, minimiz- ing the need for lane closures, detours, and use of narrow lanes. Moving the con- struction from the roadway can also lessen impacts on the surrounding environment” (Andrle et al. 2003). Lewis and Clark Bridge The construction strategy on the Lewis and Clark Bridge (spanning the state line be- tween Washington and Oregon) reduced the time during which construction affected traffic. The contractor revised the placement procedure by using self-propelled modu- lar transporters with a specially designed steel truss frame for lifting and transport- ing, which enabled contractors to meet the scheduling constraints. The transporters moved the new panel to the top of the bridge, removed the old panel that crews had just cut out, and then lowered the new panel into place before taking the old panel off the bridge. By using the self-propelled modular transporters, construction time on the bridge was reduced, minimizing the impact on traffic for the public, even though the overall schedule for the bridge work remained unchanged.

88 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS Where to Learn More About Evaluating Off-Site Fabrication Applications To learn more about evaluating off-site fabrication applications, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • SHRP 2 R04: A Toolkit for Accelerated Bridge Construction. 2013. • NCHRP Synthesis 393: Adjacent Precast Concrete Box Beam Bridges. 2011. • NCHRP Report 407: Rapid Replacement of Bridge Decks. 1998. This report identifies the need for optimized systems for rapid replacement of bridge decks to minimize delays during rehabilitation of bridge decks. It also has recommendations for details of new superstructures to facilitate future rapid replacement. • NCHRP Report 584: Full-Depth Precast-Concrete Bridge Deck Panel Systems. 2008. This report identifies guidelines for precast-concrete bridge deck panel systems and durable, rapid construction connections between panels. The use of this system reduces total deck construction time. • NCHRP Web-Only Document 173: Cast-in-Place Concrete Connections for Pre- cast Deck Systems. 2011. • NCHRP Report 681: Development of a Precast Bent Cap System for Seismic Regions. 2011. • NCHRP 18-12: Self-Consolidating Concrete for Precast, Prestressed Concrete Bridge Elements. 2004. • SHRP 2 R05 Report S2-R05-RR-1: Precast Concrete Pavement Technology. 2013. • Accelerated Bridge Construction: Experience in Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems. FHWA, 2011. • Connection Details for Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems. FHWA, 2009. • User and Non-User Benefit Analysis for Highways, 3rd ed. AASHTO, 2010. This report analyzes the benefits and costs of highway projects. The material sup- ports transportation planners who evaluate highway investments. • Accelerating Project Delivery: It’s About Time, 1st ed. AASHTO, 2006. This report highlights current construction acceleration techniques that agencies are using. 4.7 TOOL 6: DETERMINE INVOLVEMENT IN ROW AND UTILITIES Overview Determination of the required involvement in ROW and utilities should be based on the critical project success factors. Even when contractual responsibilities for coor- dinating ROW and utilities are assigned to the contractor or design-builder, it is the

89 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS owner agency and general public that ultimately suffer if ROW and utility (including railroads) issues are not integrated into the overall project. As Figure 4.9 shows, determining the required involvement in ROW and utilities arises primarily from complexity in the cost, technical, and context dimensions or from the interactions among them. Figure 4.9. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 6, determine involvement in ROW and utilities. Figur e 4.9 Relationship of dimensions t u o T l 6, d tilities. etermine in volvement in ROW and Paying additional design staff to assist railroads and utilities with design reviews or planning can be an option for project success. To the extent possible, it is important to incorporate ROW, railroad, and utilities as project partners (rather than as adver- saries) and to develop win–win solutions to issues involving potential delay or cost increases. In the context of the 5DPM model, complexity arises from the presence of a nec- essary interaction with a ROW holder (such as a railroad) or a utility that cannot be avoided because of excessive cost or lack of alter- nate technical solutions (e.g., no substitute align- ment or configurations). The interaction of these constraints will result in schedule delays if not managed properly. In other words, the involvement of utilities and ROW holders may offer some flexibility in staffing, incen- tives, early coordination, and so forth that can minimize potential schedule impacts. Therefore, at least within the context of the 5DPM framework, involvement of utilities and ROW holders can help manage schedule impacts created by cost and tech- nical constraints. Determining the required involvement in ROW and utilities is required for com- plex projects when cost and technical constraints make close coordination in these respects a must for project success. “Systematic and structured processes for right- of-way estimating and cost management are lacking in many state highway agencies. The lack of defined processes impacts the agency’s ability to consistently produce accurate right-of- way cost estimates.” Anderson et al. (2009)

90 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS When to Determine Involvement in ROW and Utilities To be effective, this integration tool should be implemented in the very early stages of design so the partners have time to provide timely information to designers before letting construction contracts. If design–build (DB) delivery is to be used, address the ROW, utility, and railroad integration issues in the request for qualifications or request for proposal development stage at the latest, before award of the DB contract. Readiness to Determine Involvement in ROW and Utilities How does your organization determine the level of involvement in ROW, railroad, and utilities issues (e.g., relocation) to prevent potential delay or cost increases in the plan- ning, scoping and programming, preliminary engineering, and final engineering phases of project development? o We do not consider in the planning, scoping and programming, preliminary en- gineering, or final engineering phases of project development because it is the as- signed contractors’ responsibility (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to determine the level of involvement in issues, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool for determining the level of involvement (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Steps in Determining Involvement in ROW and Utilities Follow these steps in determining the required involvement in ROW and utilities: 1. From the complexity analysis, results from using Methods 1 through 5, and com- prehensive risk analysis (Tool 3), identify potential negative project impacts from poorly integrated ROW, utility, or railroad conflicts. 2. Discuss major information and integration needs with ROW, utilities, and rail- roads. Hold early discussions with individuals who are empowered to commit the organizations to action. 3. Recognize potential organizational and goal conflicts and discuss mutually benefi- cial options openly (i.e., look at issues from the other party’s viewpoint). 4. Allocate project resources (e.g., staff, money, support software) to the ROW, utility, or railroad as needed to facilitate integration into overall project objectives and success.

91 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS 5. Assign a team member the specific responsibility to track communication and in- tegration progress with each ROW, utility, or railroad partner. Examples of Determining Involvement in ROW and Utilities InterCounty Connector A tracking log was used for ROW coordination on the InterCounty Connector proj- ects in Maryland. Utility agreements that were used for utility coordination were a big contributor to project success. The task force team had weekly meetings for utility coordination. I-95 James River Bridge The Virginia DOT did a comprehensive analysis of ROW requirements at the outset of project development on the I-95 James River Bridge. They identified temporary easements during construction and utility issues that required immediate action to facilitate project progress. North Carolina Tollway To help with the effort to acquire ROW on the North Carolina Tollway project, the design-builder created a priority list for the North Carolina Turnpike Authority to work with. T-REX Because the Transportation Expansion (T-REX) project in Metro Denver, Colorado, was an expansion of an old urban corridor, existing utilities were one of the biggest risks on the project. The Colorado DOT and Regional Transportation District worked with 45 utility companies that were responsible for more than 800 separate utilities to develop agreements before the procurement phase. Utility companies and quali- fied contactors completed $2.5 million of utility relocation work before the project contractor received notice to proceed. Identifying existing utilities and relocating them early provided less risk to the contractor. The widening of the highway and construction of the light rail transit required some ROW purchases. Relocation experts worked one-on-one with homeowners and tenants. The experts explained homeowner and tenant rights and provided help with financing and locating replacement housing. Relocation benefits included home- buying assistance and money to supplement rent and moving costs (B-85 assistance). The T-REX project required 30 total acquisitions and 172 partial acquisitions. Where to Learn More About Determining Involvement in ROW and Utilities To learn more about determining the required involvement in ROW and utilities, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/ Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx.

