The Sydney Airport Project Management - Case Study Example

Project management Name Grade course University Tutor Date Introduction to the project The Sydney Airport was required to construct a Runway End Safety Area (RESA) at the end of its runways for the purpose of complying with new safety requirements adopted by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. The project was expected to cost $100 and was intended to result to safe air travel as well as other benefits to the community and the passengers. More importantly, RESA is meant to reduce harm to passengers in case of an unlikely event when an aircraft over runs short of a runway. RESA was constructed on a number of land-bridges, resulting to RESA being a suspended concrete deck, the first of its kind in Australia (Smith et al 2009, p.14). Though the project was successfully completed within time and budget, there were several technical challenges. Such challenges included: projected increased loads, reducing the amount of time of restricted use of the runway, construction of the runway over a heritage and fragile sewer, the construction restrictions being done an international airport and on the bank of River Cooks (Plummer 2008, p.4). Despite these challenges, the project was completed and now the airport complies with international safety standards, accommodates new aircrafts, safe operations are guaranteed and the airport continues to function as a major international airport. Project stakeholder analysis Airports are meant to provide airport transportation services to the public and businesses in a region. Airports act as utilities providing services to the services providers and safe air services to the consumers. Airport operators are faced with the challenge of building the infrastructure, leasing the facility to service providers and later managing the service providers to ensure that quality services are provided to the consumers (Bazargan & Vasigh 2003, p.189). Since an airport operates as a public utility, an inventory of the stakeholders of an airport and their objectives is necessary whenever new development is taking place. The stakeholder will be any individual or group of individuals who can affect or affected by operations in the airport. Various stakeholders can be identified including passengers, air carriers, airport organization, investors, service providers, employees, local and federal government, communities and general aviation users. For a project to be successful, stakeholder analysis exercise that ensures that the wishes and the general well-being of the different stakeholders are incorporated. The main stakeholders in the case Sydney Airport are identified as: Passengers: the airport provides the transition point between the air transportation and the ground as well as the connection point between two airports. Many types of passengers can be identified: transfer, arriving, originating, international and domestic passengers. Irrespective of the type of passengers, the RESA project should bare in mind the presence of the passengers and consider their safety as the project progresses. Air carriers: these are the air bodies that transport passengers or the cargo. They are classified as small certified, large certified or commuter carriers (Button & Stough 2000, p.44). RESA project had to ensure that the project did not disrupt their operations. Airport organization: the organization structure of an airport varies and managed by a group of airports or individual airport through a board appointed by the government (Hamidi, Yates, Berthier & Krzeminski 2012, p.2094). The Sydney airport is interested that the RESA project implemented in line with international standards and that it does not hinder the operations at the airport. General aviations users: these are the businesses that operate in the airport and do not necessarily use the air carrier; for instance taxi operators, businesses, aircraft rental and aerial observation. However, their success depends on the success of the airport. These users pay certain fee in order to operate in the airport, Sydney airport had to ensure that their operations were not much affected by the RESA project. Investors and Bond-holders: most of airport debts are held as general airport revenue bond (GARB). The bond therefore depends majorly on the revenue generated from the airport and not from other sources like the government (Plummer 2008, p.5). The RESA project had to be implemented in a way that the Sydney airport did not make losses in the process for the sake of the investors. This was only possible by complying with the proposed budget. Service providers: these are private operators that provide services to the airport as independent operators. For instance, supplying fuel, loading and offloading aircrafts, cleaning, baggage handling, catering transport among others. The success of these operators depends on how efficient the airport is. Their interests had to be considered during the project implementation. Brief description of how the project was managed The project would not have been successfully completed without adequate consultation. The Sydney Airport was required to prepare a draft Major Development Plan to allow the public 60 days for submitting comments in accordance with the Airports Act 1996 (Smith et al 2009, p.15). Copies of Draft MDP can be viewed and downloaded at the Sydney airport website without any charge. Throughout the exhibition period, copies of the Draft MDP could also be provided in the Airport’s