Establishment of Luther King State Bridge to link Minnesota with Wisconsin

1.1 Purpose of Project Management Plan

The intended audience of the Luther King Bridge Crossing PMP is all project stakeholders including the project sponsor, the executive and the project implementation team. According to Abraham, a PMP serves the main purpose of defining a project’s path (Abraham 2014, p. 36). Thus, this PMP will give a clear definition of responsibilities, roles, processes and procedures that will ensure the project is completed safely on time and within the specified budget.

2 Executive Summary of Project Charter

Recently, the state governments of Minnesota and Wisconsin approved the project aimed at improving Wisconsin H31 and Minnesota PQ22 highways between Stillwater, Minnesota and State County, Wisconsin. Both states aim to provide reliable, safe and efficient transport corridor by reducing traffic congestions and improving highway safety. Consequently, the two categories for this project are transport mobility on an efficient highway and reliable crossing of the Luther King River.

2.1 Assumptions/Constraints

Critical PMP aspects like risk management are highly dependent on assumptions and constraints (Pūlmanis 2014, p. 196).  Changes in assumptions result into revisions in the PMP. Even though constraints are not treated like risks, their proper documentation greatly assists in protecting the project from potential issues. In relation to the Luther King Bridge Project, it is assumed that construction will occur over an approximate period of three years. Besides, the project implementation team hopes that the project funding (state, federal, county, and city) will be available prior to advertisements of any design builds and award of tender contracts. Nonetheless, the delivery processes to be adopted in the Wisconsin and Minnesota approaches will be ‘Design, bid and build. There are two underlying constraints. First, the project’s budget is not predefined. Secondly, a section of the community living around the bridge disapproves the project.

3 Scope Management

A good project scope must factor in specific project deliverables, goals, tasks, deadlines and features (Dobson 2015, p. 84). The project exhibits a stakeholder process in the development of the Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement and the relevant Memorandums of Understanding/agreement. The process resulted to a preferred alternative package that further details the project’s scope. The top executive must approve any changes to the project’s scope.  

3.1 Work Breakdown Structure

Work breakdown structures provide work packages that must be performed by the project teams for a projection to reach its completion (Fernando et al. 2018, p. 347). The Luther King Bridge Crossing Project preferred a package comprising of three components. First, the preferred bridge type was extra-dosed design (bridges with short towers having cables that connect the bridge deck to the towers). Secondly, the preferred mitigation package was developed by the state governments of Minnesota and Wisconsin, in consultation with the stakeholders. It was estimated at $17 million, aimed at addressing socio-cultural and natural aspects. In relation to the preferred alternative (location of river crossing), the proposed five lane bridge will cross the river at the current location.

3.2 Deployment Plan

Deployments plans provide step-by-step guidelines on actions that need to taken in a project’s final stages to move it into production. Rowe further contends that a deployment plan must be highly detailed and include all fact no matter how small (Rowe 2015, p. 109). The deployment plan will consist of two major approaches. Both the Minnesota and Wisconsin approaches will involve design, bid and build processes.  The Minnesota approach will adopt low bid process and the contract management will be administered from the engineer’s officer. In relation to Wisconsin, its approach exists in the Development Manual in Appendix B.

3.3 Change Control Management

It is normal for any project to hit dead ends during its execution. However, the most important thing is ensuring that the suggested changes are well managed to keep the project back on track, in relation to its scope (Kerans 2014, p. 87). In relation to Wisconsin, the project’s construction leader will be tasked with ascertaining all modification documents and completing the approval records of WisDOT. Additionally, change orders under the Minnesota package will be under MinDOT Change Order Process. Drafts of the change order will be provided to WisDOT. 

4 SCHEDULE/TIME MANAGEMENT

While schedules are important in outlining the specific timeframes for a given objective, they also ensure that all major objectives of the project are covered (Ravinder and Kollikkathara 2017, p. 319). The updated project schedule reflective of the project’s activities is found later in this chapter.

