Project Management: The Grove Student Retreat Centre - Assignment Example

The Grove – Retreat Centre” Overview and Project  Project The Grove – Retreat Centre Country or Region: UK - Scotland   Sector Covered: Education    Project Duration: Mths. 116    Proposed Budget: GBP 2,800,000 (excluding external works and landscaping)   Contractor: ME Client:   leading University, Registered Charity Project Contract Base: SBCC (2009) Funding Sources: Local Council and others The Student Retreat Centre will be built in an adjacent area to some residential buildings and existing commercial premises. The Client appointed ME as Contractor and nominated as sub-contractor Euroclad (specialist fitters). The Contractor will prepare the site and complete the project, which will provide a three-storey building (ground and two upper floors) and over 2,300 sq m of space, a mix of multi-purpose areas to accommodate 250 people. The amenities include an administration area (offices), 4 meeting rooms, a performing arts studio, lounge and outside community areas, a spacious kitchen, computer room, library, 2 conference rooms, a student work area, student offices. The project will feature all the modern and ecological facilities and will ensure all the necessary utilities and appropriate connections. The land is property of the Local Council, and and the site has been cleared and is brown-fielded. The site experiences some slopping and has been fairly restricted. Task 1 - Change 1 in the initial project specifications As part of the Planning Project phase, the site preparation and site visits and tests conducted at site, on June 26, 2011 a Borehole testing has been performed preliminary to starting the foundation design. The Borehole report signaled problems at the center of the site, as water was encountered at 2.3 m depth. Due to the sloppy site area and the soft made ground (risk by permeability), there is a high risk for the foundation to gradually deter and eventually crash. One of the technical solutions proposed initially is the piling / ring beam foundation. As Project Manager, I have to consider remedy for this problem signaled by the Borehole report, and I have to assess properly the technical solutions involved and how they impact the project. The Client should prepare a Project Change Request, in the terms that the subcontractor must re-design their initial cladding structure, as their trial Pit completed at 2.50 m and after the Borehole report, it should be adjusted for the 2.3 m depth. As long as dewatering is concerned, uncontrolled or improperly controlled groundwater can, by hydrostatic pressure and seepage, cause piping heave, or reduce the stability of excavation slopes or foundation soils so as to make them unsuitable for supporting the structure. For these reasons, subsurface construction should not be attempted or permitted without appropriate control of the groundwater and (subsurface) hydrostatic pressure. It would be the responsibility of the Contractor to design, install and operate the dewatering and groundwater control system adopted. An important facet of dewatering an excavation is the relative risk of damage that may occur to the excavation, cofferdam, or foundation for a structure in event of failure of the dewatering system. The method of excavation and reuse of the excavated soil may also have a bearing on the need for dewatering. These factors, as well as the construction schedule, must be determined and evaluated before proceeding with the design of a dewatering system. A cutoff to prevent or minimize seepage into an excavation can also be formed by digging a narrow trench around the area to be excavated and backfilling it with an impervious soil. Such a trench can be constructed in almost any soil, either above or below the water table, by keeping the trench filled with a bentonite mud slurry and backfilling it with a suitable impervious soil. Generally, the trench is backfilled with a well-graded clay sand gravel mixed with bentonite slurry. A viable technique would be to construct concrete cutoff walls by overlapping cylinders and also as continuous walls excavated and concreted in sections. These walls can be reinforced and are incorporated as a permanent part of a structure. Good specifications are essential to ensure adequate dewatering and groundwater control. The initial contract should contain a change in the specifications. Specifications must be clear, concise, and complete with respect to the desired results, special conditions, inspection and control, payment, and responsibility. A specification that sets forth the desired results making the Contractor solely responsible for design, equipment, installation procedures, maintenance, and performance, but requires that the Contractor employ or subcontract the dewatering and groundwater control to a recognized company with at least 5 years, and preferably 10 years, of experience in the management, design, installation, and operation of dewatering systems of equal complexity. The specification should also state that the system must be designed by a registered professional engineer recognized as an expert in dewatering with a minimum of 5 to 10 years of responsible experience in the design and installation of dewatering systems. This type of specification should further require submittal of a brief but comprehensive report for review and approval including a description and profile of the geology, soil, and groundwater conditions and characteristics at the site. The section of the specifications relating to dewatering and the control of groundwater should be prepared by a geotechnical engineer experienced in dewatering and in the writing of specifications, in cooperation with the civil designer for the project. Factors to be considered with the upcoming changes in the initial contract are: Design values, analyses, and calculations Drawings of the complete dewatering system including a plan drawing, appropriate