IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ndtr12/207077.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Development of Utility Tools for the Innovative Construction Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Dutta, Utpal
  • Patel, Kirtik
  • Martinico, Patricia

Abstract

Increasing travel demand and lack of sufficient highway capacity are serious problems in most major metropolitan areas in the United States. Large metropolitan cities have been experiencing increased traffic congestion problems over the past several years. The total delay that drivers experience has increased from 0.7 billion hours in 1982 to 3.7 billion hours in recent years. Combining the 3.7 billion hours of delay and 2.3 billion gallons of fuel consumed due to congestion, leads to a total congestion cost of $63 billion dollars for drivers in 85 of the largest metropolitan areas of the nation. In spite of the implementation of many demand management measures, congestion in most urban areas is still increasing. In many areas congestion is no longer limited to two peak hours in a day; it is extended to two to three hours in the morning, afternoon and evening. Thus, the congestion experienced on urban and suburban freeways and arterial streets results in delays to the motorist, excess fuel consumption and a high level of pollutant emission not only during the peak hours in a day, but also for several hours throughout the day. Road construction and duration of construction are considered to be factors responsible for a significant portion of traffic congestion. Innovative contracting approaches (such as A+B, Lane Rental, Incentive/disincentive (I/D) etc. methods) have been in use by various State Departments of Transportation (DOT) to reduce construction duration.. As a part of this approach, the contractor is paid an incentive to complete a project earlier than the time specified in the contract. If the contractor completes the project later than the time allowed, a penalty is charged by contractual agreement where disincentive money is subtracted from the payment due to the contractor. The use of an incentive may be cost effective in certain projects but may not be effective in other projects. Its use must be justified by comparing the cost of the incentive with savings in Road Users Costs (RUC) value. Michigan Department of Transportation has been using the innovative contracting approach for a number of years. In order to determine the effectiveness of the innovative contracting approach, a model was developed to establish a functional relationship between construction duration and construction cost using Michigan’s construction data. Two Measure of Effectiveness (MOEs) variables, “Project Time Crashing Index (TCI)” and “Project Cost Increment Index (CII)” “, were established as a part of this research. Regression technique was used to correlate CII and TCI. The final model was a non-linear model. Also as a part of this effort, a road user cost computation template and a screening template to determine the suitability of a project to be 2 considered for the innovative approach were designed. These two templates should assist state DOTs in computing construction incentive dollars as well as in determining the candidacy of a project for the innovative approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Dutta, Utpal & Patel, Kirtik & Martinico, Patricia, 2012. "Development of Utility Tools for the Innovative Construction Approach," 53rd Annual Transportation Research Forum, Tampa, Florida, March 15-17, 2012 207077, Transportation Research Forum.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ndtr12:207077
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.207077
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/207077/files/2012_16_Util_Tools_Construction_Approach.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.207077?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ndtr12:207077. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.trforum.org/journal/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.