Utility-Related Research

This website hosts a repository of ongoing and completed utility and right-of-way(ROW) research products.  These products include local, state, national, and international works by an assortment of researchers. If you have works that should be included here, please contact Roy Sturgill (sturgill@iatstate.edu).  

Another source of utility and ROW research, is the TRB Snap Search found here: https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/snap/RightofWayUtilitiesOutdoorAdvertising.pdf

Utility-Related TRB Synthesis Projects.

Utility-Related TRB Research Projects.

Table 4.  Utility-Related FHWA Research Projects.

Table 5.  Damage Prevention-Related PHMSA Research Projects.

Table 5.  Utility-Related Volpe National Transportation Systems Center Research Projects.

Table 6. Utility-Related State-Level Research Projects.

1. Longitudinal Occupancy of Controlled Access Right-of-Way by Utilities – Synthesis 224

Issues included in the survey were policies and experiences regarding user and worker safety; controls placed on utilities; exceptions to right-of-way policies; and operational, legal, and equity issues.

1. Utility Location and Highway Design – Synthesis 405

Further research needs identified:

1. Addressing Utilities on Design-Build Projects. Identifying the variances, pros and cons, and case studies may provide guidance for DOTs on future design-build projects.
2. Standards for Utility “As-Builting” During Installation. There are no consistent standards for creating a certified record drawing of a utility installation. Identifying the variances, costs, and ROI will assist DOTs and other organizations in creating standards for as-builting. (Possibly covered in part in SHRP 2 R-01 (A))
3. Developing Effective Utility Relocation Cost Databases. A study of effective methods to create a system for obtaining and maintaining utility relocation costs for DOTs that do not currently have one. Needs include the costs to create the system and necessary updating frequencies required for maintaining the system.
4. Integrating Utility Relocation Cost Databases with Three-Dimensional Modeling of Utility Conflicts. The ability to create and query databases in GIS systems will allow for integration of cost-relocation databases with conflict analysis.
5. Analysis of Condition Assessment with Relocation Decisions. A tool on how to assess condition, the frequency of inspection points if exposure is the best method, and the cost-benefits of such a tool will assist DOTs in their decision to relocate or design to accommodate an existing utility.
6. Evaluating Performance of Utilities When Relocation is to a Geotechnically or Seismically Suspect Area. Developing existing cost data and a decision tool will assist DOTs and utility owners in Identifying whether relocating a utility may be to a potentially unsuitable location for soils or geotechnical performance. Quantifying its short- and long-term implications for a utility may influence the decision to relocate it.
7. Factoring in the Cost of Protective Measures When Utilities Are Not Relocated Away from Construction Areas. A catalogue of protective measures and their costs may assist DOTs in the total cost of relocation will assist in relocation decisions.

1. Managing Longitudinal Utility Installations on Controlled Access Highway Right-of-Way – Synthesis 462

Areas of potential research needs:

1. Review current practices and provide guidance on the use of electric transmission lines on controlled access ROW. DOTs have little guidance for dealing with longitudinal utility installations of electric transmission lines. They would benefit from research related to encroachment into state ROW air space and compensation for tree/vegetation removal.
2. Access the use of renewable energy sources on controlled access of ROW. State DOT officials’ responses suggest these projects will increase in the future and assessment of DOT plans and developments would be useful.
3. Develop guidance for state DOTs interested in the development of policies for accommodating renewable energy projects in the highway ROW. Few state utility accommodation policies specifically address renewable energy facilities for energy generation and energy distribution/transmission.
4. Assessment and valuation of occupying controlled access ROW. There are difficulties in determining a value for the longitudinal occupation of controlled access ROW. Would benefit from resolution of special property rights cases.
5. Utility owner perspective. It would be useful to review the perspective of different types of utility owners.
6. Guidance for variances and exceptions. State DOTs offer no common definition, procedure, threshold, or parameters, for an extreme hardship and each state addresses the issue slightly differently. The lack of clarity could be an issue for nationwide utilities that qualify for an exception in one state but not another.
7. Purchase of ROW for utility relocations. It would be useful to determine which states have this ability, which conditions need to be met, which challenges are not addressed, and whether the policy has been a useful tool for the state.
8. Innovative practices to deal with safety requirements. Researches could survey DOTs to identify innovative practices and strategies to reduce safety issues associated with utility installations.

1. Effective Utility Coordination: Application of Research and Current Practices

1. Subsurface Utility Engineering Information Management for Airports – Synthesis 34
   1. Increase awareness and training on SUE practices. A guidebook would be helpful in helping airport staff and consultants gain a better understanding of effective SUE practices including lessons learned, research, and work completed by others.

