Project Scope Statement For Columbia River Crossing Project

1.0 Project Background

1. You will submit: a Project Scope Statement with stakeholder information, communication plans, and a WBS for a project you select.

• First, determine the project you will use for this assignment. It can be a real project or completely made-up.

• Think about various types of projects (e.g. starting a new company, writing a novel, planning a 50th anniversary party for your parents, consolidating departments, or possibly something in banking, health services, IT, or construction.

2. Develop a scope statement. Make any assumptions; be sure to document them.

3. Identify your stakeholders. For each, state if the stakeholder is external/internal, have influence/do not have influence, are impactful/are not impactful.

4. Determine the communication plan for your project. Some consideration or questions that may help you with this: Kloppenborg, p. 127-128. Do not get overly detailed for this part of the assignment. If your communication plan is more than a half page long, you have gotten too detailed.

5. Develop a WBS for your project down to level 3 at a minimum (6 at the maximum) and for at least one of the categories, down to a work package. There are also videos in the module that help to explain a WBS. If your work shows a severe lack of understanding of a WBS, I assume you have not done all your reading assignments or watched the videos.

In this project report, it summarizes the construction of a Columbia River Crossing Project with its project scope statement. Different assumptions are also taken to make a successful completion of the project. Apart from this, it also gives a brief description of the key stakeholders on its particular role in the construction of the Columbia River Crossing Project. A communication plan is developed with a set of strategies and intends to communicate with the consequences of the evaluation. Finally, it gives a Work Breakdown Structure to give the key deliverables of the construction project plan that organizes the work of team into manageable sections.    

Columbia River Crossing is a joint Oregon-Washington Project that replaces the existing Columbia River Bridge, which connects Portland (london.gov.uk 2012). This project focuses on rebuilding a series of highway around the bridge with the extension of light rail across the river. It also improves the existing highways. The overall project will cost up to $3.5 billion that replaces the existing Columbia River Bridge. Even the reason behind the construction of this river crossing project is that the freight that crosses the existing bridge is facing delays due to congestion (sao.wa.gov 2014). This project plan addresses various issues related to travel as well as trade. It also addresses the problem of congestion.

2.0 Project Scope Statement

This project plan provides the reduction in congestion as well as mobility with an accessibility of all the users. It recognizes all the requirements of the local as well as interstate movement in the future. It also provides an efficiently transportation system, encourages the reduced reliance on the single vehicle, improves the incident management as well as increases the capacity measures.

The scope of proposed project is to improve the mobility by addressing the future travel demand as well as needs of mobility in the Columbia River Crossing Bridge. It improves the connectivity, time of travels as well as operations of the public transportation (Brockmann 2012). It also improves the highway freight as well as addresses the needs of travel and trade. This river crossing project addresses the specific problems such as the growing demand as well as congestion, impairing the freight mobility, limiting the operations of public transportation and safety as well as vulnerabilities to the accidents (Hallgren 2012).   

The scope of this project is that it limits the operation of the public transportation that includes the trips among the Portland Central City as well as the city of the Vancouver as well as country of Clark (Joslin and Muller 2015). The overall outcome of the project plan is to focus on rebuilding a series of highway around the bridge with an extension of light rail across the river. Therefore, the project plan addresses the problem of growing demand as well as congestion and limiting the operations of public transportation within the area of Columbia.

The project manager for successful completion of the project plan takes the assumptions such that the project plan addresses the needs of the travel as well as trade (Lahdenpera 2012). The deliverables of the Columbia River Crossing Project should be delivered within the given particular period as well as estimated budget (Muller and Soderlund 2015). The issues are identified, and the risk management officer takes all the possible steps to mitigate those issues and based on those, the proposed project plan meets with its key objectives of constructing the river bridge (Shamir and Verhoeven 2013). This construction plan would result in heavy congestion that results in the growth of population within the region with a growth in the employment as well as economic activity. The traffic congestion reduces the mobility of the freight among the regional markets of Portland (Thorne et al. 2014). It is assumed that the congestion reduces the speed of bus speed as well as reliability.  These assumptions should be documented such as the project should complete within the given time and budget and can get a successful completion.

