| dc.contributor.author | Gordon Culp | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-05-08T21:54:17Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-05-08T21:54:17Z | |
| dc.date.copyright | July 2011 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2011 | |
| dc.identifier.other | %28asce%29lm%2E1943-5630%2E0000176.pdf | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/65975 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Are there alternative methods for delivering water and wastewater treatment projects that can save time and money without sacrificing project quality? This is an especially relevant question in these difficult economic times. This paper addresses the question by comparing traditional and alternative project delivery methods in terms of their effects on project quality, schedule, and costs. Project delivery methods discussed are traditional design–bid–build and the alternative methods of design–build, design–build–operate, and design–build–finance–operate. | |
| dc.publisher | American Society of Civil Engineers | |
| dc.title | Alternative Project Delivery Methods for Water and Wastewater Projects: Do They Save Time and Money? | |
| dc.type | Journal Paper | |
| dc.journal.volume | 11 | |
| dc.journal.issue | 3 | |
| dc.journal.title | Leadership and Management in Engineering | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1061/(ASCE)LM.1943-5630.0000133 | |
| dc.tree | Leadership and Management in Engineering:;2011:;Volume ( 011 ):;issue: 003 | |
| dc.contenttype | Fulltext | |