Powered by

MISS DIG Design

Program SurveyTuesday, December 15, 2015

Powered by

Q1: Please identify the type of company you are associated with.

Answered: 115 Skipped: 0

Consultant Public Owner Agency Utility Company Other

Answer Choice Responses

Consultant 33.91% (39)

Public Owner Agency 16.52% (19)

Utility Company 27.83% (32)

Other 21.74% (25)

Total 115

Powered by

Q2: How would you rate the ease of initiating the design tickets? Scale: 5 (very user-friendly) to 1 (too complex)

Answered: 109 Skipped: 6

Very user-friendly 5 4 3 2 Too complex 1

Very user-friendly 5 4 3 2 Too complex 1 Total Weighted Average

17.43%(19)

46.79%(51)

27.52%(30)

7.34%(8)

0.92%(1) 109 3.72

Powered by

Q3: How would you rate the quality of the members' contact information provided in the Design Ticket

program? Scale: 5 (very valuable) to 1 (very poor)

Answered: 107 Skipped: 8

Very valuable 5 4 3 2 Very poor 1

Very valuable 5 4 3 2 Very poor 1 Total Weighted Average

25.23%(27)

33.64%(36)

29.91%(32)

10.28%(11)

0.93%(1) 107 3.72

Powered by

Q4: Please define area of the state you perform the majority of your work.

Answered: 109 Skipped: 6

Upper Peninsula

Northern Lower

Central

Southwest

Metro-Detroit Area

Answer Choice Responses

Upper Peninsula 7.34% (8)

Northern Lower 6.42% (7)

Central 20.18% (22)

Southwest 14.68% (16)

Metro-Detroit Area 51.38% (56)

Total 109

Powered by

Q5: How helpful is the contact person for the following utilities? Scale: 5 (extremely helpful) to 1 (provides no

assistance)

Answered: 100 Skipped: 15

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

50.00%

Gas Electric Telephone Cable Water Sewer All other

Extremely Helpful 5 4 3 2 Provides No Assistance 1

Extremely Helpful 5

4 3 2 Provides No Assistance 1

Total

Gas 39.58%(38)

37.50%(36)

19.79%(19)

1.04%(1)

2.08% (2) 96

Electric 31.96%(31)

36.08%(35)

23.71%(23)

6.19%(6)

2.06% (2) 97

Telephone 10.53%(10)

36.84%(35)

34.74%(33)

15.79%(15)

2.11% (2) 95

Cable 12.77%(12)

36.17%(34)

31.91%(30)

15.96%(15)

3.19% (3) 94

Water 18.95%(18)

30.53% (29)

32.63%(31)

9.47%(9)

8.42% (8) 95

Sewer 17.89%(17)

32.63%(31)

31.58%(30)

10.53%(10)

7.37% (7) 95

All other 12.20%(10)

29.27%(24)

45.12%(37)

8.54%(7)

4.88% (4) 82

Powered by

Q6: Please provide examples about the helpfulness of your contact person(s).

Answered: 49 Skipped: 66

• “Made calls to notify us of exact location”

• “Received maps quickly”

• “Quick response, pleasant and willing to help”

• “Some email directly”

• “Adequate information to complete designs”

• “Very prompt and detailed”

• “Timely mindful information, if records not available, will mark in field”

Powered by

Q7: Please rate the usefulness of the information you receive in response to your design ticket for the various

utilities below. Scale: 5 (very useful) to 1 (not at all useful)

Answered: 94 Skipped: 21

Very Useful 5

4 3 2 Not at all useful 1

Total

Gas 42.86%(39)

39.56%(36)

13.19%(12)

3.30%(3)

1.10% (1) 91

Electric 31.11%(28)

37.78%(34)

20.00%(18)

8.89%(8)

2.22% (2) 90

Telephone 16.67%(15)

33.33%(30)

25.56%(23)

15.56%(14)

8.89% (8) 90

Cable 19.54%(17)

28.74%(25)

27.59%(24)

14.94%(13)

9.20% (8) 87

Water 28.92%(24)

33.73% (28)

22.89%(19)

9.64%(8)

4.82% (4) 83

Sewer 30.59%(26)

32.94%(28)

22.35%(19)

9.41%(8)

4.71% (4) 85

All other 19.18%(14)

28.77%(21)

32.88%(24)

10.96%(8)

8.22% (6) 730.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

50.00%

Very useful 5 4 3 2 Not at all useful 1

Powered by

Q8: Please provide noteworthy examples about the information you received in response to your design

tickets.

Answered: 43 Skipped: 72

Positive Feedback

• “Most send utility maps”• “Most just mark lines”• “Civil 3D CAD field very helpful”• “Clear maps from gas/electric”

Negative Feedback

• “Not including DSG code name”• “Lines on paper, no offsets or known

references”• “No dimensions, not detailed enough” • “No maps from municipalities” • “Vague graphics or schematics”• “Outdated maps”• “KMZ files not useful”

Powered by

Q9: If only map information was provided, has this been effective for you for the following utilities?

