The Construction, Building and Real Estate Research Conference of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Held at Dauphine

Universit, Paris, 2-3 September 2010

ISBN 978-1-84219-619-9 RICS 12 Great George Street London SW1P 3AD United Kingdom www.rics.org/cobra September 2010

The RICS COBRA Conference is held annually. The aim of COBRA is to provide a platform for the dissemination of original research and new developments within the specific disciplines, sub-disciplines or field of study of:

Management of the construction process

Cost and value management Building technology Legal aspects of construction and procurement Public private partnerships Health and safety Procurement Risk management Project management

The built asset

Property investment theory and practice Indirect property investment Property market forecasting Property pricing and appraisal Law of property, housing and land use planning Urban development Planning and property markets Financial analysis of the property market and property assets The dynamics of residential property markets Global comparative analysis of property markets Building occupation Sustainability and real estate Sustainability and environmental law Building performance

The property industry

Information technology Innovation in education and training Human and organisational aspects of the industry Alternative dispute resolution and conflict management Professional education and training

Peer review process All papers submitted to COBRA were subjected to a double-blind (peer review) refereeing process. Referees were drawn from an expert panel, representing respected academics from the construction and building research community. The conference organisers wish to extend their appreciation to the following members of the panel for their work, which is invaluable to the success of COBRA.

Rifat Akbiyikli Rafid Al Khaddar Ahmed Al Shammaa Tony Auchterlounie Kwasi Gyau Baffour Awuah Kabir Bala Juerg Bernet John Boon Douw Boshoff Richard Burt Judith Callanan Kate Carter Keith Cattell Antoinette Charles Fiona Cheung Sai On Cheung Samuel Chikafalimani Ifte Choudhury Chris Cloete Alan Coday Michael Coffey Nigel Craig Ayirebi Dansoh Peter Davis Peter Defoe Grace Ding Hemanta Doloi John Dye Peter Edwards Charles Egbu Ola Fagbenle Ben Farrow Peter Fenn Peter Fewings

Sakarya University, Turkey Liverpool John Moores University, UK Liverpool John Moores University, UK University of Bolton, UK University of Wolverhampton, UK Ahmadu Bello University, Nigeria Danube University Krems, Austria UNITEC, New Zealand University of Pretoria, South Africa Auburn University, USA RMIT University, Australia Heriot-Watt University, UK University of Cape Town, South Africa Glasgow Caledonian University, UK Queensland University of Technology, Australia City University of Hong Kong University of Pretoria, South Africa Texas A and M University, USA University of Pretoria, South Africa Anglia Ruskin University, UK Anglia Ruskin University, UK Glasgow Caledonian University, UK KNUST, Ghana Curtin University, Australia Calford Seaden, UK University of Technology Sydney, Australia University of Melbourne, Australia TPS Consult, UK RMIT, Australia University of Salford, UK Covenant University, Nigeria Auburn University, USA University of Manchester, UK University of the West of England, UK

Peter Fisher Chris Fortune Valerie Francis Rod Gameson Abdulkadir Ganah Seung Hon Han Anthony Hatfield Theo Haupt Dries Hauptfleisch Paul Holley Danie Hoffman Keith Hogg Alan Hore Bon-Gang Hwang Joseph Igwe Adi Irfan Javier Irizarry Usman Isah David Jenkins Godfaurd John Keith Jones Dean Kashiwagi Nthatisi Khatleli Mohammed Kishk Andrew Knight Scott Kramer Esra Kurul Richard Laing Terence Lam Veerasak Likhitruangsilp John Littlewood Junshan Liu Champika Liyanage Greg Lloyd S M Lo Mok Ken Loong Martin Loosemore David Manase Donny Mangitung Patrick Manu Tinus Maritz Hendrik Marx Ludwig Martin Wilfred Matipa Steven McCabe Annie McCartney Andrew McCoy Enda McKenna Kathy Michell Roy Morledge

University of Northumbria, UK University of Salford, UK University of Melbourne, Australia University of Wolverhampton, UK University of Central Lancashire, UK Yonsei University, South Korea University of Wolverhampton, UK Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa University of the Free State, South Africa Auburn University, USA University of Pretoria, South Africa University of Northumbria, UK Construction IT Alliance, Ireland National University of Singapore University of Lagos, Nigeria Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia Georgia Institute of Technology, USA University of Manchester, UK University of Glamorgan, UK University of Central Lancashire, UK University of Greenwich, UK Arizona State University, USA University of Cape Town, South Africa Robert Gordons University, UK Nottingham Trent University, UK Auburn University, USA Oxford Brookes University, UK Robert Gordons University, UK Anglia Ruskin University, UK Chulalongkorn University, Thailand University of Wales Institute, Cardiff, UK Auburn University, USA University of Central Lancashire, UK University of Ulster, UK City University of Hong Kong Yonsei University, South Korea University of New South Wales, Australia Glasgow Caledonian University, UK Universitas Tadulako, Malaysia University of Wolverhampton, UK University of Pretoria, South Africa University of the Free State. South Africa Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Liverpool John Moores University, UK Birmingham City University, UK University of Glamorgan, UK Virginia Tech, USA Queens University Belfast, UK University of Cape Town, South Africa Nottingham Trent University, UK

