Colorado Off-System Bridge Program Description and Guidelines for Selecting Bridges for Rehabilitation or Replacement Funding
|
|
|
- Jared Hawkins
- 9 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 C Colorado Off-System Bridge Program Description and Guidelines for Selecting Bridges for Rehabilitation or Replacement Funding These guidelines are intended to provide assistance in selecting OFF-SYSTEM bridge projects and estimating funding eligibility and participation in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Highway Bridge Program and CDOT established criteria. For more information, contact: Colorado Department of Transportation Staff Bridge Branch Structure Asset Management Unit, or Structure Inspection Unit (303) September 9, 2011 Page 1 of 1
2 Program Description What is a bridge? The Federal definition of a bridge as defined in the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) published in the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR 650.3) is as follows: A structure including supports erected over a depression or an obstruction, such as water, highway, or railway, and having a track or passageway for carrying traffic or other moving loads, and having an opening measured along the center of the roadway of more than 20 feet (6.1 meters) between undercopings of abutments or spring lines of arches, or extreme ends of openings for multiple boxes; it may also include multiple pipes, where the clear distance between openings is less than half of the smaller contiguous opening. Public bridges meeting this definition fall under the provisions of the National Bridge Inventory Standards (NBIS) and must be inspected on a regular basis. The results of the inspections become a part of the National Bridge Inventory (NBI). The federal government, through the federal bridge program, provides funding to the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), as well as the other states, for financing a portion of the replacement or rehabilitation costs of bridges which are on the Select List. These funds are also used for bridge inspection, inventory, and asset management purposes. CDOT s bridge program consists of the federal bridge program funds allocated to the state plus state funds. In recent years state funds have made up 40% to 50% of the total program. Per Federal requirements at least 15% of the federal bridge program funds must be used for offsystem bridges. In recent years CDOT has allocated 30% to 35% of the total CDOT bridge program funds to off-system bridges. The terms on-system and off-system refer to the Federal Functional Classification description of the route carried by the bridge. Generally CDOT owned bridges are on-system and city and county owned bridges are off-system. More specifically, On-System bridges are those where Item 26 of the NBI = one of the following: 01 (Rural, Principal Arterial - Interstate), 02 (Rural, Principal Arterial - Other), 06 (Rural, Minor Arterial), 07 (Rural, Major Collector), 11 (Urban, Principal Arterial - Interstate), 12 (Urban, Principal Arterial - Other Freeways or Expressways), 14 (Urban, Other Principal Arterial), or 16 (Urban, Minor Arterial). Off-System bridges are those where Item 26 of the NBI = one of the following: 08 (Rural, Minor Collector), 09 (Rural, Local), 17 (Urban Collector), or 19 (Urban, Local). Page 2 of 2
3 Definition of Terms National Bridge Inventory (NBI) The aggregation of structure inventory and appraisal data collected to fulfill the requirement of the National Bridge Inspection Standards that each State shall prepare and maintain an inventory of all bridges subject to the NBIS. National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) Federal regulations establishing requirements for inspection procedures, frequency of inspections, qualifications of personnel, inspection reports, and preparation and maintenance of a State bridge inventory. The NBIS apply to all structures defined as bridges on all public roads. Public Road Any road under the jurisdiction of and maintained by a public authority and open to public travel. Sufficiency Rating The sufficiency rating formula is a method of evaluating data by calculating four separate factors to obtain a numeric value which is indicative of a bridge s sufficiency to remain in service. The result of this method is a percentage in which 100 percent would represent an entirely sufficient bridge and zero would represent an entirely insufficient or deficient bridge. The sufficiency rating shall not be less than 0% nor greater than 100%. The factors considered in determining a sufficiency rating are: S1 - Structural Adequacy and Safety (55% maximum), S2 - Serviceability and Functional Obsolescence (30% maximum), S3 - Essentiality for Public Use (15% maximum), and S4 - Special Reductions (detour length, traffic safety features, and structure type - 13% maximum). Sufficiency Rating = S1 + S2 + S3 S4. Bridges which have a sufficiency rating less than 80.0 qualify for the Federal Select List. Federal Select List of Bridges The Federal Select List of Bridges, commonly known as the Select List, is a subset of the National Bridge Inventory (NBI). The bridges on the Select List have a Sufficiency Rating less than, or equal to, 80.0 AND are either Structurally Deficient or Functionally Obsolete. Bridge program funds can be expended only on bridges which meet these Select List criteria. To further refine the use of bridge program funds, those bridges on the Select List that have a sufficiency rating from 50.0 through 80.0 qualify only for rehabilitation unless it can be shown that replacement is more economical or feasible. Bridges on the Select List which have a sufficiency rating less than 50.0 qualify for replacement. Page 3 of 3