92 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP 20-24(22): Best Practices in Partnering with Public Resource Agencies. 2003. • NCHRP 20-24(54)B: Right-of Way and Environmental Mitigation Costs—Invest- ment Needs Assessment. 2006. The purpose of the study was to develop estimates of planning and environmental costs. This goal was met through a survey of five agencies and 29 projects. Because of the wide range of ROW and mitigation costs, the findings can be applied rela- tive to an overall program or used for a hypothetical average project. • NCHRP Report 351: Hazardous Wastes in Highway Rights-of-Way. 1993. • NCHRP 20-84: Improved Right-of-Way Procedures and Business Practices. 2012. The objectives of this currently active project are to develop improved ROW pro- cedures and business practices, and best practices for the long-term management of ROW assets. • NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 413: Techniques for Effective Highway Construction Projects in Congested Urban Areas. 2011. This study focused on the techniques used by agencies to effectively deal with high traffic volumes, significant utility conflicts and relocations, complex ROW acquisition actions, a diverse stakeholder base, and attentive media markets. The study identified the strategies, determined how agencies rated their success, and examined the applicability of the strategies to other projects. • Guidance on Sharing Freeway and Highway Rights-of-Way for Telecommunica- tions, 1st ed. AASHTO, 1997. This guidebook includes topics related to designating a project champion, assem- bling an information base, finding the right partners, negotiating partner responsi- bilities, monitoring existing partnerships, and considering future partnerships. • A Policy on the Accommodation of Utilities Within Freeway Right-of-Way, 5th ed. AASHTO, 2005. This guidebook covers topics including new and existing utilities along freeways, major valley or river crossings, utilities crossing freeways, utilities in vehicular tunnels, access for constructing and servicing utilities, construction and location details, and manner of making utilities installations and adjustments. • A Guide for Accommodating Utilities Within Highway Right-of-Way, 4th ed. AASHTO, 2005. This guidebook includes topics such as safety, design, location, preservation and restoration, visual quality, underground facilities and installation, overhead facili- ties, and ditches and canals. • Practitioner’s Handbook #7: Defining the Purpose and Need, and Determining the Range of Alternatives for Transportation Projects, 1st ed. AASHTO, 2007. This handbook provides guidance on how to define a project’s purpose and need according to NEPA and determining the alternatives.

93 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS • Highway/Utility Issues. Course Number FHWA-NHI-134006. On completion of this two-day course, participants will be able to explain the importance of early involvement with utility-related activities, identify successful mitigation strategies, explain major impacts on schedule and cost, identify utility conflicts and develop a conflict matrix, and generate a resource toolkit for each of the major areas of project development. • Real Estate Acquisition Under the Uniform Act: An Overview. Course Number FHWA-NHI-141045. On completion of this course, participants will be able to provide a basic overview of the Uniform Act; discuss the key elements of the act, develop an estimate of compensation through the appraisal process or waiver procedure, define the real estate acquisition process, identify relocation benefits and services, and list places to obtain relevant documents. • Local Public Agency Real Estate Acquisition. Course Number FHWA-NHI-141047. This course provides an overview of the real estate acquisition authority and the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Uniform Act) and related regulations. 4.8 TOOL 7: DETERMINE WORK PACKAGES AND SEQUENCING Overview Carefully designed work packages and sequences can increase project success pos- sibilities. Projects suffer if work packages are determined without consideration of available funding sources, available contractor capabilities, and stakeholder concerns about project impacts. The work packages and sequence must be prepared by con- sidering high-certainty funding sources, local contracting capabilities, available work force, bonding issues, procurement planning (division of internal and external work), road closure and detour options, road-user costs, and local access issues. As Figure 4.10 shows, the need to determine work packages and sequencing arises primarily from complexity in the schedule and technical dimensions or from the inter- actions between them. Figure 4.10. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 7, determine work packages and sequencing. Figure 4.10. Relationship of dimensi se ons to Tool quencing. 7, determin e work packages and

94 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS In the context of the 5DPM model, complex- ity arises when the scope of the project is large or technical capabilities are significant, which sug- gests the need for multiple designers, contractors, and consultants. If the schedule is also constrained or comple- tion is critical because of high road-user costs or other schedule factors, interim schedule mileposts (such as opening and closing ramps) or turnover of work to designers or contractors in different phases creates potential negative impacts on the project. In these cases, use of thoughtful work packages that facilitate the sequence of design and construction work, coupled with frequent com- munication between all parties, will help achieve project success. Work packaging to facilitate the sequence of work is recommended for complex projects when schedule and technical constraints make close coordination of work sequencing a requirement. When to Determine Work Packages and Sequencing Work packaging and sequencing spans several stages of the project life cycle. Begin implementation of this tool early in the planning phase as procurement for all ser- vices and construction is developed. Procurement, sequencing, and integration of work packages continue throughout completion of the project. Readiness to Determine Work Packages and Sequencing How does your organization prepare and develop work packages and design the se- quence of work packages in the planning, scoping and programming, and preliminary engineering phases of project development? o We do not consider in the planning, scoping and programming, or preliminary engineering phases of project development (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to develop work packages and their sequences, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in developing work packages and their sequences (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. “There is a definite, predictable relationship between cycle time, work in process, and production system throughput. It provides a pathway for further study of production system characteristics that have historically not been included in construction management models, with the expectation of developing new construction management tools that will account for more of the characteristics of construction production systems that affect project performance and company financial performance.” Bashford et al. (2005)

95 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS Steps in Determining Work Packages and Sequencing After identifying complexity factors and completing Methods 1 through 5 (particu- larly procurement planning and project arrangements with Method 3), follow these steps to assign and sequence work packages: 1. Identify capabilities of the local suppliers, vendors, suppliers, contractors, and labor force. Determine the maximum level of each critical resource that is avail- able during the project’s execution period. 2. For externally procured work, develop work packages that can conform to local workforce and regional organizational capabilities. For internal work packages, make sure that adequate resources are available to be able to complete them in the time allotted. 3. Sequence work packages to facilitate seamless scheduling. Design work packages should lead directly to their associated construction work packages rather than be separated from the construction. 4. Include contract language in each work package to include coordination with up- stream and downstream work. Examples of Determining Work Packages and Sequencing Detroit River International Crossing For the DRIC project, the team developed a required project management plan that is updated periodically and used as a tool to summarize the project status and work plan. The team used internal Michigan DOT software to support financial and resource management, expenditures, and work activity management. Status reports were pro- vided to senior leadership biweekly. Doyle Drive At the start, the Doyle Drive project in San Francisco, California, was planned to be one project. However, the estimated cost was too high, so not all the needed funds were available. The project was broken into eight contracts to accelerate the schedule. I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor After finding no bidder for the original Pearl Harbor Bridge contract (because it was too complex and risky), the Connecticut DOT divided the project into smaller, simpler, and shorter contracts, which became the I-95 NHHCC program. InterCounty Connector Because of a political mandate for the InterCounty Connector projects in Maryland to finish in a compressed four-year time frame, the three active projects (Segments A, B, and C) were scheduled concurrently. The DB approach was used to fast-track the work sequence. The procurement started before planning was completed. Partial notices to proceed were issued to start design with pending environmental litigation and chang- ing ROW requirements, which added to the complexity of work sequencing.