Michael Murray Saka Najimu Stanley Njuangang Henry Odeyinka Ayodejo Ojo Michael Oladokun Alfred Olatunji Austin Otegbulu Beliz Ozorhon Obinna Ozumba Robert Pearl Srinath Perera Joanna Poon Keith Potts Elena de la Poza Plaza Matthijs Prins Hendrik Prinsloo Richard Reed Zhaomin Ren Herbert Robinson Kathryn Robson Simon Robson David Root Kathy Roper Steve Rowlinson Paul Royston Paul Ryall Amrit Sagoo Alfredo Serpell Winston Shakantu Yvonne Simpson John Smallwood Heather Smeaton-Webb Bruce Smith Melanie Smith Hedley Smyth John Spillane Suresh Subashini Kenneth Sullivan Joe Tah Derek Thomson Matthew Tucker Chika Udeaja Basie Verster Francois Viruly John Wall Sara Wilkinson Trefor Williams

University of Strathclyde, UK Glasgow Caledonian University, UK University of Central Lancashire, UK University of Ulster, UK Ministry of National Development, Seychelles University of Uyo, Nigeria Newcastle University, Australia Bogazici University, Turkey University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa University of KwaZulu, Natal, South Africa Northumbria University, UK Nottingham Trent University, UK University of Wolverhampton, UK Universidad Politcnica de Valencia, Spain Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands University of Pretoria, South Africa Deakin University, Australia University of Glamorgan, UK London South Bank University, UK RMIT, Australia University of Northumbria, UK University of Cape Town, South Africa Georgia Institute of Technology, USA University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Nottingham Trent University, UK University of Glamorgan, UK Coventry University, UK Pontificia Universidad Catlica de Chile, Chile Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, South Africa University of Greenwich, UK Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, South Africa MUJV Ltd. UK Auburn University, USA Leeds Metropolitan University, UK University College London, UK Queens University Belfast, UK University of Wolverhampton, UK Arizona State University, USA Oxford Brookes University, UK Heriot-Watt University, UK Liverpool John Moores University, UK Northumbria University, UK University of the Free State, South Africa University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa Waterford Institute of Technology, Ireland Deakin University, Australia University of Glamorgan, UK

Bimbo Windapo Francis Wong Ing Liang Wong Andrew Wright Peter Wyatt Junli Yang Wan Zahari Wan Yusoff George Zillante Benita Zulch Sam Zulu

University of Cape Town, South Africa Hong Kong Polytechnic University Glasgow Caledonian University, UK De Montfort University, UK University of Reading, UK University of Westminster, UK Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia University of South Australia University of the Free State, South Africa Leeds Metropolitan University, UK

In addition to this, the following specialist panel of peer-review experts assessed papers for the COBRA session arranged by CIB W113 John Adriaanse Julie Adshead Alison Ahearn Rachelle Alterman Deniz Artan Ilter Jane Ball Luke Bennett Michael Brand Penny Brooker Alice Christudason Paul Chynoweth Sai On Cheung Julie Cross Melissa Daigneault Steve Donohoe Ari Ekroos Tilak Ginige Martin Green David Greenwood Asanga Gunawansa Jan-Bertram Hillig Rob Home Peter Kennedy Anthony Lavers Wayne Lord Sarah Lupton Tim McLernon Frits Meijer Jim Mason Brodie McAdam Tinus Maritz London South Bank University, UK University of Salford, UK Imperial College London, UK Technion, Israel Istanbul Technical University, Turkey University of Sheffield, UK Sheffield Hallam University, UK University of New South Wales, Australia University of Wolverhampton, UK National University of Singapore University of Salford, UK City University of Hong Kong University of Salford, UK Texas A&M University, USA University of Plymouth, UK University of Helsinki, Finland Bournemouth University, UK Leeds Metropolitan University, UK Northumbria University, UK National University of Singapore University of Reading, UK Anglia Ruskin University, UK Glasgow Caledonian University, UK Keating Chambers, UK Loughborough University, UK Cardiff University University of Ulster, UK TU Delft, The Netherlands University of the West of England, UK University of Salford, UK University of Pretoria, South Africa

Francis Moor Issaka Ndekugri John Pointing Razani Abdul Rahim Linda Thomas-Mobley Paul Tracey Yvonne Scannell Cathy Sherry Julian Sidoli del Ceno Keren Tweeddale Henk Visscher Peter Ward