4 Selecting Bridges for Rehabilitation or Replacement Funding The following procedures and requirements are used for bridge replacement and rehabilitation projects utilizing bridge program funds. 1. Projects are selected for funding by the Special Highway Committee (SHC). The SHC is administered through the Colorado Municipal League and Colorado Counties Incorporated and is composed of four representatives each from counties and municipalities. On years where bridge program funding is available for authorizing additional projects, the SHC will solicit the counties and municipalities for bridge applications. Projects are then selected based on priority, typically determined by sufficiency rating and available funds. Off-System bridge program projects are administered by the CDOT regional offices through the Region Local Agency Project Coordinator. When a county or municipality is notified by the SHC that their bridge application has been successful, the county or municipality then works with the CDOT Region Local Agency Project Coordinator to deliver the project. The SHC will typically maintain a four year plan of projects. Funding is typically not made available until July and is only made available for budgeting projects scheduled in that fiscal year. The state fiscal year starts on July 1 st. 2. Before submitting an application for bridge program funding to the SHC, verify that the structure is on, or currently qualifies for, the Federal Select List of Bridges. A copy of the select list can be obtained from the CDOT Staff Bridge Branch, Structure Asset Management Unit. In order to qualify for the Select List, two conditions must be satisfied: a) The structure must have a Sufficiency Rating of 80.0 or less and b) The structure must be either Structurally Deficient (SD) or Functionally Obsolete (FO). Whether a structure is SD or FO is determined by applying specific Federal criteria. If a structure is both SD and FO, then the SD designation controls. Changes of bridge inspection coding may cause the bridge to fall off the current Select List. Bridges are generally considered eligible if the bridge has appeared on the Select List sometime in the last ten years. Any request to use bridge program funds for a bridge not on the Select List should be fully documented and justified to indicate that additional deficiencies have developed through some natural or unforeseen phenomenon or that the bridge was dropped from the Select List because of changes in the Federal Coding Guide. Contact the Bridge Management Unit for clarification in these cases. 2. Determine if the structure qualifies for replacement or rehabilitation funding: a) Replacement: Structures on the Select List with a Sufficiency Rating LESS THAN 50 qualify for replacement. However, rehabilitation of a structure should always be considered. Page 4 of 4
5 Project eligibility includes total replacement of a structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridge with a new facility constructed in the same general traffic corridor. b) Rehabilitation: Structures on the select list with a Sufficiency Rating less than or equal to 80.0 qualify for rehabilitation. Project eligibility includes the work required to restore the structural integrity of a bridge, as well as work necessary to correct major safety defects, except as noted under ineligible work. 3. Bridge program requirements which must be addressed: a) Design Requirements: The project design for replacement or rehabilitation must follow the criteria set by the following design documents: CDOT Project Development Manual, CDOT Bridge Design Manual, CDOT Bridge Detailing Manual, CDOT Bridge Rating Manual, CDOT Drainage Manual, the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, the AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, and other requirements as identified by the CDOT Region Local Agency Project Coordinator. A structural selection report shall address alternative and economic solutions for the replacement or rehabilitation of the existing bridge. On a case-by-case basis, under certain conditions a structure apparently only eligible for rehabilitation may still be replaced if: 1. the existing structure type makes rehabilitation impossible, or 2. the existing conditions would be sacrificed by rehabilitation, or 3. the cost of rehabilitation would exceed the cost of replacement. Applicable hydraulic and environmental issues shall also be included in the report. This report should be submitted in the early stages of the design process to CDOT Staff Bridge Design and Management through the Special Highway Committee. CDOT Staff Bridge Design and Management will forward the report to the appropriate Region Local Agency Program Manager for review and concurrence. b) Ineligible work: 1) Roadwork: The costs of long approach fills, causeways, connecting roadways, interchanges, ramps, and other extensive earth structures, when constructed beyond the attainable touchdown point, are not eligible under the bridge program. A nominal amount of approach work, sufficient to connect the new facility to the existing roadway or to return the gradeline to an attainable touchdown point in accordance with good design practice is eligible. This roadway work should generally be no more than 15% of the cost for replacing the bridge and shall not be more than the minimum necessary to meet current geometric design requirements. Page 5 of 5
