The Difficulties of Value Stream Mapping a Public Sector Project (1)

docx

School

University of Nairobi *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

MISC

Subject

Industrial Engineering

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

30

Uploaded by DoctorHeat19121

Report
The Design Process of the Public Sector Projects: a Detailed Look and the Factors and Difficulties that Affect its Duration Abdullah Faqeh 1 Abstract The community doesn’t hold a positive view of the performance of the services from the public sector, same goes for their projects (Teeuwen, 2010), and for that reason, the demand on efficiency in the public sector have increased over the past few years, which have raised the need for new strategies on how the public sector and its projects can be improved (Denhardt and Denhardt, 2000). Unfortunately, handling projects in a government agency is much more difficult than in a private engineering company, as they have more significant obstacles to overcome, and one of which is the frequent and lengthy delays that occur during the design process of those projects. This research paper discusses in detail the design process of a public sector project and its difficulties that they face in every project that they manage, using a public project of implementing a new rapid bus lane in a wide area of the community as a basis for the discussion. Keywords : Process Map, Public Sector, Design Process, Public Project, Transportation 1. Introduction Government agencies aim to deliver their services to the public with their limited resources and funding, and for many of them, this translates into a trade-off between money and quality of services (Bhatia and Drew 2006). Those agencies are also responsible for many public projects, especially transportation-related, and they are much more vital than projects from private companies, allowing public employees to go into a wide range of different working environments. Among the key challenges that public sectors in the United States face today, public transport projects include delayed implementation of the 2030 transport mobility network in San Diego (King & Fischer, 2018). It was not clear exactly when this master plan will be completed and the slow implementation of critical projects which are in the plan. There are many public complains and worse still a lawsuit to block coming into effect the removal of packing spaces on Street 30th. Even though regulations of electric scooters come into effect, it did not solve the problem, especially on their fight to way with other road users. Some motorists are also opposed to the system of eliminating more vehicles on the roads and are just comfortable with the slow movement on the roads. 1 Graduate Student, Civil, Const. and Envir. Engrg. Dept., San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182-1326, USA, +1 619 772-8499, abdullah-faqehh@hotmail.com 1
Unfortunately, it is not as easy as it looks since there are several factors and difficulties public sector projects face. This paper analyzes the design process of the public sector project in detail and presents the factors that affect their duration, either if those factors were caused by delays or certain steps in the process. To better understand those factors, this study analyzed a small project developed by a City department. The scope of this project was installing a 2.7-mile rapid bus-only lane in one of the communities, and the budget was about $100,000. In terms of complexity, projects from the public sector are much more complex, as unlike within the private sector, the remaining cash from the project won’t be enough to invest it in another project. There is limited financial resources capacity to improve on the existing roads as well as to build more lines for transit. It has slowly undermined the public transport projects leading to severe delays on the roads with some vast consequences on the loss of workforce and forgone earnings. The current budget to improve the bus lane project was about $100,000, which is way far below what is needed to improve the mega transport infrastructure to be set up in place. As a result, some of the projects would have to be forgone to choose the best among more of Rapid Bus routes, electric busses, on-demand transit, twenty-four-hour service, Purple Line trolley from the border to Kearny Mesa and a trolley to the airport. The performance of the public transport design process has been more efficient, taking into account some of the recent developments in the design process. The design of new public transportation projects has taken into account the community using such infrastructures to ensure there are no harmful environmental or health-related problems that may befall such communities. Besides, plans are underway to expand San Diego's airport so that it meets the long term needs of freight and passengers air travel (Bolton & Heller, 2018). This is coupled with the development of a multimodal transport system to ensure access to the airport. The transport design process has ensured bike and pedestrian connection to the major transit stations, thus improving on availability, accessibility and pocket-friendly to most of the residents. The design process establishes pedestrians’ routes to shopping and recreational centers with improved infrastructure to enhance pedestrian mobility, safety, walkability as well as neighborhood quality. The public and communities are taken into account much more seriously in public projects. Rapid population increase with more people migrating to the urban centers has posed a significant challenge to the public transport design process. In standard cases, the design takes into account the existing number of people and moderate growth in population to determine the size and length of pathways and roads (Monk et al., 2019). However, the rapid increase in population still leads to heavy congestions that render the original design process invalid and no longer useful to meet the transport challenges facing the people. Land use is another significant challenge for the design process. With the increase in the use of personal cars, more parking spaces are demanded in areas such as restaurants, churches, shopping malls, and areas of recreational activities. This has reduced the size of space available to expand major highways due to conflicting needs and interests. A few other differences are that, in public projects, political aspects become involved in the decision making, and their focus is on the social benefits of the project, not strictly the financial ones. 2
A study was conducted in 2010 on how the public views the public sector, it showed that people would rather improve government performance than reducing its size, and the public sector receives a mediocre to poor performance ratings from the public both in terms of how effective it is and how well managed its projects are. More than 2,500 people were interviewed, and almost 75% of the respondents say it is very important to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the federal government’s programs and agencies (Molyneux, Teixeira & Whaley, 2010). Controversial plans have emerged in efforts to improve the transport network within the United States. Among the competing projects include; having more of Rapid Bus routes, electric busses, on-demand transit, twenty-four-hour service, Purple Line trolley from the border to Kearny Mesa and a trolley to the airport in San Diego. The delay in the implementation of these transport projects has resulted in severe congestion on the roads making road transport an awful mode of transport within San Diego (King & Fischer, 2016). This paper will look at a public transport project and examine the factors and challenges that affect its duration. 2. Research Method 3. PROVIDE A SECTION ON Value Stream Mapping (VSM) AND HOW IT HAS BEEN USED TO EVALUATE THE DESIGN PROCESS. The purpose of this research is to identify the issues and obstacles the engineers face in the design process of public sector projects. Process Map According to Cooper, Aquad, Kagioglou & Sexton (1999), process maps help organizations map their processes into some meaningful structure are still lacking, and it can assist them in ensuring the delivery of products on time, within budget and to the right quality while capturing the best process practices. When mapping a service process, as one presented in this paper, it is important to take into account the demand that is placed on them, the budget and other aspects that will be mentioned in this paper; delivering the required service to the customer is the priority in every public project. This paper will be focusing on the current state of the process map rather than creating a value stream map (VSM) of the project; the goal here is to find the unforeseen obstacles and reasons every government agency face that would cause delays during the project’s design process. Sources of Data The author used a rapid bus lane project that he took part in, located in one of the areas in the United States. Most of the information about the project came from the author himself; the author is a junior traffic engineer who designed the drawings and visited the site to record information such curb and striping measurements, public opinion, and potential sign locations, participated in the meetings, created the necessary work orders and was part of the project from beginning to end. 3
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