Research Needs:

1. Integration of utility mapping with geotechnical investigations. Utilities interfere with these geotechnical investigations by contributing to energy fields in the regions decreasing the accuracy of the interpretations. Identifying applicable factors for investigation, coupled with a trial project or two to analyze results and costs savings, might be useful.
2. Development of SUE prequalification criteria. Airports may benefit from research into prequalification checklists and other materials.
3. Standard scopes of work for utility mapping. Research into a standardized scope of work for utility mapping that shows mandatory items along with optional items may be useful for airports.
4. Cost guidelines. Because SUE services are often required during design, the typical percentages of overall project design costs will also help airports assess the amount of money SUE services will require.
5. Development of a utility data model. Research into development of an airport industry data model or standard that is compatible with FAA, ASCE, and other relevant guidelines may be useful to airports.
6. Improved CADD–GIS interoperability. Research into airport CADD–GIS exchange standards and/or nonproprietary data formats would be helpful to airports.
7. Development of a metadata profile. Research into an airport metadata profile may describe the source, method of collection, quality level, date or validity of the data collected, and feature level of existing subsurface utilities.
8. Integrating utilities into the project development process for airports. Other transportation sectors have developed a multitude of flow charts, coordination checklists, design criteria, utility avoidance strategies, and other items that can be incorporated into a project’s planning, design, and construction process. Research into developing such an application to airports may be useful.

1. Successful Practices for Utility Coordination in Transit Projects

Research Needs:

1. Effective utility investigation protocols for transit projects. Research could help transit agencies become more familiar with the ASCE 38-02 standard. It should include the reasons the standard is not frequently used by transit agencies, a risk assessment tool to help determine which investigation tool to use, and a utility investigation manual and training materials.
2. Improved methodology to identify and manage utility conflicts. Research should determine the reason and motivation behind the infrequent use of utility conflict matrices, document the benefits of using the matrices systematically, adapt the matrix approach developed in project SHRP 2 R15B, and develop and integrate a quantitative risk assessment tool for utility conflicts.
3. Templates and model master utility agreements. Assemble a document of most effective practices on how to develop and implement agreements with utility owners.
4. Framework and architecture for database of utility coordination and relocation costs in relation to total project costs. Having access to statistics on the capital expenditures on utility relocation would facilitate project planning and scoping, project cost monitoring, and risk management.
5. Effective practices for compliance with Buy America provisions. Assist transit agencies, utility owners, and federal regulators in implementing compliance with Buy America standards by documenting impacts on the different levels of the project, providing case studies outlining effective practices, and outlining potential changes to the current regulatory framework.
6. Guidelines for utility relocation practices in transit projects. Assemble currently available regulations and information on utility accommodation and relocation practices during transit projects and develop guidelines to help stakeholders navigate compliance with transit project regulations.
7. Utility coordination effective practices for different delivery methods. Document differences and effectiveness of various utility coordination procedures depending on the project’s delivery method.
8. Feasibility of a strategic transit research program. Identify a strategic road map addressing high profile, strategic highway issues regarding safety, renewal, reliability, and capacity. Apply lessons learned from SHRP 2 and use them to identify and resolve critical transit issues.

1. Avoiding Delays During the Construction Phase of Highway Projects

Future Research:

1. AASHTO should work with pipe manufacturers to develop a way to locate underground PVC pipe using existing geophysical technologies.
2. AASHTO and NCHRP should work together to develop rational methodologies for determining the “B” parameter in A + B bidding. The “B” parameter should vary depending on the classification of the project (i.e. Class 1, etc)
3. AASHTO should develop a manual of recommended practice relative to the time evaluation of design consultants.
4. Guidelines should be developed for when and how to relocate and protect underground utilities.
5. A common protocol should be developed for lessons-learned databases.
6. Standards of practice should be developed by AASHTO on how to review a project schedule, including choosing and modifying the type of schedule based on the project situation.
7. A training course on contracts and contract interpretation should be developed by the NCHRP. It should include how to interpret various clauses in the general conditions and effective contract administration.

1.  Improved Right-of-Way Procedures and Business Practices

Major Property Management Issues

1. Difficult to use database of information system documenting ROW assets
2. Illegal/unauthorized ROW encroachments
3. Difficulty in tracking and monitoring the use of property/ROW assets
4. Difficult to track permit applications (also NCHRP 20-07, Task 312)
5. Difficulty in tracking the disposal of surplus ROW interests

1.  Exploratory Analysis of Augmented Reality Visualization of Right-of-Way Excavation Safety
   1. The system has some additional technical challenges that need to be overcome before large scale deployment on actual construction sites. Future work is needed to identify the proper implementation of marker-based sensors in excavator pose estimation systems
   2. The use of multiple site-based cameras or multiple site-based markers for redundancy to ensure markers remain in the camera’s field of vision.