96 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS The InterCounty Connector team used a detailed work breakdown structure (WBS) to structure and sequence the work, which included field quality control, cost control, and project acceptance. The program manager developed a master schedule to sequence and track the entire program. (Primavera P6 software was specified at the project level.) Because the projects were on a new alignment and performed concurrently, there was no need for interfaces between projects, and there were no incremental milestones in the schedules. The schedules were cost-loaded for payment purposes, P6-scheduled updates were required to be submitted biweekly, and narrative progress reports were submitted monthly to monitor progress. The projects also required weekly construc- tion meetings and used three-week look-ahead schedules from the general contractors for short-term work package planning. New Mississippi River Bridge On the New Mississippi River Bridge project between Missouri and Illinois, there was a need to keep the project scope within available funding limits. Breaking the original project into “fundable” phases helped move the project forward. The scope flexibility in phasing the project into fundable packages was an effective tool for helping to man- age project complexity. Where to Learn More About Determining Work Packages and Sequencing To learn more about determining work packages and sequencing, see the associ- ated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/ Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP Project 25-25: Compendium of Best Practices for Incorporating Envi- ronmental Commitments into Transportation Construction and Maintenance Contract Documents. 2009. • NCHRP 10-42: Constructability Review Process for Transportation Facilities. 1996. • Constructability Review Best Practices Guide. AASHTO, 2000. • Current Design–Build Practices for Transportation Projects. FHWA, 2009. • NCHRP 20-07, Task 229: Bridge Construction Practices Using Incremental Launching. 2007. This report contains the current state of the practice for the incremental launching method for bridge construction, as well as recommendations pertaining to best practices for planning, design, and construction activities. Applications and limita- tions are also provided. • NCHRP Report 652: Time-Related Incentive and Disincentive Provisions in Highway Construction Contracts. 2010. This report offers best practices for using time-related incentives and disincentives. It covers the time of contract provisions used, the success of contract provisions,

97 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS the criteria used to determine when provisions are appropriate, the methods used to determine dollar amounts on incentives and disincentives, and the effects on projects. • FHWA Guide for Construction Contract Time Determination Procedures. 2002. This guide provides guidance on topics such as the elements in determining a con- tract time, establishing production rates, adapting production rates to a particular project, developing a progress schedule, contract time determination techniques, and other project considerations. 4.9 TOOL 8: DESIGN TO BUDGET Overview Complex projects often have complicated funding systems with fixed, finite appropria- tions that expire and must be disbursed within a specified time frame. In other cases, project elements are underwritten by debt instru- ments, or the entire project funding may not even be identified or secured. In these cases, designing within the known budget may be the only way to execute the project. However, designing to a fixed budget ceiling must fit the overall project strategy. Consider use of project phasing and phased design and estimating to build the segments of the project that can be funded with currently available funding and innovative financing while keeping future overall project goals in mind. Also, consider stakeholder expectations in the process. As Figure 4.11 shows, the need to design to budget arises primarily from complexity in the cost, technical, and financing dimensions or from the interactions among them. In the context of the 5DPM model, designing to budget is based on the assumption that fund- ing is constrained and the cost of the project must remain within the available funding. This constraint may require redesign, breaking the project into phases (Tool 7), or both, and suggests the need for strict cost control. Technical requirements are made complex by the need to design current (funded) phases of the project to align with future phases that will be completed pending iden- tification of funds. There may also be increased need for design exceptions. Designing to budget has been found to be effective for complex projects when financing is constrained, cost control is possible without an impact on schedule, and there is flexibility in technical alternatives. “There are four issues that must be addressed in the internal design to budget process: 1. Communications between the designers and the owner’s design reviewers 2. Developing design work packages that support the construction plan as well as the owner’s design submittal schedule 3. Integrating preconstruction review input in the design schedule 4. Making all designers on the team aware of budget and schedule constraints.” Koch et al. (2010)

98 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS When to Design to Budget You will need to decide to limit design options or reduce the initial project scope to conform to a constrained budget or schedule early in the planning process and com- municate those limitations or reductions to designers before the start of significant design work. You also need to communicate any financing issues that threaten project feasibility to external stakeholders and the general public at the earliest discussions of the project so they are not taken by surprise if the project is reduced in scope or any nonessential design options (e.g., bike paths or artwork) are eliminated. Readiness to Design to Budget Does your organization consider designing the project within the budget or breaking the project into phases to meet the funding constraints during the planning, scoping and programming, and preliminary engineering phases of project development? o We do not consider in the planning, scoping and programming, or preliminary engineering phases of project development (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to consider designing to budget, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in designing to budget (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Figure 4.11. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 8, design to budget.Figure 4.11. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 8, e sign to budget.

99 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS Steps in Designing to Budget From the results of the complexity identification and mapping process, as well as Meth- ods 1 through 5, identify the cost and schedule constraints that necessitate designing the project to budget. Historically, design drives the budget, but as financing becomes an increasingly important aspect of project management, the opposite relationship holds true, and budget drives design. This shift requires designers to be innovative. It is facilitated by the use of coloca- tion of the design team with the owner and construction team (Tool 9) and flexible design criteria (Tool 10). Follow these steps in designing to budget: 1. Identify available funding and other cost and schedule constraints that affect de- sign options; these constraints include project phasing, initial project scope, and restrictions on various sources of funding. 2. Establish maximum budget and schedule and develop design options intended to remain within those maximum values. 3. Confirm cost and schedule values early in the design process and update frequently to ensure that design and scope remain within the constraints. Look at alternative project delivery, early contractor involvement, or use of preconstruction service consultants to help achieve project success. 4. Use a tracking log for design exceptions required to maintain project cost and schedule and begin the approval process for design exceptions early. Communicate all requests for design exceptions early and track them. 5. Clearly communicate cost and schedule constraints and financing limitations to external stakeholder groups so that expectations for project outcomes or viability of other design options are managed appropriately. Examples of Designing to Budget Detroit River International Crossing The DRIC project used Microsoft Project to create a project schedule that was based on team agreement of identified tasks, including resource and financial needs to com- plete the tasks. New Mississippi River Bridge On the New Mississippi River Bridge project between Missouri and Illinois, the team adopted a practical design philosophy that helped the project stay under budget and on schedule. Practical design also allowed for design revisions to minimize ROW takes as cost and schedule risk-control mechanisms. During procurement, the project team had a process for allowing contractors to propose alternative technical concepts in an effort to get good value decisions in the procurement process. The team also used independent contractor reviews and value engineering.

