CIVE / ENVE 4918

2016-17

Systematic Approach to Project

Planning & Design:
Conception, Feasibility,
Specifications, Data Acquisition

Conception => Feasibility =>

Specifications
PLANNING
Identify, analyze and evaluate
alternatives (Conception)
Feasibility
Public participation
Select preferred alternative
Specifications
Environmental Assessment

Conceptualize (Identify) possible alternatives to solve

the problem .
Analyze alternatives (i.e., find out all the required
information needed for evaluation) 10
 Conception => Feasibility => Specifications (Cont.)
As a part of PLANNING (Cont.)
Evaluate the alternatives and establish
feasibility.
Identify the best alternative for further study.
Design specifications of the selected
alternative are prepared.
Project management, scheduling and
resource identification processes are initiated.
NOTE: Feasibility and Specifications
Report Guidelines are now posted. 11

What is meant by feasibility?

Suggested Physical realizability
Can it be done/built?
solution Will it perform as needed?

Overcomes recognized constraints

In addition to physical constraints, there could be
legal, environmental, and social constraints

Meets economic and financial criteria

Meets risk assessment test

12
Feasibility study (Courtesy: Prof. Isgor)

In the conception phase we define the

problem to be solved and conceptualize
possible alternatives to solve it
There can be many alternatives to solve a
specific problem
We will define
on which feasibility study
will be carried out.

13

Comparison of alternatives (Cont.)

Review ECOR 3800 Engineering Economics
we will obtain guidance from engineering
economics methods in feasibility studies.
If variables can be quantified in cost and
revenue terms (or cost & benefit terms), we
can use the basic concepts of: MARR, service
life, interest rate/discount rate, benefit-cost
analysis, cash flow diagrams, NPW, Net EAW,
IRR, etc.

14
Comparison of alternatives (Cont.)
Three types of criteria to compare
Financial (e.g. capital, operational, maintenance)
Social (e.g. impact to communities)
Environmental (e.g. pollution, noise)
There are different ways to include these
three in your comparisons
Each group will choose its own way depending
on the specifics of the project

15

Approach 1: If all factors can be valued

in $ terms
Include these into cash flow diagrams as costs
and revenues (or benefits) ($)
You need to find a way to quantify (in $) social
and environmental costs & benefits
You will have one cash flow diagram for each
alternative
You will use applicable techniques to compare
the cash flow diagrams (e.g. NPW, Net EAW).

16
 Approach 2: When some factors cannot be quantified
in $ terms (See Task 3 Report Guidelines document
for an example)
Create a cash flow diagram for costs and
revenues (or benefits) and find Net EAW, NPW,
etc.
For the social and environmental criteria (e.g.
minimize environmental impacts), develop a
qualitative (or semi-quantitative) method to
establish effectiveness.
Assign importance scores (weights) to financial,
environmental and social criteria.
Find Weighted Effectiveness in achieving the
criteria and compare the alternatives.
17

Evaluation Example (same as in Task 3)

Weighted Effectiveness Method to Evaluate Alternatives A1, A2, A3
Evaluation Criteria Importance Score
(out of 1.0)

Maximize NPW (for equal lives) or Maximize Net EAW (for unequal 0.5
lives)
Minimize Adverse Environmental Impact 0.3
Minimize Adverse Social Impact (e.g. displacements) 0.2
Effectiveness of Alternative A1
Criteria Effectiveness Relative value Weighted Effectiveness

Net EAW $100M ($100M for A1)/ (0.5)(100/300) = 0.17

Highest $300M for A3)
Adverse Medium As compared to Low impact (0.3)(2/3) = 0.2
Env. caused by A2,
Impact Relative value for A1 =2/3
Adverse Medium As compared to Low impact (0.2)(2/3) = 0.13
Social caused by A2,
Impact Relative value for A1 = 2/3
Overall Effectiveness of A118
=0.5
Evaluation Example (same as in Task 3)

The alternative with the highest weighted effectiveness

or importance score should be the choice (according to
the criteria and weights used).

Also, please note that this is a very basic method and

not the only method to include environmental/social
effects. You need to find the best way to evaluate
alternatives for your project.