4.1         Milestones

Milestones

Estimated Completion Timeframe

Environmental Impact Assessment Phase

Jan 2014- April 2014

Municipal Consent In Wisconsin and Minnesota

May 2014-  August 2014

Design and Mitigation Stage

December 2014- December 2016

construction phase

3 Construction years

4.2         Project Schedule

Phase

DESCRIPTION

Timeline

Stakeholder Solution Stage

Preparation of documents and drafts

Sep 2010

Public Scope meetings between Minnesota and Wisconsin Departments

Dec 3 & 4 2010

Preparation of an all inclusive Scope Decision Document

Dec 2010- Feb 2011

Environmental Impact Assessment

Independent Environmental assessment by National Park Service

March 2011- July 2011

Quality Planning process and development of documentations

July 2011-September 2011

Publishing of findings and start of a 60 day comment period

September 2011-November 2011

Publication of final decision records and adequacy determination

November 2011- February 2012

Mitigation Consent

Joint memorandum of Understanding between Wisconsin and Minnesota

February 2012- April 2012

Design/Mitigation Phase

Implementing Mitigation Items

December 2011

Acquiring state permits

2013-2015

Acquisition of Right of Way

2013-2015

Design/Build up and tender award for New Luther King Bridge Crossing

2015-2016

Construction Phase

Construction

3 years (No sooner than Jan 2019)

Completion of project and opening to traffic

(No sooner than Jan 2021)

4.2.1         Dependencies

Dependencies, whether external/internal, are the existing relations between a preceding and a succeeding task (Pūlmanis 2014, p. 193). Internally, the project will rely on the availability of quality output from the project implementation teams. Externally, the project will be based upon the availability of project funds and suitable weather conditions.

5 Cost/Budget Management

According to Teller and Gemünden, budget overruns serve as the litmus test for a project to be deemed a success or failure (2014, p. 75). Thus, it is vital for the management team to pay full attention to effective utility of the budget to meet the entire project’s scope. A project review team met in Wisconsin to review the projects estimated construction cost. Besides, they evaluated costs associated with risks and probabilities. The following were the conclusive cost estimates.

Description

Current Project Estimates

Recommended total Project Estimate (risks inclusive)

Team Recommendation current estimates

2014 Base

$ 325 Million

$ 376 Million

$ 50 Million

2019 Construction

$ 416 Million

The team suggested that an extra $50 Million should be added to the original project estimates. It comprises $ 22 Million of base costs of non-included scopes and $28 Million in additional risk costs. Budget management would incorporate cost efficient design decision making processes and full contractor involvement. Further, changes in the budget must be outlined in a revised project plan. The outlines must be approved by the project manager and oversight teams.

6 Quality Management

For Quality Management (QM) to be achieved in a project, all the relevant implementation teams have to be involved (Steen et al. 2018, p. 4). Consequently, all teams will play a role in QM. The project manager will be responsible for ensuring all processes and documentations are in conformity with the plan. Besides, quality specialists and the rest of the project team will work in hand with the project manager to develop QM plans and establishment of quality standards. Quality assurance will ensure all the processes used in the project meet the established standards.

7 Human Resource Management

Even though other variables in a project like risks may be properly factored in, failure to properly manage the project personnel could spell failure (Pūlmanis 2014, p. 183). The project implementation team comprises the executive committee, oversight team, coordination team (delivery, financial, environmental and legal teams), public affairs team, mitigation compliance team and the Wisconsin /Minnesota design-build teams.

8 Communications Management

Communications in a project context serves the purposes of conveying the project objectives from the executive to the implementation teams alongside the emergent changes (Fernando et al. 2018, p. 333). The projects will have both internal and external communication processes. In the internal context, biweekly conferences, weekly project meetings and quarterly updates will be the source of communicating project progress. Besides, external communications will be coordinated by the Public Affairs Team and press releases.

8.1 Communication Matrix

Communication Type

Messages

Frequency

Communicators

Feedback Mechanisms

Biweekly Conferences

Summary of the project’s status

Weekly

Sponsor

Stakeholders

Emails

Project team meetings

Review of action registers

Weekly

Coordinating Team

Oversight team

Meetings

Emails

Press releases

Communicating project progress to the public

Monthly

Public Affairs Team

National Newspapers

9 Risk Management

While risk management plays an important role of identifying potential risks to a project, its effectiveness is only measured by establishing effective control to mitigate such risks (Mohammad 2018, p. 120). A methodical strategy that identifies and ranks risk will be adopted by the project team. High impact risks will be mitigated first and status updates provided to all implementation teams. Upon project completion, a review of the risk management process will be done to determine necessary improvements for future projects.

9.1 Risk Log

The Risk Management Log will be found in Appendix F

10 Issue Management

Issues can have negative impacts on the general success of a project unless they are adequately resolved on time (Cagliano, Grimaldi and Rafele 2015, p. 234).  In the event that issues arise in the project, the execution team will determine if the issue’s gravity warrants a reporting to the project manager. The manager, in consultation with the coordination and oversight teams will decide if the issue deserves the attention of the project sponsors and general stakeholders. If so, the arising issues will be resolved in consultation with all teams. Some of the possible issues to look out for are design and raw material concerns.