sections, pump and pipe capacities and sizes, power system, standby power and pumps, grades, filter gradation, surface water control, valving, and disposal of water. A description of installation and operational procedures A plan and schedule for monitoring performance of the system The piling / ring beam solution is extremely expensive. Because all the formwork and steel cages tied rather than just dumping the conny in a trench with sheet reinforcement - more labour is involed. We need to be extra sure we have the right cages in there and that they are tied properly! Also we need to think if we have protrude steels for vertical pillers/walls later. The rebar will have to be bent and tied together before being lobbed into the ground. This will take several hours, as its a small job our fixed costs (machinery) will be higher in relation to each metre length of ring beam required. The cost for the ring beam could be slightly less, but when you consider the digger and labour to pull the trench, the skips for debris, the materials and making up of the steel in the beam and tying to the piles, the cubic metres of concrete, the pump lorry, other plant and labour for the pour… that is much. As the Planning Permission and Building Warrant are already in place, the remaining time allocated to the project should not exceed 27 weeks. With this changes in the initial specifications, there will be considerable delays, which will transfer into exceeding the initial budget also. The changes proposed must be agreed first by the Client. Then, deepnding on the technical solution adopted, probably one more sub-contractor must be involved. This means call for tenders / bids submission, selection and new agreement, which is time consuming. Or, in any case, we need extra project staff involved – professional engineer for the dewatering, a geotechnical engineer, professional staff who cost money to attract and keep them motivated and committed. Extra machinery and appropriate personnel to operate them may be required. If from the existent personnel we will not be able to cover the necessary for the new operations, either we need to bring new ones or train from the existent lot. Also for the piling solution as suggested, it is recommended to use a professional company to do it. Location of work, the access restrictions, impediments for example for a concrete wagon discharge direct, are also factors to be considered. The site is nearby a community, so we have to consider all the extra works to be done and eventually get some new approvals from the Local Council. According to the basis Contract for this project – SBCC, In the Supplemental Provisions, the Contractor is now obliged to "suggest economically viable amendments to the Works" which might approve environmental performance. It is most probably also required extensions of time and written instructions into place – written notices to all the parties of the contract (expect arguments which are time consuming and may not finalize with the expected result). TASK 2 – Change 2 in the initial project specifications The site has been srapped down to formation level. Excavation and installation of most of the main utility lines done according to plan. At this point Client Request for Change comes into place: Instead of steel framed building, client wishes Volumetric Modularised System (VMS), designed and supplied by a subsidiary company of Ground Securities Ltd; VMS modules come to site as finished accommodation units with dimensions 3.4 m wide x 8 m long – 5.4 m wide x 8 m long. All with single storey height, average weight in the order of 1.3 T, ready to hook up with their respective utilities. The Client’s motivation for using modular construction is understandable, because of over-riding requirements for speed of construction, improved quality, and for early return of investment. It also reduces distruption if we consider the congested site. Disadvantages of this change, particularly if applied incorrectly or executed inappropriately include the following: Early decision making is required about the build method and the exact specification requirements. Greater level of coordination at the procurement stage is required to ensure that the offsite packages interface correctly with each other and with the traditional elements of build. One has to take account of all the benefits Offsite offer and not just the cost of the materials. We have to consider transportation costs (need of module shipment to the project site for permanent installation, increased shipping costs for the project, requirement of double-handling as equipment and materials are shipped to the site), module size limitation (different restrictions for each mode of transport, the design must consider dividing modules according to transportation constraints), increased engineering effort (requires more intensive engineering effort, closure engineering must be completed prior module fabrication, planning and design are forced earlier). With modularisation, on-site crews will still be utilised to carry out civil work, piece together the modules, remove bracing and various other activities. The key is for ME to work with the Client to determine the optimal balance. It is important to remember that the on-site fit-up of these modules may become an issue, particularly it is ME and the sub-contractor handling the fabrication and construction responsibilities and these activities must be perfectly coordinated. Another consideration when evaluating modular construction is labor productivity. We have also to consider the space available (limited) to install equipment, which is especially important for the dimensions of our site to accommodate certain types of cranes. As mentioned before, we have to examine the costs associated with the transportation of these modules, as well as the cost of the additional steel needed for the modules, and whether these extra expenses will exceed the