corporate office and library during the normal working hours. The Draft MDP describes the work process involved in upgrading the runway safety area, the potential environmental impacts as well as the proposed mitigation measures. Another important thing on the Draft MDP was the suggested timetable for the construction. The Sydney Airport encouraged the stakeholders to read the Draft MDP and make comments. Submissions had to be submitted within 60 days and had to contain the names and address of the writer (Smith et al 2009, p.7). High level of aircraft noise is not acceptable since it is a nuisance to the environment. Governments around the world are ensuring that everything possible is done by setting minimum environmental standards in order to address the noise nuisance (Button & Stough 2000, p.45). Sydney Airport Community Forum (SACF) appreciates the importance of the RESA project but emphasized that everything possible to be done in order to mitigate the potential negative impacts of the project (Smith et al 2009, p.8). The RESA project success could be attributed to the extensive stakeholder participation in the early stages of the project. There were 60 business days allowed for the members of the public to make submissions in an exhibition. The Draft MDP contained the potential environmental impacts and how to mitigate them as well as the timetable for the construction process. The success of any project depended on how the project’s objectives were defined, planned and managed. RESA project may have succeeded in the project by having well defined objectives that were also well planned and managed. The RESA project success depended on whether the community could oppose or support the project. By having well defined, planned and managed objectives, RESA provided the community with a Draft MDP before starting the project; the draft contained and spelt out the objectives of the project. It was after understanding the Draft MDP that the Sydney Airport Community Forum (SACF) accepted the need for runway safety enhancement to be constructed but the members of the community needed to be satisfied that the possible impacts of the project are avoided or minimized in case they cannot be avoided (Plummer 2008, p.6). Before the projected commenced, it was well agreed that Sydney Airport Corporation as the designated proponent had the responsibility to ensure that the suggested mitigation measures were implemented even though such expertise was with the Air services Australia. During entire project cycle, SACL agreed to maximize the availability of the east-west runway for the purpose of sharing the noise. To avoid accidents, MDP specified on the types of equipment to be used; for instance the use of lowering cranes was recommended since such cranes can be lowered or removed after work. Also, in order to minimize time, MDP suggested extended working hors and additional resources (Plummer 2008, p.7). Critical analysis of the project outcome The RESA project was successfully completed after well defined planning process that ensured that the project was implemented as defined in the initial planning stages. Of critical importance, the project succeeded from the support it received from the community. The initial Draft MDP was made available to the public through an exhibition. This draft detailed the objectives of the project, the impacts and the mitigation measures. The members of the public were allowed to make their written submissions regarding the project before the final MDP was made (Smith et al 2009, p.12). The project did not start before this stage until it was approved by the community which was most affected. Having endorsed the project to commence, the community also agreed on what it would do to help mitigate the impact of noise (Plummer 2008, p.9). This ensured that the project got the ownership of the community and therefore no conflicts would arise when the project was ongoing thereby saving time. A project manager should be very keen when drafting the project plan at the initial planning stages. RESA project manager ensured that responsibilities were well defined for the various actors in order to ensure that all the activities and the mitigation measures proceeded well. The tools and the strategies to be adopted were also well stated in the final MDP which guided the activities of the project. Tools that would ensure safety of the works were well stated; strategies to ensure that the projected complied with the scheduled time were also stated. Successful managers should cooperate with the stakeholders by sharing the information regarding the project to ensure that the stakeholders are aware of what is expected throughout the project cycle. This helps to enhance efficiency and avoid later conflicts (Hamidi, Yates, Berthier & Krzeminski 2012, p.2096). References Bazargan, M. & Vasigh, B., 2003. Size versus efficiency: a case study of US commercial airports. Journal of Air Transport Management, 9(4), 187-193. Button, K.J. & Stough, R., 2000. Air transport networks, Melbourne: Edward Elgar Publishing. Hamidi, B., Yates, M., Berthier, D., & Krzeminski, M. 2012, Overcoming Challenges with Jet Grouting at Sydney International Airport, Grouting and Deep Mixing pp. 2092-2101. Plummer, T., 2008, Runway Safety Enhancement Runway 25 – Runway End Safety Area Sydney Airport. Sydney Morning Herald – 19th March 2008. Smith, V., et al, 2009, Sydney Airport Runway Safety: Sydney Airport Community Forum Submission to SACL on Draft MDP. Sydney. Read More