in the Infrastructure Design Process
Tarmo SAVOLAINEN and Jouko KANKAINEN1 Overview
The reasons for the difference between infrastructure project cost levels is related to three categories:
• the scope
• the design solutions
• the economical situation of the market
The usual process of construction is divided to four major steps:
• scope definition
• design
• construction
• maintenance
Usually landscape architecture projects begin by concentrating on the design step. The process follows the pattern above but the scope definition is made by concentrating highly on the small details of the final result. In that kind of process there is a risk of forgeting the larger issues of the final result. Achieving the results and managing the cost level are more difficult.
Ten big infrastructure clients (property owner organisations) in Finland (National Highway Administration, National Railroad Administration, Cities of Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa, Turku, Tampere, Kuopio, Oulu and Jyväskylä) and one commercial privately owned company (Rapal Ltd) have made an agreement for a cost management development project lasting 6 years (2003-2008).
The project is based on co-operation with the Laboratory of Construction Economics and Management at Helsinki University of Technology. The targets of the project are:
• to create a commonly used and tested infrastructure cost management system
• to create new consulting markets for construction economics in the infrastructure branch
The ten client organisations made a consortium agreement with each other. The consortium and Rapal Ltd made a partnership agreement for the project. The systematic development project includes:
• the systematic project definition method
• the cost management systems
• end product element based cost management system for the scope prizing
and the work is ongoing.
Fig. 1: Infrastructure property management process
2
The scope management process
2.1 The systematic scope definition
Landscape architecture projects are usually very complex. The better the scope is defined, the better the results and the more effective the cost management will be. In the development project, Rapal has developed a systematic project definition which includes:
• a document for the infrastructure scope definition and
• a list of end product elements systematic project component list
The project definition document is a document which describes the result (the scope) of the project divided into the end product elements. Each element is based on the specific need (fig1) and is systematically described for the starting information of the design process.
Fig. 2: The needs of the project are changed into targets, which are described as end product elements when described in reference to the scope.
The main use for the project plan during the process are:
• to describe and make the first model of the final result
• to find out the expectations of the different interest groups (e.g. municipality, citizens)
• to develop the project´s results
• to steer the project´s design solutions
• to make exact definitions for the DB-projects
• to make the cost management possible
Routes for the motor engines Highways
Streets Railroads Tunnels Bridges
Light traffic routes Other routes
Parks and green areas Squares and market places Rock facilities
Traffic areas
Systems related to infrastructure Waste management systems Lightning systems
Noice protection systems
Fig. 3: The end product element list includes for example the following subtitles The end product elements of the typical landscape architecture projects are, for example: the different kinds of park areas, different kinds of functional areas, different kinds of green areas, different kinds of market squares and other public areas.
2.2 Cost management by the end product element system
The scope defined in the project definition can be executed in many different ways. There are lots of combinations of design, cost, quality and schedule for example. The end product element-based cost management system provides a price, which is a typical example of the kind of end product.
Fig. 4: The example of the end product elements of the typical city park project
For example the city has a project idea to make a park area with sport functionalities. The city can define the scope based on the functionality factors. The simple definition of, for example, the typical city park project is the simple list of the end product elements:
• functional area (public place) 400m2 • 50% football
• 50% other activities
(for example children and family activities)
• green area 400m2
• plaza-area 50m2
• area defined for elderly people
• passageway 80m2
• special defined structure 1pc
• maintenance area
The list with the standard definition and the amount is the starting definition for the project and the target cost level can be defined. The target can be reached by using lots of different design solutions.
The cost management process by the end product element has certain steps as well:
• to identify components of the project
• to identify the end product elements of the project components
• to get a price for each end product element from the price list (or the previous projects)
• to identify additional circumstances (for example environmental, interference caused by the built environment or unknown factors as reservations)
• to identify other additional costs
• to define costs related to the project management (for example the difference between big and small projects)
3
The cost engineering process
3.1 The cost management by the building element system
Cost management by the standard building elements gives the answer for the question: “What is the price of certain design solutions?” The standard building elements consist of the recourse model, which is updated by the market-defined resource prices (fig. 5).