2.1 Assumptions

The assumptions of the project plan consist of:

• The availability of the key project member
• The performance of the key project member
• The skills of the team members
• Delivery time of the vendors
• Issues related to vendor performance
• Accuracy of the dates related to project schedule

The project is the joint project of the departments of transportation between the Washington as well as Oregon.

Key Stakeholders	Responsibilities	Influenced/Non-Influenced	Impactful/Non-Impactful
Co-leaders Federal Highway Administration as well as Transit Administration	The responsibility is to improve the mobility of the river bridge highways through national innovation as well as program delivery (Yu, Ma and Wang 2011). It develops the improved mass communication.	High The co-leaders are maximizing its influence by working with the leadership of other transit agencies (Thorne et al. 2014).	High The contribution of the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration develops the mass communication among the states of the United States (Dorobantu, Nartey and Henisz 2013).
Local partners City of Portland City of Vancouver Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council	They are guiding the regional transportation planning program that includes the transportation policy development (Waligo, Clarke and Hawkins 2013). It develops the regional transportation plan and the programming of the transportation projects for funding.	High The management of the local partners has an influence on the development of the regional.	Medium The local partners are overseeing the transportation planning process over the Columbia River Bridge crossing.
Transit agencies TriMet C-TRAN	They are operating regular bus route services.	High The internal as well as external factors that are used to influence the ridership growth (Dorobantu, Nartey and Henisz 2013). The internal factors are the level of service, and external factors are traffic congestion and trade growth.	Medium These transit agencies are most impactful with the least imposing upgrade.
People of Clark Country and Portland	They have the responsibility to give their feedback on the construction plan.	Low They are influenced to do so such that their feedback should help in designing the best possible structure of the river bridge (Waligo, Clarke and Hawkins 2013).	Medium The feedback is given by the People of Clark country, and Portland has an impact on the construction of the bridge.
Elected officials	They have the responsibility to make sure that it fulfills all the duties under the law it powers (Richman 2012).	Low They want to fulfill the duties under the law and follow all the guidelines of constructing a river bridge.	Medium If the river bridge is not constructed by following the guidelines, then it gives an impact on the project plan.
Project Sponsors and staff	They fund for the project plan as per the materials required to construct the Columbia River Crossing Project (Schwalbe 2014).	High If the project plan is not completed within the given budget, then there is a high chance of risk within the plan (Dinsmore and Cabanis-Brewin 2014).	High If any resources are added, then it will increase the total fund of the project (Heagney 2012).
Neighborhood associations	The project team works with the neighborhood associations in order to provide information with project updates (Waligo, Clarke and Hawkins 2013).	High The other stakeholders are not able to get the information on the latest updates.	High If they are not giving the exact updates, then it will not be able to provide the necessary information (Joslin and Muller 2015).

Deliverable Information	Recipient	Delivery Method	Schedule
Project Status	Project Planner Director	Weekly meetings, Pod casts posted on the project website	Weekly
Agenda	Project team, Steering Committee	E-mail, Meetings	Monthly
Timeline update	Steering Committee, Executive Project Sponsor	Mailing list, Website update	As required
Project risks	Project steering committee, Project team	Risk document, project minutes	Monthly
Funding of the project plan	Project Sponsor	E-mail	Weekly
Supply information kits conducted training	Consultant	E-mail, phone call	Weekly
Meetings regarding the design of the river crossing bridge	Project Designer	E-mail, phone call	As required
Address and resolve the issues	Risk Officer	Meetings	Weekly

WBS Predecessors	WBS Activities
1.0	Understand and Explain the needs
1.1	Discuss with the government about the construction plan
1.2	Utilize the specifications of project plan
1.3	Meeting with the stakeholders
1.4	Sign off
2.0	Procurement for constructing the river bridge
2.1	Bridge Working drawings
2.1.1	Structural steel
2.1.2	Structural bearings
2.1.3	Expansion of highways
2.1.4	Machinery for movable bridges
2.1.5	Electrical items for the bridges
2.1.6	Concrete crib walls
2.2	Road requiring design
2.2.1	Impact attenuators
2.2.2	Sheeting
2.2.3	Electrical items
2.3	Sequence of processes
2.3.1	Steel placing
2.3.2	Expansion joints
2.3.3	Wearing coat
2.3.4	Concrete placement
3.0	Completion of the Design of the Bridge
3.1	Start and build the Columbia River Crossing Bridge
3.2	Understand the design of the bridge
3.2.1	Modification of the process of the design
3.2.2	Identify the areas of modification
3.3	Risk management plan
3.3.1	Identify the risks
3.3.2	Testing for the performance
3.4	Final Design
4.0	Construction of the Columbia River bridge
4.1	Pre-turn around construction
4.2	Turn around
4.3	Major construction
4.4	Feasibility study of the construction plan
5.0	Testing of the plan
5.1	Manuals and Documents
5.2	Integrated testing
5.3	Test the resources and equipment
5.4	Preventative maintenance
6.0	Sign off the project plan

