Identification of Utility Conflicts and Solutions: Pilot Implementation of the SHRP 2 R15B Products at the Maryland State Highway Administration (2014)

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.

CHAPTER 4 One-Day UCM Training Course Introduction The research team delivered the one-day UCM training course twice as part of the pilot implementation in Maryland. The first time was before the districts started the pilot application of the UCM approach on actual projects. Following discussions with MDSHA near the end of the pilot implementation, the research team scheduled a second one-day UCM training course for additional users who did not have the opportunity to attend the first course. This chapter provides a summary of lessons learned with both training courses and updates to the training materials to reflect these lessons learned. January 2013 Course This course took place in Hanover, Maryland. A total of 36 participants attended the course, representing MDSHA (29 attendees), utility owners (4 attendees), consultants (2 attendees), and FHWA (1 attendee). MDSHA participants included design, utility, and right-of-way acquisition officials, both from districts and headquarters. With some minor exceptions, the lesson plan was the same as that developed for the SHRP 2 R15B project, as follows: Morning Session • Lesson 1: Introductions and Course Overview • Lesson 2: Utility Conflict Concepts • Lesson 3: Utility Conflict Identification and Management Afternoon Session • Lesson 4: Hands-On Utility Conflict Management Exercise • Lesson 5: Use of Database Approach to Manage Utility Conflicts • Lesson 6: Wrap-Up The hands-on exercise used sample materials from a Georgia DOT (GDOT) project, which GDOT provided for developing the one-day UCM training course as part of the SHRP 2 R15B research. The 1.8-mile project was a typical road widening project in a suburban environment in Marietta, northwest of Atlanta, and involved 13 utility owners. As part of the project, GDOT conducted a QLB utility investigation and received several data sheets with QLA data. For the hands-on exercise, participants were divided into seven groups. To maximize group diversity, participants were asked to sequentially pick a number from 1 to 7. Group 1 was composed of all participants who said 1, Group 2 was composed of all participants who said 2, and so on. Instructions to each group included identifying as many utility conflicts as possible 55

from a specific section of the set of plans, manage a sample of conflicts using a UCM, conceptualize a solution strategy for one or two conflicts, and at the end, give a three-minute presentation to all the participants. Although the time allocated to each of the lessons was generally appropriate, participants spent considerably longer during the hands-on exercise in Lesson 4. All groups were highly involved in their assignments, particularly during the identification of utility conflict resolution strategies and the group presentation, and, therefore, the research team decided to let the groups continue with that lesson for an additional half hour. To keep the course within the allocated schedule, the duration of the data model and database demonstration was shortened. This was an acceptable trade-off considering that the audience was composed mainly of engineers and utility coordinators, but not IT professionals. Participants were highly satisfied with the course structure and exercise dynamics. Prior to delivering the course, the research team made a few minor changes to the materials that were delivered as part of the SHRP 2 R15B research. The research team’s observation was that participants reacted positively to those changes, particularly in Lesson 4. At the same time, participants provided several suggestions for improvements, including providing color plans to help differentiate utility features (the sample plan set was in black and white) and making sure the plan sets were printed to scale (due to a printing error, the scale was slightly off when the plans were printed prior to delivering the course). Other suggestions included using a set of plans from projects that participants were familiar with (instead of using projects or plan symbology from elsewhere that participants would have difficulty recognizing) and emphasizing the utility conflict resolution process. Some participants also recommended reducing the duration of the data model and database presentation (although some other participants recommended the opposite). September 2013 Course The research team conducted a second one-day UCM training course in Baltimore. The original intent was to provide UCM training to District 3 officials and their consultants, taking into consideration that most of these officials did not attend the first course. However, MDSHA considered that moving the course to agency headquarters in Baltimore would provide a greater opportunity for a larger number of officials to receive training on the use of the UCM approach. In total, 40 MDSHA officials representing several disciplines attended the course, although most participants were designers. Realistically, this was a strategic move, which will likely accelerate the deployment of the UCM approach in Maryland. The research team used essentially the same version of the course materials that were used in the first course. The only difference was that plans from the MD 210 project were used instead of the set of plans from GDOT (see Chapter 2). The risk of using MD 210 project files was that the utility investigations (and corresponding documentation) were only preliminary. As a result, it was not possible to demonstrate a complete example of the UCM to manage utility conflicts. However, the significant advantage was that officials were already familiar with 56

