Project No. 0-4617:Identifying Delays in the ROW and

Utility Relocation Processes Affecting

Construction and Development Methods for Expediting the

Processes

Dr James T. O’ConnorDr G. Edward Gibson

Mr Rei-Lin (Garry) ChangMr Stephen M. Hedemann

Dr Wai-Kiong (Oswald) Chong

AGENDA

• Study Overview• ROW Study• Utility Study• Conclusions• Questions

AGENDA

• Study Overview• ROW Study• Utility Study• Conclusions• Questions

Problem Statement

How long does ROW acquisition take?

How long does utility relocation take?

What are the drivers of duration?

Study Objectives

Develop:• Process model for ROW

acquisition and utility relocation• Duration metrics and • Advisory tool for duration

estimation

Data BasisROW:• Number of projects: 55• ROW parcels: 200 + • Interviews: Five Districts, Texas Turnpike

Authority (TTA), ROW DivisionUtilities:• Number of projects: 67• Utility adjustments: 300 +• Interviews: Six Districts, TTA, ROW

Division

Process Map

• 100+ activities• Stratified by organization• Shows integration and links to PS&E • Key milestones• Some “aha’s” and future

improvements

Process Map

Businesses,Farms& Non-ProfitOrganizations

YES

Parcel Owner Rejected

Rejected

(3)Preliminary

DesignConference

(16) OngoingAssistance forMoving, Re-

establishment& Searching for

Location

(19)Begin

CurativeWork

(9) ReceiveTitle Information:

5 Year SalesData &

Preliminary TitleCommitment

(19.2) DistrictRecommendsto Approve /

Deny

(2) EarlyCoordination

with LocalAgencies

(20) Calculate andRecommend

Supplements forR/W Division

Approval

(13)Assign

Appraiser

(6) Obtain:- Environmental Clearance- Local Agency Agreements

(If Applicable)- Approved R/W Map- Funding Authority

(10) ObtainPropertyOwner

Addresses

(7) R/W ProjectReleased

(38)Prepare

FinalOfferLetter

(22) Send 90Day Notice

andDeterminationof RelocationEntitlement toDisplacees.

(4)Project

Develop-ment

Process

(11) MakePre-AppraisalContact with

PropertyOwner

(17) R/WDivision

Approval forSpecial

BusinessPayments

(19.1)ReceiveWrittenCounter

Offer(15)

Review /ApproveAppraisal

DivisionDecision

(12)Contact

Displacees

(19.3)Division

Accepts orRejects

Counter Offer

(5.1) ProjectReceives“Develop”ProgramAuthority

(1)Preliminary

R/W &Utility DataCollection

(21) ReceiveApproved

ReplacementHousing

Supplements &Special Business

Payments

(18)Present

Offer

(39)Order

UpdatedTitle

Commitment

(5)Place

Projectin STIP

OfferRejected

(8) Order TitleInformation: 5

Year SalesData &

Preliminary TitleCommitment

Change in Appraisal

Parcel Owner Accepted

No Change in Appraisal

Parcel Owner Rejected

Objections to Award

No Objections to Award

No Objections to Award

Objections to Award

(53) Start 20 DayPeriod to File

Objections

(58) Receive andDeposit Warrant

OfferRejected

(55)Objections

Filed

(49) JudgeAppoints SpecialCommissioners

(47) AGPreparesPetition

(50)Coordination to

ScheduleSpecial

CommissionersHearing

(45) Reviewand ReviseFinal Offer

(48) TxDOTFiles

Petition

(43)Update

Appraisal

(46)Document

“NOCHANGE” in

Appraisal

(57) RequestWarrant fromR/W Division

(58) Receive andDeposit WarrantConcurrent with

Signature ofJudgment in

Absence of OfObjections

Possession of Deed byCondemnation

(44) Reviseand Approve

UpdatedAppraisal

No Changeor Change

(42) R/WDivision

ForwardsParcel File to

AttorneyGeneral

(56) UpdateTitle

Commitments

OfferAccepted

(52) SpecialCommissionersSignature and

Delivery of Award

(40) Prepareand SubmitRequest for

EminentDomain.