University of Salford, UK University of Wolverhampton, UK Kingston University, UK Universiti Technologi, Malaysia Georgia Tech, USA University of Salford, UK Trinity College Dublin, Ireland University of New South Wales, Australia Birmingham City University, UK London South Bank University, UK TU Delft, The Netherlands University of Newcastle, Australia

Material Management within Confined Construction Sites

John Peter Spillane Queens University Belfast jspillane01@qub.ac.uk Dr. Lukumon O Oyedele Queens University Belfast l.oyedele@qub.ac.uk Jason Kyle Von Meding Queens University Belfast jvonmeding01@qub.ac.uk Ashwini Konanahalli Queens University Belfast akonanahalli01@qub.ac.uk

Abstract
The objective of this paper is to identify various managerial issues encountered and resulting strategies adopted, with regards management of materials on confined construction site. This is achieved through classifying the various managerial burdens encountered with the numerous strategies adopted, for the successful management of such confined environments within the realm of materials management.

Through conducting an extensive literature review and detailed interviews, a comprehensive insight into the materials management concerns within a confined construction site environment is envisaged and portrayed. The following are the leading issues highlighted; (1)Lack of adequate storage space, (2)Work place becoming over-crowded, (3)Lack of adequate room for the effective handling of materials and (4)Difficult to transport materials around site. The leading managerial strategies to the management of materials on confined construction sites may be listed in order of importance, as follows; (1)Pre-fabrication and pre-assembly, (2)Providing adequate storage, (3)Space scheduling, (4)Just-In-Time delivery techniques, and (5)Effective design site layout.

Based on the research conducted, it can be concluded, that through effective management of the issues identified along with implementing the various strategies highlighted; successful materials management within a confined construction site environment is attainable.

Innovative Aspect of Paper: An empirical study of three different construction sites in three different countries (Ireland, England and USA) investigating the managerial issues and strategies relating to implementation of materials management in confined construction sites.

Keywords: Confined Site Construction. Materials Management. Pre-Fabrication / Pre-Assembly. JustIn-Time. Space Scheduling.

Introduction
On reviewing the construction industry in the modern era, it may be noted that the majority of constructions sites are located on brown field sites, often within the confines of a city centre location, limited by boundaries on three or sometimes four sides (Singer, 2002). Coupled with the considerable burden of site costs in these central locations (Ellis, 2002), the resulting projects often occupy a significant proportion of the area of the construction site (Tindiwensi, 2000). Dixon (2009) reported that in 2001, eighty percent of the population of the United Kingdom lived in urban areas and of this eighty percent, forty one percent of urban dwellers lived in one of the ten most populous areas. Yet, eighty percent of the population of the United Kingdom is spread over just nine percent of the country. Biddy (2009) adds to this by indicating that between 2000 and 2004, the density of urban areas increased significantly.

As a result of these factors, construction project managers are faced with the challenges of constructing these sometimes intricate structures, with little room to facilitate and manage the associated works within the proposed confines of the projected development (Wideman, 1990, Remington et al., 2007). These factors coupled with the ever increasing burdens of reduced project program durations, coupled with the need for increased personnel management, lead to an amplified burden on the health and safety concerns of those made accountable for ensuring project completion (Winch, 2009).

With the ever increasingly complex designs and countless materials required to construct these often intricate structures, endless quantities of materials are required at various times and in various locations, in order to complete a successful project. In the case of confined site construction, where space is a finite resource, effective management of materials on-site is becoming increasingly difficult (Thomas, et al., 2005). With the majority of construction projects, materials amount to between 5060% of the total contract cost (Song, et al., 2006), thus effective management is essential. Effective management of this resource can lead to a reduction in costs, resulting in a significant saving. Bell, et al., (1987) highlights that a potential 6% saving through effective materials management is achievable, yet Navon, et al., (2006) outlines that the construction industry invests only 0.15% in material management and control. Based on the possible savings that are achievable, the potential for more competitive tendering and increased profit margins are evident and becoming increasingly beneficial in the current economic climate.

Objective and Scope

The main objective of this paper is to highlight the various managerial issues in the management of materials on confined construction sites. In doing so, a number of issues are outlined along with documenting numerous strategies that may be adopted, to enable successful materials management where space is a limited resource. For the purpose of clarity, material management within the constructed structure and beyond the bounds of the site are not discussed. Due to the broad nature of the topic, materials management software is also omitted from this paper.

Literature Review
The literature review covers two categories in which the study was conducted. The first covering the managerial issues, the second covering the managerial strategies to the management of materials on confined construction sites.