19

Things to decide before starting (if

economic factors apply)
Establish MARR for the project
Inflation rate
Service life of each alternative
The method of comparison of alternatives
Use the approaches noted earlier
Be realistic: treat different service lives (use EAW)
(if applicable)
Be realistic: Comparison of alternatives with
infinite lives (if applicable)

20
 Financial
Revenues for commercial projects

Benefits (for public projects):

Examples:

deaths, injuries, etc.).

21

Financial
Costs:
Capital costs (e.g. planning and engineering
studies, land costs, material costs, construction
costs, equipment & labour costs)
Operating costs (e.g. power, water, etc.)
Maintenance & rehabilitation costs (annual
maintenance, periodic maintenance;
rehabilitation costs)

Salvage value of asset components

22
 Costing
There are tools available for costing
RS Means
http://rsmeans.reedconstructiondata.com/
http://meanscostworks.com/
Get-a-quote.net: Over 2,500 pages of cost data,
current material prices (based on location), labour
and crew rates, quick calculators.
http://www.get-a-quote.net/

23

Sources of Construction Cost Data

NOTE: Please check government sources for cost data (e.g.

Department)
24
Example: Intersection improvement (Courtesy:
Prof. Isgor)

25

Example
Capital costs

26
 Example

Maintenance and repair (every 2-5 years)

Maintenance and repair (every 10 years)

27

Simple example for Cash Flow Diagram

(CFD)
Alternative 1

28
 Feasibility study document (Courtesy:
Prof. Isgor)
PLEASE SEE TASK 3 GUIDELINES (Posted)
Budget constraints (available funds, if known)
MARR value public projects: You can keep a low
MARR value (e.g. 3-7%). Justify with a short
paragraph.
MARR for Commercial Projects: use market rates.
Justify.
If more
than 3 alternatives, eliminate the least feasible by
qualitative evaluation.
29

Feasibility study document (Cont.)

Service life of each alternative (e.g. 25 years,
infinite, etc.)
Estimate costs and revenues (or benefits)
Total construction cost (capital cost) (include
all components: planning & engineering, land,
materials, labour, etc.)
Cost of operations, maintenance,
rehabilitation.

30
Feasibility study document (Cont.)
Create cash flow diagrams for each
alternative.
Although these are preliminary estimates,
justify all cash flow items.

31

Feasibility study document (Cont.)

Consistency of assumptions, costs, revenues
(or benefits), etc. among alternatives is
crucial.

Looking ahead -- Final costing (in the final

design document should be refined).

32
Feasibility study document (Cont.)
Social & environmental factors that were not
included in your cash flow diagram since they
were not easily quantifiable.
In order to include these factors, you can use
different approaches. One is using importance
scores (An example is given in the Task 3
guidelines document).
Other methods: note that this is not the only
method to include environmental and social
effects, and you need to find the best way for
your project.

33

Feasibility study document (Cont.)

For economic feasibility: methods of
comparison (e.g. NPW, Net EAW, etc.)
Public projects: NPW or Net EAW >0 for
feasibility; the higher the better for
comparisons
Compare alternatives with the methods you
chose.
Comment on the results.

34
 Design Specifications
Concept phase requirements => design
specifications

Design specifications are used as a basis to

develop a preliminary design

Specifications include requirements but

contain more than just requirements.

36

Design Specifications
A typical specification document should
include everything that a designer needs to know
about the system to be designed;
be specific (i.e. should not include vague and generic
statements);
not include redundant information;
be concise;
not raise further questions;
give flexibility to the designer as much as possible;
reflect the knowledge of latest developments in the
field.
 Design Specifications
Every technical specifications document is
different since the requirements of various
designs are not the same.

The following provides a general review of a

typical design specifications document.

Also, see Guidelines for Specifications Report

Task 4 (posted)

Design Specifications
Project Highlights: a brief description of the
system that you will design.
Here you can also highlight the objectives of
the design.
 Design Specifications
Applicable documents (e.g. manuals):
reference all documents (and their versions)
to be used in this specifications task and
during design
e.g. boilerplate documents, building codes,
Environmental regulations, Carleton University
regulations for a campus project, etc.