(41) MinuteOrder for

Eminent DomainApproved by

TransportationCommission

(54) AG andDistrict PrepareSummary and

RecommendationReport

- As Builts- Permit Files- Field Verification- SUE- Aerial Photographs- Topographic Surveys- Coordinate w/ District Utility Engineer

- Ongoing Process- Updated Throughout Project

NO

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Iterative

Highway Project LettingDate

D13

U13. InitiateMultiple UtilityCoordinationMeetings

Initial Estimate Submitted

U22. TxDOT /ConsultantRedesign

Is there an agreement?

Is there a set of plans?

Is there an AdvancedFunding Agreement?

30% PS & E

D8Date of Adjustment

Completion

U37. UtilityMeeting AfterConstructionContract Award

U21. AlternateProcedureRelease

U9. UtilitiesBudget Funds forFutureRelocations

U33. HighwayProject Release& Letting

U11. UtilitiesAllocate Fundsfor a ProjectAdjustments) U35. Adjust

Utilities

U8. UtilitiesSend Map

60% PS & EFONSI

U20. Get SIBLoan / Delay /BondReferendum

A.P. Release

U19. UtilitiesPrepare Designand Sign LocalJoint UseAgreements

U26. UtilityCompany SignedAgreements

U23. UtilitiesFinalize Design

Distribute Current Plansto Initiate Design andFacilitate Coordination

U15. UtilitiesProposeConcept, TxDOTdevelopsConceptualEstimate,

D3

No

U16. FundingAvailable?

U18. Analysis ofrelocation cost

estimates. ProjectRedesign

Beneficial?

Date Agreement ReviewStarted

U32. Pre-AdjustmentTxDOT Fie ldWork

U29. SubmitAssemblyPackage

Date of Agreement Approval

U10. Obtain AllInformation onExisting Utilities

U34. SiteCoordination:Multiple Utilitiesand / or GeneralContractors

D9

D7

U24. PrepareEstimate andAgreements

U30. ExecuteAgreements(TxDOTApproval)

U31. Pre —Letting UtilityMeeting

U7. DetermineAmount of Rightof Way Needed

U4. PreliminaryUtilityInvestigation

+/- 15% PS & E

Actual Date of AgreementSubmittal

U12. DevelopConflict List

U28. DevelopNeed For SpecialProvision: Noticeto Contractor

U25. PrepareUAR Exceptionsas Needed

D10U14.

Reimbursable?U36. Inspectionof Adjustments

6. DEVELOP PS&E

60% PS & E15% PS & E

30% PS & E

D10Date of Agreement Approval

Date Agreement ReviewStarted

U30. ExecuteAgreements(TxDOTApproval)

D9

D12

90% Paid Date - Pre Audit

Final Payment Date - PostAudit

D11

U38. TxDOTReimbursesUtilities forEligibleAdjustments

U39. UtilityConstructionMeeting DuringHighwayConstruction

R/WRelease Date

Parcel Owner Accepts Offer

w/ occupants

w/o occupants

Accepted

(35) LeaseBack

(32) Pay forTitle Policy

(23) Assist Displacees in FindingReplacement Dwelling

(if Requested)

(27) ObtainTitle

Commitment

POSSESSION BYNEGOTIATION

(37) Removalof

Improvements

ACQUISITIONCOMPLETE

(34) Send30 DayNotice

(31)Receive

TitlePolicy

Close File

(26)CompleteCurative

Work(33)

RelocationProcess

(29)ReceiveWarrant

(30)ClosingBy Title

Company

OfferAccepted

(25)Instrument ofConveyance

Signed

(36) MoveDisplacees

(28) SubmitPayment

Request toR/W Division

(5.2)AdvancedAcquisition

(If Applicable)

(6.2)AdvancedAcquisitionApproval

(6.1)Request

R/W Release

(14)ReceiveAppraisal

Residential

YES / NO

NO

(42.1) EminentDomain Cause

NumberAssigned by

AttorneyGeneral

Legal

(54.1) Approve AGRecommendations

ObjectionYes / No

No ObjectionsFiled

ObjectionsFiled

U3.1 TxDOTRequests UtilityMaps

U27. TxDOT R/W Review andApproval o fException

DISTRICT TXDOT RIGHT OFWAY AND UTILITIES

Note:

Activity Boxes NOT Time Scaled

Box Numbering is for the purposeof identifying the tasks and doesnot necessarily reflect processsequencing.