Material Management Managerial Issues

On analysing the numerous writings on the management of materials in construction, many writers (Formoso , et al., 2002; Oglesby, et al., 1989; Li, et al., 2001; Tommelein, et al., 1991) have sought to detail the effects site layout have on both materials and there waste. Thomas, et al., (2005) identifies that material wastage amounts to a daily reduction in productivity of up to forty percent. Perttula, et al., (2003) also identifies that the surrounding environment has a significant effect on the management of materials and the associated level of accidents that occur. The constraints identified by Perttula, et al., (2003) are many, but the more significant constraint identified is the surrounding environment and its sporadic nature On reading several of these articles, many of the writers have stated the significant importance to both of these areas to that of the site layout. Those writing on waste (Thomas, et al 2005; Sanad, et al., 2008) highlight the significance of the on-site layout and many attribute it to one of the leading factors of waste on building sites today. But in contrast to this area of study, many of the researchers highlight that it is the larger sites that pose the biggest problems due to the long distances for which materials must be transported, coupled with the additional burden of monitoring materials. Many fail to take the aspect of confined sites into consideration when looking at material wastage, under such headings as; Lack of adequate storage space, Lack of adequate room for the effective handling of materials, Damage occurring due to poor material management, and Lack of adequate room to account for materials. Materials becoming buried on-site.

Although there is an abundance of literature on the management of materials on-site, little is given on the management of sites where space is a finite resource requiring extensive management. This is a topic of considerable importance, particularly where space is a limited factor. Thomas, et al., (2005) identifies that effective management of such aspects as delivery, off-loading, storage, handling, on-site transportation and on-site utilisation of materials is essential to the overall success of any development, but this is even more accurate in the case of a confined construction site. On analysing the various literatures on materials and there effective management, little by way of information or clarity is given with regards space restrictions and the management of materials on-site.

Material Management Managerial Strategies

The effective management of materials both prior to and when delivered to site is fundamental to the success of any development. In cases where this process is made more difficult, that is, where space to accommodate these deliveries is limited, this process becomes even more important. Thomas, et al., (2005) identifies that there is a necessity to divide the site into three areas for the allocation of materials and effectively manage each of these areas as necessary. Through the effective management of a combination of these storage areas, management can effectively supervise the delivery and allocation of materials on-site. This is further emphasised by Hendrickson, (2008) who identifies the benefits of a materials management system on-site.

The use of particular management techniques within the construction industry is wide and varied. One of the better know techniques is the implementation of Just-In-Time delivery. On reviewing the many journals and publications written on this topic within the construction industry, many only made comparisons of the construction industry with that of the automotive industry, where the principles of just-in-time delivery were first established. This is evident in such articles as drafted by Ballard, et al., (2008) where he makes comparisons with the automotive industry but give little insight into its uses with regards construction sites and the ever changing requirements. Akintoye (1995), identifies the application and implementation of Just-In-Time management of building materials and encompasses total business management under the realm of Just-In-Time materials management.

This technique is essential in the management of material, especially in cases where the availability of space is limited, as in the case of restricted sites. Various articles have been penned with the emphasis on just-in-time delivery, but none of which detail its importance within the realm of confined site construction. Opfer (1998) illustrates the principles of just in time construction materials management, but the considerable benefits to sites of a confined nature are over look by this and many authors on the subject (Harris 2006; Ballard, et al., 1995; Fang 2004; Thomas, et al., 2005).

A solution being utilised more prominently in the last number of years is pre-fabrication and preassembly. Due to the limited space on-site for the delivery, storage, assembly and transportation to the job face, in some cases it is more beneficial to acquire the components delivered to site pre-assembled.

A vast array of authors all identify and acknowledge the benefits of pre-fabrication and pre-assembly in construction projects (Ballard, et al., 1995; Yeung et al., 2005; Hass et al., 2000; Alistair 1999). Yeung, et al., (2005) continues by identifying the benefits of prefabrication and to the fore is that of the space saving characteristics of prefabrication due to the reduced requirement to store and manage excessive amounts of material on-site.

Once materials are successfully delivered to site, they must be accommodated within the bounds of the site or storied appropriately. The overall site layout is critical to the success of this aspect of materials management. Chudley, et al., (2006) highlights this point by outlining the importance of a well designed site layout and its effects on material management. Material storage areas must be located close to off-loading areas and yet in close proximity to the works area. Harris, et al., (2006) outlines the importance of material management on-site, including the importance of correct material storage.

Another area within the realm of materials management is waste management. The American Institute of Architects (1994) gives a brief but concise insight into the management of construction materials and its effect on the management of its resulting waste. This topic is critical due to the limited space on-site, therefore any excess material or waste material is occupying space that could be better allocated to tasks requiring the allotted space.

Research Methodology
On conducting research into the topic proposed, an in-depth literature review was undertaken, to ascertain all of the various managerial issues and the numerous managerial strategies to the management of confined site construction. For the purpose of this study, a confined construction site is defined as a site where the building footprint occupies in excess of 90% of the development site, within the limits of the site boundary.

An extensive interview procedure followed, so that an exhaustive list of managerial issues and resulting strategies to materials management, within a confined construction site, were included for discussion. The interview process encompassed three interviews from three on-site professionals from three separate case studies adopted. In total, twelve interviewees were approached, with an average of fifteen years experience within the project management profession.