In order to gain more information about the project and its timeline, obstacles and the fieldwork, semi-structured interviews were conducted by the author with the three senior engineers who were responsible for approving the project’s designs, the work orders and the input gained from community outreach, The senior engineer of the traffic operations division who oversaw the project and who scheduled the meetings had a hand in the designs and established the deadlines of the designs, work orders, and fieldwork. The senior engineer of the transportation system oversight division who is in charge of implementing CIP projects in the area. The senior engineer of the bicycle division who had a big role in the project The input of the community from public outreach was also used to show their concerns about the project. The answers and interviews were recorded by note-taking and were transcribed; the public’s input was analyzed and examined, as they give a more in-depth understanding of their perspective of the project and motivations. Meeting minutes, department’s annual reports, and agendas were also used for this research. The data collection started when the author was designing the striping and pavement marking locations of the bus lane. It took three months to get all the information; the senior engineers had a small window of time to spare as multiple important projects were happening during that time. The author was writing this research paper while he was designing the necessary drawings and creating the work orders, by the time this paper was complete he finished creating the last work orders and the project was complete. This paper will analyze and describe the events, activities and delays of the design process from getting the notice to proceed with the designs, until the completion of the construction operation and sending the last batch of work orders, as the design engineers’ tasks are done. This paper will also explain in detail why some of the events and iterations (multiple meetings) took more time than necessary and clarify the delays that took place during the process 4. Public Sector: Department of Transportation 3.1 The Organization The public sector, who managed the mentioned project, was the transportation department. The department is responsible for maintaining and developing the transportation infrastructure and systems in this nation, from roads maintenance in small communities to railways. The main goal of this department is to improve the means of transport for people. The department usually handles traffic and pedestrian projects that can improve traffic flow, incorporate better pedestrian and bicycle traffic, and projects that promote safety on streets and walkways. The department is split into different divisions, and each has its tasks and responsibilities as seen in Figure 1 4
Figure #1 : Public Sector Department of Transportation Organization Chart The Bicycle Division responds to traffic requests that require conducting studies and coordinating with communities and issuing community plan updates as they relate to bicycle rack locations, bicycle corrals, and new and improved bicycle facilities. The Transportation Operations Division evaluates and responds to traffic requests received from the public, which consists of conducting field inspections of the existing roadway, taking field measurements and other necessary data, and preparing the required traffic work orders for striping, signage, and pavement markings. The Traffic Signal Management Division evaluates traffic signal timing and system optimization, signs and striping at signalized intersections, street light investigations, and assists in the management of consultants and contractors. The engineers in the Transportation Systems Oversight Division assist in scoping and implementing future capital improvement plan (CIP) projects in neighbourhoods by ensuring the transportation infrastructure needs are planned and funded by reviewing the streets comprehensively, and the author was part of the design team of that division. The Street and Traffic Division and they are responsible for a wide range of services and operations, which includes overseeing the construction and maintenance of the streets, structures, and future projects. The division repairs and maintains all alleys, streets, sidewalks, street trees, bridges, fences, street lights, traffic signals, and guardrails; they also maintain and manufacture pavement legends in the street and traffic signs. Each division has its senior engineer, who is responsible for providing technical guidance to staff engineers, coordinating and planning check processes for new developments, and provide engineering support and construction management services for the city capital improvement program. Each senior engineer has his or her own agenda and ideas to share and implement for a project. 3.2 Selecting And Financing Public Projects The public sector’s main goal is to satisfy the community, provide public service, and implement fixes as quickly as possible, but the funds required to meet such expectations are enormous, 5 Director Transportation Department Deputy Director Bicycle Division Senior Engineer of the Bicycle Division Division Assistant and Junior Engineers of that Division Operations Division Senior Engineer of the Transportation Operations Division Division Assistant and Junior Engineers of that Division Management Division Senior Engineer of the Traffic Signal Management Division Division Assistant and Junior Engineers of that Division Division Senior Engineer of the Transportation Systems Oversight Division Division Assistant and Junior Engineers of that Division Division Senior Engineer of the Streets and Traffic Division Traffic Crew Field Workers and Traffic Crew
especially in the developed economies where populations are aging, and the public sector hasn't kept pace with of the private sector in terms of technology, productivity, and pace. The need exists to get value for money from governments as much as possible. The public sector depends on funds to support their projects. Some of the funding sources are grants, bond financing, TransNet funds (if it is transportation-related), Capital Improvement Project (CIP) funds, enterprise funds, and many other sources. When the department chooses a project to be funded, the objective is to deliver the required quality of service and the lowest cost if possible in order to cover more projects. Every year the department of transportation would submit a capital budget request to get funds that cover the approved capital projects. Underserved and low-income residents suffer from a lack of infrastructure investment and public services, and it’s the public sector’s job to help them. The key goal of the public sector when receiving funds in any fiscal year is to focus the investment in those communities on maximizing the opportunities that support affordable housing and create more jobs in that area. Not only should the investments be focused on the communities that need them the most, but the projects should also bring environmental and community benefits. In the public sector, that is how the projects are picked. When receiving a large fund, the transportation department would focus on the prioritization factors in order to choose the projects to be financed. Those factors are in order from most to least important: 1. Projects that avoid or minimizes the risk to health, safety and environment that are associated with the planned infrastructure 2. Urgent projects that help reduce potential hazards in the community 3. Projects that promote safety and improve reliability of infrastructure 4. Projects that contribute towards economic development of the area 5. Projects that benefits communities with high population 6. Projects that improve existing conditions and facilities to meet the required quality of service 7. Projects that improve the health of the community and its environment, which would result in a greener neighborhood. 8. Projects that provide multiple transportation options for the community 9. The project’s rank increased based on the amount of funding needed to complete it 10. Projects that are ready to enter the construction phase (design-build) 11. Projects that reduce construction costs The director of the department and the senior engineers of the different divisions would hold a meeting together and choose the applicable projects based on those factors. There is a scoring system for the projects as a way to find which projects should be prioritized first than the others. It is not clear how it is done but the score weights depend on the mentioned factors from high to low priority. After that they would work on their studies and initial designs to make it presentable to the city council to see how they view them. 3.3 Process of a Transportation Project in the Public Sector 6
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Every project is unique; like any project in the private sector, each has its designs, obstacles, and problems. However, the general design process applies to small transportation projects in the department, when funded, and would be the following in order: 1. Data collection and site investigation - Visit the site to examine existing conditions 2. Implementing the data in MicroStation - Create initial drawing with the existing conditions 3. First meeting with senior engineers - Examine the existing conditions - Select the ideal designs and details for the project 4. Implementing the desired design details - Follow the design details the senior engineers wanted for the project 5. One or more meetings with senior engineers - Examine the designs until they are final - Fix any errors and implement necessary corrections along the way 6. Finalize the designs - Implement the final corrections to present it to the public 7. Public input on the final designs - Present the project in a planning committee meeting - Hear the concerns and answer any questions 8. Apply desired corrections from the public 9. Meet with the street division (or construction contractor if it was design-build) - Set up a schedule of the operation - Answer any questions related to the designs - Discuss the required materials and resources for the construction operation - Provide additional feedback 10. Meeting with other affiliated parties if necessary (transit agencies, transportation agencies, etc.) - Discuss operational work details - Discuss public outreach coordination during and after construction 11. Create the necessary work orders and public outreach of the project area - Contacting involved people and organizations of the project - Plan how the work orders should be done 12. More meetings with the street division / construction contractor - Get updated on the project’s materials, equipment and resources - Notify the status of the work orders (or batch of them) 13. Creating the work orders and construction sequence begins - Street division crew (or outsourced company) would begin working when they receive the work orders (or in batches) - Notify and send the work orders as planned to begin construction and continue to do so along the way until they are done 14. Project completion 7
Small projects with low budgets usually take the same steps, from creating a new rapid bus transit line to commuter rail expansion. Even though they are small projects with fewer steps compared to other bigger projects, they tend to solve traffic issues, increase transit ridership, offer better travel options, improve livability, decrease traffic congestion, ease road vehicles while driving and improve transportation performance in the area. How designs are made 3.4 Work Orders in the Public Sector When creating a work order, the components that should be included in the work order are the activity number, the type of work, the drawing itself, activity codes, as they are numerous codes for almost everything (category, quantity, classification, and other aspects of an activity) and the engineer’s name who designed the specific drawing (or segment of that drawing). With all of that being put down in one single work order, it can make it more complicated. In the public sector, the work orders are broken down based on the type of work, as the division that handles the fieldwork may be split into multiple sections; one section handles sign work orders, another one handles the striping, one handles the pavement markings, and so on. While the effort might be long and tedious for the design engineers to create those different types of work orders, it results in much clearer instructions for the field workers to do their jobs without any confusion or struggle, as they will be handed only their tasks and not including the others (i.e., the crew responsible for the sign placements will have only the sign work orders). Engineers create work orders using MicroStation. A software called Systems, Applications and Products (SAP) was used in the public sector as well as by many government organizations around the world. This software is used to manage operations, enterprise resource planning (ERP) and specifically to track, receive, review and update work orders. When an engineer finished creating a work order, it would be uploaded in the SAP and would be sent to the desired division/department/person. Project Description 4.1 Reasons for the Project A community needed a bus-only lane in their area to increase the bus ridership. It would also have the potential to improve bus speeds significantly and their reliability. To handle the demand of bus ridership, a new bus lane will be reserved in the right lane in both the eastbound and westbound lanes of the streets, which will 2.7 miles long. Other benefits of the bus lane were to avoid traffic congestion and slow down traffic on the streets, as the public sector received many complaints from nearby residents and merchants concerning vehicles operating at high speed. So, having a total of four travel lanes on both directions instead of six makes it safer for pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles. The area of study hosts some of the most dangerous intersection in the city and one of the busiest corridors by bus ridership with an average of 10,000 passengers per day. The community requested some safety improvements in the area, including a bus lane. Several organizations in 8
the study area also requested to improve the reliability and transit times of buses and to improve traffic safety and walkability for everyone in the area. 4.2 Project funding and approval steps before it was assigned to design The department was awarded a large CIP fund and this project, so the deputy director of the transportation department discussed with senior engineers of the divisions in a meeting on what projects to choose from. Using the prioritization factors and the scoring system, and the bus lane project was considered as one of the high priority projects, since it promotes safety and improves reliability of infrastructure, contribute towards economic development of the area, improve existing conditions (the rapid bus program in the area), it improves the transportation option for the community and it needs low amount of funds compared to the rest. The senior engineers of the department, while cooperating with the transit service providers of the study area, worked together and prepared potential project alternatives for the bus lane for evaluation and consideration before the project approval process. The alternatives are different from one another, but the criteria included the project should be cost-effective, must deliver an improvement to the bus service to increase the ridership of the area, and the lane must be clear and visible to the road users. There was not a lot of information available about the other alternatives that were used for this project. The director of the department of transportation approved the project alternatives and recommended and they were ready to be shown in the city council. The senior engineers presented them in the city council, as they conducted public hearings on next year’s budget and its approved capital improvement projects. One of the alternatives, which is the main focus of this paper, was chosen by the City Council and was perfect for the area. After that the design team, who will be responsible for this project, were given a notice to proceed with the designs. 4.3 Project goals The main goals of this project are: Finding the possible operational modifications. Provide enhancements to bus service in that area within the existing right-of-way. Improve travel time reliability, visibility, and efficiency of transit operations. Improve safety to pedestrians and road users Decrease traffic congestion in the area and provide smoother traffic flow 4.4 Project scope The project involves installing a bus-only lane in one of the communities. With the cooperation of different senior engineers and transit service providers, the design team was made up of three engineers, including the author, and the other two engineers were part of the transportation operations division. Solid eight-inch white striping, signs on nearby poles and pavement markings on the lane will be used to help identify the bus lane to road users and making it highly visible. This roadway has a total length of 2.7 miles covering both directions. A preliminary cost estimate for this project was nearly $100,000, 9
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Project Timeline The project timeline can be seen in Figure #2 below: 10
11 7/18: Notice to proceed with design work 7/19: Going to the site and take curb measurements among other tasks 7/30: Implementing the measurements and field notes to MicroStation 8/22: Meeting #1 with senior engineers 8/23: Develop proposed designs (striping and pavement Markings) 8/30: Meeting #2 with senior engineers 9/9: Apply corrections in the designs + revisit site (new sign locations) 9/13: Meeting #3 with senior engineers 9/16: Implement the final corrections 9/19: Public input on the proposed bus lane designs (Planning Committee) 9/20: Implement public input on the designs and finalize designs 9/23: Sending the designs to street division to review and study 9/30: Conference Call #1 with field workers (street division) 10/1: Meeting with staff from public transit service provider 10/1: Public Outreach (eastbound) 10/8: Conference Call #2 with field workers (street division) 10/8: Start working on WO & Send the first batch (eastbound) 10/10: Continue working on WO & Send the second batch (eastbound) 10/16: Finalizing the WO & Send the final batch (eastbound) 10/21: Public Outreach (westbound) 10/25: Conference Call #3 with field workers (street division) 10/25: Start working on WO & Send the first batch (westbound) 11/30: Continue working on WO & Send the second batch (westbound) 11/1: Finalizing the WO & Send the final batch (westbound) 11/12: Project Design Process Complete Figure #2: Project Timeline
The project steps are as follows: 5.1 Notice to Proceed July 18 th The transportation department received a notice to proceed with the design of the rapid bus lane project on July 17th. The design team, who consist of a traffic engineer and two civil engineers, were notified about the project and its goals in a meeting a month ago and were prepared to start working on it the very next day. 5.2 Data Collection July 18 th – July 30 th The first goal was to focus on the pavement markings and striping of the bus-only lane. The design team established that the project is made up of 80 segments (40 westbound and 40 eastbound) based on blocks to make it easier for the design engineers and field workers to create and understand the drawings. Each segment was about 300 feet long, On the very next day, the senior engineers tasked the design team to study and visit the site and conduct the following studies: Measuring the curb lengths of each segment based on colour and purpose (red for no parking, blue for disabled person parking only, green for limited time parking, yellow of for commercial loading, and white for drop-offs); Measuring all lane widths; Identify any unique features and unnoticed changes and problems in the project area (such as existing parking meters, new bus stop and areas under construction); Identify any problems and complications in the existing striping and pavement markings (such as faded striping, or curb needs a repaint). Using the two-dimensional aerial maps of the segments, the engineers marked down and wrote field measurements and other notes. It was a long process, so it took the engineers nearly seven workdays to finish all the segments. 5.3 Develop the Designs on MicroStation July 30 th – August 15 th When the design team finished with the data collection process, the next step was to implement all the measurements and field notes in MicroStation, which is a CAD software platform that engineers (specifically in the transportation engineering) use to model, document, and analyse their projects. Since it was a total of 80 segments and there were three design engineers, the team agreed the design duties should be split between the three equally (one engineer handles 26 segments while the other two work on 27 segments each), and each segments has its own drawing. During that time, the engineers would research and collect the background and basis for the project and its assumptions. They would use the department’s database to find the necessary information, which are the project limits, traffic counts, flood plain areas, property boundaries, and ridership forecast. The process is important in any transportation-related project to determine 12
