2016 master slides

HSM: Unlocking Funding for
Safer Highways
2016 Design Summit
Caroline Trueman – FHWA
David Kuhn – NJDOT
Jim Yeager – Michael Baker International
Scott Diehl – Urban Engineers
David Bizuga – NJDOT

HSM
MEASURING NJ’S HIGHWAY SAFETY
PERFORMANCE
CarolineTrueman
Safety Engineer

Crash Costs
Congestion
Costs
$
City Size

Safety
Operations
Environment
Right of Way

Highway Safety
Improvement Program
Based on
Fatalities &
Serious
Injuries
SHSP
All Public
Roads
Performance
Based
Annual
Reporting

TRUE or FALSE:
“My design meets or exceeds all minimum
criteria. Therefore it’s safe.”

Compliance
with
standards,
warrants,
guidelines
Predicted
crashes
frequency &
severity

PredictedCrashes
Crash History
Roadway Features
Traffic Volume

NJ Strategic Highway
Safety Plan
Dave Kuhn
Assistant Commissioner NJDOT

New Jersey’s SHSP Emphasis Areas

63%
37%
Fatal/Injury Crashes
Local
Roads
State
Roads

$0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
FFY 2012 FFY 2013 FFY 2014 Actual 2015 2016 Goal
HSIP (incl AC) Rail Highway Crossing
HSIP Authorizations
(millions)
Delivering projects

Case Study
Route 7 Belleville, NJ
JimYeager
Michael Baker Intl.

Safety Case Study:
Route 7
Concept Development
Belleville, NJ

Project Limits Map Existing Roadway Cross
Section
• Principal Arterial
• Central Business District
• Transit Corridor
• Schools
• Municipal Building
• Washington Avenue and
Belleville Turnpike
• 2013 AADT = 15,381

• Identified as a HIGH pedestrian crash
corridor (19 pedestrian and 8 bicycle)
• Involvement began with a Pedestrian
Road Safety Audit for NJDOT – Office of
Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs
• A locally supported Road Diet Concept
Recommended
• Pavement Reconstruction Concept
Development
BACKGROUND

• Identified two Safety Management System (SMS)
ranked intersections. (Rutgers Street and
Joralemon Street)
• Purpose and Need updated to address Safety
during Concept Development.
• And included safety improvements for all modes
- Vehicles, Pedestrians, Bicycles and MORE!
NETWORK SCREENING

Crashes by Milepost
DATA DRIVEN SAFETY

CRASHES BY TYPE
Same Dir-Rear
64
Same Dir-Side
60
Right Angle
33
Head-On
2
Parked Vehicle
23
Left Turn/U-Turn
60
Overturned
3
Fixed Object
9
Pedalcyclist
8
Pedestrian
19
Backing 11
Encroachment
4

TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION ALTERNATIVES

Advanced the proposed traffic
analysis early process.
The analysis helped to guide the
concept design.
WILL A ROAD DIET CONCEPT WORK FROM
AN OPERATIONAL STAND POINT?

Intersection Improvements
Dedicated Left and Right Turn Lanes
Updated Traffic Signals
New Pedestrian Signals
ADA Compliant Curb Ramps
Segment Improvements
Road Diet (4 Lane to 3 Lane)
Two Way Left Turn Lane
Bicycle Lanes
IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection Improvements
Dedicated Left and Right Turn Lanes
Updated Traffic Signals
New Pedestrian Signals
ADA Compliant Curb Ramps
Curb Extensions
Hi-Visibility Crosswalks
Intersection Enhancements for Bicyclists

DESIGN STANDARDS
Don’t be a Settler! Be a Safety Champion!
Complete
Streets which
are safer for
ALL users

HSM Predictive Method
• Quantifies predicted crashes for sites
o Individual Intersections
o Homogeneous Segments
• Safety Performance Function (SPF)
o Predicts crash rate based on AADT,
configuration
o Linear regression models
• Crash Modification Factor (CMF)
o Index of how crash rate will change
following a modification in design
or traffic control
Can We Justify Using HSIP Funds?