From the literature review and the interviews from the case studies, the results are combined and ranked, on the basis of the interviewees assessment, to gauge the prevalence and importance of the various factors highlighted. From these factors identified, possible conclusions and implication for the industry can be identified.

Analysis
To highlight the underlying prevalence of the various managerial issues and strategies to the management of materials within confined construction sites, a qualitative analysis was conducted. This qualitative analysis encompassed three separate case studies, located in Ireland, England and the United States of America. Each of the case studies was chosen due to the noted difficulty in the management of the various resources due to the increased spatial restrictions present on-site. Each of the interviewees approached highlighted that there was a need for increased managerial intervention in the management of the available space on-site due to the limited space available. Within each of these case studies conducted, three individuals from each project were interviewed and questioned in relation to their relevant confined construction site. From the data obtained along with the information retrieved from the literature review, it was then possible to gauge the prevalence and significance of the various factors highlighted. The following table illustrates the order of importance, the various issues highlighted, as perceived by those interviewed.

Managerial Issues
1. 2. Lack of adequate storage space Workplace becoming over-crowded

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Lack of adequate room for the effective handling of materials Difficult to transport materials around site Lack of available space on-site to facilitate the effective storage and removal of material waste from site The increased difficulty in getting large material deliveries onto site Damage occurring due to confined space in which materials are to be handled The storage space for materials on-site is not sufficient, resulting in poor quality materials Increased security risks due to the lack of adequate space to safely facilitate the storage of materials

10. Lack of adequate room to account for materials. Materials becoming buried on-site

Table 1 Material management issues on confined construction sites The table illustrates, in order of importance, the numerous managerial issues highlighted from the literature review and the case studies undertaken, as perceived by the interviewees questioned. The leading issues are discussed, as follows;

Lack of storage space The first issue that came to the fore is the lack of adequate storage space. Thomas, et al., (2005) identifies storage as the first step in materials management. Thomas, et al., (1989) continues by identifying that failure to accommodate materials results in poor productivity and waste. Enshassi, et al., (2007) also outlines the effect of unsuitable storage locations, as a leading factor in labour productivity, thereby indicating that not only is the presence of adequate storage space essential, but correctly located storage is also a factor in the overall productivity within a project. Sanders, et al., (1991) continues by highlighting the negative effect of inadequate/inappropriate material storage on masonry productivity through identifying that the storage of materials can have a positive or negative effect on the productivity of masonry crews on a construction project.

Thomas, et al., (2006) outlines that mismanagement of material storage is a leading factor in spatial congestion and as a result, reduced levels of productivity on a construction project. Resulting from this, the lack of adequate storage space is directly linked to inadequate spatial management, particularly where space is a limited resource, as is the case in confined construction sites.

Horman, et al., (2005) indicates that ensuring an adequate stockpile of materials on-site is essential in the management of production. Where there is a lack of storage space, this inventory may become compromised, resulting in further negative results in productivity and materials .management.

Overcrowded workplace The second issue highlighted is that of an overcrowded workplace. Thomas, et al., (2006) highlights this issue with congested work areas and concludes that congestion and overcrowding on construction sites is directly correlated to poor project productivity. Horman, et al., (2005) continues by indicating that an overcrowded construction site leads to double handling of materials, again, reducing productivity and increasing damage to materials. Inadequate management of materials through over allocation also has been identified as impeding progress, workflow and overall productivity, due to over crowding the limited work space available (Horman, et al., 2005).

Poon, et al., (2004) outlines that in the nature of confined sites, material waste may increase. Bossink, et al., (1996) estimates that on average, 1 to 10% of materials entering site, leave site as waste, due to improper management. Formoso, et al., (2002) may consider this estimate conservative as he reports the range of material waste to fall between 2-15%. Formoso, et al., (2002) also highlights that the total building waste in urban areas is reported to be as much as 30%; an environment which is predominantly characterised by confined construction sites.

Lack of adequate room for the effective handling of materials The third material management issue is that of a lack of room to handle materials. Resulting from this, materials become damaged; require double handling and are misplaced, due to inadequate management of the limited available space on-site. This, as outlined by Jang, et al., (2003), may be classified and detailed under the title of material flow. In a study conducted by Jang, et al., (2003), material flow management was classified as the second most important critical factors in project managements level of satisfaction in construction logistics.

Mitropoulos, et al., (2005a), explains that inadequate working conditions leads to increased material handling, resulting in possible injury to personnel. Mitropoulos, et al., (2005b) also outlines that the unpredictability generates hazardous situations results in chaos and confusion.

Furthermore, Elbeltagi, et al., (2004) outlines the benefit of an effective site layout to contribute to the flow of materials, through providing adequate spatial considerations. This is highlighted further where adequate planning is required to avoid excessive movement of materials on-site, thereby, reducing the probability of double handling materials in adverse conditions. Thomas, et al., (2002) concludes by explaining that Any interruption to the normal flow of materials will result in causing serious degradations on performance and labour productivity. Resulting from this, it can be concluded that inadequate room for the effective handling of materials is a significant issue in materials management in confined site environments.