Scale: 5 (maps have been effective) to 1 (maps have not been helpful)

Answered: 87 Skipped: 28

Maps have been effective

5

4 3 2 Maps have not been helpful 1

Total

Gas 41.46%(34)

34.15%(28)

19.51%(16)

0.00%(0)

4.88% (4) 82

Electric 31.71%(26)

24.39%(20)

30.49%(25)

7.32%(6)

6.10% (5) 82

Telephone 21.95%(18)

18.29%(15)

28.05%(23)

18.29%(15)

13.41% (11) 82

Cable 24.10%(20)

18.07%(15)

31.33%(26)

19.28%(16)

7.23% (6) 83

Water 34.62%(27)

24.36% (19)

28.21%(22)

6.41%(5)

6.41% (5) 78

Sewer 33.77%(26)

25.97%(20)

27.27%(21)

6.49%(5)

6.49% (5) 77

All other 19.72%(14)

22.54%(16)

43.66%(31)

7.04%(5)

7.04% (5) 71

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

50.00%

Gas Electric Telephone Cable Water Sewer All other

Maps have been effective 1 4 3 2 Maps have not been helpful

Powered by

Q10: Please provide examples about the maps you received in response to your Design Ticket.

Answered: 36 Skipped: 79

Positive feedback:

• “Provides a paper trail”• “Gas, electric, sewer, water CAD maps very useful”• “Generally members let us know the limits and approximate location”

Negative feedback:

• “Very little detail and no specific location provided”• “No measurements, offsets, dimensions, distances from relative landmarks”• “Maps not to scale”• “Many on state plan coordinate system and can’t be plotted into CAD”• “Hand sketches or notes on plans”

Powered by

Q11: Given that the current response time for a design ticket is 21 days, please rate the response time you

receive from the various utilities. Scale: 5 (very good response time) to 1 (very poor response time)

Answered: 88 Skipped: 27

Very good response times 5

4 3 2 Very poor response times 1

Total

Gas 47.06%(40)

40.00%(34)

9.41%(8)

1.18%(1)

2.35% (2) 85

Electric 30.49%(25)

37.80%(31)

19.51%(16)

6.10%(5)

6.10% (5) 82

Telephone 16.87%(14)

39.76%(33)

22.89%(19)

9.64%(8)

10.84% (9) 83

Cable 15.66%(13)

42.17%(35)

30.12%(25)

6.02%(5)

6.02% (5) 83

Water 15.85%(13)

40.24% (33)

19.51%(16)

7.32%(6)

17.07% (14) 82

Sewer 13.41%(11)

40.24%(33)

19.51%(16)

8.54%(7)

18.29% (15) 82

All other 10.00%(7)

37.14%(26)

34.29%(24)

7.14%(5)

11.43% (8) 70

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

50.00%

Gas Electric Telephone Cable Water Sewer All other

Very good response times 5 4 3 2 Very poor response times 1

Powered by

Q12: Please provide examples about the response time on of the information you received.

Answered: 36 Skipped: 79

Positive feedback:

• “Isolated instances where a particular utility doesn’t respond”

• “If project near utility, they respond within ½ hr.”• “Gas responds 2 days”• “21 days is good time frame”• “Usually right away”• “Far more prompt since the new law passed”

Negative feedback:

• “Most cities, townships, counties ignore design tickets”• “Rare to have all responses by 21 days”• “Responding after deadline”

Powered by

Q13: Do you rely on the Positive Response information for Design Tickets?

Answered: 90 Skipped: 25

Yes No

Answer Choice Responses

Yes 74.44% (67)

No 25.56% (23)

Total 90

Powered by

Q14: Some utilities assume that if a map is sent as their response to the ticket, then no online posting is necessary to Positive

Response. The Positive Response posting may be to indicate when staking has been completed or if maps are provided. If a utility

provides maps, do you think there is a need for the utility to provide posting to Positive Response as well?

Answered: 87 Skipped: 28

Yes No

Answer Choice Responses

Yes 62.07% (54)

No 37.93% (33)

Total 87

Powered by

Q15: Comments about the necessity for providing input to Positive Response.

Answered: 24 Skipped: 91

Pros:

• “Provides a complete listing of all responses in one report”• “Proves if utility has responded or staking is required”• “Nice for tracking purposes” • “Useful if maps are incomplete/incorrect area”• “Absolutely needed when staking in lieu of providing record”

Cons:

• “Positive response should be used for only staking tickets”• “Unnecessary if record info is current and mappable”• “If maps provided, staking should not be required”• “Most utilities send email, never check positive response”

Powered by

Q16: Do you have any suggestions for the Design Ticket process?

Answered: 43 Skipped: 72

• “All utilities participate and provide”

• “Provide for a penalty when utilities don’t respond”

• “Correct contact person for utilities”

• “Improve map, as not user-friendly”

• “Box for designer’s job number attach a map of project location”

• “Faster turn around time”

• “Reinstitute the survey ticket”

• “Companies archive to third party”

• “Utilities can see the map on the design ticket”

Powered by

Q17: How would you rate the overall value of the MISS DIG Design Ticket process?

Answered: 87 Skipped: 28

Very valuable 5 4 3 2 Very poor 1

Very valuable 5 4 3 2 Very poor 1 Total Weighted Average

36.78%(32)

35.63%(31)

24.14%(21)

3.45%(3)

0.00%(0) 87 4.06

Powered by

• Benefits of posting to Positive Response

• Requirement of 21-day response time

• Importance of clear records/updated maps

• Providing and updating appropriate contact info

• Necessity of mandatory participation—particularly municipalities

• Developing DPLs as new point of contact for Associate Members on the

Design Program, providing program information and education.

• Review design ticket entry/maps and software

MISS DIG 2016

Contact all facility owners/agents to provide ongoing education on Design

Program for: