Case Study: Owner-Prescribed Construction Phasing Conflicts with Field Realities in Illinois (2016)

Project Overview
• Name: Jane Byrne Interchange Reconstruction
• Location: Chicago, Illinois
• Year: 2016
• Project Size: $800 million
• Scope: Multi-phase urban interchange reconfiguration under live traffic conditions
• Lead Agencies/Contractors: Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) /

Category of the Issue, Problem, or Challenge
• Contract Owner
• Construction Sequencing & Phasing

Summary of the Issue, Problem, or Challenge
The owner-mandated phasing sequence did not account for construction logistics and site access limitations, leading to rework and material handling inefficiencies.

Root Cause Analysis

  • Owner prioritized traffic flow over construction feasibility without contractor input.
  • Initial phasing did not reflect physical constraints for equipment maneuvering.
  • Early contractor involvement (ECI) was not used despite project complexity.

Impacts Due to the Issue, Problem, or Challenge

  • Over 200 days of cumulative delays across three prime contracts.
  • More than $20 million in change orders due to re-staging and traffic control revisions.
  • Damage to IDOT’s public perception and political scrutiny.

Corrective Actions Taken

  1. Phasing plans for future projects required validation by contractor means-and-methods experts.
  2. IDOT created an internal constructability review team to vet all complex phasing.
  3. Traffic management and construction schedules now developed in parallel.

Lessons Learned

  • Owner-imposed phasing must be grounded in construction reality.
  • Early contractor involvement can reduce constructability risks.
  • Urban infrastructure projects demand dynamic and collaborative planning.

Audit & Prevention: Project Control Questions to Ask on Future Projects to Help Control the Situation

  • Has the construction phasing been reviewed from a logistics and field feasibility perspective?
  • Were contractors engaged early in phasing development?
  • Are there mechanisms for revising traffic control plans as field conditions evolve?
PreviousNext