6 Roadwork costs exceeding 15% of the bridge replacement or rehabilitation costs, or the minimum necessary to meet current geometric design requirements, shall utilize other funding sources. 2) Aesthetic features: Special architectural features on bridges required by the environmental document may be eligible for bridge program funds. Otherwise, other funding sources shall be utilized. 3) Ten-Year Rule: A bridge will not appear on the Select List nor qualify for bridge program funding within 10 years of the date of its construction, reconstruction or major rehabilitation. This policy applies no matter what funds were used for the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation: Federal, State, local, private, or any combination thereof. Bridges removed from the Select List because of the 10-year rule criteria but with Federal-aid funds obligated for construction work prior to their removal will continue to be eligible for bridge program funds. 4) Examples of work which are not considered reconstruction or major rehabilitation and are not eligible for bridge program funding: A. Safety feature replacement or upgrading (for example, bridge rail, approach guardrail or impact attenuators). B. Overlay of bridge deck as part of a larger highway surfacing project (for example, overlay carried across bridge deck for surface uniformity without additional bridge work). C. Utility work. D. Emergency repair to restore structural integrity to the previous status following an accident. Federal ER program funding may be available for a declared disaster exceeding $700,000 roadway/bridge damage. E. Retrofitting to correct a deficiency which does not substantially alter the physical geometry or increase the load-carrying capacity. F. Work performed to keep a bridge operational while plans for complete rehabilitation or replacement are under preparation (for example, adding a substructure element or extra girder). Page 6 of 6
7 Eligibility Flow Chart Check Sufficiency Rating (S.R.) Is S.R 80.0? NO Structure Does YES Then Check for SD or FO Not Qualify for Bridge Program Is Structure SD or FO? NO Funding YES Does it Qualify for Rehab or Replace? Is S.R. < 50.0? NO FHWA OK? NO QUALIFIES FOR REHAB YES YES ONLY QUALIFIES FOR REPLACEMENT CHECK COST ESTIMATE GO TO NEXT PAGE Page 7 of 7
8 Estimating Reasonable Costs for Bridge Replacement The following method is provided to estimate bridge replacement cost prior to any engineering and is for planning purposes and to establish an initial reasonable project cost. A detailed engineering cost estimates will be needed before starting either the design or construction phases of projects using bridge program funds. Actual costs will be significantly different than this estimate. The SHC or CDOT may require a detailed engineering estimate before approving an application for funding or a request to supplement previously approved funds. If the funding requested exceeds the amount obtained by using this method, a detailed engineering cost estimate should be performed to help justify the request. This method only applies to bridge replacements. Bridge rehabilitation projects vary widely in scope and therefore require a bridge engineer s estimate. The total project cost factor accounts for the roadway work, traffic control, utilities, environmental work, ROW, and other non-bridge items that relate to the bridge replacement project. The larger engineering cost factor includes both design and construction engineering. If the application is for construction funds only, use the smaller factor. If the new bridge deck area is not known, a method for estimating the new area based on the area of the old bridge is given below. Estimating Total Project Cost New bridge deck area Sq. Ft. Times the bridge only unit cost, x $134/Sq. Ft. Times the total project cost factor, x 2.73 Times engineering cost factor, x 1.31 or 1.15 Estimated reasonable total project cost = $ Estimating New Bridge Deck Area Calculate the deck area of the existing bridge to the nearest Square Foot: Structure Length (NBI Item49): Ft. Times the width out-to-out (NBI Item52): Ft. Existing Deck Area = Sq. Ft. Estimate the area of the new bridge deck: Existing Deck Area from above Sq. Ft. Multiply by size factor x 2.11 Estimated new deck area = Sq. Ft. Page 8 of 8
GENERAL. This manual addresses five local programs that are funded under the current Highway Act:
OVERVIEW The Local Public Agency Manual published by the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) is intended to be used as a guide for cities and counties that sponsor projects utilizing federal
KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CABINET POLICY FOR FEDERALLY FUNDED PAVEMENT REHABILITATION AND PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROJECTS
KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CABINET POLICY FOR FEDERALLY FUNDED PAVEMENT REHABILITATION AND PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROJECTS I. GENERAL The following policy shall apply when the intent of the project is to
LOCATION AND DESIGN DIVISION