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
the existing conditions for the purposed project in the study area. Those existing conditions will be shown in the initial drawings to study more about the project area and identify the ideal design striping, lane width and pavement marking details. The design team also contacted the transit service providers to know more information about the type of buses that will be used for the rapid bus lane and their width, length and speed. Those factors affect the decision making of the design details of the bus lane and it’s surrounding area. For twelve workdays, the designers worked simultaneously full time on the designs of the project’s existing conditions in detail. Once they were finished, a total of 80 drawings (since there are 80 segments, ready to be presented to the senior engineers. 5.4 Meeting #1 with the senior engineers August 22 nd The first meeting with the senior engineers had to be delayed a week later on August 22 nd as the four senior engineers (the bicycle, traffic signal, transportation operations, and transportation system oversight divisions) have their own agenda and are on a tight schedule with other public projects, so there was one week of delay. During that time, design engineers focused on their other tasks and projects in the department. Scheduling a meeting with all of the senior engineers present in the same room is very crucial to discuss the project, as one opinion/suggestion can conflict with the other. In the meeting, the senior engineers discussed the following issues and points: Review existing conditions Determine where to place the bus-only lane pavement legends Striping details Traffic Signal Timings Rapid bus details Bike lane discussion Painting the bus lane Setting up the date of the next meeting Develop points of key areas to focus on/get more information from Assignments and goals for the next meeting There was an argument whether a bike lane should be added next to the bus lane; the traffic operations senior engineer was not fond of that idea, as it can affect the other traffic lanes, and there was not enough space in some segments to install a bike lane. At the same time, the bicycle division wanted to have a bicycle lane in that area, as it would be safer for cyclists, and would encourage more people to be cyclists rather than using their cars. The senior engineers were still conflicted about the idea, so they put it on hold until the next meeting. There was another discussion during the meeting about whether it was a good idea to use special painting for the bus lane. The senior engineer of transportation system oversight division liked the idea as it would make the bus lane more recognizable for other vehicles and would require fewer signs to install, and not painting the lane would make it suffer from low driver compliance, the bus lane would require additional enforcement. However, the traffic operations division 13
senior engineer disagreed; it does not come cheap, delays could occur, since red paint in travel lanes is currently not approved, and it would require an experimentation request and additional time to process. In the end, based on the transit service provider’s opinion. The senior engineers agreed not to use red paint for the bus lane. After the meeting was complete, the designers would collect all the necessary details to start creating the bus lane designs (striping and pavement markings details), focusing on the striping and pavement markings. The bike lane was still an issue between the senior engineers, so the design engineers were told to focus on it later. Despite of all of that, the senior engineers saw it was possible to attend the planning committee meeting on September 5 th . The plan was to present the striping and pavement marking designs to the planning committee and ask their opinion about where to place the potential signs for the bus lane. 5.5 Design Phase (Striping and Pavement Markings) August 23 rd – August 30 th Using MicroStation, It took the design team one full week (40 hours full time each) to complete the striping and placing the pavement markings in their preferred locations. During that time the team had to ensure the operation would be done without any issues from other projects, so the engineers contacted other public sector departments and divisions to see if any other projects were in progress or would be executed soon in the project are that could impact the proposed bus lane. One of the design engineers found out that there was an ongoing project in the project area; a two-stage pedestrian traffic signal and crosswalk at one of the intersections and was still in the design phase . The engineers examined the project and contacted the involved people, and they determined that it would not impact the bus lane project. 5.6 Meeting #2 with the Senior Engineers August 30 th A second meeting was held on August 30 th with the same four senior engineers, and its main goal was to review the proposed designs of the bus-only lane. During the meeting, the design team also gathered any issues and corrections from the senior engineers to implement them in the drawings. Those requirements were: Keeping a few open parking spots. Increase the width of a certain vehicle lanes near the bus lane. Create new right-pocket lanes next to the bus lane. Replace a pavement marking in another location. Add a parking lane next to the bus lane The bike lane argument was brought up, and it took almost all the time of the meeting. In order to avoid design mistakes and redesigns of the current drawings, the design team was told by the senior engineers to standby and stop working on the designs for a week until they can agree on a solution for this issue. The design team had the opportunity to work on their other ongoing designs and smaller public projects at the time; from street intersection design and sidewalk installation to handling public concerns. 14
In that one week of delay, the four senior engineers worked together and designed three options for the bike situation, using our designs that were shown in the meeting. The first option was to create a bike lane (5’ in width) next to the bus lane, while decreasing the width of other nearby vehicle lanes. The second option was to merge the bike lane and bus lane together, without affecting nearby lanes. The third option was to leave the bus lane as it is, and not follow any of the two options above. On September 9 th , the senior engineers ordered the design team to focus on the examining potential new “Bus Only Lane” signs locations for the bus lane, since the design team were almost done with the striping and pavement markings and it won’t affect any of the mentioned bike options according to the senior engineers. A third meeting was scheduled on the September 13 th , the senior engineers agreed to decide what of the three options to choose from using the updated drawings from the design engineers. The senior engineers saw their was it wouldn’t be possible to attend the planning committee meeting on September 5 th , so they requested the design team to mind as well mark the potential sign locations on the designs and show them at the meeting on September 19 th 5.7 Determine the New Sign Locations September 9 th – September 13 th On September 9 th , the purpose of this field visit was to find and mark potential sign locations, with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) guidelines in mind. Transportation engineers use the MUTCD as it contains general guidelines in deploying the guide signs but does not provide a methodology to determine the advance placement distance of the guide signs as it determined by the engineer in the field; the sign’s location should be easy to recognise and simple to understand by the road user. The focus was to install the new signs on existing poles and light poles if possible to save money, rather than creating new ones; if there were no existing poles in a segment, or it did not meet the guidelines then the design team would choose to create a new pole instead. Other details to focus on were: Vegetation, as a tree could block the sign and the drivers would not be able to see it, (the engineers would create a vegetation trim work order in that case). If it was possible to place a sign on a pole that hosts other existing signs. The colour of the curbs colors, as it is discouraged to place new poles in parking areas, as a car could block the sign. Placing new signs on red zones is preferred. The engineers would return from the field and design the potential sign location in the same MicroStation file with the striping and pavement markings. It would take the design team a week to finish this task (35 hours total). 5.8 Meeting #3 with the Senior Engineers September 13 th 15
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
