John Overman

Strategies to Address Utility Challenges in Project Development

Streamlined project delivery is one of the main goals of transportation agencies nationwide to achieve a more efficient and more effective transportation system. Many factors can cause delays while transportation projects are being developed and constructed. A critical factor contributing to inefficiencies is the lack of adequate information about utility facilities that may be affected by a transportation project. This lack results in problems such as unplanned environmental corrective actions and unanticipated utility relocation activities during construction. These unplanned activities cause frequent delays during construction, can increase the impact of construction on motorists and society, and may exacerbate the cost of the project. This paper summarizes the results of research conducted to evaluate the feasibility of (a) obtaining more-reliable existing utility data during preliminary design and coordinating this activity with the environmental process and (b) increasing the level of definition of components during preliminary design without affecting environmental requirements so as to support the earlier application of utility processes. The analysis resulted in 10 optimization strategies that addressed a variety of environmental and utility issues. The researchers also developed a highly detailed business process diagram that integrated environmental and utility functions, with a specific emphasis on the preliminary design phase. To facilitate access to model information, the researchers developed a web-based tool called TxDOT Business Process Explorer, which can be accessed remotely or at a local or networked computer drive.

Effective Project Scoping Practices to Improve On-Time and On-Budget Delivery of Highway Projects

This guidebook demonstrates how a state transportation agency (STA) can improve its project scoping process (PSP) and practices to produce a project cost estimate and schedule that facilitate programming decision making and accountability. It illustrates the effort needed to develop a robust cost estimate and then manage to a baseline budget and scope throughout the project delivery cycle. The guidebook consists of two parts. Part 1, “Research Results about the PSP,” addresses the following issues: why STAs should formalize the PSP; current practices for PSP; and how agencies can implement an effective PSP. Part 2, “Implementation Guidelines,” provides an easy-to-understand layout and describes how to implement the PSP. The guidelines are divided into three sections. Each section details one of the three major activities of the PSP—develop the project, analyze the alternatives and document findings, and develop the recommended alternative. The guidelines also have two appendices. The first appendix summarizes the tools that can be used while performing different activities in the scope development process. The second appendix is the list of online links to various resources and tools to support the PSP, as referenced in this guidebook.