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LOCATION AND DESIGN DIVISION INSTRUCTIONAL AND INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM GENERAL SUBJECT: DESIGN EXCEPTIONS / WAIVERS SPECIFIC SUBJECT: DESIGN EXCEPTION REQUEST FORM
100 Design Controls and Exceptions
Table of Contents 100 Introduction... 1 101 Functional Classification... 1 101.1 General... 1 101.2 Urban & Rural... 1 101.3 Classification Used In ODOT Design Criteria... 1 102 Traffic Data... 2 102.1
FHWA Emergency Relief (FHWA-ER) Training
FHWA Emergency Relief (FHWA-ER) Training Training Developed and Coordinated By Colorado Department of Transportation 2 Agenda FHWA Flowchart Policies, Purpose, Agency Roles Application Process Eligibility
Surface Transportation Program (STP) Projects
Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (Economic Stimulus Program) Application Packet for: Surface Transportation Program (STP) Projects APPLICATIONS DUE
FEBRUARY 2014 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 4-1
FEBRUARY 2014 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 4-1 4. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION The analysis of bridges and structures is a mixture of science and engineering judgment. In most cases, use simple models with
Chapter 4 ASSET INVENTORY AND CONDITION CHAPTER 4 ASSET INVENTORY AND CONDITION PAGE 33
Chapter 4 ASSET INVENTORY AND CONDITION CHAPTER 4 ASSET INVENTORY AND CONDITION PAGE 33 This page intentionally left blank. PAGE 34 MINNESOTA GO MNDOT TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN ASSET INVENTORY
FHWA Minnesota Division Guidance for the Preparation of a FHWA INTERSTATE ACCESS REQUEST
FHWA Minnesota Division Guidance for the Preparation of a FHWA INTERSTATE ACCESS REQUEST August 2003 Background: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has retained all approval rights to the control
National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) Metrics
Table of Contents National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) Metrics NATIONAL BRIDGE INSPECTION STANDARDS (NBIS) METRICS TABLE OF CONTENTS...1 Metric #1: 23 CFR 650.307 Bridge inspection organization...2
SUMMARY OF CATEGORIES 2007 STATEWIDE PRESERVATION PROGRAM (SPP) _MAINTAIN IT_
2007 STATEWIDE PRESERVATION (SPP) _MAINTAIN IT_ 1 Preventive Maintenance and Rehabilitation MING AUTHORITY allocation by fmula. Projects selected by districts. State % 0% State Districts RANKING INDEX
Earth Retaining Structures
Earth Retaining Structures and Asset Management Earth Retaining Structures and Asset Management A Critical Component Tool in Maintaining Public Safety Earth Retaining Structures (ERS) are often an overlooked
CHAPTER 7: QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE ***DRAFT***
CHAPTER 7: QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE ***DRAFT*** CHAPTER 7: QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE... 1 SECTION 7.1 INTRODUCTION... 2 Subsection 7.1.1 Purpose... 2 Subsection 7.1.2 Scope... 2 Subsection
Bridge Preservation Guide. Maintaining a State of Good Repair Using Cost Effective Investment Strategies
Bridge Preservation Guide Maintaining a State of Good Repair Using Cost Effective Investment Strategies Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation
FOREWORD. William A. Weseman, Director Office of Engineering
FOREWORD The Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation's Bridges (Guide) has been revised several times in the past. This latest edition revises the Guide to convert
STREET LIGHTING CONSTRUCTION DESIGN CRITERIA
STREET LIGHTING CONSTRUCTION DESIGN CRITERIA DC9-001 GENERAL. Proposed street lighting construction in the city of Olathe shall in all respects conform to the technical criteria for analysis and design
Methodology to Identify Preservation Priority Bridges
Methodology to Identify Preservation Priority Bridges Louisiana Historic Bridge Inventory Task 8 Prepared for Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development Prepared by www.meadhunt.com November
Federal Highway Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 202-366-4000
1 of 8 12/27/2013 8:21 AM U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 202-366-4000 MAP-21 - Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century
2012 Statewide Bridge Sufficiency Rating Report. The Indiana LTAP Center. Indiana Department of Transportation
2012 Statewide Bridge Sufficiency Rating Report March 2013 RP-2-2012 Compiled by The Indiana LTAP Center Compiled using data provided by the Indiana Department of Transportation and by the Indiana Department
15 LC 39 0962 A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT
Senate Bill 169 By: Senators Gooch of the 51st, Williams of the 19th, Beach of the 21st, Mullis of the 53rd, Miller of the 49th and others A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Federal Guidelines for STP-U Funding
MPC 5.f Attachment 1 STP-U Eligibility Guidelines Page 1 of 5 Federal Guidelines for STP-U Funding SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP) ELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years FUND: Highway
CHAPTER 4 SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP)
Local Assistance Program Guidelines Chapter 4 CHAPTER 4 SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP) CONTENTS Section Subject Page Number 4.1 INTRODUCTION... 4-1 4.2 ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA... 4-1 General... 4-1