Design Specifications
Project requirements
Service life
Definitions and required data
System characteristics
Design and construction requirements
 Design Specifications
Definitions and data
drawings (if applicable: architectural, location,
etc.)
technical data (e.g. land use data, borehole data,
groundwater data, traffic flow data, water flow
data, chemical analysis data, air quality data, etc.)
existing system information (if applicable: for
replacement or system improvement projects)

Design Specifications
System characteristics
performance / capacity requirements (if
applicable)
serviceability / functionality (if applicable)
maintenance / operational requirements (if
applicable)
 Design Specifications
Design and Implementation (Construction)
considerations
Key component features (e.g., approach roads,
bridge, structural elements)
Key design considerations (e.g., height,
suspension bridge)
Material selection (if applicable)
Design regulations (if applicable)
Restrictions and limitations (e.g. scheduling,
seasonal limitations, etc.)

Design Specifications
You can find many design specifications
examples on the Internet. Use these to get a
feeling about how to write one for your
project.
There are also books on this topic.
 Some Useful Sites
http://www.liverpool.nsw.gov.au/construction
anddesignspecifications.htm#design
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/techpubs/man
ual/bridgemanuals/bridge-design-
specifications/bds.html
http://your.kingcounty.gov/solidwaste/greenb
uilding/specifications-plans.asp
http://www.london.ca/d.aspx?s=/Consultant_
Resources/design_specs.htm

Data/Information Collection
Information is required to:
Define the problem
Conceptualize solution(s)
Analyze solution(s) (e.g., use of performance
models)
Evaluate solution(s) (feasibility) & Choice
Design specifications of the selected alternative

The above tasks cannot be carried out without

information/data.
Not all required information is obtainable from primary
sources. But
be real or realistic data.
47
 Data/Information Collection (Cont.)
Use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS):
GIS maps and geo-coded data are available
from many sources. Also, software are
available for your use around the campus.

Use of statistical and other software for data

organization, modelling, and visualization.

48

A Current Major Example Project: Alternatives

& Feasibility of Adding Capacity to Windsor (Ontario)
Detroit (Michigan) Border Crossing System ; Some preliminary
design specifications
Detroit Windsor

Ambassador Bridge (built in the

1920s). At capacity. The only facility
for freight trucks.

Tunnel (built in 1930s)

Freight trucks cannot use it. At
capacity.
Detroit
River Pictures : courtesy of web sources
49
 The Problem (Web sources)
In 2010, more than $1.7 billion worth of goods and
services crossed the Canada-U.S. border every single
day. Canada-U.S. border costs Cdns up to $19B/year.
Three reasons for adding capacity.
(1) Bottleneck on the Canadian side.
Truck traffic is forced to go through the city streets of
Windsor, Ontario, past shopping malls and offices.
(2) Ambassador Bridge is the only crossing for
commercial trucks.
Most eighteen wheelers cannot use the Detroit-Windsor
Tunnel

way for many businesses. 50

Conception & Feasibility of New Crossing

(3) Security: Not enough room at the Ambassador Bridge
to do secondary inspections of suspicious trucks. They
have to go to another site.
Solutions:
(1) Do-nothing: most stake-holders were not happy with
this option.
(2) Twin the Ambassador Bridge: The owner of the
Ambassador bridge did not cooperate (initially). Canadian
authorities did not agree traffic impacts in Windor.
(3) Build a new toll bridge and operate it as a public-
private facility.
(4) A new toll tunnel and operate as a public-private
facility.
51
 Do-nothing

Lack of capacity and high cost of delays.

Problems in Windsor

Security concerns.

52

Need for a New Crossing: Many Millions

spent on Environmental and Engineering
Studies

Planning/Need and Feasibility (P/NF) Study Report

identified a long-term strategy to meet the needs of the
transportation network serving the border between

sources)

53
 Twin the Ambassador Bridge

But, Canadian officials did not want a

second span at the Ambassador Bridge
site.

through Windsor and severe traffic

congestion.