100 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS T-REX As with most DB projects, the contract on the T-REX project in Denver, Colorado, was set by the proposal amount, and the design-builder was obligated to provide a design that conformed with the contract amount. However, the owner did not specify a budget amount in advance. Where to Learn More About Designing to Budget To learn more about designing to budget, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training mate rials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP Report 390: Constructability Review Process for Transportation Facili- ties. 1997. This project includes topics such as the current practice in constructability, criti- cal issues in implementation, interpretation of current practice and critical issues, preliminary constructability review process model, formal constructability review process model, constructability review tools, and an implementation plan. • NCHRP 20-24(31): Research Program Design—Administration of Highway and Transportation Officials: Effective Program Delivery in a Constrained Fiscal Envi- ronment. 2007. This report describes the forces of change and the impacts on program manage- ment and delivery and documents state-of-the-practice techniques used by state highway agencies to manage the process. • Guidelines for Value Engineering, 3rd ed. AASHTO, 2010. This document provides guidelines for establishing and administering value engi- neering programs. It includes topics such as the elements of a state value engineer- ing program, preconstruction value engineering for projects, construction value engineering, DB value engineering, and program management. • Effective Program Delivery in a Constrained Fiscal Environment, 1st ed. AASHTO, 2009. • Value Engineering Workshop. Course Number FHWA-NHI-134005. This three-day course covers topics such as how value engineering can improve project performance, reduce costs, and enhance value. Participants acquire the necessary skills to be an effective value engineering team member. • TCRP Web-Only Document 31 (Project G-7): Managing Capital Costs of Major Federally Funded Public Transportation Projects. 2005.

101 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS 4.10 TOOL 9: COLOCATE TEAM Overview Before the start of the project, discuss the advantages and disadvantages of project team colocation. Some compromise may be necessary, but having the whole team together most of the time may increase the odds of achieving critical project success factors. Particularly on multijurisdictional (e.g., bistate) projects, you may find placing a dedicated, empow- ered, representative project team in a common loca- tion important to project success. Depending on the project delivery system used, you may incorporate the colocation strategy for DB partners or the con- tracting team in later project stages. As Figure 4.12 shows, the need to colocate the team is determined primarily by the technical dimension of the project. When using the DB approach, cost and schedule complexity may also be factors in the decision to colocate, but they derive from the technical scope of the project. In the context of the 5DPM model, this tool is used because the technical complexity of the project makes it necessary (and justifies the cost of colocation) to maintain close communication between the owner, designers, and builder to guarantee that cost and schedule constraints are met. Colocation is recommended for complex projects when technical complexity war- rants the increased cost of colocation in return for improved cost and schedule controls. Figure 4.12. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 9, colocate team.Figure 4.12. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 9, c olocate team. “Some fast-track projects have literally done away with formal design reviews and substituted collocated, over-the-shoulder design reviewers.” Koch et al. (2010)

102 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS When to Colocate Team You can use the colocation tool in planning, design, and construction, depending on the type of delivery system used and which project partners are colocated. Colocation is perhaps most likely to occur during the final design and construction phases. Readiness to Colocate Team How does your organization consider colocating project teams, depending on the proj- ect delivery system to be used, during the scoping and programming, preliminary en- gineering, and final engineering phases of project development? o We do not consider in the scoping and programming, preliminary engineering, or final engineering phases of project development (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice) o The project team is supposed to colocate project teams, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in colocating teams (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Steps in Colocating Team Use the identification of complexity factors and the outcomes of Methods 1 through 5 to determine if colocation should be considered and to provide input into which members of the team to include in the colocation agreement. Integrate the use of the colocation tool with other tools, including comprehensive risk analysis (Tool 3), design to budget (Tool 8), and flexible design criteria (Tool 10). Follow these steps in collocat- ing teams: 1. Identify the possible need for colocation and evaluate costs and benefits. 2. If colocation is warranted, identify which project team members should be in- cluded in the colocation. 3. Identify viable physical locations for colocation and arrange for necessary technol- ogy upgrades (e.g., voice or data lines, audio/visual, satellite, high-speed Internet) and space build-out (e.g., offices, conference rooms, storage). 4. Develop contractual agreements on payment for space improvements, lease pay- ment, terms and duration of colocation, and other administrative details.

103 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS Examples of Colocating Team I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor The Connecticut DOT established the NHHCC project headquarters in an indepen- dent building close to major project contracts and housed the program management firms in that office. According to project directors, this policy helped to create an effec- tive team atmosphere for managing the project. I-595 Corridor Colocating all partners on the Florida DOT I-595 Corridor project in the same build- ing was extremely helpful. The number of meetings and collaboration would have been very difficult without colocation. New Mississippi River Bridge On the New Mississippi River Bridge project between Missouri and Illinois, coloca- tion of a dedicated, empowered project team enabled rapid design development and responsiveness to changes. T-REX The DB team on the T-REX project in Denver, Colorado, was colocated along with representatives from the owner’s team. In this case, colocation allowed for sharing of information, facilitation of communications, ensuring the right mixture of skills, and partnering. Where to Learn More About Colocating Team To learn more about colocating project teams, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP Web Document 39: Managing Change in State Departments of Trans- portation. Scan 7 of 8: Innovations in Public–Private Partnering and Relationship Building in State DOTs. 2001. This document examines successful partnerships and relationships and determines the common elements of success. It also provides a starting place for the develop- ment of new partnering tools. • NCHRP 20-24(22): Best Practices in Partnering with Public Resource Agencies. 2003. • NCHRP 20-24(63): Partnership Approaches to Identify, Promote, and Implement Congestion Management Strategies. 2009. This document summarizes the current knowledge about the relationships among transportation congestion, economic activity, economic growth, and transporta- tion system investment at both the regional and national levels. It reviews con- gestion mitigation strategies that have been used and performs four case stud- ies. Finally, it covers the lessons learned from effectively implementing congestion management practices.