Managerial Strategies
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. The utilisation of pre-fabrication and pre-assembly of materials prior to reaching site Providing adequate storage of materials on-site The utilisation of space scheduling so as to maximise the usage of the available space The use of Kanban or Just-In-Time delivery techniques to minimise the volume of materials on-site The effective design site layout so as to aid in the management of materials on-site Implementation of a materials management program to assist in the movement/storage of materials on-site Implement a traffic management program to aid in the overall management of the construction process Executing a traffic management plan to aid in the movement of materials on-site The effective management of material waste on-site

10. The installation of tower cranes on-site to aid in the movement of materials 11. The installation of material hoists on-site to aid in the movement of materials

Table 2 Material management strategies on confined construction sites The second table illustrates, in order of importance, the numerous managerial strategies highlighted from the literature review and the case studies undertaken, as perceived by the interviewees questioned. The leading strategies will be discussed, as follows;

Pre-Fabrication and Pre-Assembly The leading strategy highlighted in the effective materials management on confined construction sites is pre-fabrication and pre-assembly. Egan, (1998) outlined the need to improve the construction industry in a number of areas with pre-fabrication being one of these areas. Leading authors (Yeung, et al., 2005; Blismas, et al., 2006; Gibb, 2001) all highlight the importance of such a technique in relation to materials management. The leading benefit was identified as savings in space allocated to materials storage. Due to the reduced material storage requirements, more space is made available to other tasks which require additional spatial considerations. Blismas et al., (2006) summarises the benefits of pre-fabrication and pre-assembly through time, cost, quality, productivity, people and process groupings. Through pre-fabrication techniques, the time spent locating various materials on-site are removed, therefore making the process more productive. Bell, et al., (1987) reported that material management foremen often exceed 20% of their time in locating material on-site and an additional 10% of their time tracking purchase orders. Through substituting traditional material purchasing with pre-assembly, this non-productive time is reduced dramatically.

Providing adequate storage of materials on-site Effective storage of materials on-site is essential to the overall productivity of personnel on-site. Inadequate storage leads to congested workspaces, where space is a limited factor, resulting in significantly reduced productivity (Thomas, et al., 2006). To over come such issues, management must ensure that adequate storage space is assigned for the various material requirements. Providing sufficient storage arrangements coincide directly with the design site layout, which invariably occurs prior to commencing on-site. It is at this stage that storage space for the various materials required, are accommodated. Elbeltagi, et al., (2004) outlines that where specific site layouts are not considered prior to commencing on-site, the possibility of increased material waste and extra handling/double handling is more likely to occur.

Space Scheduling

Space scheduling aids in the management of materials and the available space on-site. Elbeltagi, et al., (2004) outlines that space scheduling optimises the site layout paying particular attention to the interrelationship of the other facilities on-site. Resulting from this, on-site storage is critically accessed and located accordingly, to benefit the end user on-site, thereby, reducing travel distances, improper/inadequate storage and incorrectly located storage facilities. Elbeltagi, et al., (2004) continues by indicating that effective space scheduling and materials management will incur an initial cost but inevitable result in greater direct cost and time savings over the duration of a project.

Winch, et al., (2006) furthers outlines the importance of space scheduling and materials management by indicating that materials management is one of the core task execution spaces requiring attention in construction project planning. This is further illustrated when analysed in comparison with spatial loading, where the ratio of available space and the required space is compared. The following figure illustrates the space capacity factor, as taken from Thabet, et al., (1994); =

If the space capacity factor remains at 1 or above, the work area is not congested and productivity is said to be at 100%. If this figure falls below 1, it is said that the work area is congested due to the need for space surpassing the available space (Thabet, et al., 1994).

Just-In-Time Delivery Techniques Opfer, (1998) defines Just-In-Time materials management simply as ensuring materials only arrive to site just as they are needed. The benefits of Just-In-Time delivery techniques are widely acknowledged but seldom practiced, mainly due to the intricate and diverse nature of the construction industry (Ballard, et al., 1995). The benefits of just-in-time materials management are significant; especially where the space required for the materials is greater than the space available on-site. Furthermore, significant savings in both monetary and time may be gained through Just-In-Time delivery, through saving on double handling and minimising accommodating large quantities of materials that are required at a later date (Bertelsen, et al., 1997).

Poppendieck, (2000) details that Just-In-Time not only organises the materials management of a project but co-ordinates the overall flow of work and the associated materials required rather than assess individual work packages and there corresponding needs.