(10) Optimum Placement of Utilities within the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) R/W

a. It is recommended several potential improvements to the existing programs be considered for future expansion of effort:

1) It is likely that other software packages could be identified that contain relevant data as well as computational capabilities. Direct linkage to these packages may prove desirable and should be explored. Likewise, there may be databases that are directly accessible (presently or in the future), containing useful information, as for example archived unit cost data.

2) Other investigations may offer information and techniques relative to the present effort. For example, an area currently being explored is automated data storage regarding facilities locations.

3) As the software capabilities for optimal placement grow, it may be profitable to explore moving to a web based service for performing calculations. In addition to allowing more oversight of the type of work being requested, an in-house computational facility would also allow data capture and archiving.

4) Initial attempts to construct a permit program were successful but this effort will require further improvements and modifications. It is recommended that this effort receive high priority. Obviously, the development of such a package would include substantial testing, verification and documentation. Provisions should be made for long term maintenance and upgrades.

5) During the course of this investigation several issues were identified as potential problem areas and examined, but left unresolved, to be the subject of continued investigation. Some of the issues (which have not been mentioned elsewhere) include:

Inclusion of shoring slope angle (function of soil type)

Maintenance of traffic (modeling function required)

Non-circular facility conduits.

Default data for frequency of access

Relationship between search step size and installation tolerance

Vertical riser costs for above ground facilities

b. Investigation of advanced techniques for optimization

At several points in this report it was noted that one direction for the research had been chosen over another, especially regarding optimization and the methods of evaluating the cost function. There are several alternative methods that could be explored further. These methods are included in the general topics of advanced optimization algorithms (simulated annealing, Monte Carlo techniques, genetic algorithms, etc). Furthermore, there exist methods for handling uncertainty in the available data, including decision-making strategies, application of fuzzy logic, game theory and data mining. It is not obvious that these methods will lead directly to better methods for the current project but nonetheless the potential application of each should be considered. Any promising methods could also be incorporated into the user package described above. It should be noted that one step in this direction has already been taken by the investigators and that this effort has resulted in a Master’s thesis (as mentioned earlier).

c. Accidental damage data for cost function

As was pointed out in the body of this report, one of the least certain components of the cost modeling was that associated with the part of the cost function devoted to damage due to excavation. This part of the model could be improved by a separate study of incidence rates and cost associated with such damage and revisiting the underlying modeling assumptions. It is possible that better types of models could be developed, using statistical techniques. Before proceeding however, it would be wise to devote more effort in a sensitivity study of this parameter.

d. Constructability

One issue considered only briefly during this investigation is that of constructability, ensuring that the method and the timing of installation of a particular utility is compatible with other ongoing work as well as with previously installed facilities. Included in this issue are questions concerning

1) Location constraints: To what extent is stacking of facilities permitted?

Can vertical risers be rerouted when stacking is allowed? Is joint trenching encouraged and how is the cost function modified? How does flexibility in clearance constraints affect the final outcome?

2) Construction limitations: How are construction clearance rules modified by shoring? What is the effect of local obstructions on overall planning?

What are the consequences of installation in medians or under sidewalks?

How does the order of installation affect the attainment of optimal configurations?

3) Uncertainty of location of installed facilities: As discussed elsewhere, once a utility has installed facilities the location of these conduits is to a degree uncertain. Thus, during future construction events there exists a possibility of increased damage events. Furthermore, installation of additional facilities at planned locations may not be possible due to unplanned occupancy. The current approach to this problem is to enforce a zone of no construction, but such action may be wasting valuable resources. A combination of advanced locating techniques (subsurface utility engineering) and improved record keeping may reduce costs and improve corridor configurations.

e. Advanced strategies for installation

Although it may be possible to use the current software to approximate cost saving approaches to installation, the possibilities of common trenching or the benefits of undergrounding aerial electrical transmission lines has not been extensively considered here. Construction of the cost function including these and similar ideas will need to be reconsidered. Similar issues apply to totally specified configurations, in order to ensure that an optimum is attained.

f. Decomposition of overall installation into smaller sections

The software package as currently constituted can address sections of installation work along linear portions of the roadway. Modest horizontal curvature is allowed, but no provisions are made for intersections, conflicts or other situations that call for abrupt changes in the installation configuration (some consideration of routing around large conflict boxes was attempted).

Unfortunately most projects have at least some instances of these limitations.

Thus it is not possible to optimize the entire installation but only to sum the results for individual sections. Consideration should be given to this particular issue to ensure that an overall optimal configuration results.