MDSHA file symbology and design standards, and, in several cases, they were also familiar with the project. As a result, the hands-on exercise was extremely effective, particularly during the group presentations at the end of Lesson 4. Feedback from course participants was highly positive. Officials also provided suggestions for changes to the training materials. The research team incorporated these changes, as described in the following section. Updated UCM Training Materials The research team prepared an updated set of training materials to support the one-day UCM training course. The changes made addressed comments and recommendations from participants at the two training events, as well as observations by the research team prior to, during, and after those events with respect to ways to improve the effectiveness of the presentation. The revised one-day UCM training course is divided into six lessons, as follows: Morning Session • Lesson 1: Introductions and Course Overview (30 minutes) • Lesson 2: Utility Conflict Concepts (75 minutes) • Lesson 3: Utility Conflict Identification and Management (75 minutes) Afternoon Session • Lesson 4: Use of Database Approach to Manage Utility Conflicts (20 minutes) • Lesson 5: Hands-On Utility Conflict Management Exercise (120 minutes) • Lesson 6: Wrap-Up (10 minutes) Tables 4.1 through 4.6 provide an overview of each lesson. The course is designed for a total of seven hours and 15 minutes of instruction, from 8:30 a.m. to 3:45 p.m. It includes 5:30 hours (330 minutes) of direct instructor contact and 1:45 hours (105 minutes) of breaks (including lunch). The course provides ample 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. 57

Table 4.1. Lesson 1 (Introductions and Course Overview) Lesson No. 1 Lesson Title Introductions and Course Overview Topics • Introductions (both instructor and participants). • Overview of course objectives, outcomes, agenda, and reference materials. • Discussion of ground rules, sign-in-sheet, feedback forms, and other housekeeping items. Instructional Method Activity 1: Instructor welcomes participants, introduces him/herself, and leads participants through introductions. Participants introduce themselves and provide a brief description of their roles and experience in utility coordination, design, or other project development and delivery process matters. Activity 2: Instructor provides an overview of the course objectives, outcomes, agenda, and reference materials. Activity 3: Instructor discusses ground rules, sign-in sheet, feedback forms, and other housekeeping items as needed. Instruction Day Day 1: 8:30 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. Time Allocation • Activity 1: Introductions 15 minutes • Activity 2: Course overview 10 minutes • Activity 3: Housekeeping 5 minutes • Total Lesson 1 30 minutes Note: Depending on the course setting and the length of time actually spent on Lesson 1 activities, it might be possible to increase the time allocated to Lessons 2 or 3. In any case, for maximum effectiveness, it is not recommended to extend Lesson 3 beyond noon. Evaluation Plan • Instructor uses the instructor review form to take notes on the background, experience, and role of participants in utility coordination, design, or other project development and delivery process matters. References • Course binder. • Lesson 1 PowerPoint file and handouts. • SHRP 2 R15B research report (http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/166731.aspx). • SHRP 2 R15C research report (http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/170965.aspx). 58