Discussion
As many of the authors outline, materials management is core to the successful management of a construction project (Kini, 1999; Formoso, et al., 2002). Where environments are restricted as in the case of confined construction sites, the difficulty and importance of materials management increases significantly due to the numerous issues outlined. Bibby, (2009) emphasizes that, contra to belief, urban areas within the United Kingdom are not increasing but much of the new developments are being built within the existing urban environment. Furthermore, Biddy (2009) outlines that the transformation of green field sites to development land is estimated at five thousand hectares per annum, a drop of two thirds compared to 1975. This has been aided by government policies that are encouraging inner city development of brown field sites and thus, increasing the urban density of many cities around the country. Home (2009) points out that the United Kingdom is also one of the most populated countries in the world, with a population density of 246 people per square kilometre. The increasing number of urban developments suggests that confined site construction is rapidly becoming the norm within the industry. Therefore, confined site construction must be acknowledged as an important aspect of project management in todays modern construction industry and therefore given adequate research to effectively manage this spatially restricted environment accordingly.

Implication for Practice

Due to the increasingly confined nature in which many of todays projects are located, it is to the benefit of all concerned to acknowledge the numerous issues outlined and manage these issues accordingly through utilising one or more of the proposed strategies highlighted in this study. Based on the research conducted, through exploiting a number of these strategies, there are significant financial and programme benefits present, to help ensure that a project whose environment mirrors that of a confined construction site, may be completed successfully.

Conclusions and Recommendations

On analysing the numerous writings on the increasing urban development trends, both in the United Kingdom and around the world, the reality of confined site construction becoming the norm is quickly becoming a reality for the majority of developers and project managers around the globe. Based on the

extensive literature review conducted and the opinions of the interviewees from the case studies, the issues and strategies to the effective management of materials on confined construction sites are many and diverse. Through analysing the results of the issues highlighted, it is evident that effective management is to the core of the majority of the issues highlighted. Though identifying the numerous issues and counteracting these issues with one or more of the strategies outlined, project management professionals can successfully manage the countless materials required in these restricted site environments.

As identified, urban development is quickly becoming the norm within the built environment, resulting in sites that are spatially challenging for all concerned. To acknowledge and understand these restricted environments, it is recommended that further research be conducted into spatial management and confined site construction within urban areas, to distinguish and counteract the issues identified and formulate appropriate strategies to aid in the management of confined site construction.

References
Akintoye, A. (1995) Just-In-Time Application and Implication for Building Material Management Journal of Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp 105-114. Alistair, G., F., G. (1999) Off-Site Fabrication: Prefabrication, Pre-assembly and Modularisation 3rd Ed. John Wiley and Sons. American Institute of Architects (1994) Construction Materials Management Guidelines For Economy and Ecology in Design and Construction AIA Houston for the Governors Energy Office Ballard, G. and Howell, G. (1995) Towards Construction JIT Proceedings of the 1995 ARCOM Conference, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Sheffield, England Ballard, G and Howell, G. (2008) Toward Construction JIT Lean Construction Journal, Lean Construction Institute, Issue 1 Bell, L. C. and Stukhart, G. (1987) Cost and Benefits of Materials Management Systems Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 113, No. 2, pp 222-234. Bertelsen, S. and Nielsen, J. (1997) Just-In-Time Logistics in the Supply of Building Materials 1st International Conference on Construction Industry Development: Building the future Together, Singapore Biddy, P. (2009) Land Use in Britain Land Use policy, Vol. 26, No.1, pp 2-13 Blismas, N., Pasquire, C. and Gibb, A. (2006) Benefit Evaluation for off-site production in Construction Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp 121130 Chudley, R. and Greeno, R. (2006) Advanced Construction Technology 4th Ed UK, Pearson Education. Dixon, T. (2009) Urban Land and Property Ownership Patterns in the UK: Trends and Forces for Change. Land Use Policy, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp 43-53. Egan, J. (1998) Accelerating Change A report by the strategic forum for construction - Chaired by Sir John Egan The report of the Construction Task Force to the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, on the scope for improving the quality and efficiency of UK construction, Strategic forum for construction, Department of trade and Industry, Crown Copyright. England. Elbeltagi, E., Hegazy, T. and Eldosouky, A. (2004) Dynamic Layout of Construction Temporary Facilities Considering Safety Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 130, No. 4, pp 534-541. Ellis, M. (2002) Regional Land Values - The price of residential land for sale in the UK has increased a staggering eight-fold over the last 20 years Fang, T, Hg, S. T. and Skitmore, R. M. (2004) Modelling the Logistics of Construction Materials through the Peri Net Techniques QUT Facilities and Division Formoso, C. T., Soibelman, L., De Cesare, C. and Isatto, E. L. (2002) Material Waste in Building Industry: Main Causes and Prevention Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. Vol. 128, No. 4, pp. 316-325. Gibb, A. (2001) Standardization and Pre-Assembly Distinguishing Myth from Reality using Case Study Research Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp 307315