104 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS • AASHTO Partnering Handbook, 1st ed. 2005. This handbook covers topics such as the partnering definition and the various roles in partnerships, the characteristics of successful partnerships, the partnering process, the partnering workshop, issue resolution, the importance of measuring a partnership, and how to showcase and celebrate a partnership. • Design-Build Environmental Compliance Process and Level of Detail: Eight Case Studies. AASHTO, 2005. • Partnering: A Key Tool for Improving Project Delivery in the Field. Course Number FHWA-NHI-134060. On completion of this course, participants will be able to integrate partnering at the project level, develop and implement control documents required in the part- nering process, and guide other project personnel in integrating partnering at a project level. 4.11 TOOL 10: ESTABLISH FLEXIBLE DESIGN CRITERIA Overview Establishing flexible design criteria is closely related to project cost, schedule, and quality performance (e.g., designing to budget), as well as to critical permit issues. You can use flexible design criteria to help minimize potential ROW, utility, and U.S. DOT Section 4(f) conflicts. You can achieve flexible designs through the use of design exceptions, need-based review and approval pro- cesses, performance specifications, and mechanistic designs. Whenever possible, consider implementation of procurement protocols that allow designers to work with major material suppliers and vendors early in the project life cycle. As Figure 4.13 shows, the need to establish flexible design criteria is determined primarily by the technical dimension of the project. The best examples of establishing flexible design criteria may be renewal projects whose technical scope is too complex to establish contract documents effectively before construction. In these cases, performance specifications, qualifications-based DB selection, and use of design exceptions to reduce cost and shorten the schedule may facilitate project success. Use of flexible design criteria is recommended for complex projects when technical complexity and constraints in other dimensions make standard designs and specifica- tions impractical. “Develop flexible design criteria for roadways that provide for a range of design treatments that are context sensitive while satisfying fundamentals of roadway design, yet remain within the acceptable limits of AASHTO guidelines.” Bochner et al. (2004)

105 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS When to Establish Flexible Design Criteria Analyze use of design exceptions during the planning phase, and implement options throughout the design phase. Unless design exceptions are analyzed during planning, the flexible design criteria tool will provide little benefit or will make redesign neces- sary. To the extent possible, all exceptions should be completed before completion of the final design. Readiness to Establish Flexible Design Criteria Does your organization establish flexible design criteria in the scoping and program- ming and preliminary engineering phases of project development to minimize potential ROW, railroad, and utility conflicts by using design exceptions, need-based reviews, or performance specifications? o We do not consider in the scoping and programming or preliminary engineering phases of project development (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to establish flexible design criteria, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in establishing flexible design criteria (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Figure 4.13. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 10, establish flexible design criteria.Figure 4.13. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 10, establish flexible design criteria.

106 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS Steps in Establishing Flexible Design Criteria Use the results of complexity identification and mapping, along with the outcomes of Methods 1 through 5, to provide guidance for establishing flexible design criteria. In addition, use the flexible design criteria tool to coordinate with identifying critical per- mit issues (Tool 4), evaluating applications of off-site fabrication (Tool 5), determining involvement in ROW and utilities (Tool 6), designing to budget (Tool 8), colocation (Tool 9), development of public involvement plans (Tool 13), and other tools as appro- priate for your project. Follow these steps in establishing flexible design criteria: 1. Identify design constraints and locations of potential conflict (e.g., ROW, utility locations, historic neighborhoods, environmentally sensitive areas) that can be mitigated through alternative or innovative design approaches. 2. Catalog design exceptions required under each design option. 3. Articulate the rationale for design exceptions (e.g., use of performance specifica- tions, mitigation of environmental impact, alleviation of ROW issues). 4. Set up a tracking and monitoring system to manage documentation, request, ap- proval, and implementation of each design exception. Examples of Using Flexible Design Criteria Capital Beltway HOT Lanes No design set could go to construction on the Capital Beltway HOT (high-occupancy toll) Lanes project in Virginia until approved by the owner. This arrangement provided control but maybe not enough control. Comments for each design were separated into three categories: preferred, reasonable or standard, and specified. Detroit River International Crossing An Executive Order required application of context-sensitive solutions principles on the Detroit River International Crossing project, so application of flexible design, public involvement, and enhanced mitigation or combinations of these factors were required. The aesthetic design guide for the project would implement the outcomes of the context-sensitive solutions process by specifically illustrating the design intent, design features, and enough detail to demonstrate to the stakeholders that the com- mitments made during the NEPA process were incorporated into the final design and into construction. The first phase of the aesthetic design guide is to define visual issues and impacts, goals and priorities, and conceptual aesthetic features and elements; the second phase generates design requirements and alternative design concepts and refines a preferred set of design elements for integration into the plans, specifications, and estimates. Separating design consultants based on distinct project limits, like scopes of services (such as freeway interchange design consultant, interchange bridge design consultant, aesthetic design guide consultant, value engineering consultant, and oversight consul- tant), will be a tool for flexible design.

107 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor The Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, which is part of the NHHCC project, was the first extradosed bridge in the nation. The extradosed system could add to the complexity of the project from a technical point of view. The extradosed system is a hybrid design that combines a box-girder bridge and a cable-stayed bridge to expand the span of the box girder. The extradosed main spans of the new Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge were designed in both steel and concrete, allowing bidders to choose the least-cost alternative. I-595 Corridor When the Florida DOT made the decision to use design–build–finance–operate– maintain project delivery on the I-595 Corridor project, management recognized that for the project to be attractive to outside investment, design criteria had to be uncon- strained wherever possible. In meeting that condition, management created an envi- ronment in which the concessionaire was able to balance life-cycle design issues with project pro forma requirements for the financing. Where to Learn More About Establishing Flexible Design Criteria To learn more about establishing flexible design criteria, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP 8-68: Citizen’s Guide and Discipline-Specific Professionals’ Guide for Context-Sensitive Solutions in Transportation. 2010. This project developed two documents (one as a citizen’s guide and one as a discipline-specific professional’s guide) that explain the roles, responsibilities, and oppor tunities in transportation decision making from conception to operations and maintenance. • NCHRP Report 390: Constructability Review Process for Transportation Facili- ties. 1997. This project includes topics such as the current practice in constructability, criti- cal issues in implementation, interpretation of current practice and critical issues, preliminary constructability review process model, formal constructability review process model, constructability review tools, and an implementation plan. • NCHRP Report 703: Guide for Pavement-Type Selection. 2011. This guide covers topics such as an overview of the pavement-type selection processes, identification of pavement alternatives and development of pavement life-cycle strategies, life-cycle cost analysis, selection of preferred pavement alter- natives, alternate pavement-type bidding, and contractor-based pavement-type selection. • NCHRP Report 442: Systems Approach to Evaluating Innovations for Integra- tion into Highway Practice. 2000. This report provides an approach to evaluating innovations to determine if they should be integrated into current procedure. It looks at both qualitative and

108 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS quantitative information and at various innovations such as ground-penetrating radar, light-emitting diode traffic signals, and partnering. The use of the informa- tion in the report should result in higher-quality decisions. • Practitioner’s Handbook #7: Defining the Purpose and Need, and Determining the Range of Alternatives for Transportation Projects, 1st ed. AASHTO, 2007. This handbook provides guidance on how to define a project’s purpose and need according to NEPA and determining the alternatives. 4.12 TOOL 11: EVALUATE FLEXIBLE FINANCING Overview Be sure to look at alternative funding sources to furnish the funds for a project when needed. If the cost, schedule, scope, and context represent relatively fixed and con- strained factors, use of flexible financing may be the only option to advance the project. As seen in Figure 3.8, several alternative funding sources are available, including the following: • Tolling and other revenue-generation approaches (e.g., congestion pricing, HOT lanes) • Transportation sales tax or other special taxes • Project phasing to leverage different sources of financing • Grant anticipation revenue vehicle bonds • Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loans • Hybrid forms of contracting such as public–private partnerships (PPPs) or various combinations of the design–build–operate–maintain–transfer approach • Monetization of assets and service options, such as franchising As Figure 4.14 shows, the need to evaluate flexible financing is determined primarily by the financing dimension of the project. Use of flexible financing is recommended for complex projects when few viable technical alter- natives exist, contextual constraints are significant, and cost or schedule parameters require the need to move forward (e.g., the problems will only get worse if the project is put on hold). “A Financial Plan is a comprehensive document that reflects the Project’s cost estimate and revenue structure and provides a reasonable assurance that there will be sufficient financial resources available to implement and complete the project as planned.” FHWA (2007)