Asset Management Performance Report (Asset Management Plan Phase 1)
2016 Asset Management Performance Report (Asset Management Plan Phase 1) Prepared by the California Department of Transportation In Accordance with Government Code Section 14526.5 Table of Contents Executive
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ACCESS AND RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH GUIDELINES
Approved 6/26/01 HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ACCESS AND RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH GUIDELINES All new, modified and/or changed use access(es) onto county roads shall be subject to the access and corridor protection guidelines
P. ALTERNATE TECHNICAL CONCEPTS FOR CONSTRUCTION, STAGING AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
P. ALTERNATE TECHNICAL CONCEPTS FOR CONSTRUCTION, STAGING AND TRAFFIC CONTROL 1.0 Description. 1.1 This specification allows bidders the opportunity to include in their overall bid proposal, pricing for
Safe & Sound Bridge Terminology
Safe & Sound Bridge Terminology Abutment A retaining wall supporting the ends of a bridge, and, in general, retaining or supporting the approach embankment. Approach The part of the bridge that carries
3.1 Historical Considerations
3. Recommended Scope of Bridge improvements 3.1 Historical Considerations In the fall of 2000, an outside consultant, Fraser Design, suggested that the existing 4 th St. Bridge is potentially eligible
REFERENCE SERIES: Transportation in Connecticut ARTICLE NO. 02 Potential Federal-Aid Sources
REFERENCE SERIES: Transportation in Connecticut ARTICLE NO. 02 Potential Federal-Aid Sources THIS DOCUMENT IS IN TEXT ONLY FORMAT - A FULLY FORMATTED DOCUMENT WITH GRAPHICS IS AVAILABLE AT THE CT DOT WEBSITE
CONCEPTUAL REHABILITATION ALTERNATIVE
Appendix D While federal law requires preservation/rehabilitation of historic bridges be considered, there is no standard procedure to determine when rehabilitation is appropriate and when replacement
CIRCULAR LETTER 2007-20 Page 2 of 5 November 30, 2007
CIRCULAR LETTER 2007-20 PPC DECK BEAM NEW SHAPE IMPLEMENTATION, STANDARD BRIDGE PLAN RETIREMENT, AND PPC DECK BEAM INSPECTION COUNTY ENGINEERS/SUPERINTENDENTS OF HIGHWAYS MUNICIPAL ENGINEERS/DIRECTORS
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES
Chapter 8 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES SCDOT BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL April 2006 Table of Contents Section Page 8.1 PROGRAMMING ESTIMATES...8-1 8.1.1 Bridge Replacement Projects...8-1 8.1.2 Other Projects...8-1
1. It would create hazardous effects of storm water run-off. 3. It would increase hazardous driving conditions on the public road.
SECTION 6: REQUIREMENTS FOR A DRIVEWAY CONNECTION A. Required information. The application shall be accompanied by a sketch of the proposed driveway which at a minimum shall indicate: 1. Geometric information
Program guidance that details the eligibility, criteria and application process. Ferry Boat Program. Ohio Department of Transportation
Program guidance that details the eligibility, criteria and application process. Ferry Boat Program Ohio Department of Transportation TABLE OF CONTENTS Program Overview Program Administration.........2
WORK ZONE SAFETY & MOBILITY GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
WORK ZONE SAFETY & MOBILITY GUIDANCE DOCUMENT August 2007 Prepared by: Vermont Agency of Transportation The following document was drafted in response to updates made to the work zone regulations at 23
WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS ADMINISTRATIVE OPERATING PROCEDURES SECTION I, CHAPTER 8 FLOOD EMERGENCY RELIEF PROJECTS. Effective 11/15/2004
WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS ADMINISTRATIVE OPERATING PROCEDURES SECTION I, CHAPTER 8 SECTION TITLE: CHAPTER TITLE: GENERAL FLOOD EMERGENCY RELIEF PROJECTS I. INTRODUCTION II. RESPONSIBILITIES A.
FHWA Colorado Division Control of Access to the Interstate and its Right-of-Way February 2005
FHWA Colorado Division Control of Access to the Interstate and its Right-of-Way February 2005 Background: It is in the national interest to maintain the Interstate System to provide the highest level of
Marketing Bridge Preservation UTAH Perspective
Marketing Bridge Preservation UTAH Perspective Southeast Bridge Preservation Conference Orlando, Florida April 2010 David Eixenberger, SE, MBA Utah Branch Manager T.Y. Lin International Special Thanks
IH-635 MANAGED LANES PROJECT, SEG. 3.2
IH-635 MANAGED LANES PROJECT, SEG. 3.2 Location: Dallas, Texas Owner: Texas Department of Transportation Client: Ferrovial Agroman Construction Cost: $1 Billion Construction Completion Date: December,
HERS_IN. HIGHWAY ECONOMIC REQUIREMENTS SYSTEM (for) INDIANA. AASHTO Transportation Estimator Association Conference October 16, 2001
AASHTO Transportation Estimator Association Conference October 16, 2001 HERS_IN HIGHWAY ECONOMIC REQUIREMENTS SYSTEM (for) INDIANA OVERVIEW HERS Background System Planning Tool Development HERS_IN Structure
How To Improve Road Quality
A Customer Service Level Approach for Maine DOT s Asset Management System Jeffrey L. Zavitski, B.A. Senior Implementation Specialist Deighton Associates Limited Chip Getchell, P.E. Director, Work Plan
2015 ODOT Bridge Design Conference May 12, 2014. DeJong Rd Bridge High- Seismic Zone Case Study: Bridge Rehab vs. Replacement.
