Review of inconsistencies between SUDAS and Iowa DOT specifications.
i


Review of inconsistencies between SUDAS and Iowa DOT specifications.

  • Published Date:

    2006-05-01

  • Language:
    English
Filetype[PDF-576.65 KB]


Details:
  • Publication/ Report Number:
  • Resource Type:
  • Geographical Coverage:
  • OCLC Number:
    779385663
  • Corporate Publisher:
  • NTL Classification:
    NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Design ; NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Construction and Maintenance ; NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Materials ; NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Pavement Management and Performance ;
  • Abstract:
    The Iowa Department of Transportation's Standard Specifications for Highway and Bridge Construction were originally developed with highway construction in rural areas. As the state continues to develop, an ever-increasing portion of the projects administered by the Iowa DOT take place in urbanized areas. Most of this urban work involves construction on Primary Highways and Federal-Aid roadways through developed portions of counties and/or cities. Given the rural nature of the existing Iowa DOT specifications, it is often necessary to include supplemental specifications or special provisions on State projects in urban areas. In order to reduce the frequency of this, the Iowa DOT specifications need to be expanded in areas such as water main, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, utility accesses, trenching, traffic signals, etc., which are not typically encountered on rural projects. Given the increasing number of projects that involve urban work, it has been suggested the Iowa DOT utilize the Iowa Statewide Urban Specifications for Public Improvements as the construction specifications for urban roadway projects. The utilization of the SUDAS specifications on urban Iowa DOT projects appears to be an obvious solution to the insufficient urban specifications within the Iowa DOT standard specifications. Many obstacles must first be overcome to prevent confusion to both the contractor and engineer, ensure consistency from project to project, and to maintain the rural and urban strengths and characteristics of the two manuals. This project outlines those obstacles and recommends a "plan of attack" to address the task of combining the two documents.
  • Format:
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • File Type:
  • Supporting Files:
    No Additional Files
No Related Documents.

You May Also Like:

Version 3.15