Project Configuration can varysignificantly; there may be manyparcels per project, or none. Theremay be many utility adjustmentsper project; or none.

PS&E Designer

DECISIONSOMITTED ACTIVITIES RELATEDTO NEGOTIATIONS PROCESS

Responsibility Code and Symbols

KEY EVENT /MILESTONE

DIVISION TXDOT RIGHT OF WAY

Utility Company

ACTIVITY

Others (Engineer, Project Manager, Title Co., Project Owner, Etc.)

CHARTLEGEND

Utility Designer

FHWA

PROJECT ASSOCIATES

DATE: MAY 2005REV. 4.0

U3. ApprovedGeometrics /Schematics

- Final CorridorAlignment- Project Schematic

U1. STIP:Long termdiscussion offuture projectsw/ utilities

U2. Environmental Clearance

AgreementUpper Limit

Above Limitwith recommendations

Within Limit

Rejected

DistrictDecision

Accepted

Key Durations

AGENDA

• Study Overview• ROW Study• Utility Study• Conclusions• Questions

Cumulative % for ROW Acq. > 10 ParcelsROW Release Possession Critical Path Parcels v. Typical Parcels

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500

Time (Calendar Days)

Cum

ulat

ive

Perc

enta

ge o

f Pro

ject

s th

at h

ave

R1

acqu

ired

befo

re

the

Tim

e R

ange

CPP >10 Parcels (PAT) TPAT > 10 Parcels (TPAT)

ROW Release

Critical Path Parcel (N = 41)

Typical Parcel (N = 132)

Cumulative % for ROW Acq. ROW Release Possession

by Number of Parcels

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500

Time (Calendar Days)

Cum

ulat

ive

Perc

enta

ge o

f Pro

ject

s th

at h

ave

R1

acqu

ired

befo

re th

e Ti

me

Ran

ge

Greater than 30 Parcels per Project (PAT) 10-30 Parcels per Project (PAT) Less than 10 Parcels Per Project (PAT)

ROW Release

> 30 Parcels (N = 108)

10-30 Parcels (N = 88)

< 10 Parcels (N = 27)

Cumulative % for ROW Acq. ROW Release Possession

Rural versus Urban

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500

Time (Calendar Days)

Cum

ulat

ive

Perc

enta

ge o

f Pro

ject

s th

at h

ave

R1

acqu

ired

befo

re th

e Ti

me

Ran

ge

Urban Projects (PAT) Rural Projects (PAT)

ROW Release

Urban (N = 42)

Rural (N = 151)

Cumulative % for ROW Acq.ROW Release Initial Appraisal

by # of ParcelsPlot of Cumulative Percentage vs. Time (Calendar Days)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 250 500 750 1000

Time (Calendar Days)

Cum

ulat

ive

Perc

enta

ge o

f Pro

ject

R3

valu

es (P

AT

- TPA

T)

10-30 Parcels per Project (R3) Greater than 30 Parcels per Project (R3)

ROW Release

10-30 Parcels (N = 103)

> 30 Parcels (N = 85)

Key Drivers: Critical Path Parcels

Summary of Delay Factors from Critical Path Parcels

Potential ROW Delay Factors

Percent of Total Parcels (count1 =

45)

(1) Owner: Pricing, compensation and impact dispute 44.4%(2) Owner: Title curative and ownership change 28.9%(3) Third party 26.7%(4) Parcel characteristics, owner initiated, improvement delays 20.0%

(5) Environmental sensitivity and expert witness delays 17.8%

(6) Legal activity causing delays 15.6%

Others: Utility, design change or revisions, terrain features dispute causing delays 24.5%

[1] Some Critical Path Parcels had multiple delays

ROW Key Findings• Projects with fewer parcels have faster

acquisition times• Projects with more parcels have more lag

time between ROW release First appraisal

• Delay Drivers:– Critical path parcel drivers – ROW release First appraisal

• Little difference in acquisition times: Urban vs. rural parcels

AGENDA

• Study Overview• ROW Study• Utility Study• Conclusions• Questions

Cumulative % for Utility Reloc.: ROW Release Adj. Compl.