2015 ODOT Bridge Design Conference May 12, 2014 DeJong Rd Bridge High- Seismic Zone Case Study: Bridge Rehab vs. Replacement Mary Ann Triska 2015 HDR, all rights reserved. Presentation Outline Project
MassDOT s Work Zone Transportation Management Procedures. By: Neil Boudreau, MassDOT and Michael Sutton, P.E., VHB
MassDOT s Work Zone Transportation Management Procedures By: Neil Boudreau, MassDOT and Michael Sutton, P.E., VHB What is the Work Zone Safety and Mobility Rule? 23 CFR 630 Subpart J, effective October
City of Auburn Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan for Curb Ramps, Sidewalks, and Pedestrian Signals ADA TRANSITION PLAN
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan for Curb Ramps, Sidewalks, and Pedestrian Signals ADA TRANSITION PLAN December 21, 2009 Public Works Department 171 N. Ross Street, Suite 200 Auburn,
Section 11.5 TESTING AND CORRECTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT SURFACE DEFICIENCIES
Section 11.5 TESTING AND CORRECTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT SURFACE DEFICIENCIES 11.5.1 Purpose To provide a uniform procedure for determining that the last structural layer meets the applicable straightedge
INDOT 2000-2025 Long Range Plan
Chapter 9 INDOT 2000-2025 Long Range Plan Highway Needs Analysis Overview The statewide transportation planning process provides for the identification of highway needs through a comprehensive process
Ohio Department of Transportation Division of Production Management Office of Geotechnical Engineering. Geotechnical Bulletin PLAN SUBGRADES
Ohio Department of Transportation Division of Production Management Office of Geotechnical Engineering Geotechnical Bulletin GB 1 PLAN SUBGRADES Geotechnical Bulletin GB1 was jointly developed by the Offices
5.14 Floodplains and Drainage/Hydrology
I-70 East Final EIS 5.14 Floodplains and Drainage/Hydrology 5.14 Floodplains and Drainage/Hydrology This section discusses floodplain and drainage/hydrology resources and explains why they are important
UPDATE: Contingency Requirements for Close Out of the RREM Program
UPDATE: Contingency Requirements for Close Out of the RREM Program If you are participating in the RREM Program and meet the following conditions; Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, Elevation, and Mitigation
REHABILITATION PACKAGE 1-a
1-a WINONA BRIDGE (BRIDGE 5900) REHABILITATION PACKAGE 1-a Rehab option 1-a is a rehabilitation package whereby all spans of the existing structure would be rehabilitated to the degree feasible and strengthened
Jesus M. Rohena, P.E Senior Tunnel Engineer Federal Highway Administration [email protected]
Jesus M. Rohena, P.E Senior Tunnel Engineer Federal Highway Administration [email protected] What is a tunnel? NFPA: ``enclosed roadway for motor vehicle traffic with vehicle access that is limited
RPA 14/ATURA Surface Transportation Program (STP) APPLICATION FOR FUNDS
RPA 14/ATURA Surface Transportation Program (STP) APPLICATION FOR FUNDS Please provide the following information when applying to RPA 14/ATURA for Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding for projects
Safety, Health and Accessibility Design Guidelines For Architects, Engineers and Design Firms
Safety, Health and Accessibility Design Guidelines For Architects, Engineers and Design Firms U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs Division of Safety and Risk Management Introduction
I-25/ARAPAHOE INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
MANDATORY PRE-BID SIGN IN CDOT Carrie DeJiacomo, Program Engineer John Hall, Resident Engineer Telecia McCline, Project Manager Tammy Maurer, Assistant Project Manager David Evans/Hartwig Design Consultant
UTILITY MANUAL of the Colorado Department of Transportation
UTILITY MANUAL of the Colorado Department of Transportation GUIDELINES FOR ACCOMMODATING UTILITIES IN THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHTS OF WAY PURSUANT TO 2 C.C.R. 601-18 Effective January 31, 2011 UTILITY MANUAL
Public Information & Public Scoping Meeting
Public Information & Public Scoping Meeting William F. Cribari Memorial Bridge Route 136 over the Saugatuck River Review of Rehabilitation Study Report Public Scoping for the gathering and analysis of
Work Breakdown Structure Element Dictionary. Final Design
Initiation FD 4.1 Initiation encompasses deliverables associated with the development, implementation and control of the project s schedule, budget and scope. The lead office develops these project parameters