Fig. 5: Example of the standard unit price list The building element system has three purposes:
• with the building element price, the design result can be compared to the scope (comparison with the end product element price)
• comparable prices for different design solutions are given.
• the market price estimate for the contract is given.
The systematically used building element method requires that:
• many separate terms ar eused
• price lists are tested with the real executed contracts
• pricelists are maintained (from the resources)
• the price list items and the used design items are comparative
3.2 Cost information system and storage
Systematic cost management needs systematic information storage. The end product elements have certain requirements for use, investment, environment and functionality. Those requirements can be modelled through the following steps:
• product elements (for example foundations, or surface layers)
Visualisation Aarni Heiskanen, AE-Thinking Business End Product Element End Product Element End Product Element a b c
”End Product Element Library”
Product Element a Product Element b Product Element c Building Element a Building Element b Building Element c Production Element a Characteristic 1 Characteristic 2 Characteristic 3 Characteristic 4 Characteristic 5 Characteristic 6 Characteristic 7 InfrastructureProject End Product Element 1 End Product Element 2 End Product Element 3 End Product Element 4
Use Investment Environment Functionality
Production Element b Production Element c Resource 1 Resource 2 Resource 3 Resource Cost Data Requirements Sollutions
Resource Breakdown Structure
Fig. 6: Systematic cost management information storage
A cost management system is built into a database. The database has a strict structure to keep all the information in order. The Rapal Cost Management system is designed to follow the Finnish common Infra-nomenclature, which was developed by Rakennustieto and Helsinki University of Technology. Product model work is just starting in Finland , but in the basis of today´s information the product model and the end product elements have the same kind of main structure.
3.3 The benefits of process
The benefits of the systematic cost management system are:
• the real needs of the project are identified earlier with the project plan method and the update of the project plan during the process is easier because of the systematic description method
• the expectations of the interest groups are collected more efficiently with the use of the systematic project plan and it is then the forum for the discussion based on the facts of the project
• the cost level of the project can be modelled earlier and more exactly than before because of the defined scope
• the cost level in every step of the project is comparative because of the structured product elements
• there are comparative prices in different projects because of the common cost management system
• the feedback of the prices in the executed contracts goes straight into the system
4 Conclusions
Conclusion of the results so far is that:
• systematic project definition before the design process is the key to good cost management and to better conversation with interest groups
• to get a good cost estimate in the early stage of the project, we need new kind of requirement based end product element system
• the building element system needs systematic information storage and continuous systematic feedback from real projects to remain valid and updated
• the common cost management system gives the benefits of synergy to all organisations
References
Haahtela, Y. & Kiiras, J. (1980), Rakennuttajan ja suunnittelijan kustannustieto. – Finland. Kankainen, J., Lindholm, M. & Erke, J. (1998), Infraprojektin osittelu. – SML:n
Maarakentajapalvelu Oy, Helsinki.
Kankainen J., Lindholm M. & Leppänen M. (1995), Tienrakennushankkeen suunnitelmien taloudellinen ohjaus. –Tielaitos, Helsinki.
Kerzner, H. (2001), Project Management – a systems approach to planning, scheduling and controlling.
Pilcher, R. (1992), Principles of construction management (3rd edition). – McGraw-Hill
International, UK.
Project Management Institute Committee (1996), A guide to the project management body of knowledge. – Project Management Institute, Upper Darby, PA 19082, USA.
RIL 231-1-2006 (2006), Infrarakentamisen kustannushallinta Tekstiosa. – RIL.
Ruskin, A M. & Estes, E. W. (1982), What every engineer should know about project management. – Marcel Dekker Inc, New York.
Väylänpidon markkinat Suomessa – Tiivistelmä, (2003), Public website. http://alk.tiehallinto.fi/hankintastrategia/vaylamarkkinat_tiivistelma.pdf
