TY - GEN
T1 - Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance
AU - El Asmar, Mounir
AU - Ariaratnam, Samuel
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was funded by the Water Research Foundation (WRF) Project 4685 “Project Delivery Performance Evaluation and Decision Support Tool for Water and Wastewater Capital Projects.” The authors would also like to thank all the utility and industry participants for providing project data and valuable expert feedback.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American Society of Civil Engineers.
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - This paper analyzes the performance of project delivery methods for water and wastewater infrastructure projects. Aging infrastructure, population growth, and more stringent environmental regulations have been some of the main drivers highlighting the need to upgrade existing drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities, and build new ones. Industry leaders and decision-makers are looking at innovative technological and project delivery solutions to achieve this colossal but urgent challenge. Water and wastewater facilities have traditionally been constructed, retrofitted, and rehabilitated using the design-bid-build (DBB) process, which is adequate for projects where the work is well defined and has relatively low uncertainty and complexity. However, DBB might not be ideal for more complex facilities where the potential for integration between the different stakeholders may result in innovative solutions and improved efficiencies. Therefore, alternative project delivery methods (APDM) such as design-build (DB) and construction manager at risk (CMAR) have been on the rise recently, mostly due to improved project cost and schedule outcomes. In fact, the project performance impacts of APDM have been quantified for the transportation and building sectors; this paper's objective is to quantify delivery methods' performance for the water infrastructure sector. The paper discusses a national data collection effort and analysis focusing on water and wastewater projects. Early results show improved cost and schedule performance associated with APDM. These findings can assist stakeholders in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water and wastewater project.
AB - This paper analyzes the performance of project delivery methods for water and wastewater infrastructure projects. Aging infrastructure, population growth, and more stringent environmental regulations have been some of the main drivers highlighting the need to upgrade existing drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities, and build new ones. Industry leaders and decision-makers are looking at innovative technological and project delivery solutions to achieve this colossal but urgent challenge. Water and wastewater facilities have traditionally been constructed, retrofitted, and rehabilitated using the design-bid-build (DBB) process, which is adequate for projects where the work is well defined and has relatively low uncertainty and complexity. However, DBB might not be ideal for more complex facilities where the potential for integration between the different stakeholders may result in innovative solutions and improved efficiencies. Therefore, alternative project delivery methods (APDM) such as design-build (DB) and construction manager at risk (CMAR) have been on the rise recently, mostly due to improved project cost and schedule outcomes. In fact, the project performance impacts of APDM have been quantified for the transportation and building sectors; this paper's objective is to quantify delivery methods' performance for the water infrastructure sector. The paper discusses a national data collection effort and analysis focusing on water and wastewater projects. Early results show improved cost and schedule performance associated with APDM. These findings can assist stakeholders in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water and wastewater project.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050916627&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85050916627&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1061/9780784481646.034
DO - 10.1061/9780784481646.034
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85050916627
T3 - Pipelines 2018: Planning and Design - Proceedings of Sessions of the Pipelines 2018 Conference
SP - 328
EP - 333
BT - Pipelines 2018
A2 - Macey, Christopher C.
A2 - Lueke, Jason S.
PB - American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
T2 - Pipelines 2018 Conference: Planning and Design
Y2 - 15 July 2018 through 18 July 2018
ER -