109 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS When to Evaluate Flexible Financing Ideally, begin evaluating flexible funding in the planning phase and complete it before design is finalized. If using project phasing to leverage financing, coordinate design packages with phasing and bid-letting schedules. Readiness to Evaluate Flexible Financing How does your organization evaluate alternative funding and financing sources in the planning, scoping and programming, and preliminary engineering phases of proj- ect development when the currently available funding is limited and the project cost, schedule, scope, and context represent relatively fixed and constrained factors? o We do not consider in the planning, scoping and programming, or preliminary engineering phases of project development (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to consider and evaluate alternative funding and financing sources, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in between with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in evaluating alternative funding and financing sources (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Figure 4.14. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 11, evaluate flexible financing.Fi gure 4.14. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 11, evalua te flexible financing.

110 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS Steps in Evaluating Flexible Financing Use the results of complexity identification and mapping, along with the outcomes of Methods 1 through 5, to provide guidance for evaluating flexible financing. In addi- tion, be sure to coordinate evaluation of flexible financing with designing to budget (Tool 8). Follow these steps in evaluating flexible financing: 1. Identify total expected project costs (planning, design, construction). These num- bers should come from a comprehensive cost model that has been built specifically for this purpose. 2. Identify available funds from typical sources (state program, federal aid) and any time constraints that are associated with each. 3. Analyze any funding gaps. 4. Identify potential funding sources for gap financing, including debt and private equity, within state regulatory authority if possible. 5. If gap financing is inadequate for project funding, consider adding revenue- generating options such as congestion pricing, tolling, franchising, and so forth. Examples of Using Flexible Financing Capital Beltway HOT Lanes An independent financing team was in charge of developing funding sources for the Capital Beltway HOT Lanes project in Virginia. An innovative project delivery group that focused on the technical aspects of the project worked with the financing team, which took a consulting role for the financing aspects. Detroit River International Crossing On the DRIC project, the owner solicited with a request for proposal of interest for market feedback, which was used to develop government policy and to structure a formal procurement process and needs for formal agreements with Canada. Project development correlated directly with the mechanism chosen to finance the project. This was to pursue a PPP for the bridge and for either all or a portion of the plaza. One of the alternative funding methods considered was to have either the Mich- igan DOT or a new bridge authority sell revenue bonds, secured by future tolls from the bridge, to finance the construction of the bridge and all or portions of the plaza. Doyle Drive On the Doyle Drive or Presidio Parkway project (one gateway to the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, California), the government agreed to PPP, an innovative contracting method, to execute financial qualification. I-595 Corridor The Florida I-595 Corridor project is the first highway project in the United States to be delivered by the design–build–finance–operate–maintain method. This approach was attractive to the Florida DOT primarily because financing was available to the project, thus speeding up the construction schedule.

111 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS North Carolina Tollway The North Carolina Tollway project used bonds for financing. Costs were in two parts: capital costs (covering construction and ROW) and operations and maintenance costs. Together, these costs made up the total cost, which was then taken to the bond market. There were concerns about any cost overruns. The North Carolina DOT, through legislative action, agreed to pay for any cost overruns through the North Carolina Turnpike Authority. This agreement helped with the market rating on the bond market. Where to Learn More About Evaluating Flexible Financing To learn more about evaluating flexible financing, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP Research Results Digest 179: Financing Highway Improvements Through Public and Private Partnerships. 1991. • NCHRP 8-57: Improved Framework and Tools for Highway Pricing Decisions. 2009. • NCHRP Report 639: Guidelines for the Use of Pavement Warranties on Highway Construction Projects. 2010. • NCHRP Web Document 121: Assessing and Mitigating Future Impacts to the Federal Highway Trust Fund Such as Alternative Fuel Consumption. 2003. • NCHRP Report 623: Identifying and Quantifying Rates of State Motor Fuel Tax Evasion. 2009. • NCHRP Report 689: Costs of Alternative Revenue-Generation Systems. 2011. • NCFRP 3/NCHRP 185 Web-Only Document: Truck Tolling: Understanding Indus try Trade-offs When Using or Avoiding Toll Facilities. 2011. • NCHRP 20-24(07): Alternatives to the Motor Fuel Tax for Financing Surface Transportation Improvements. 1994. • NCHRP 20-24(13): Innovative Financing Clearinghouse. 2002. • NCHRP 20-24(51)C: State DOT Funding and Finance. 2006. • NCHRP Report 341: Bond and Insurance Coverages for Highway Construction Contractors. 1991. • Uniform Audit and Accounting Guide for Audits of Architectural and Engineering (A/E) Consulting Firms. AASHTO, 2012. This guide presents topics such as the adequacy of accounting records, the stan- dards for attestations and audits, cost principles, cost accounting, labor-charging systems and other considerations, compensation, information on selected areas of cost, general audit considerations, audit reports and minimum disclosures, and cognizance and oversight.

112 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS • NCHRP Project 20-68A, Scan 07-01: Best Practices in Project Delivery Manage- ment. 2009. The findings of this scan were that the best practices could be best divided into four focus areas: (1) project management, (2) performance measures, (3) contract- ing practices, and (4) community involvement. The scan provides detailed infor- mation in each of the four areas. 4.13 TOOL 12: DEVELOP FINANCE EXPENDITURE MODEL Overview For complex projects, you will need to obtain project cash flows and integrate them into project phasing plans to balance anticipated inflows and outflows of funds. You can use resource-loaded project plans and network schedules to track both expendi- tures and project cash needs. If cost, schedule, scope, and context represent relatively fixed and constrained factors, analyze the inflows and outflows of project funds, regardless of the source of funding. As Figure 4.15 shows, the need to develop a finance expenditure model is determined primarily by the financing dimension of the project. With or without flexible financing, you will need to track the pay request schedules of design- ers, consultants, and contractors against bond sales, appropriations, and other inflows of funds. You will need to establish and maintain minimum cash balances throughout the project as a source of contingency. Figure 4.15. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 12, develop finance expenditure model.Figure 4.15. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 12, develop fin ance expenditure model. “A Financial Plan provides a description of how a project will be implemented over time by identifying project costs and the financial resources to be utilized in meeting those costs. The plan should clearly explain the assumptions about both cost and revenue upon which the plan is based.” FHWA (2007)