C. Section 014510 TESTING LABORATORY SERVICE.
SECTION 014500 QUALITY CONTROL PART 1 GENERAL 1.01 RELATED REQUIREMENTS A. Drawings and General Provisions of Contract, including General and Special Conditions and other Division 1 Specification Sections,
WSDOT s Approach to Seismic Retrofit of Highway Structures
WSDOT s Approach to Seismic Retrofit of Highway Structures Role of the Lifeline Route in Reducing Network Risk Lynn Peterson Secretary of Transportation Patrick Morin, PE Capital Program Development &
Retaining Wall Global Stability & AASHTO LRFD Unnecessary, Unreasonable Guideline Changes Result in Huge Wastes of Money at Some Wall Locations
Retaining Wall Global Stability & AASHTO LRFD Unnecessary, Unreasonable Guideline Changes Result in Huge Wastes of Money at Some Wall Locations The implementation of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications
TOWN OF NEW HAVEN ROAD PLAN
1 TOWN OF NEW HAVEN ROAD PLAN BACKGROUND The Town of New Haven, Vermont consists of 42 square miles of land and a population of approximately 1400 people. At the start of the 21 st century, it is served
Informational Workshop Public Meeting Kanawha Falls Bridge Project
Informational Workshop Public Meeting Kanawha Falls Project WV Department of Transportation Division of Highways in Cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration State Project S310-13-0.02 00 Federal
I Gotta Know What? A Math Tutorial For Prospective CPO Students. FR = FA times FMR or FR = FA x FMR Volume (V)gallons = Volume (V)cubic feet x 7.
olume (V) = Area (A) x Average Depth (AD) I Gotta Know What? FR = FA times FMR or FR = FA x FMR Volume (V)gallons = Volume (V)cubic feet x 7.5 A = L x W A Math Tutorial For Prospective CPO Students AD
ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDELINES. for SUBDIVISIONS OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS
ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDELINES for SUBDIVISIONS OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS City of Birmingham Department of Planning, Engineering and Permits Engineering Division Office of the City Engineer 2008 TABLE
Local Transportation Capital Improvement Program (LOTCIP)
CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Local Transportation Capital Improvement Program (LOTCIP) GUIDELINES 2013 November 2013 Table of Contents Introduction...3 Application Process/Preliminary Project
WASHINGTON STATE TRANSPORTATION BY THE NUMBERS:
WASHINGTON STATE TRANSPORTATION BY THE NUMBERS: Meeting the State s Need for Safe and Efficient Mobility MARCH 2014 202-466-6706 www.tripnet.org Founded in 1971, TRIP of Washington, DC, is a nonprofit
MAP 21 themes. Strengthens America s highway and public transportation systems. Supports the Department s aggressive safety agenda
MAP 21 themes Strengthens America s highway and public transportation systems Creates jobs and supports economic growth Supports the Department s aggressive safety agenda Simplifies and focuses the Federal
Emergency Relief and Recovery Funds
Chapter 33 Emergency Relief Program This chapter provides information and instructions on procedures applicable to emergency projects funded by FHWA under the Emergency Relief (ER) Program. Agencies should
Paving Capitalization Work Categories and Treatments
Statement of ODOT Infrastructure Capitalization Policy Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) 34 requires public agencies to capitalize infrastructure assets on their financial statements for periods
EXPERIENCE WITH GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) / MAPPING
EXPERIENCE WITH GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) / MAPPING TEC has performed many GPS/GIS inventory projects and studies for the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), Counties, and municipalities.