benefits of the modularisation. In addition, our work permits are already in place, and in such case, the off-site construction is not the best solution, since shop work should begin while permits are being obtained. ME, the sub-contractor and the Client will need to consider also the equipment size, because certain components may be too large to modularise; then the maintenance access, particularly if the equipment will need to be frequently removed and replaced by a maintenance worker, and the ability to incorporate piping, instrumentation and electrical systems in the module, since they are part of a highly integrated system. Though traditional in the school building sector in UK, some problems have been associated over the past years (since the 50’s) with the modularised system propoed by the Client Intergrid system (using precast reinforced concrete columns and beams to form the structure) and the CLASP system (based on lightweight steel), such as condensation, leaking joints (poor insulation), but they were proved to be rather a result of poor workmanship rather than design. The system has an inflexible grid causing steel columns and bracing to inhibit the creation of present day space and the diaphragm slab prevents significant drainage alterations as the slab cannot be cut for a drainage runs without compromising structural integrity. The grid has construction zones for components to prevent conflict between these components. To satisfy these modern standards such as insulation and acoustics these zones would be compromised. Changing live loads on multi-storey buildings (i.e. changing uses of rooms) can be restricted by the existing structure’s original design parameters. Due to the structure it is difficult to alter room sizes without making them significantly oversized or undersized, corridors are too narrow in many cases which causes behavioural problems, these are integral to the structure in many cases so very difficult to alter, and result in inefficient remodelling. Extending or altering CLASP steelwork (particularly column positions) is expensive and complex. The whole frame acts as a single unit, and components would have to be specially hand made, in addition the slab has specific reinforcement to take the column loads, which can not be augmented at a later date as they are integral to the slab. At this point, I suggest we keep the steel framed straucture of the building, as complementary structural components can easily be accommodated, curtain walling readily and efficiently connected to the structure, and other modularised elements such as toilet pods, dry-casing, M & E items easily fitted. It allows easy adaptation - during the construction period the client may wish to alter installations and this can readily and rapidly be achieved. Steelwork connections, particularly bolted ones, can easily be released or re-made in whatever form necessary. The client may need to extend, to change the use of the steel framed building, to absorb changes in loading requirements, and to incorporate new installations. Should an increase in loading requirements occur, then the structural steel elements can easily be individually strengthened, or additional members introduced or altered to suit. Steels relative lightness in weight allows adaptation in the future to be easily accomplished. New connections can easily be introduced by bolting or welding enabling alterations for services or changes of use. Costs are predictable, which helps with a meaningful calculation of the investment and risk involved in the project. At the construction stage, delivery of steelwork is relatively straightforward - requiring little space, time or inconvenience. The hours of delivery can be selected in order to reduce public nuisance. Because steelwork comprises prefabricated elements, there is as a result less site disruption with adjoining properties. Construction equipment normally used to erect steelwork is cranes and mobile platforms. These by their nature require little permanent or temporary space to operate. Noise when manufacturing, delivering or erecting steelwork is not a major problem. The speed of steelwork erection means inconvenience caused is reduced to a minimum period. Task 3 – Change in allocated resources for the project Due to the latest changes requested in the project, I have been asked to incorporate two new Asst Project Managers, to be used also for further projects. The two managers have been selected from a pool of 6 candidates. Despite their equivalent of HN qualifications, being young they have very little skills and experience in the way of rain-screen cladding. But when it comes to staff acquisition, every identified staffing need that is still blank or identified only with a function, or marked “to-be-hired” is a risk. Considering our project already started, and there have been already two major changes in it, with the deadline pressure, we have to make sure of the best ways our project team can welcome the new members. First, I have to introduce the new employees to the layout / project site, so they can be familiar with the background and basics of the project. New employees are anxious to prove themselves and theres no better time to start than now. The new employees will arrive 1 week only prior their tasks commence and we have to make sure they will integrate and merge with the existent team smoothly and fast. We have to make our new colleagues immediately aware of the Health and Safety Regulations into place, the policies and procedures as stated and imposed by our project. For this, I will require our HSE Officer to make sure the two new managers are properly educated and trained towards our daily main topic: Safety. We also have just 1 week to update them with our project status and the problems we are facing, so they can start their proper work with a full package and information. I, as Project Manager, will make sure some of the basics are met