113 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS Implement the finance expenditure model tool for complex projects when the proj- ect technical scope is large and fixed, project cost is closely equal to available fund- ing, and few alternatives exist that would not substantially delay the project. In these circumstances, you will need to develop the model to maintain adequate cash bal- ances. If, in any pay period, contextual constraints are significant and cost or schedule parameters require the need to move forward (e.g., the problems will only get worse if the project is put on hold), the financial expenditure model gives a statement of the resources available to solve the problem, which helps facilitate project success. When to Develop Finance Expenditure Models Develop and use a finance expenditure model as the planning process is completed and the project scope is well defined. Some information required for the finance expendi- ture model may not be available until the contractor has been selected. For revenue-generating projects, your expenditure model may extend past the completion of construction and be modeled over the economic life of the project. Readiness to Develop Finance Expenditure Models How does your organization develop finance expenditure models in the planning, scoping and programming, and preliminary engineering phases of project development to manage and maintain adequate cash balances? o We do not consider in the planning, scoping and programming, or preliminary engineering phases of project development (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). o The project team is supposed to consider and develop a finance expenditure model, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in be- tween with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in developing finance expen- diture models (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Steps in Developing Finance Expenditure Models Use the results of complexity identification and mapping, along with the outcomes of Methods 1 through 5, to provide guidance for developing a finance expenditure model. Coordinate use of the finance expenditure model tool with work packages and sequencing (Tool 7), designing to budget (Tool 8), evaluation of flexible financing

114 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS (Tool 11), and other tools as appropriate for your project. Follow these steps in devel- oping finance expenditure models: 1. Identify timing of revenue inflows. 2. Use resource-loaded network schedules or earned-value analysis to identify pro- jected cash outflows. 3. Aggregate inflows and outflows to common periods (probably end of month). 4. Analyze the finance expenditure model to identify cash balance shortfalls. 5. Develop protocols (e.g., maximum draw schedules, short-term borrowing, contractor-financed phases) to manage cash balance shortfalls. Examples of Developing Finance Expenditure Models Capital Beltway HOT Lanes The Capital Beltway HOT Lanes project used concession-funded legislation, which means a private partner gave money ($6 million for the Virginia DOT development costs and $15 million for traffic enhancements) in the project development phase and would generate revenue from tolls later. Using these funds required special legislation. Private-sector money had to be obtained in advance and placed in a fund to ensure that Virginia DOT could make payments. I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor Each of the NHHCC projects was scheduled according to availability and the cash flow distribution of the federal assistance for the project. This constraint caused the Connecticut DOT to rearrange and package projects in a manner that was compatible with the availability of federal funds rather than other constraints, such as expediency. I-595 Corridor The original finance expenditure model for the Florida DOT I-595 Corridor project proved that the funding necessary to accommodate future growth on the project would not be available in a reasonable time frame or in sufficient amounts over time. There- fore, the finance expenditure model was used as justification to move the project to design–build–finance–operate–maintain project delivery. InterCounty Connector Bond money was separated, so it was not used on nonpublic InterCounty Connector projects in Maryland. Ballpark estimates were used for in-house personnel on private- owner projects. Based on bond money and estimates, an expenditure model was devel- oped. Some projects were charged according to the expenditure model. North Carolina Tollway The design-builder was required to have a cost-loaded critical path method schedule on the North Carolina Tollway. This schedule was updated every two weeks. The activities within this schedule could not exceed 20 days or $500,000 (with a few exceptions, such as a bridge deck pour). There were more than 3,000 activities, each with its own cost curve, and this was the basis of payment.

115 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS Where to Learn More About Developing Finance Expenditure Models To learn more about developing finance expenditure models, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • Uniform Audit and Accounting Guide for Audits of Architectural and Engineering (A/E) Consulting Firms. AASHTO, 2012. This guide presents topics such as the adequacy of accounting records, the stan- dards for attestations and audits, cost principles, cost accounting, labor-charging systems and other considerations, compensation, information on selected areas of cost, general audit considerations, audit reports and minimum disclosures, and cognizance and oversight. • The Forum on Funding and Financing Solutions for Surface Transportation in the Coming Decade Conference Report. AASHTO, 2011. • Use of Advance Construction in Financing Transportation Projects. AASHTO, 2011. • Innovative Transportation Financing Report, 1st ed. AASHTO, 1995. This document offers an overview of the financing methods used by various state agencies and provides an overview of the legislation used in those states. • AASHTO Center for Excellence in Project Finance. http://www.transportation- finance.org/. • NCHRP Project 20-68A, Scan 07-01: Best Practices in Project Delivery Manage- ment. 2009. The findings of this scan were that the best practices could be divided into four focus areas: (1) project management, (2) performance measures, (3) contracting practices, and (4) community involvement. The scan provides detailed information in each of the four areas. • NCHRP Synthesis 442: Practices and Performance Measures for Local Public Agency Federally Funded Highway Projects. 2013. • NCHRP Report 694: Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. 2012. • FHWA: Financial Plans Guidance. 2007. 4.14 TOOL 13: ESTABLISH PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLANS Overview Stakeholder needs and concerns are frequently the driver in developing design options and project delivery methods on many complex projects. Extensive public outreach is required for project success, particularly for complex renewal projects.

116 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS When to Establish Public Involvement Plans Begin planning for public involvement at the earliest stages of the project and continue with implementation through completion of construction. Readiness to Establish Public Involvement Plans How does your organization establish public involvement plans such as neighborhood meetings and public communications in the planning, scoping and programming, pre- liminary engineering, and final engineering phases of project development to mitigate public disruption and dissatisfaction? o We do not consider in the planning, scoping and programming, preliminary engi- neering, or final engineering phases of project development (novice). o The project team may use its own judgment or hire a subject matter expert (above novice). Implement public involvement planning early in the planning phase to help miti- gate public disruption (such as with self-detour planning) and dissatisfaction. Consider retaining public relations specialists to serve as points of contact. Also, consider hold- ing neighborhood or community meetings with open agendas and mechanisms to solicit feedback. Develop your public communication plans very early in the planning process. As Figure 4.16 shows, the need to establish public involvement plans is determined primarily by the context dimension of the project. If context uncertainty or complexity creates a potential impact on cost and schedule factors, con- sider the use of public involvement plans to man- age the process of external communication and management of expectations. If using innovative financing, public involvement plans can be useful in educating the public about the new methods employed on the project. Figure 4.16. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 13, establish public involvement plans.Figure 4.16. Relationship of dimensions to Tool 13, establish p ublic involvement plans. Stakeholder management is “the continuing development of relationships with stakeholders for the purpose of achieving a successful project outcome.” McElroy and Mills (2003)