Quick vs SlowPlot of Cumulative Percentage vs. Time, Quick vs Slow Projects Duration U3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Duration (Calendar Days)

Quick

Slow

Cum

ulat

ive

Perc

enta

ge o

f Pro

ject

U

3 va

lues

for R

OW

Rel

ease

Slow (N = 32)

Quick (N = 20)

Cumulative % for Utility Reloc.: ROW Release Adj. Compl.Reimbursable or Non-Reimbursable

Plot of Cumulative Percentage vs. Time for Reimbursable vs. Non-Reimbursable Projects, Duration U3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Duration (Days)

Cum

ulat

ive

Perc

enta

ge o

f Pr

ojec

ts fo

r Whi

ch D

urat

ion

U3

is C

ompl

ete

at th

e G

iven

Tim

e

Reimbursable

Non

Cum

ulat

ive

Perc

enta

ge o

f Pro

ject

U

3 va

lues

for S

tatu

s of

R

eim

burs

emen

t

Reimbursable (N = 41)

Non-Reimbursable (N =

12)

Cumulative % for Utility Reloc.: ROW Release Adj. Compl.

LPA v. Non-LPA FundingPlot of Cumulative Percentage vs. Time by LPA Funding, Duration U3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Duration (Calendar Days)

Cum

ulat

ive

Perc

enta

ge o

f Pr

ojec

ts fo

r Whi

ch D

urat

ion

U3 is

Co

mpl

ete

at th

e G

iven

Tim

e

NonLPA

LPA

Cum

ulat

ive

Perc

enta

ge o

f Pro

ject

U

3 va

lues

for L

PA o

r Non

-LPA

Fu

nded

LPA Funded (N = 30)

Non-LPA Funded (N = 9)

Average Durationby Utility Type

Type of Adjustment Sample Size (n)

Mean Duration

Days Years

(1) High Pressure Gas 14 1674 4.58

(2) Water 26 1468 4.02

(3) Overhead Power 25 1215 3.33

(4) Underground Communications 22 1108 3.03

Average Durationby Number of Agreements

Number of Agreements

Sample Size (n)

Mean Duration

Days Years1 10 690 1.892 8 582 1.593 7 865 2.374 6 919 2.525 5 2174 5.95

>5 11 2737 7.49

Additional Key Drivers of Duration

• Rural vs. Urban/Metro• TxDOT project type• Accurate utility location information• Timely communication of project to

Utilities• TxDOT coordination between Utilities

Utility RelocationKey Findings

• Utilities waiting on ROW acq., drainage design

• “Last minute” design changes problematic

• Robust utility data management system needed

Right of Way and Utility Relocation Duration Information

System (RUDI)

Advisory Software ToolIn Development

RUDI

AGENDA

• Study Overview• ROW Study• Utility Study• Conclusions• Questions

ConclusionsROW Acquisition:• Critical Path Parcels take approx. 950

days on avg.; 90th% approx. 1650 days• Typical parcel takes approx. 300 days

on avg.; 90th% is approx. 900 days• Key drivers for delay:

– Pricing, compensation and impact disputes– Title curative– Third party– Delay from ROW Release First appraisal

ConclusionsUtility Relocation Duration:• From ROW Release: 1160 days on

avg.; 90th% approx. 2400 days• From Final Agreement: 220 days on

avg.; 90th% approx. 540 days• Key Drivers:

• No. of Agreements• Rural vs. Urban/Metro• TxDOT project type• LPA funding• Type of utility

Questions?