Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
1Executive Summary Two critical factors that contribute to inefficiencies in the transportation project development process are the lack of accurate, complete information about utility facilities that might be in conflict with the project and the resolution and overall management of those conflicts. Inaccu- rate or incomplete information about utility facilities in conflict with the project can result in a variety of problems: ⢠Disruptions when utility installations are encountered unexpectedly during construction, either because there was no previous information about those installations or because their stated location on the construction plans was incorrect; ⢠Damage to utility installations, which can disrupt utility service, damage the environment, and endanger the health and safety of construction workers and the public; and ⢠Delays that can extend the period of project development or delivery and increase total project costs. The traditional approach for resolving utility conflicts at many state departments of transpor- tation (DOTs) is to relocate the affected utility facilitiesâoften at great expense to the utility owner or the DOT or both. Relocating a utility facility is not necessarily the only or best strategy to resolve a utility conflict. Other strategies include designing and constructing the transporta- tion facility in such a way as to leave the affected utility facilities in place. Utility conflict matrices (UCMs) enable users to organize, track, and manage utility conflicts. Practices involving the use of UCMs vary widely across the country. There is a need to document these practices and develop optimized UCM concepts and techniques that can contribute to standardization and optimization of the utility coordination process. SHRP 2 Renewal Project R15B addressed this need in the following ways: ⢠Reviewing trends around the country and identifying the best practices on the use of UCMs; ⢠Developing and testing a standardized UCM concept; ⢠Developing training materials; and ⢠Developing implementation guidelines. The products resulting from this research include the following: ⢠Prototype stand-alone UCM (Prototype 1). This is a stand-alone product in Microsoft Excel format that includes a main utility conflict table and a supporting worksheet to analyze utility conflict resolution strategies. ⢠Prototype utility conflict data model and database (Prototype 2). This stand-alone product is a scalable UCM representation that enables the management of utility conflicts in a database
2environment. To facilitate implementation, the research team used industry-standard proto- cols for the development of the data model (including a logical model, a physical model, and a data dictionary). The data model is in AllFusion ERwin Data Modeler format, which can be easily exported to databases such as Oracle and SQL Server. The prototype data model and the corresponding database in Microsoft Access format were tested using data from sample utility conflict tables from across the country. ⢠Hands-on UCM training course. This stand-alone product includes a lesson plan and presenta- tion materials to assist with the dissemination of research findings. The 1-day UCM training course is divided into six lessons, designed for a total of 7 hours and 15 minutes of instruction. The seminar provides numerous opportunities for participant interaction and enables the instructor to adjust session and lesson start times and durations depending on the audience and the level of participant engagement in the discussions. The training materials use National Highway Institute (NHI) standards and templates. ⢠Implementation guidelines. This product contains strategies and an implementation plan to promote application of the research products (see Chapter 7). The implementation guidelines address topics such as audience or market for the products, assessment of impediments to successful implementation, research product leaders (or champions), activities necessary for successful implementation, and criteria for judging the progress and consequences of imple- mentation. The implementation plan includes a series of specific steps to start and continue the implementation of the research products, including identifying an implementation team, providing UCM training courses, and specific activities in connection with the implementa- tion of both prototypes. The audience for the research products is the stakeholders who are involved in utility coordi- nation throughout the development process of transportation projects. Because utility conflicts can affect transportation projects from project concept to project completion, the expected audience for the research products is potentially large. This audience includes three main groups of stakeholders: ⢠Public sector (project owners). Agencies that may be interested in the research products include the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), state DOTs, and local public agencies (cities and counties). Within these agencies, interested groups include those responsible for transporta- tion planning, environmental clearance, preliminary design, right-of-way acquisition, utility activities, design (including plans, specifications, and estimates), and construction. Project owners are expected to play various roles with respect to the research products, including user, developer, manager, and steward. ⢠Private sector (consultants and contractors). Groups that may be interested in the research prod- ucts include design consultants, utility consultants, subsurface utility engineering consultants, highway contractors, and utility contractors involved in utility coordination activities between conflict elimination stakeholders. Consultants and contractors are expected to play a user role, although, depending on their relationship with project owners, they could also be developers or managers. ⢠Utility owners. Groups that may be interested in the research products include owners and oper- ators of privately, publicly, or cooperatively owned utility facilities or systems. Utility owners are expected to play a user role.