54

A New Border Crossing Bridge System

Proposed new
border crossing
Existing Ambassador
Bridge

New Bridge (Bridge+ approach facilities + Other parts of

the system can cost over $6 billion): Approved for
construction.
Courtesy: web sources 55
The New International Bridge
cable-stayed / conceptual illustration only

suspension / conceptual illustration only

56

57
Bridge Option: New International Trade
Crossing System
Environmental Assessment Act and the Ontario

On the U.S. side, the Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) has issued a Record of Decision approving the
U.S. portion of the new Detroit-Windsor border
Web sources)
The Record of Decision is the last step under the U.S.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to gain
project approval.
New Windsor-Detroit Authority (WDA) appointed to
oversee construction (July 31, 2014)
58

A New Border Crossing

April 12, 2013, the US Department of State and
the Obama Administration granted Michigan the
permit required to build the bridge, allowing
construction to go forward once details were

Final regulatory hurdle cleared in July 2014 [Web

sources]
Traffic crossing the
border anticipated to
grow from
18,500 vehicles a day in
2016 to 26,500 by 2025
59
 Land clearing begins, makes way for new
Windsor-Detroit Crossing

Who pays $250 M for US Customs Plaza? To avoid delays

in construction, Transport Canada says if Canada does
pay, it would recoup the cost through bridge tolls.
60

Crossing Configuration Alternatives: Example: US Plaza

Crossing A Plaza A
Preliminary Analysis Summary (Web sources)

Length of River Crossing (Bank to Bank) = 1.1 km

Total Length of Crossing (Plaza to Plaza) = 4.3 km
62
 Example: US Plaza Crossing A Plaza A
Preliminary Analysis Summary (Web sources)

63

Example: US Plaza Crossing B Plaza A

Preliminary Analysis Summary (Web sources)

Length of River Crossing (Bank to Bank) = 0.8 km

Total Length of Crossing (Plaza to Plaza) = 4.3 km

64
 Example: US Plaza Crossing B Plaza A
Preliminary Analysis Summary (Web sources)

65

Present Status of the Bridge Project

"More progress can't come too quickly. There are compelling
needs for a new crossing
Michigan Government Official (April 21, 2016)

66
 can't come too quickly' on new $2.1B bridge to

Land acquisition in Canada is nearly complete.

On the U.S. side, acquisition is underway for the 300

houses and 45 businesses located within the 145 acres in
southwest Detroit.

Also included in the Detroit portion of the project is a

new I-75 interchange that will include "four new crossing
road bridges, five new pedestrian bridges, four long
bridges crossing the railway and connecting I-75 to the
US Port of Entry, and service roads and local road
improvements," according to the Windsor-Detroit Bridge
Authority. 67

Summary of Conception, Feasibility and Preliminary

Design Specifications

Conception:
New crossing needed, involving approach roads,
plazas, and Bridge Crossing location alternatives
identified.

Feasibility:
Many constraints defined; preliminary economic
feasibility defined, based on public-private toll
authority model.

68
 Summary of Conception, Feasibility and Preliminary
Design Specifications
Preliminary Design Specifications (for a number of
alternatives):
Not reported clearly on the websites, but the
following can be inferred):

Approach roads and plazas

Crossing locations & length
Bridge
Height
Number of lanes, etc.

69

Further Information: See below

Introductory Project Meeting presentation in Detroit, Michigan on
August 6, 2015
August 31 2015 https://www.youtube.com/embed/d2lL_9omfEY
Emdedded video: https://www.youtube.com/embed/d2lL_9omfEY
In support of the procurement process, the Windsor Detroit Bridge
Authority (WDBA) held two introductory project meetings one in
Windsor, Ontario and one in Detroit, Michigan for interested
respondents. At the meeting, the WDBA shared the scope of the
requirements outlined in the Request for Qualifications: RFQ.
Source: https://www.wdbridge.com/en/introductory-project-
meeting-presentation-in-detroit-michigan-on-august-6-2015

For recent progress, see:

http://www.mlive.com/business/index.ssf/2016/04/progress_cant_c
ome_too_quickly.html
70