On September 13 th , the full designs, with the proposed striping, pavement legends, and potential sign locations, were completed and printed in full scale and were laid on the meeting table in order; the senior engineers would point out any issues in the drawing, as it is important to make the nearby vehicles safe and comfortable while driving, and that is by examining the passenger vehicle’s point of view through the full-scale design papers with the project being in place. The senior engineers were still arguing about the bike lane and were not able to make a choice yet, so they decided to show their options (completely remove it, merge it with the bus lane or adding a new bike lane) in the planning committee hear the public’s opinion about it. The director of the department of transportation was also present in the meeting to see the designs and make a final review of the project; the director has the authority to accept and reject the project and its findings. After examining the designs and sharing some concerns and adjustments, the director permitted the engineers to continue with the project. After fixing and implementing the corrections, the discussions were finalised it was time to show the designs to the public to completely finalise it. During that meeting, the senior engineer of the traffic operations division became the supervisor of the design team to help the team with the drawing, conduct meetings with the involved parties, take part in the planning committee and sign the necessary work orders for the street division to handle. 5.9 Implementing the Corrections September 16 th The team had to fix a few aspects of the designs that the senior engineers suggested from the third meeting (correct lane widths of a few segments and add new red curbs in some areas) which only took the design team an hour to finish. After implementing the final corrections, there were three days of waiting time (delay) before the committee meeting, so the design engineers worked on their other project during that time. It only took one hour (for each design engineer) to fix the issues in the designs. 5.10 Planning Committee Meeting September 19 th A planning committee meeting of the project area was held on September 19th. The senior engineers planned to present the project in the previous meeting on September 5th, but due to the mentioned delays (scheduling the first meeting and the bike lane argument) in the design process they had to wait for the next one, as those meetings cannot be scheduled, as one meeting is held every two weeks. A planning committee meeting is where presenters (engineer, activist or any regular citizen) display their public projects and proposals to be discussed by the councillors and would decide if the planning application should be approved or rejected. It is also where the public and applicants would state and express their opinions, questions and concerns, and comments about the presented projects. During the meeting with the public the engineers (design team, senior engineer of transportation operations division and senior engineer of the bicycle division) listened to their opinions and feedback of what to change, remove and add from the presented designs. Those comments were heard and wrote down to be discussed between the design team and senior engineers. After presenting the designs, questions of the public were answered, and the team was able to gather some changes based on their demands, such as placing the new sign on a new pole instead 16
of the decorative light pole, keeping a parking spot as an affected company’s business depends on it to attract customers, creating more parking spots and installing ter in a few areas. Some of the questions in the meeting were: If the new bus lane would help achieve better frequency; Identifying existing bus conflicts in some areas at that time and how the bus lane would help fix them; How monitoring the project during construction would work ; Pedestrian and traffic speed improvements; Concerns about whether it is possible to add a new bike lane; Signal prioritization; If it was possible to place the new sign on a new pole instead of the decorative light pole; How the bus lane would impact current buses in the area. The feedback about the designs were only a few and they were about keeping a few parking spots, removing a few red curbs in an area and making it open parking, and not placing signs on specific light poles. One crucial feedback during the meeting was that a sharrow, which is a bicycle-shaped pavement marking with two inverted V- shapes above it to indicate which part of the road should be used by cyclists. The senior engineers decided that merging the bike lane with the bus lane while adding a sharrow in the centre of the lane is the best solution to this problem. This idea would accommodate both modes at low speeds, and it would provide more space and visibility for the other vehicles while improving the transit service in that area. Because of this decision the signs had to be changed to “Bus and Bike Only” signs. 5.11 Implementing the Final Corrections (explain holiday) September 20 th - September 23 th The design team went back to work on the drawings the very next day and started implementing the public’s feedback and ideas from the planning committee on the designs. It took the design team eight hours to finish this activity (all three designers, full time). The drawings were sent to the field workers (who will be in charge of implementing the bus lane in the project area) from street and traffic division on September 23rd to review and study and hold a meeting with to discuss the construction operation of the project. Unfortunately, the meeting had to be scheduled a week later as they were busy working on other construction operations in public and not enough people were available at the time. 5.12 Conference Call #1 with Street Division September 30 th A conference call was held on September 30th with street division, the senior engineer of the division and five field workers were involved in the call, and its goals were: Answer any questions related to the designs (striping details, specific signs, and pavement marking locations) Discuss the required materials and resources (thermoplastic polymer for pavement marking installation, paint for striping and curbs and the required equipment) Provide additional feedback 17
Estimate the number of signs that they would produce before construction and when they would be ready. During the meeting, the field engineers estimated that the operation would start on October 10th starting west of eastbound and heading east until the end and that they will wait until they hear from the transit service providers. After the conference call, the design engineers would work on their other projects after the meeting between the senior engineer of the transportation operations division and the transit service providers. 5.13 Meeting with Public Transit Service Providers October 1 st A meeting with the public transit service providers, who are in charge of bus transit services in the area, was scheduled on the next day (October 1st). The senior engineer of transportation operations division went to meet with three people from the public transit staff in order to discuss operational work details and public outreach coordination during and after bus lane installation. The outcomes of this meeting were: The design team would complete the work orders for striping, pavement markings, and signs (and other necessary work order types such as vegetation trim). The design team would coordinate with the involved organizations in the area to hear and fix their issues and concerns about the designs (if there are any) Estimating how long construction would take and how it would be done. The field crew (street division) work at night from west to east eastbound then east to west westbound, with an estimated completion of five to seven blocks a night, and that they would be closing one or two lanes, and bus stops. During that time the public transit providers would work on community outreach to communicate possible passenger delays, as rapid bus stations would be closed by them temporarily. When construction is completed as planned, they will hold a press conference or other media event, as the design engineers would continue to observe the project when it is under construction. The senior engineer notified the design team and street division about those outcomes and decisions of the meeting, and the design engineers’ task was to start creating the work orders. 5.14 Public Outreach (Eastbound) October 1 st - October 8 th After the meeting with the transit service providers, it was time for public outreach. Since a lot of improvements and changes were to happen in that area, it was important for the design team to communicate with the affected organizations, building owners, and retail stores in that area. That was done through phone calls, emails, handing out brochures, planning committee meetings, provide the project information through the department and public sector’s main website and their social media (twitter, facebook and youtube). It was important to let the public know about the changes, from removing parking spots to adding new poles, as they will be profoundly affected by them. The team didn’t face any conflicting requests and problems and the affected people were cooperative and on board with the project. Some were concerned if the bus lane 18
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
operation would affect their business, but they were rest assured that the operation would be done in the night. 5.15 Conference Call #2 with Street Division October 8 th On October 8th, a conference call took place with street division from street division (the senior engineers and the same five field workers), and they updated the team about the status of the required materials for the bus lane. The field workers clarified that the materials were ready to be used when the work orders are ready. They decided that the design team should send work orders batch by batch, so as not to let the field crew stay idle and be able to work on the other segments at the same time as the design team continue creating the work order for the next segments. 5.16 Creating Work Orders of the Eastbound Segments October 8 th - October 18 st The work orders were split based on the type of work. Usually, it was at least six work orders per street block; three work orders for each eastbound and westbound lane, comprised of pavement markings, signs, and striping work order. There were eighty-block segments, which meant a total of at least 240 work orders had to be created by the design team, and each batch was about at least 40 work orders in total. In the end, a total of 250 work orders had to be made, 10 of which about minor details found in specific segments that help the bus lane or fix an existing issue in the project area (vegetation trim, striping and curb repaint, and parking meter installation) When the design team complete a batch of work orders, they would be signed by the senior engineer of traffics operation division (the supervisor of the design team) and sent directly to the field workers. It would take some time to transfer the work orders in the system due to the quantity and size of each work order paper, but it would take less time to send them in batches than one by one. Each design engineer would keep working on the segments that he/she previously designed to create the work orders. The design team started creating the work orders on October 8 th and send them in three batches (through SAP) to street division. Once the first batch was received, the field crew mobilized construction operations and started working on it, followed by the second and third batch. The design team managed to complete the work orders, and the crew finished the whole eastbound segment in two weeks. During that time, there were a few phone calls from them to the designers asking about specific sign locations and other minor question, and design team would resolve them quickly. The total workers in the project site were not known at the time of the research, but they were up to speed with the design team until the very end. 5.17 Public Outreach (Westbound) October 21 st - October 24 th After the design team sent the last batch (eastbound), it took three more days for street division to complete the operation in the eastbound. During that time, the design engineers started public outreach in the westbound segments, and it was the same process with the eastbound segments, and their concerns and question were resolved. 5.18 Conference Call #3 with Street Division October 25 th 19
On October 25 th another conference call was held with the field crew from street division. The field workers notified the engineers of the situation of the operation (striping, pavement marking and sign locations) and if there were any problems or questions, availability of materials and resources. The field crew were also ready for the bus lane installation on the westbound segments. 5.19 Creating Work Orders of the Westbound Segments October 25 th – November 6 th After the meeting, the design team started working on the work orders on the westbound side on October 25 th . The same work order process happened on the westbound segments as in eastbound, and the field workers completed the whole westbound section in two weeks. The design team sent their last batch on November 5 th . After that, the design engineers shifted their work to their other tasks until they hear back from street division. 5.20 Project Completion November 12 th The field workers spent three more days to manage the last batch of work orders. On November 12 th , they finished with the construction operations on the westbound segments and notified the design team and other senior engineers of the department. The bus lane was open to the public a week later (so that the paint from striping dries), and operational monitoring commenced (such as volume counts, running time and ridership). Monitoring would be done by transit service providors, as the design engineers’ role was finished with the completion of the construction operations. By the time this research was conducted, the design had sent their last batch to street division . 5. Process Map Current State Figure #2 illustrates a simple process map of the design process of the project. 20
21 Figure 2: Process Map Current State
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
A process map was used to show the steps of a work activity and the people who were involved in the process. The process map legend is shown in Table #1 (Athuraliya, 2019) Table #1 : Process Map Legend Shape Name Use Activity/Process To represent a step/ activity of a process Decision/Meeting To represent a decision that has to be made Start/ End To represent the start and end of a process Line/flow To represent the connection between two steps and the direction of flow (left to right, tope to bottom) Worker/Engineer To represent the number of people involved in the activity For this research, two metrics had been created in order analyze the time reported in the timeline, and they are Value and Delay; Process Time is the time it takes to complete a specific activity, and Queue Time (waiting time) is the time it takes to transition to another activity It took the engineers and workers involved in the project nearly 77 workdays in total to complete the design process (610 hours total), the estimated value was 423 hours (53 days), and the Delay was 187 hours (24 days). The current state process map can be divided into three sub-processes: data collection phase, design phase and the project implementation. Table #2 shows the results of value, delay, and duration of each phase of the project The data collection phase represents the steps of collecting data and site conditions from the project site, implementing them in MicroStation and present them to the senior engineers. The design phase consists of creating the proposed designs until it is finalized, through public input, guidance from senior engineers, and meeting with the involved parties before beginning with the work orders. The project implementation phase consists of work order creation, public outreach and meeting with the street division for construction updates until design process completion. Table #2: Project phases value, delay and duration Phase Process Queue Process Queue Duration in the 22
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Time (hr) Time (hr) Time (%) Time (%) project (%) Data Collection phase 152 41 36% 21.9% 31.7% Design phase 93 114 22% 61% 34% Project implementation phase 178 32 42% 17.1% 34.3% IF YOU WANT TO ANALYZE WHY THE DESIGN TOOK THAT LONG, THEN THE ANALYSIS SHOULD EXPLAIN WHY IT TOOK THAT LONG TO PRODUCE THE INFO AND MAKE THE DECISIONS. 1) WHAT DECISIONS HAD TO BE MADE A lot of decisions had been made during the process, but one of which that resulted in increasing the duration of the design process was the bicycle lane argument. One of the goals of this project was to improve traffic safety and walkability for everyone in the project area. After studying the existing conditions and field observations from the initial drawings. The senior engineers saw potential to include bicyclists in the project plan, but they weren’t sure how at first No decision was made in the first meeting, so the senior engineers had to adjourn the discussion until the next meeting. No decision was made in the second meeting, so they ordered the engineers to stop working on the designs for a week while they come up with a few options to select from (after a week they ordered the engineers to work on finding potential sign locations for the bus lane). On the third meeting, all the options worked well with the designs so not decision was made. Instead, they decided to show the three options to the planning committee and see what option they would choose. The committee chose the second option, and with that they also agreed on adding a sharrow in the bus lane and use the “Bus and Bike Only” signs. This whole bike lane argument increased the duration of the project by two weeks; the plan was to attend the planning committee meeting on September 5 th , but instead they attended the meeting on September 19 th . The senior engineers had to delay their first meeting with design team, and the first conference call with street division (the senior engineer included) was also delayed. The reason for both of those delays was because of unavailability; they were working on other important projects at the time, so those meetings had to be delayed. These two delays prolonged the design process two more weeks 2) HOW DID THE DESIGN ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTE TO THE DECISIONS? up 3) WHY DID THE DESIGN TASKS TAKE THAT LONG? DELAYS ARE ONLY ONE FACTORS OF THE DURATION. Delays are not the only factor that extended the design process. The data collection phase took about 152 hours in total. In that phase, the engineers would go to the field and perform the necessary studies that were mentioned before, using the required equipment and measuring tools in the field to collect the necessary data and measurements. Having to repeat the same studies for 23
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
all 80 segments is time consuming but necessary to get the right data for the project, and to implement them in the drawings is also takes quite some time but important nonetheless to help the design team and the senior engineers study the project area to design the bus lane details. In the project implementation phase, 250 work orders had to be created for the field workers in street division, which took about 112 hours in total. From the 250 work order created, 80 of which were striping work orders, another 80 were pavement marking work orders, another 80 were sign work orders, and the 10 work orders consist of vegetation trim, (a few trees blocked the view of the new signs), repaint existing striping and curb zones (they were worn out), and installing parking meters in a couple of green zones as the community requested. As previously mentioned, work orders requires the design engineer to fill out and add important details; in a striping work order, the engineers must fill out the width of the lane, striping line type and width, striping line lengths, and any specific details of necessary (such as adding new striping line for the right-turn pocket) ( Note : there are over 10 specific details that we had to implement in this project and they would take more one page to write and explain, and I don’t think it is necessary add them here as they didn’t affect the duration really, so I think one example is enough ). Each work order has its own set of information and details to fill and write down, and each segment is different from the other in terms of design details, length of segment, number of lanes, number of zones (red, white, yellow, etc.), vegetation and its types and other unique features ( forgive me but had to put the word “other” here; too many unique details and features to list here ) In the public sector, SAP is used to manage the work orders. Even though it is a great software and does its job, it would take some time to upload and read them, and the way to send a work order to anyone is lengthy, as categories, work order details and other information have to be filled whenever a work order is processed in the system. The public outreach took 64 hours in the project implementation phase; Usually the public outreach is done through phone calls and emails, and if they cannot be reached or had other concerns, the design engineer who is responsible for that segment would visit them and explain to them about the bus lane project. In those phone calls and emails, the affected owners would ask questions about if their building would be affected, how long will the operation take, and if the road vehicles would be able to park next to the bus lane. All of these question were resolved and no issues and problems happened that would affect the bus lane construction operation. There were about four to six buildings in each segments, and the engineers had to contact each and every one of them. The reason the public outreach was longer in the eastbound section than in the westbound was because more organizations, shops, restaurants and retail stores were affected on the eastbound segments. The westbound segments had fewer of them and were mostly parking lots. 4) YOU SHOULD PERFORM A “PRODUCTIVITY ANALYSIS” OF THE DESIGN TASKS. WHY THIS PRODUCTION RATE? WHAT METHODS USED, ETC., WAS THERE “REWORK”? 24
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
5) CAN THE TASKS OVERLAP OR ARE THEY COUPLED? Some of the tasks were coupled together and done simultaneously; at the start of the design phase, the design team would contact (through email) the other divisions and departments of the public sector to see if there are ongoing projects in that area. While the design team wait for their reply, they would work on the bus lane designs, so the both processes merged and were completed together in one week (five workdays). The public outreach and creating work orders cannot be done simultaneously; work orders cannot be created until the team is confident that all of the building’s owners are on board with the designs. The designs include removed parking spots, trimmed tree branches, potential new pole locations on sidewalks for the new signs and placing those signs on existing light poles. If the involved people had any problems with those details, the design team would try to fix them if possible, as they can be easily changed in MicroStation. If they had requests which cannot be fixed or changed then they had to be informed by the design team that they can’t be fulfilled as the project depends on those changes ( can’t give an example here, never encountered any of those problems myself and each project has its own unique problems when it comes to public outreach ). Once the public outreach is done, the team would work on the work orders. The team couldn’t do public outreach while the senior engineer is in a meeting with the transit service providers (and the one-day delay before it); the purpose of the meeting was to discuss operational work details and public outreach coordination, and the team thought that the transit service providers would do the community outreach. Instead, they would only let them know about possible passenger delays, and the design team would do the rest. Not sure how to explain about the rest of the processes since they cannot be overlapped anyways (ie. The design team can’t do the designs while attending a meeting) 6) ONCE THE TASKS WERE COMPLETED, WHY DID THE DECISIONS TOOK SO LONG? 7) ARE THERE CLEAR CRITERIA FOR DECIDING? ETC. IS IT CLEAR WHO ARE THE DECISION MAKERS? When it comes to decision making, the senior engineers are mainly the decision makers here. The senior engineers are more qualified than the junior and assistant engineers, that is why they make the decisions; based on years of experience and knowledge of transportation design manuals. One important manual that ever traffic engineer uses is the MUTCD. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is a manual used to specify the standards of traffic signs, striping, pavement markings, signals, road surface and how to install, design and use. All the decisions and design details that were made by the senior engineers were based on this manual. 25
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
If the public had any requests for the bus lane project, or any transportation-related project for that matter, engineers would refer to this book first and see if it were possible to fulfill their requests. If it can be fulfilled, the supervisor senior engineer is the one who decides if the request should be done or not; a request may meet the MUTCD guidelines but the project might not have the budget or would affect other processes. The duration of those steps are considered as labour hours; during all of the activities, the members involved were 100% committed to them and devoted all their time on the project, which means if an activity duration is 40 hours, then the engineer spent five full workdays on the activity. As for technical issues along were minor and did not affect the project; computer lagging and unexpected weather conditions during the data collection phase but nothing the team could not handle. The design phase had the most delay time for a total of 114 hours; the bike lane argument, the waiting time for the planning committee meeting, and the unavailability of field workers from the street division are the main reasons. Table #3 shows the duration of each step and their how much they affected the duration of the total value of the project and the whole design process 6. Discussion The factors and difficulties that affect the duration of the design process in a public sector project are the following: - Competing interest and expertise In the public sector, there are many different engineering departments with their different divisions, and each senior engineer is responsible for his or her own division. Each division varies from one another, as it was explained in the previous section. Hence, all senior engineers have different interests and opinions that they want to share in different projects. When there is a public project, the involved senior engineers will start discussing between one another; the end goal is to have high-quality public service. In this project, the second meeting between the senior engineers and design team was held in the design phase (1 hour long). The bike lane problem made the senior engineers delay the project for one whole week (40 hours, five workdays) which caused the whole project to be delayed by one full week. The senior engineers planned to show the designs to the planning committee on September 5th, but because of the hold, they had to wait until the next meeting, which was on September 19th. The design team finished implementing the corrections from the third meeting with the senior engineers on September 16th, so they had to wait three days (24 hours) to present the drawing in the meeting. In short, the project was delayed by two weeks because of that argument. Even though having those difficult discussion and arguments in a project can cause delays and prolong the project further, they are justifiable and crucial in any public project to discuss and examine existing conditions, how and in what way a specific component/idea should be designed 26
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
and where to place them in the project site, finding the best solution of an issue through cooperation and other important decisions that had to be made in the meetings. Several meetings are needed for this type of project as the success of the bus lane depends on its development process and its carefully phased implementation of study of the area, before and after lane installation, so the design team and senior engineers had to be really careful and not rush to conclusions and ideas that deem undesirable or even unworkable. Senior engineers from each division must cooperate and optimize their solutions and agendas to satisfy all parties involved and deliver the best solution to the public. Senior engineers realize that every detail of any process that they want to implement, they will be held accountable and would cause severe problems in the department. In conclusion, they must discuss and debate about those important ideas and details together before implementing them in order to avoid any unwanted problems and consequences. - Public’s Input and Concerns Citizens are valued as partners in a public project, as their ideas are taken seriously and put into practice (Teeuwen, 2010). An effective design, study and community outreach strategies are critical during the planning and design phase and post-implementation phase. Public outreach took 8 days (64 hours, 10.5% of the total duration of the project) altogether; this is considered value in the public sector. Even though it took a lot of time in the project, it was of the utmost importance to find any potential impact of any public project, it would also promote the support of the project and ensures success of it. After completing a transportation project in an area, it is important the mark the exclusivity of it to road users through striping, sign and pavement legends This project was presented to the planning committee of the area in September 19 th , their questions were answered and were able to gather some changes based on their demands. There were three days of delay and the meeting took only two hours. Since those meetings are important in any public project the design team and they cannot move on with the design until they hear the public’s opinion about them, they had to wait for three days until the day of the meeting. Luckily, it’s only 3.9% of the total delays that affected the project In any public sector it is important to be involved with the community and to reach out to the citizens because their purpose is to improve the community and act on their feedback. The quality of the project and service depend on their input - Work Orders Work orders are designed to make any operation faster and to bring more control in its process. Since there were 250 work orders for this project alone, it was decided to send the work order in batches through SAP. It took up to 14 days (112 hours, 26.4% of the total value of the project and 18.4% of the total duration) to create those work orders in the project implementation phase Instead of making one complex work order which would cover all the work to be done in a specific segment, they are broken down to multiple work orders. Even though creating that many 27