Table 4.2. Lesson 2 (Utility Conflict Concepts) Lesson No. 2 Lesson Title Utility Conflict Concepts Learning Outcomes • Understanding of relevant concepts related to the management of utility conflicts within the project development and delivery process. Instructional Method Activity 1: Instructor uses PowerPoint slides to • Describe typical utility conflict management concepts and issues. Activity 2: Instructor uses PowerPoint slides and printed UCM materials to • Describe the purpose and main findings of the SHRP 2 R15B project. • Summarize trends and other information gathered through the online surveys and follow-up interviews. • Summarize the process for developing a stand-alone UCM. • Describe UCM data model and Access database application. Activity 3: Questions and answers: • Instructor answers questions from participants. As needed, other participants participate in the discussion. • Depending on the course setting, instructor might choose to encourage questions from participants throughout the presentation instead of allocating 10 minutes at the end of the lesson for questions and answers. Instruction Day Day 1: 9:00 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. Time Allocation • Activity 1: Utility conflicts and project development and delivery 25 minutes • Activity 2: SHRP 2 R15B research findings 40 minutes • Activity 3: Questions and answers 10 minutes • Total Lesson 2 75 minutes Evaluation Plan • Instructor uses the instructor review form to summarize the types of questions and comments from participants. Depending on the setting, this activity might need to be completed after the course. • Participants use the participant feedback form to rate the effectiveness of the presentation. References • Lesson 2 PowerPoint file and handouts. • Stand-alone and sample UCM printouts. 59

Table 4.3. Lesson 3 (Utility Conflict Identification and Management) Lesson No. 3 Lesson Title Utility Conflict Identification and Management Learning Outcomes • Understanding of the process for developing and maintaining a UCM by using data from a sample project. • Understanding of the types of reporting options available when using a database representation of the UCM. Instructional Method Activity 1: Instructor uses PowerPoint slides and sample materials to • Demonstrate the process for identifying utility conflicts by using sample project drawings and associated information. • Describe structure and format of the UCM and the process to populate and maintain the UCM using sample project data. Activity 2: Discussion, questions, and answers • Instructor answers questions from participants. As needed, other participants participate in the discussion. • Instructor encourages participants to share and discuss real-world examples and/or the applicability of UCMs to real-world situations. • Depending on the course setting, instructor might choose to encourage questions and discussion from participants throughout Activity 1 instead of allocating 30 minutes at the end of the lesson for questions and answers. Instruction Day Day 1: 10:30 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. Time Allocation • Activity 1: Utility conflict management and use of UCM 65 minutes • Activity 2: Discussion, questions, and answers 10 minutes • Total Lesson 3 75 minutes Evaluation Plan • Instructor uses the instructor review form to summarize the types of questions and comments from participants. Depending on the setting, this activity might need to be completed after the course. • Participants use the participant feedback form to rate the effectiveness of the presentation. References • Lesson 3 PowerPoint file and handouts. • Sample UCM printouts, plan sheets, and test hole reports. 60

Table 4.4. Lesson 4 (Use of Database Approach to Manage Utility Conflicts) Lesson No. 4 Lesson Title Use of Database Approach to Manage Utility Conflicts Learning Outcomes • Understanding of utility conflict data model and database capabilities. • Understanding of the process for developing and using customized queries and reports. Instructional Method Activity 1: Instructor uses PowerPoint slides, Access database, and sample materials to • Describe data model and database structure and capabilities. • Describe data model connections with other DOT information systems. Activity 2: Instructor uses PowerPoint slides, Access database, and sample materials to • Describe how utility conflict data are stored into the database. • Illustrate the process for using Access queries, forms, and reports. Activity 3: Questions and answers: • Instructor answers questions from participants. As needed, other participants participate in the discussion. • Depending on the course setting, instructor might choose to encourage questions from participants throughout the presentation instead of allocating 10 minutes at the end of the lesson for questions and answers. Instruction Day Day 1: 1:00 p.m. – 1:20 p.m. Time Allocation • Activity 1: Data model structure 5 minutes • Activity 2: Use of Access database to manage utility conflicts 10 minutes • Activity 3: Questions and answers 5 minutes • Total Lesson 4 20 minutes Evaluation Plan Participants’ learning will be evaluated by their participation and questions. References • Lesson 4 PowerPoint file and handouts. • Printed copies of sample database queries and reports. 61

Table 4.5. Lesson 5 (Hands-On Utility Conflict Management Exercise) Lesson No. 5 Lesson Title Hands-On Utility Conflict Management Exercise Learning Outcomes • Identification of utility conflicts on sample project design drawings. • Use of UCMs to manage utility conflicts. Instructional Method For all activities: Instructor uses PowerPoint presentation and other sample materials to • Direct course participants during exercise and answer questions as needed. Activity 1: Participants organized in groups use sample project materials and blank UCM template to • Identify as many utility conflicts as possible on sample project materials. • Evaluate potential locations for test holes. • Transcribe utility conflict information into the UCM. Activity 2: Instructor hands out test hole data sheets. Participants use test hole data sheets to • Review and assess potential utility conflicts. Activity 3: Participants use blank conflict resolution alternatives template to • Choose 1-2 utility conflicts and develop 3-4 utility conflict resolution strategies each, including cost estimates. • Choose the best strategy to resolve the utility conflicts. Activity 4: Participants use portable document format (PDF) plan sheets to: • Give a 3-minute group presentation, highlighting a utility conflict, the strategies considered to resolve the conflict, and any other lessons learned. Instruction Day Day 1: 1:20 p.m. – 3:35 p.m. Time Allocation • Activity 1: Identify conflicts 30 minutes • Activity 2: Review test hole data and analyze utility conflicts 30 minutes • Afternoon break 15 minutes • Activity 3: Develop conflict resolution strategy 30 minutes • Activity 4: Group presentations 30 minutes • Total Lesson 5 135 minutes Evaluation Plan • Instructor uses the instructor review form to summarize the types of questions and comments from participants. Depending on the setting, this activity might need to be completed after the course. • Participants use feedback form to rate the effectiveness of the presentation. References • Lesson 5 PowerPoint file and handouts. • Sample UCM printouts, plan sheets, and test hole reports. 62

Table 4.6. Lesson 6 (Wrap-Up) Lesson No. 6 Lesson Title Wrap-Up Topics • Instructor provides summary of course. • Instructor collects feedback forms. Instructional Method Activity 1: Instructor summarizes the activities of the course, addresses any final questions of course participants, and provides some closing remarks. Participants fill out the feedback form. The instructor then collects the feedback forms provided by the course participants. Instruction Day Day 1: 3:35 p.m. – 3:45 p.m. Time Allocation • Activity 1: Final questions and closing remarks 10 minutes • Total Lesson 6 10 minutes References • Participant feedback form. The training materials are organized in a folder structure that can be easily disseminated via compact disk or the Internet. Table 4.7 provides a list of all the files. 63

Table 4.7. One-Day UCM Training Course Materials Folder Name File Name Format1 Binder Training Material Binder Participant pdf Training Material Binder Instructor pdf Instructional Materials Lesson 5 Group 1 Exercise Materials pdf Lesson 5 Group 2 Exercise Materials pdf Lesson 5 Group 3 Exercise Materials pdf Lesson 5 Group 4 Exercise Materials pdf Lesson 5 Group Assignment pdf Lesson 5 Test Hole Forms pdf Lesson 5 Utility Conflict Solution Sheet pdf Lessons Lesson 1 pptx Lesson 2 pptx Lesson 3 pptx Lesson 4 pptx Lesson 5 pptx Lesson 6 pptx Stand-alone UCM Utility Conflict Matrix xls Data Model and Database UCD Data Dictionary pdf UCD Data Model – Access erwin UCD Data Model – Oracle erwin UCD Export Schema Oracle sql UCD Logical Data Model pdf UCD Physical Data Model – Access pdf UtilityConflictDatabase–Application accdb UtilityConflictDatabase–Data accdb Note: UCD = user-centered design. 1 File formats: erwin = Computer Associates ERwin Data Modeler; accdb = Microsoft Access 2010; pdf = Adobe Portable Document Format; pptx = Microsoft PowerPoint 2010; sql = Structured Query Language; and xls = Microsoft Excel 2007. 64