Utility Management System Cost and Time Benefits and Implications from the Local Agency Perspective
Publication: Journal of Infrastructure Systems
Volume 22, Issue 1
Abstract
Utility management systems (UMSs) have become more common for government agencies, and their use has recently been advocated by AASHTO on a statewide basis. By identifying current utility locations and correlating utility-related information between ongoing and upcoming projects, UMSs can reduce the occurrence of unexpected delays and cost overruns resulting from unforeseen utility conflicts found during construction. This paper presents an analysis of a two-part survey of local agency professionals in the transportation industry, regarding perceptions of UMS cost and time benefits and implications associated with implementation. The paper evaluates two hypotheses regarding local agencies’ perception on two key areas: (1) impact of UMS cost and time implementation requirements on implementation decisions; and (2) difference in cost and time benefits and implications for different types of local agencies. The study finds that despite its obvious potential benefits, UMSs are not being widely implemented at the local level because the cost to adopt them is perceived to be high. Additionally, this study found opportunities for improvement that may considerably advance UMS practices.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
AASHTO. (2012). “Utility relocation electronic document management systems close-out report.” AASHTO Technology Implementation Group, Washington, DC.
AASHTO. (2014). “Utility relocation electronic document management system (UREDMS).” Washington, DC.
ASCE. (2002). “Standard guidelines for the collection and depiction of existing subsurface utility data.” ASCE C-I 38.02, ASCE Code and Standards Activity Committee, Reston, VA.
Boddy, R., and Smith, G. (2009). Statistical methods in practice for scientists and technologists, Wiley, Padstow, U.K.
Campbell, H. F. (2003). Benefit-cost analysis: Financial and economic appraisal using spreadsheets, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Collier, N., and Kranc, S. (1984). “Optimizing facilities placement and automating permit process for improved utility corridor development.” J. Transp. Res. Board, 151–158.
Furnham, A. (1986). “Response bias, social desirability and dissimulation.” Pers. Individual Differ., 7(3), 385–400.
Khogali, W. E. I., and Mohamed, H. (1999). “Managing utility cuts: Issues and considerations.” APWA Int. Public Works Congress, American Public Works Association, Kansas City, MO, 41–50.
Kraus, E., Li, Y., Overman, J., and Quiroga, C. (2013a). “Utility investigation best practices and effects on TxDOT highway improvement projects.”, Texas A&M Transportation Institute, College Station, TX.
Kraus, E., Quiroga, C., and Scott, C. P. (2013b). “Innovations in the use of utility conflict matrices to optimize project development and delivery.” Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1–21.
Lees, P., and Scott, P. (2002). “Avoiding utility relocations.”, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC.
Levene, H., Olkin, I., and Hotelling, H. (1960). Contributions to probability and statistics: Essays in honor of Harold Hotelling, Stanford University Press, Redwood City, CA, 278–292.
Lew, J. J. (1999). “Cost savings on highway projects utilizing subsurface utility engineering.”, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC.
O’Brien, W. J., Gau, P., Schmeits, C., Goyat, J., and Khwaja, N. (2012). “Benefits of three-and four-dimensional computer-aided design model applications for review of constructability.”, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 18–25.
Oppenheim, A. N. (2000). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement, Continuum, London.
Quiroga, C., Ellis, C. D., and Shin, S. (2001). “Integrated platform for managing utilities along highway corridors.”, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 233–241.
Quiroga, C., Ellis, C. D., Shin, S., and Pina, R. (2002). “A data platform for managing utilities along highway corridors.”, Texas A&M Transportation Institute, College Station, TX.
Quiroga, C., and Pina, R. (2003). “Utilities in highway right-of-way: Data needs and modeling.”, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 133–142.
Quiroga, C., and Pina, R. (2004). “Issues in automating utility permits at transportation agencies.”, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 143–151.
Scott, P. (2005). “SUE then and now.” Damage Prevention Conf., Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 1–6.
Stevens, R. E. (1993). “Adding value through the innovations of subsurface utility engineering (SUE).” Proc., Society of American Value Engineers, Society of American Value Engineers, Dayton, OH.
Tseng, S., Chou, C., Ho, T., Lin, C., and Chen, T. (2011). “A spatiotemporal database approach to the management of utility work schedules in transportation projects.” Autom. Constr., 20(6), 729–739.
Wright, K. B. (2005). “Researching internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services.” J. Comput.-Mediated Commun., 10(3).
Zembillas, N. M., and Beyer, B. J. (2004). “Proactive utilities management: Conflict analysis and subsurface utility engineering.” Pipelines 2004 Int. Conf., ASCE, Reston, VA.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Infrastructure Systems
Volume 22 • Issue 1 • March 2016
Copyright
© 2015 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jul 29, 2014
Accepted: Jul 15, 2015
Published online: Sep 18, 2015
Discussion open until: Feb 18, 2016
Published in print: Mar 1, 2016
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.