Chapter 2 – Research Approach

The research efforts of NCRHP Project 15-81, Guideline for Depicting Existing and Proposed Utility Facilities in Design Plans, included the preparation of a guidebook and this conduct of research report. The project involved a literature review, surveys, and the collection of depiction examples to identify best practices. These findings were then critically examined through peer exchanges and a validation workshop. This enabled the development of the associated guide to support a standardized approach for the proper depiction and use of utility data in highway plans.

The NCHRP 15-81 research highlighted the need for standardization in utility depiction in highway plans due to vast inconsistencies in accuracy and completeness of utility data, unwillingness to deviate from existing policies and procedures, and lack of education/knowledge as to the value and use of the utility data in later stages of a project’s lifecycle. To support this need, the associated guidance was produced. The guide discusses practices for retrieving, depicting, and managing data for various utilities and for utility conflict identification and depiction. Additionally, the guide includes tools deemed useful and appropriate, as collected and developed from the NCHRP 15-81 research. The guide concludes with an assessment of emerging technologies to include the use of 3D models, inclusive of emerging utility data sources. Broadly, the guidance provides concepts for retrieving, depicting, and managing data for various utilities and for utility conflict identification. This guide fulfills the research objectives and was accomplished through the tasks presented in Figure 3.

The initial stage of the research involved preliminary data gathering via literature review and the development of a practitioner survey for further collection of information. These tasks were presented in an initial technical memorandum and included:

• Task 1a: Literature Review
• Task 1b: Design of Practitioner Survey.

Task 1a involved a review and summary of literature regarding the retrieval, management, and depiction of data for various utilities. The review investigated resources on determining and depicting utility conflicts and included related research in progress, case studies, new technologies for acquiring better utility data, and research/implementation gaps. The research team relied upon previous research experience to provide significant insight into the resources available. The review consisted of products from FHWA studies, SHRP2, NCHRP studies, state DOT commissioned studies, and applicable standards. This literature largely focused on domestic works but also included international materials. As mentioned in the proposal, many resources needed for this literature review were readily available to the research team based on previous work completed. The research team included the relevant sources and expanded on those previously reviewed. In addition to reviewing relevant literature, the research team reviewed state DOT policy and procedure manuals as they often capture effective practices and present how DOT processes may differ or be similar. The literature findings are summarized in the next chapter and the literature review is included in an appendix.

The next task of the research was Task 1b involving the design of the practitioner survey. The research panel suggested the survey include state DOTs but also may include local transportation agencies, contractors, consultants, and utility owners. The research team added to this with an aim to survey practitioners including DOT consultants, members of the National Utility Locating Contractors Association (NULCA), National Utility Contractors Association (NUCA), American Public Works Association (APWA), American Public Power Association (APPA), Telecommunication Industry Association (TIA), and others. The intent with the state DOT survey, is to send it to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Committee on Right-of-Way, Utilities, and Outdoor Advertising Control (CRUO) members. Considering the two broadly different groups, two surveys were developed. One survey targeted utility companies and associates, and the other targeted state DOT staff and their consultants.

Task 2a involved conducting the practitioner survey designed within Task 1, which was revised based on panel feedback and testing. The revised survey was distributed electronically via the Qualtrics survey software. Qualtrics is a powerful survey management and analysis software allowing flexibility in feedback and analysis. The survey included instructions, applicable definitions, and survey logic to simplify the survey experience for participants. The practitioner surveys sought to identify (1) current practices for compiling, managing, and sharing utility data; (2) differences in state DOT and utility owner data collection, depiction, and management practices; (3) guidelines and requirements that practitioners comply with; (4) utilities for which data cannot be obtained; (5) risk management strategies; and (6) implementation lessons learned. The data captured was used in the development of research deliverables including the associated guide.

There were negligible responses from the survey of utility companies and associates. However, the responses to state DOT and consultant survey collected 53 total responses of varying levels of completeness. The DOT survey saw 29 substantially completed survey responses, which included 16 state DOT responses. The survey findings are summarized in the following chapter, with the survey instruments and entire feedback included in an appendix.

The previous tasks also contributed to the development and completion of Task 2b, which delivered an initial draft outline for the guide later developed as part of the research project.

These deliverables were combined into an interim report, presented, and discussed with the research panel as part of Task 3.

Task 4 consisted of four subtasks to conduct the virtual peer exchanges and workshop-like group discussions to collect feedback on the outline of the draft guide. The subtasks of Task 4 included:

• Task 4a involved revising the draft outline of the guidelines based on feedback from Task 3. The objective of this task was to prepare the draft outline for the review and feedback mechanisms of Task 4 overall.

• Task 4b involved developing an initial proof-of-concept architecture for the proposed tools of the research effort.

• Task 4c gathered feedback on the draft outline of the guidelines and the concepts of the proposed tools from practitioners familiar with utility data challenges. In task 3, we coordinated with the panel to identify appropriate practitioners to participate in these events. Our research team conducted multiple larger exchanges to collect feedback from a broad number of participants. The team also conducted smaller exchanges of a cross-section of previous participants of the peer-exchange groups to allow coordinating feedback from across the groups of the previous sessions. This feedback was woven into the draft guidelines.

• Task 4d completed and delivered a technical memorandum and initial planning for the guide validation workshop.

The findings of Task 4 are summarized in the next chapter, with the guidance and tools provided in the associated guide deliverable.

Task 5a involved the development of draft guidelines to cover practices for retrieving, depicting, and managing data for various utilities and for utility conflict identification and depiction. The research team also assembled a list of proposed attendees, a planned agenda, and workshop materials for the guide validation workshop. Task 5b involved planning and conducting the guide validation workshop to collect feedback on the guide and tools. This workshop included attendees as approved by the research panel, in-person in Washington, D.C., and those who participated online. Their collective feedback was used in final revisions of the guide and tools provided in the final deliverables of the research.

The final task, Task 6 involved preparing the project final report and project deliverables, including the guide, this conduct of research report summarizing the research effort, an implementation memo, and presentation slides to accompany the guide.

Together, these tasks accomplished the research objectives, providing the following findings and the associated guidance and tools.