Conclusion

It is concluded that the construction plan for Columbia River Crossing Project replaces the existing Columbia River Bridge, and this bridge connects to the Portland. It also rebuilds a series of highways that improves the existing highways. It is built due to the reason behind the construction of this river crossing project is that the freight that crosses the existing bridge is facing delays due to congestion. This project plan addresses various issues related to travel as well as trade. From the construction of this plan, it gives an outcome that it results in heavy congestion those consequences in the growth of population within the region with an expansion in the employ as well as financial activity.

The congestion of traffic uses to reduce the mobility of the freight so that it reduces the speed of the bus as well as reliability. This construction plan contains the list of the stakeholders with their particular communication plan so that they can able to improve the existing highways and overcome with the issues of high congestion on the highways. Through the communication plan, they can able to communicate with others so that there is no possibility of any conflict among the key stakeholders. This project plan also addresses the detailed problems such as the rising demand as well as overcrowding, impairing the freight mobility, preventing the operations of public transport.

References

Dinsmore, P. and Cabanis-Brewin, J., 2014. The AMA Handbook of Project Management. New York: AMACOM.

Heagney, J., 2012. Fundamentals of project management. New York: American Management Association.

Richman, L., 2012. Improving your project management skills. New York: American Management Association.

Schwalbe, K., 2014. Information technology project management. Boston, MA: Course Technology.

Brockmann, C., 2012. Construction Project Scheduling and Control (CourseSmart), 2nd edn.Construction Management and Economics, 30(11), pp.1012-1013.

Dorobantu, S., Nartey, L. and Henisz, W., 2013. “First Impressions: Stakeholder Networks, Proactive Engagement & Stakeholder Opinions of Companies”. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2013(1), pp.17448-17448.

Hällgren, M., 2012. The construction of research questions in project management. International Journal of Project Management, 30(7), pp.804-816.

Joslin, R. and Muller, R., 2015. Relationships between a project management methodology and project success in different project governance contexts. International Journal of Project Management, 33(6), pp.1377-1392.

Lahdenperä, P., 2012. Making sense of the multi-party contractual arrangements of project partnering, project alliancing and integrated project delivery. Construction Management and Economics, 30(1), pp.57-79.

Muller, R. and Soderlund, J., 2015. Innovative approaches in project management research.International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), pp.251-253.

Shamir, U. and Verhoeven, J., 2013. Management of wetlands in river basins: The WETwin project.Environmental Science & Policy, 34, pp.1-2.

Thorne, C., Castro, J., Cluer, B., Skidmore, P. and Shea, C., 2014. Project Risk Screening Matrix for River Management and Restoration. River Res. Applic., 31(5), pp.611-626.

Waligo, V., Clarke, J. and Hawkins, R., 2013. Implementing sustainable tourism: A multi-stakeholder involvement management framework. Tourism Management, 36, pp.342-353.

YU, P., MA, Q. and WANG, L., 2011. TBM Cutting Tools Maintenance Technology for the Yellow River Crossing Project in the Middle Route of South-to-North Water Diversion Project. South-to-North Water Diversion and Water Science & Technology, 9(1), pp.21-25.

london.gov.uk, 2012. East London River Crossings: Assessment of Options. [online] Available at: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/gla_migrate_files_destination/East%20London%20River%20Crossings%20Assessment%20of%20Options%20TfL_0.pdf [Accessed 31 Jan. 2016].

sao.wa.gov, 2014. Columbia River Crossing Project. [online] Available at: https://www.sao.wa.gov/state/Documents/Columbia_River_Crossing_Project.pdf [Accessed 31 Jan. 2016].