10.1 Issue Log

The Issue Management Log will be found in Appendix E

11 Procurement Management

Procurement Management Plans must be well defined to clearly identify the necessary procedures and responsibilities for procurement during the project (Atan and Eren 2018, p. 508). The procurement process for Luther King State Bridge will involve two processes. Request for Qualification (RFQ) will give the project’s scope, shortlist criteria, requirements for construction/design and estimated project costs. Evaluation will be conducted to determine the most qualified bidders who will then submit RFPs. Only shortlisted bidders will submit RFPs. The key components of the RFOs will be contract documents, specific project requirements, applicable standards and reference information documents. The proposal evaluation team will award contracts to the lowest responsive bidder to deliver the project.

12 Compliance Related Planning

Compliance is not only vital in providing project oversights, but provides guidance on conforming to laws, policies, standards, regulations and requirements (Atan and Eren 2018, p. 515). The Luther King Bridge Crossing Project will adhere to the Construction and Engineering Manual of both Minnesota and Wisconsin. Additionally, the Public Procurement and Disposals Act will be deployed in steering the procurement function in the project.

Appendix A: Project Management Plan Approval

The undersigned acknowledge they have reviewed the Luther King Bridge Crossing Project Management Plan and agree with the approach it presents. Changes to this Project Management Plan will be coordinated with and approved by the undersigned or their designated representatives.

Signature:

Brad.K.P

Date:

25/03/2018

Print Name:

Bradley Kingsley Peters

Title:

Project Sponsor

Role:

Representative MinDOT

Signature:

Lee. Z.A

Date:

25/03/2018

Print Name:

Lee  Zebedy Antony

Title:

Project Sponsor

Role:

Representative MinDOT

Signature:

L.PO

Date:

25/03/2018

Print Name:

Lucy Pauline

Title:

Project Manager

Role:

Overall Project Coordinator

APPENDIX B: REFERENCES

The following table summarizes the documents referenced in this document.

Document Name and Version

Description

Location

Development Manual

The manual outlines development procedures, rules and guidelines alongside public procurement rules and regulations.

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/library/publications/format/manuals.html

APPENDIX C:  KEY TERMS

The following table provides definitions for terms relevant to this document.

Term

Definition

Project Management Plan

A document that defines the path a project takes in relation to execution, monitoring and control.

Project Risk Management

The process of outlining project risks that must be exhaustively analyzed, hence the implementation of required strategies to respond to those risks throughout a project’s lifespan and in the best interests of its objectives

Risk

Unexpected/unforeseen event or outcome

APPENDIX D:  SUMMARY OF SPENDING

 BY: Budget Year

APPENDIX E:  RISK LOG

Risk Id.

Risk Description

Mitigation Plan (what to do to avoid the risk occurring)

Contingency Plan (what to do if the risk occurs)

Impact (what the impact will be to the project if the risk occurs)

Likelihood of occurrence (e.g., %, or high / medium / low)

Misunderstanding of project requirements by project team

Clear outline of human resource roles and responsibilities

Re-evaluation of project requirements and training workshops

Failure to achieve project objectives

High

12

Change management overload

Frequent communication of changes. Immediate implementation of changes

Readjustment of project schedule to accommodate many changes

Slowed project work time

Overstretched schedules

Medium

3

Stakeholder conflicts

Determination of stakeholder’s core points of interest

Mutual conflict resolution strategies

Poor communication hence possible stalling of the project

Low

APPENDIX F: ISSUE MANAGEMENT LOG

ISSUE MANAGEMENT LOG

Project Name:

Luther King Bridge Crossing Project

National Centre:

Minnesota/Wisconsin

Project Manager Name:

Lucy Pauline

Project Description:

The project’s objective is improving Wisconsin H31 and Minnesota PQ22 highways between Stillwater, Minnesota and State County, Wisconsin

ID

Current

Status

Priority

Issue

Description

Assigned To

Owner

Expected

Resolution

Date

Escalation

Required

(Y/N)?

Impact

Summary

AA129WTY27

Open

Critical

Issues raised by board members about the financial viability of the project are preventing the project from moving forward as planned.

Yes

Potential project stoppage

AA129WTY28

Work In Progress

High

The project is short on a specific skill set.

No

Possibility of project work not completed on time

AA129WTY29

Closed

Medium

Negotiations with functional managers in an organization competing for scarce human resources are forecasted to delay project completion.

Yes

Possibility of project work not completed on time

s