Haas, C., OConnor, J., T., Tucker, R., L., Eickmann, J., A. and Fagerlund, W., R. (2000) Prefabrication and Pre assembly Trends and Effects on the Construction Workforce Centre for Construction Industry Studies, Report Number 14, The University of Texas, Austin, USA. Harris, F., McCaffer, R. and Edum-Fotwe, F. (2006) Modern Construction Management 6th Ed. England, Wiley-Blackwell Hendrickson, C. (2008) Project Management for Construction Version 2.2 Prentice Hall, Pittsburgh, PA, USA Home, R. (2009) Land Ownership in the United Kingdom: Trends, Preferences and Future Challenges Land Use policy, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp 103-108. Horman, M. J. and Thomas, R. H. (2005) Role of Inventory Buffers in Construction Labour Performance Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 131, No. 7, pp 834 843. Jang, H., Russell, J. S. and Yi, J. S. (2003) A Project Managers Level of Satisfaction in Construction Logistics Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of WisconsinMadison, 2320 Engineering Hall, 1415 Enineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706, U.S.A. Published on the NRC Research Press Web site. Li, Z, Anson, M. and Li, G., (2001) A Procedure for Quantitatively Evaluating Site Layout Alternatives Construction Management and Economics, Vol 19, No. 5, pp 449-467 Mitropoulos, P., Howell, G. A. and Abdelhamid (2005a) Accident Causation Strategies: Causation Model and Research Objectives American Association of Civil Engineers - Construction Research Congress 2005. Mitropoulos, P., Abdelhamid, T. S. and Howell, G. A. (2005b) Systems Model of Construction Accident Causation Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 131, No. 7, pp 816825. Navon, R. and Berkovich, O. (2006) An Automated Model for Materials Management and Control Construction Management and Economics, Vol 24, No. 6, pp 635646 Oglesby, C.H., Parker, H.W., and Howell, G.A. (1989) Productivity Improvement in Construction McGraw-Hill Inc, New York, NY Opfer, N. (1998) Just-In-Time Construction Materials Management AACE International Transactions, Morgantown, PC05.1, pp10-15 Perttula, P., Merjama, J., Kiurula, M. and Laitinen, H. (2003) Accidents in Materials Handling at Construction Sites Journal of Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp 729-736. Poon, C. S., Yu, A. T. W., Wong, S. W. and Cheung, E. (2004) Management of Construction Waste in Public Housing Projects in Hong Kong Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 22 No.7, pp 675689. Poppendieck, M. (2000) The Impact of Logistics Innovations on Project Management Proceedings of Project Management Institute Seminars & Symposium, Houston, Texas, Copyright Poppendieck, pp 1-7. Remington, K. and Pollack, J. (2007) Tools for Complex Projects Gower publishing limited. 2007.

Sanad, H. M., Ammar, M. A., Ibrahim, M. (2008) Optimal Construction Site Layout considering Safety and Environment Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 134, No. 7, pp 536-544. Sanders, S. T. and Thomas, R. T. (1991) Factors Affecting Masonry-Labour Productivity Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 117, No. 4, pp 626-644. Singer, B. (2002) Building on Confined Sites Poses Construction Challenges BNET United Kingdom Real Estate Weekly. Song, J., Haas, C. T. and Caldas, C. H. (2006) Tracking the Location of Materials on Construction Job Sites Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 132, No. 9, pp 911-918. Thomas, H. R., Riley, D. R. and Messner, J. I. (2005) Fundamental Principles of Site Material Management Journal of Construction Engineering and Management Vol. 131, No. 7, pp 808815. Thomas, H. R. and Riley, D. R. (2006) Fundamental Principles for Avoiding Congested Work Areasa Case Study. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp 197-205. Thomas, H. R., Sanvido, V. E., and Sanders, S. R. (1989). Impact of Material Management on Productivity a Case Study Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 115, No. 3, pp 370384 Tindiwensi, D. (2000) Integration of Buildability Issues in Construction Projects in Developing Economies Department of Civil Engineering, Makerere University P. O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda. Tommelein, I.D., Levitt, R.E., Hayes-Roth, B. and Confrey, T. (1991) "SightPlan experiments: alternate strategies for site layout design" Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp 42-63. United Nations (2008) Urban Agglomerations, 2007 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, New York, NY, USA. Winch, G. M. and North, S. (2006) Critical Space Analysis Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 132, No. 5, pp 473-481. Wideman, R. M. (1990) Total Project Management of Complex Projects Improving Performance with Modern Techniques Presentation to the Construction Industry in the cities of Bangalore, Bombay, Calcutta, Madras and New Delhi on behalf of the Consultancy Development Centre New Delhi, India. Winch, G. (2009) Managing Construction Projects: An Information Processing Approach John Wiley and Sons. Yeung, N. S. Y., Chan, A .P. C. and Chan, D. W. M. (2005) Application of Prefabrication in Construction A New Research Agenda for Reform by CII-HK Proceedings of the Conference on Precast Concrete Building Systems, 26-27 November 2002, Hong Kong, Paper No. 3.