CONSTRUCTION OF FEDERALLY FUNDED (FEDERAL AID) LOCAL AGENCY PROJECTS BY NON-COMPETITIVE BID CONTRACT (FORCE ACCOUNT) FINAL AUGUST 2015
CONSTRUCTION OF FEDERALLY FUNDED (FEDERAL AID) LOCAL AGENCY PROJECTS BY NON-COMPETITIVE BID CONTRACT (FORCE ACCOUNT) FINAL AUGUST 2015 The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 23, part 112, and 23 CFR
Legislative Fiscal Bureau One East Main, Suite 301 Madison, WI 53703 (608) 266-3847 Fax: (608) 267-6873
Legislative Fiscal Bureau One East Main, Suite 301 Madison, WI 53703 (608) 266-3847 Fax: (608) 267-6873 December 7, 2011 TO: FROM: Members Joint Committee on Finance Bob Lang, Director SUBJECT: Military
Asset Management Plan Final Report
AssetManagementPlan FinalReport DillonConsultingLimited 10FifthStreetSouth Chatham,ONN7M4V4 T:519-352-7802 F:519-354-2050 May,2014 www.dillon.ca EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Public infrastructure is central to our
Regional Surface Transportation Program Policy and Allocation
FY 2014-15 Regional Surface Transportation Program Policy and Allocation August 2015 Humboldt County Association of Governments 611 I Street, Suite B Eureka, CA 95501 Phone: 707.444.8208 www.hcaog.net
STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS MANAGEMENT MANUAL
STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS MANAGEMENT MANUAL Ohio Department of Transportation Access Management Committee Office of Urban and Corridor Planning Office of Roadway Engineering Services Office of Traffic Engineering
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ACCESSIBILITY TRANSITION PLAN
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ACCESSIBILITY TRANSITION PLAN FOR THE VILLAGE OF HUNTLEY, ILLINOIS 2015 Contents Introduction 1 Purpose 1 Officials Responsible for Implementation 2 Public Notice 2 Grievance Procedure
DOING BUSINESS WITH CDOT
DOING BUSINESS WITH CDOT Who is CDOT? CDOT is responsible for 9,146 miles of highway including 3,447 bridges One of the largest state government agencies with an annual budget of $1.2 billion Primarily
CAPPELEN MEMORIAL BRIDGE REHABILITATION
CAPPELEN MEMORIAL BRIDGE REHABILITATION Owner: Hennepin County Engineering: HNTB with Olson-Nesvold Engineering (ONE) and others Section 106 Historical Committee: Hennepin County, MnDOT Cultural Resources
TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT The Strategic Direction of Georgia Department of Transportation
2011 TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT The Strategic Direction of Georgia Department of Transportation Division of Organizational Performance Management 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS I II III IV EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.3
Stone Arch Bridges of Washington County, MD
Stone Arch Bridges of Washington County, MD Presentation for the County Engineers Association of Maryland (CEAM) 2009 Spring Conference May 14, 2009 Scott Hobbs, P.E. Capital Projects Engineering John
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP) PROCEDURES FOR THE OKLAHOMA CITY URBANIZED AREA FUNDS
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP) PROCEDURES FOR THE OKLAHOMA CITY URBANIZED AREA FUNDS October 2015 Background The Surface Transportation Program (STP) was originally established as Section 133 of
Historic Bridge Alternatives Analysis Layout
Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act of 1966 (Title 49, USC, Section 303) requires special considerations be made regarding the use of any publicly owned park, recreation area, wildlife/waterfowl refuge or historic
Township of Enniskillen. Asset Management Plan
Township of Enniskillen Asset Management Plan 2014 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Introduction 3 B. State of Local Infrastructure 4 C. Desired Levels of Service 7 D. Asset Management Strategy 8 E. Financing
Highway 23 Paynesville Richmond Soils Borings, Soils Tests, and Reporting
Highway 23 Paynesville Richmond Soils Borings, Soils Tests, and Reporting MnDOT Contract No. 1003249 General Project Overview This work is located along Trunk Highway (TH) 23, for State Project (SP) 7305-124.
2014-2018 TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS I II III IV EECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION LEVELS OF SERVICE LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT PAVEMENTS V VI BRIDGES HIGHWAY SIGNS GROWTH AND DEMAND FINANCIAL SUMMARY VII TAM PRACTICES ASSET MANAGEMENT
Alternatives to the Circ Project Prioritization Methodology Prepared for Circ Task Force July 28, 2011
Alternatives to the Circ Project Prioritization Methodology Prepared for Circ Task Force July 28, 2011 CCRPC staff has developed a draft methodology described below and detailed in the attached pages for
5 ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS AND EVALUATION
Page 23 5 ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS AND EVALUATION The process used for the assessment and evaluation of the alternatives follows the procedures of the Municipal Class EA, as described below: Identify a reasonable
GAO U.S. INFRASTRUCTURE. Funding Trends and Federal Agencies Investment Estimates. Testimony
GAO For Release on Delivery Expected at 3:00 p.m. EST Monday July 23, 2001 United States General Accounting Office Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Committee on Environment