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
work orders was tedious and very time-consuming, it made the operation much faster, clearer and more organized for the field workers. - Handling Multiple Projects As mentioned above, public sector engineers are usually tasked to work and design more than one public project. The first meeting had to be delayed for 1 week as the senior engineers had to take care of other projects in the department and when street division were busy with their own projects. After the second meeting on August 30 th , the team had no other choice but to stop working on the bus lane project and finish other ongoing designs and smaller public projects that were time-sensitive needed in the area, so they had to shift their priorities to them first and then continue with the bus lane project later. Luckily the few times that there was a delay in the project and the design team would work on their other projects during that time; when meeting #1 with senior engineers was delayed (5 days, 6.6% of the total project duration) as they were busy with other big public projects, waiting for the field workers from the street division to finish their construction operations and projects (5 days, 6.6% of the total project duration). In order to work more efficiently and quickly people would work on those projects one by one and not juggle multiple tasks simultaneously. Other minor factor was that the SAP software was slow to upload and process the work order batches, it took a total of 6 hours (about 0.8% of the total project duration) to do so in the project implementation phase. Even though it is a reliable software and is effective in managing work orders and other tasks in the public sector, due to the amount of information stored in this software it would take a long time to do specific tasks and actions Lean thinking in general are used in the public sector for cost savings and deliver higher quality of service to the public. However, despite the benefits of Lean in an engineering project, the public sector would face more challenges than a private engineering company; handling costumer’s concerns, managing operations and freedom in exposing problem (Drew and Bhatia, 2006). The other difficulties are included in this paper which are work order breakdown, handling the SAP software, limited funding and competing interest and expertise between senior engineers. One recommendation that the SAP could be replaced by another software but that would be transferring an enormous amount of information and details from the SAP to the new software and would take years to do so and to adapt using the new one. The mentioned difficulties can be unpredictable, time-consuming and complicated, but they are very crucial and are part of any public project in order to meet the project’s requirements and to provide the best service to the public, and they build on the existing evidence that public sector struggle more when trying to reduce the duration of their projects. 7. Conclusion There were some limitations for this research; since this is the public sector there are documents, information and among other things that couldn’t be accessed or shared in this paper because 28
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
they are confidential. Information about the design development wasn’t very clear and not enough for this research due to short time available. There were also some engineers the author couldn’t interview or get answers from due to time conflicts and that they were unavailable. As for the people that were interviewed they were too short as they have their own schedule to take care of. There were other struggles that could have been added in this paper such as the role of politics in this project; even though they had a role, not a lot of information was available at the time of the research. A value stream mapping was planned to be included in this project, unfortunately due to limited time the VSM format had to be replaced with a process map. It is important to consider the mentioned factors that affect every public project. In this research, reasons have been presented to understand why the public sector has a more difficult time with mapping and reducing the duration of their project in comparison with the private sector. In this paper the department of transportation and its divisions was discussed in Section 3, and the project description, background and funding were explained in Section 4 The design process of a transportation related public project was explained in Section 5 in detail; it starts with data collection and site investigation and implementing the data in MicroStation, conduct a meeting with senior engineers to examine the existing conditions, implementing the desired design details while having multiple meetings with engineers and people and hear the public’s opinion until the designs are finalized, meet with the street division (and set up a schedule of the operation, create the necessary work orders and public outreach of the project area in order for the construction sequence to begin until the project is completed. The timeline of the project was discussed in detail in Section 3 and was presented in Figure 1. And finally, with the help of the process map in Figure 2 and its data from Section 6, the factors and difficulties of the design process was explained in Section 7. In short, competing interest and expertise between engineers are important but can halt the project, same goes to public opinion and community outreach as they are the key to the project’s success, the work orders are separated depending on the type of work which results in much clearer instructions for the field workers to do their jobs, even though it would mean the engineers spend more time to create them, and the SAP software, while detailed and reliable, is slow and tedious to use. Those points can apply to almost all of the large public projects; every public has to have a meeting with the senior engineers to discuss the project’s limits and potential improvements, have the same type of work orders, must obtain public’s input through meeting committees or other means and the engineers in all divisions of the public sector are always tasked to do multiple other public projects at the same time Some of the uncertainties that the author would like to find but didn’t have the time was to know what projects the senior engineers were focusing on to make them delay the meetings. Another info that might help with the findings was to know and study the schedule and plan of the field workers when installing the striping, pavement legends, new poles and signs and how they studied the work orders; it would be interesting to know more about how the workers from the street and traffic division operate in the field, and it can make up for a research paper on its own. 29
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Other suggestions for future research include finding the best project management practices to implement in the public sector, or to see if implementing all lean concepts is possible in the public sector considering the mentioned obstacles are in its path. References Teeuwen B. (2010) Lean for the Public Sector: The Pursuit of Perfection in Government Services. Productivity Press, USA, 2010 Bhatia, N. and Drew, J. (2006) Applying Lean Production to the Public Sector, The McKinsey Quarterly, v. 3, p.97-8 Cooper, R. Aquad, G. Kagioglou, M & and Sexton, M. (1999), The Development Of A Process Map For The Construction Sector, TIME Research Institute, University of Salford, 1999 Lan, C. and Li, J. (2006) A Supplement to Advance Guide Sign Placement Guidelines in MUTCD. The National Academies of Sciences, January 2006 Denhardt, J. and Denhardt R. (2000) The New Public Service: Serving Rather Than Steering, Routledge, 2016. Molyneux, G. Teixeira, R. and Whaley, J. (2010) Better, Not Smaller: What Americans Want From Their Federal Government, Center for American Progress, July, 2010 Arthuraliya, A. (2019) The Easy Guide to Process Mapping, Creately, April 2019 https://creately.com/blog/diagrams/process-mapping-guide/ Bolton, B., & Heller, J. (2018). Effective airport project delivery, leadership and culture. Journal of Airport Management, 13(1), 6-16. King, D. A., & Fischer, L. A. (2016). Streetcar projects as spatial planning: A shift in transport planning in the United States. Journal of Transport Geography, 54, 383-390. King, D., & Fischer, L. (2018). Long Term Land Use Effects of New Rail Investment: Lessons from San Diego. Urban Science, 2(1), 6. Monk, A. H., Levitt, R. E., Garvin, M. J., South, A. J., & Carollo, G. (2019). Public–private partnerships for infrastructure delivery. In Public–Private Partnerships for Infrastructure Development. Edward Elgar Publishing. 30
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help