Brogan, Elizabeth A (2022) Drainage design engineering risk on design-build transportation projects. PhD thesis, University of Colorado at Denver, USA.
Abstract
The design progression of a transportation design-build ("DB") project includes at least three distinct design milestones: owner provided design, final bid design, and ready for construction design. Research indicates existing risk models are insufficient to predict the amount of design change between these milestones. This research study focuses on the (1) documents commonly included by Department of Transportation ("DoT") agencies to prospective bidders, (2) variance in drainage quantities between the three design milestones, and (3) identification of project characteristic predictors for high variance in drainage infrastructure cost. Data identify the natural logarithm of Impervious Area Onsite and Watershed Cost per Lane Mile as having a significant relationship with the drainage infrastructure cost variance between bid design and ready for construction design. In addition, if the owner provides a proposed drainage infrastructure design, the project is more likely to have higher variance in drainage infrastructure cost between bid design and ready for construction than if the owner does not provide a proposed drainage infrastructure design.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Clevenger, Caroline |
| Index terms: | variance, design engineering, cost variance, transportation project, onsite, bidder, drainage, agency, owner, design change, documents |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, infrastructure and transport systems, financial analysis, bidding, sociology, measurement and scaling, building construction, professional development, structural engineering |
| Topics: | Procurement, Information Management, Cost Management, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here