and all this process will go according to the plan, for our common best interest. We have to lay out the welcome mat. As new duties are undertaken its important to let the new employees know he or she is a welcome member of a functioning team. Accept their presence and spend time getting to know them. Work on developing a sense of partnership between our new employees and the people they will be working with. I will provide clear performance expectations. Professional work begins with knowing exactly whats expected and understanding clearly explained goals. The process by which these expectations are met must be understood by everyone involved. New employees are more comfortable when they know what the game plan is going to be. I will delegate the responsibility to the new team members. I will allow the newest employees to participate and accomplish tasks that benefit the business, and hence help people who are just getting started to feel valued. Everyone feels good when theyre trusted to accomplish a task and given the tools to do it. I make here a high and sound appeal for Communication. Providing clear performance expectations and delegating responsibility all require good communication skills. Make sure our new colleagues understand what our Client expects and how he or she will be asked to reach the goals. The ongoing offer of assistance and an open door policy into the supervisors office are important. Open communication encourages commitment to success and provides an atmosphere in which the new employee is acclimated into the business. Usually, it takes some time for the people added to a project to become productive. New workers on the project must first become trained about the work that has preceded them; this education requires diverting resources already working on the project, temporarily diminishing their productivity while the new workers are not yet contributing meaningfully. Both new workers also need to integrate with a team composed of multiple engineers who must educate them in their area of expertise in the code base, day by day. In addition to reducing the contribution of experienced workers (because of the need to train), new workers may even have negative contributions – due to their lack of experience and even insufficient knowledge on a specific technical matter, they can make mistakes and create further disruptions from the project completion. For this, we have to make sure again that the communication we establish with our new team members is very clear, and is my duty to make sure that I understand the individuals, which ones respond best to a pat on the back and which ones respond best to a kick up the baseline. But we all simply have to be able to understand each other. And I have the job to demonstrate that I can be someone that the team looks up to, someone they dont want to disappoint. I suggest we keep in mind that the two new team members will be Assistant Managers, so they will have decisional power and supervisory roles. Considering the fact that they are quite young and inexperienced, the leadership skills required by their positions are quite difficult to be possessed at the moment. We have in our existent team senior engineers and experinced people, with high knowledge and skills in the technical aspects, and their reaction towards an appointed young manager, who does not have enough experience accumulated, despite of maybe same level of knowledge, might be a negative one. Their authority in front of their subordinates may shake and even be ignored if these two young managers will not have support and back up. So, it is my job as Project Manager and leader of the project team to make an appeal to everyone for support, understanding and full cooperation towards our new colleagues. I will myself make sure to provide them all my support and intervention, whenever needed and I will initiate in the first 2 days of their arrival full-day training sessions on leadership and communication skills. 27 weeks Approved project specifications Approvals & work permits ready Start work / Site preparation Borehole Report 26 June 119 weeks Initiation of the project Planning resources (project team, work site, working approvals / permits) Start Launch / execution Performance & control risk management, QC Evaluation Management of Change: Category No. Comment PCN – project change notice issued to date – pending approval 1 According to Borehole Report on 26 June, new technical solution to be adopted for the foundation PCN – project change notice – pending approval 1 Client requests change from building steel framed structure to VMS References Roger Bullivant. © Roger Bullivant Limited 2008. 25 Nov.2011 < http://www.roger-bullivant.co.uk/products/underpinning.html> SBCC. “Minor Works Building Contract with Contractor’s Design for use in Scotland”. © The Joint Contracts Tribunal Limited Amendment 1, April 2007. 26 Nov.2011 http://www.sbcconline.com/pdf/iMan_Docs_2961028_1.pdf Wikipedia. “Well Logging”. 25 Nov.2011 < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well_logging> Project Management for Construction. Labor, Material and Equipment Utilization. Version 2.2 prepared Summer, 2008. 26 Nov.2011 Business Balls. Project Management. © alan chapman 1995-2010. 25 Nov. 2011 Release of Asbestos Fibers in System Built Schools. By Michael Lees. 12th of June 2008. 26 Nov.2011 Google.Books. “Project Management” by Dennis Lock. 25 Nov.2011 http://books.google.com/books?id=ApkhCGWFh9IC&pg=PA403&lpg=PA403&dq=impact+of+changes+in+project&source=bl&ots=eATrAGCiMx&sig=N0-tM59BS8QQOlW4i5veKQOu1es&hl=en&ei=uUnSTu3_A8bIhAf5reS6DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=impact%20of%20changes%20in%20project&f=false Berkley Lab. US Department of Energy. Project Management Office. Revision 1.0 - February 2009. 26 Nov.2011 < http://www.lbl.gov/Ops/assets/docs/PMO/PMO%20Procedures/PMO-1.3%20Project%20Organizational%20Breakdown%20Structure.pdf> Read More