Springfield Interchange Improvement Project
-
Upload
bobby-boris -
Category
Documents
-
view
527 -
download
0
Transcript of Springfield Interchange Improvement Project
THE SPRINGFIELD INTERCHANGE
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Presented by
Billy
Bobby
Tun
Son
Objectives
Project Management Knowledge Areas
Project Management Process Groups
Using the Springfield Project to:
-Demonstrates project management practices and principles
-Assess the performance of the project using the project management knowledge areas and process groups
Project Management Knowledge Areas and Process Groups
Project Overview
The Springfield Interchange is in Virginia, 10 miles from Washington, D.C.
To improve traffic flow, the Virginia Department of Transportation rebuilt the interchange to make it safer for commuters
The Springfield Interchange Improvement is an eight-year, seven-phase construction project that began in 1999 and completed in 2007
The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) was the administrator of the planning, design, right-of-way acquisition and construction.
The total cost of the Project was $676 million
PROJECT ORGANISATIONAL CHART
VDOT
HNTB (Interchan
ge Design)
FHWA
Dewberry Davis and
Bechtel (engineering
services)
General Contractors
Shirley Contracting Company (phase
2,3,4)Project follows Design-Bid-Build
Lane Construction Company(Phase 5)
Archer Western Contractor ltd(Phase 6,7)
Quality Assurance/ Quality Control
Public Relation
Safety Officer
Project Manager
Project Finance
Direct Reporting Relationship
Partnership
Project Work Breakdown Structure
Level 1 WBS
Project Team
Architect
Engineer Project
General Contractor
Construction
Level 2 WBS
Project team
selection
Architect Design
Engineering Design
Budget and time
frame developm
ent
General Contractor Selection
Phase 1 Phase 2 and 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 and 7
Level 3 WBS Project
manager
Architect selection
Engineer selection
Budget developm
ent
Contract Bidding
Add fourth lane on I-
95
Rebuild the I-95/Route 644 Interchange
Widen the access road
and overpass bridges to
accommodate higher traffic
flow
Direct overpass for I-495
westbound traffic to
southbound I-95
Enlarge the ramp from
I-395 South to
westbound I-495
Complete the I-95
northbound and local
ramps
Complete the I-395
southbound and high
occupancy vehicles (HOV)
roadway
Public
relation officer
Architectural design
and completion
Engineering design and completion
Time line developm
ent
General contractor selected
Add exit ramp from
I-95 northbound to Spring Mall Drive
Old Keene Mill Road widened to 8 lanes from
Commerce Street to Spring
Road
Add third southbound
lane to Loisdale
Road
Construct I-95
southbound roadway
from Capital
Beltway to Franconia- Springfield Parkway
Construct ramp from I-395 south to Beltway inner loop
safety officer
Budget and time
line approval
Old Keene Mill Road widened
to 10 lanes from Spring Road to
I-95
Improve Amherst Avenue bridge
Relocate Capital Beltway
outer loop
Quality
assurance and control
Construct Franconia Road
over Loisdale Road and
Frontier Drive to four lanes
Add 3rd lane (turn-lane)
southbound from Spring Mall Dr to
Newington Rd
Project Finance
Duration (months) 1 6 6 2 6 12 24 47 35 47
Cost (Million USD) 133 178.5 95.5 106.6
General Contractor/ Company
HNTB
Dewberry Davis and Bechtel
Shirley Contracting Company
Shirley Contracting Company
Lane Construction Company
Archer Western Contractor ltd
Project Cost (in Million)
Construction and Design Cost
Phase 1 12.3 Phase 2 & 3 133.0 Phase 4 178.5 Phase 5 95.5 Phase 6 & 7 106.6
Total Construction and Design Cost 525.9
Preliminary Engineering 45.0Congestion Management 28.0Springfield I Project Store 6.0Right-of-way Acquisition 71.1
Total Project Cost 676.0
Activity on Node
14
1 2
3
2.1
3.1
4 5 6 7 8 9
10
11 12 13 15
Project Analysis - Defining Stage
Main concerns:
Potential loss for local business owners and Commercial carriers
Execute a cost-effective project given the condition of the location
Actions:
Held a series of public hearing
Inputs helped to define the project scope
Created Congestion Management Plan
Project Analysis - Defining Stage (cont)
Problems:
Lack of control over cost
Politics slowed down project progress
Lack of risk management plan
Bad team work
Actions:
Communication to key stakeholders
Involve all parties in decision making
Identify potential risks
Project Analysis - Planning Stage
Problems:
Inexperience project managers
Lack of formal risk mitigation strategies
Lack of formal support and procedures
Lack of quality assurance program
Politics
Organizational structure
Project Analysis - Planning Stage (cont)
Actions:
Fine tuning project scope
Development of intervening programs
Attend to the needs of stakeholders
“Parallel Development”
Communication campaign
Project Analysis - Executing Stage
Problem:
Flawed cost estimation continued to affect the project
Project schedule was delayed due to heavy traffic and stringent safety requirements
Project Analysis - Executing Stage (cont)
Actions:
Recalculate cost estimation of the entire project
Attractive contract incentives to speed up the completion time
Established formal risk management and quality assurance program
Major organizational change in VDOT
Project Analysis - Closing Stage
Contractual incentives readjusted – sped up time schedule
Improved cost estimation and risk management
Developed an extensive quality control system and contract closing procedure – “Punch List”
Improved communication
Project Analysis - Closing Stage (cont)
The project has done a fair job of satisfying stakeholders
Time schedule remained relatively on-course
Overall Risk management remained weak
Project-wide communication was exceptional
Project Quantitative Analysis SummaryProject Management
Knowledge AreaDefining
Stage Planning Stage Executing Stage Closing Stage Average
Scope Management 3.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 3.75
Time Management 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.50
Cost Management 1.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.75
Quality Management 1.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 2.50Human Resource
Management 2.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.75Communications
Management 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 4.25
Risk Management 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 2.25
Procurement Management 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.75
Integration Management 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 2.75
Average 2.22 2.44 4.00 3.89 3.14
Rating scale 5- Excellent 4- Very good 3 - Good 2- Poor 1- Very Poor
Assessment by PMKAs
Scope Manage-
ment
Time Manage-
ment
Cost Man-agement
Quality Manage-
ment
Human Re-source
Manage-ment
Communica-tions Man-agement
Risk Man-agement
Procurement Management
Integration Management
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
3.75
3.50
2.75
2.50
2.75
4.25
2.25
3.75
2.75
Average Rating by PMKAs
Rat
ing
Strength Opportunity for Improvement
Assessment by Project Stage
Conclusion
Project change is inevitable, recognition of problems and the ability to adapt, determines the outcome of the project
The use of modern project management techniques and tools will increase the accuracy of project planning and allows for drastic improvements to take place.
The End
Thank you for listening
If you got any further questions, please feel free to keep it to yourself