117 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS o The project team is supposed to consider and establish public involvement plans, but the process is not well defined and may vary from project to project (in be- tween with buy-in). o We have a standard and documented process or tool in establishing public involve- ment plans (some maturity or experience). o In addition to Item 4 above, we have a system for the feedback and lessons learned by collecting relevant information after the project is completed to continuously improve the process (mature or experienced). Table 2.2 (in Section 2.2) provides recommendations, depending on your answer. Steps in Establishing Public Involvement Plans Use the results of complexity identification and mapping, along with the outcomes of Methods 1 through 5 (particularly Method 5), to provide guidance for establishing public involvement plans. Coordinate your public involvement planning with compre- hensive risk analysis (Tool 3), critical permit issues [specifically, U.S. DOT Section 4(f) issues] (Tool 4), and evaluation of off-site fabrication (Tool 5). Follow these steps in establishing public involvement plans: 1. Identify key public stakeholders (from comprehensive risk analysis) and road users affected by the project. 2. Set up communication and information-sharing systems (e.g., public meetings, websites, newsletters, web cams, 411 phone links, mobile alerts, dynamic message boards). 3. Gather information on specific public stakeholder concerns and relay information to the project team (e.g., designers, builders, consultants). 4. Report back. The key to successful public involvement plans is frequent, targeted communication that is responsive to the concerns of public stakeholders. Be sure to design follow-up communications to address concerns raised in Step 3 or a rationale (such as budget constraints, funding limits) to explain why public con- cerns cannot be addressed. Examples of Using Public Involvement Plans Capital Beltway HOT Lanes For the Capital Beltway HOT Lanes project, a communications and outreach plan was developed and a public communication line was maintained 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Knowing that public expectations were high, the Virginia DOT guaranteed to respond at any time of the day. To build positive relations with the local community, the Virginia DOT maintained one of the largest public information teams in the state and sponsored and supported many civic events to help build and ensure trust. Open, timely communication and a commitment to promises were the best response to political concerns or inquiries. Having a direct line to the secretary of transportation was effective in moving the project along and managing information

118 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS for the sake of political involvement. The Virginia DOT responded to political requests with communication and by fulfilling promises. From the owner’s point of view, decision making from lower-level personnel for matters at a much higher level served as an effective tool. More authority was given to lower-level personnel in managing mega projects on the Capital Beltway HOT Lanes project. Detroit River International Crossing For the DRIC project, an aggressive public involvement plan was developed from the required application of context-sensitive solutions principles from an Executive Order. Nearly 100 public meetings, hearings, and workshops were held to facilitate pub- lic involvement. The methods used and information presented were guided by public involvement plans established at the outset of the project and refined as the project unfolded. Access to the study through a toll-free project hotline and written comments through the project website or by mail were available and encouraged through the study process. A DRIC Study Information Office was open to provide information and answer questions about the project. Approximately 10,000 residences and businesses received mailings about each for- mal public meeting. In addition to the mailings, more than 1,000 fliers were delivered door-to-door for public meetings and workshops. A local advisory committee was established to provide a focused opportunity for feedback on the project. The team also arranged private-sector forums to provide an overview of the project and updates, as well as a complete overview package, which included frequently asked questions and answers, describing the project. As legislatively mandated, the Michigan DOT performed an investment-grade traffic study that provided traffic data to refine the purpose and need for the project and validate funding needs and revenue opportunities. InterCounty Connector The InterCounty Connector projects in Maryland incorporated extensive public out- reach and public input. Visual models of design ideas were created for public viewing, and there was an interagency working group to establish public relationships. Exten- sive coordination was executed to streamline resolution of potential environmental issues. I-95 James River Bridge An early public information plan was used that included a community advisory panel, dialogue with Interstate truckers, and variable message signs before design. The pub- lic information plan was implemented as soon as the need for communications was defined.

119 Chapter 4: USING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS Where to Learn More About Establishing Public Involvement Plans To learn more about establishing public involvement plans, see the associated SHRP 2 R10 training materials, which are available at www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167482.aspx. The following resources are also available for more in-depth information: • NCHRP 8-40: Evaluating Cultural Resource Significance Using Information Technology, 2002. This research was used to develop a range of options and solutions to improve decision-making procedures in transportation agencies. Solutions and options include the “do nothing” alternative, non–information technology solutions (e.g., training, guidelines, and procedures), and information technology solu- tions (e.g., improvement of data collection and management, improvement of data accessibility, development of knowledge management, and decision-support tools). • NCHRP 8-65: Guidebook for Successful Communication, Cooperation, and Coordination Between Transportation Agencies and Tribal Communities. 2010. This guidebook summarizes the current practices of the efforts used to involve tribal communities in transportation planning and project implementation. The report goes on to determine which strategies are the most effective for communica- tion and collaboration between transportation agencies and tribal communities. • NCHRP Report 710: Practical Approaches for Involving Traditionally Under- served Populations in Transportation Decision Making. 2012. This report details the patterns, trends, and factors driving change across the United States. It examines practical approaches to involving underserved popula- tions and provides effective practices, tools, and techniques and use of data sources and tools to best involve underserved populations. • NCHRP Report 364: Public Outreach Handbook for Departments of Transporta- tion. 1994. This project report covers topics such as principles of communications, the six steps to strategic communications planning, public finance, and applying prin- ciples to practice. • NCHRP 20-24(51)B: Building Credibility with Customers/Stakeholders. 2006. • NCHRP 20-24(62): Communication Strategies to Increase Understanding of Funding and Revenue Needs for the Nation’s Transportation System. 2010. This report covers the first phase of the project and covers topics such as the essen- tial guide for senior staff, the tactical toolkit, and the lessons learned from several case studies. • NCHRP 20-24(62)A: Communication Strategies to Enhance Public Understand- ing of Highway and Transit Program Funding Needs. 2010. • NCHRP Report 487: Using Customer Needs to Drive Transportation Decisions. 2003. This report includes topics such as a rationale for customer needs analysis, cus- tomer grouping and segmentation, choice of data-gathering techniques, applying

120 GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX PROJECTS customer needs to decision making, nontransportation best practices, transporta- tion best practices and implementation strategies, case studies of customer analysis in agency work, guidelines for practitioners, and the potential for information sharing. • NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 407: Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. 2010. This synthesis includes a literature review and a survey of 26 public agencies to determine the best practices (tools and techniques) used and examples of their use. The four main subareas that were consistent in all the agencies were organiza- tional structure, staffing, cost quantification, and the process with regard to public involvement. • NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 413: Techniques for Effective Highway Construction Projects in Congested Urban Areas. 2011. This study focused on the techniques used by agencies to effectively deal with high traffic volume, significant utility conflicts and relocations, complex ROW acquisi- tion actions, a diverse stakeholder base, and attentive media markets. The study identified the strategies, determined how agencies rated their success, and exam- ined the applicability of the strategies to other projects. • Practitioner’s Handbook #5: Utilizing Community Advisory Committees for NEPA Studies, 1st ed. AASHTO, 2007. This handbook provides the key issues to consider and the practical tips to use when determining whether to employ a community advisory committee. Some of the practical tips include items such as potential members, selection process, de- fining the community advisory committee’s role, rules for participation, logistics, cost, and timing and scope of committee involvement. • Public Involvement in the Transportation Decisionmaking Process. Course Num- ber FHWA-NHI-142036. By the end of this three-day course, participants will be able to describe U.S. DOT decision-making processes, the relationship between the public and decision mak- ing, develop a public involvement plan, describe interest-based problem solving, and identify ways to enhance public involvement plans. • Effective Communications in Public Involvement. Course Number FHWA- NHI-142059. On the completion of this six-hour course, participants will be able to define values, interests, and needs (VIN); identify common problems that develop when the VIN is not understood; communicate through the public’s VIN; develop a communi- cations plan and incorporate the public VIN into the plan; develop a plan for a public meeting; make an effective presentation; describe facilitation techniques to accomplish meeting goals; and describe a process for dealing with hostile groups.