•Uses statistical models to estimate average
crash frequency for given conditions
•Overcome 3-year historical crash analysis
flaws:
•Natural variance in frequency
•Regression-to-the-mean bias
•Variations in site conditions
HSM Predictive Method

Developing Concepts
No Build Alternative Alternative 1
Alternative 3Alternative 2

No Build Alternative
Improvements:
None
Predicted:
56.1 Crashes/Year

Alternative 1
Improvements:
Road Diet with Turn Lanes
Upgraded Traffic Signals
Predicted:
47.8 Crashes/Year

Alternative 2
Improvements:
Road Diet with Turn Lanes Curb Extensions
Pedestrian Signal Heads Bike Lanes
Upgraded Traffic Signals
Predicted:
44.7 Crashes/Year

Alternative 3
Improvements:
Road Diet with Turn Lanes Curb Extensions
Pedestrian Signal Heads Bike Lanes
Upgraded Traffic Signals Raised Center Median
Predicted:
31.5 Crashes/Year

Portion of Project Total Cost Interest Rate
Capital
Recovery
Factor (A/P)
Annual Cost
Washington Ave
Pavement
Reconstruction and
Road Diet
$6,994,000 3% 0.0672 $470,107
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS ANNUALIZED

Portion of Project
Annual
Benefit
Annual Cost
Benefit/Cost
Ratio
Washington Ave
Pavement
Reconstruction and
Road Diet
$933,011 $470,107 1.98
BENEFIT – COST RATIO

Case Study
Rt. 206 Whitehorse Circle
Scott Diehl
Urban Engineers

US Route 206 Whitehorse Circle
Circle to Roundabout Project

May 18, 2016 Design Summit: Whitehorse Circle to Roundabout Project
Agenda
Project Background and History
• Project Location
• Crash History
• Traffic Operations
• Previous Efforts
Modern Roundabout
HSM Analysis

Project Location

Crash History
161 crashes at or near the Circle (2006-2008)
• 62 Angle
• 68 Rear-End
• 26% Injury

Crash History

Traffic Operations - Queuing

Previous Efforts
NJDOT Developed short-term mitigation measures
• Improved signing & striping
• Updated regulatory & warning signs
Evaluated as part of an Annual Safety Report
• No reduction in angle crashes, overall frequency or
percent injury
Problem Statement Completed
• Recommended study to develop a “larger” solution

Modern Roundabout
KEY POINTS
• Addresses safety and operational issues
• Has operational capacity for the long-term
• Limited impacts to existing businesses
• Provides for a transition from highway setting
to a more urban/neighborhood setting
• Provides for “gateway” into Hamilton

HSM Analysis
• Over 10 year period a Roundabout is expected
to have about 350 less crashes than existing.
425
75
Existing Roundabout

HSM Analysis
• Over 10 year period a Roundabout is expected to have
about 350 less crashes than existing.
• Expected 0.63 Injury+Fatal (I+F) crashes per year.
Averaging about 11 I+F crashes per year with the
existing configuration.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Existing Roundabout
I + F Crashes Per Year

HSM Analysis
• Over 10 year period a Roundabout is
expected to have about 350 less crashes
than existing.
• Expected 0.63 Injury+Fatal (I+F) crashes
per year. Averaging about 11 I+F crashes
per year with the existing configuration.
• Signalized Intersection would be expected
to have more than TWICE the number of
I+F crashes.

HSM Analysis
• Over 10 year period a Roundabout is expected to
have about 350 less crashes than existing.
• Expected 0.63 Injury+Fatal (I+F) crashes per year.
Averaging about 11 I+F crashes per year with the
existing configuration.
• Signalized Intersection would be expected to have
more than TWICE the number of I+F crashes.
• $14.7M present value of a modern roundabout
based on a 10 year analysis.
• Benefit/Cost ratio of 7.74.

Systemic Safety
Projects
Dave Bizuga
Executive Manager NJDOT

CLRS across the Nation and in NJ
 CLRS create noise & vibration inside your vehicle
that alert you as you cross the center line.
 11 state and one national study show that CLRS
reduces crossover crashes 18 to 64%.
 NJDOT had a systematic program for CLRS from
2014 thru 2015.
 All paving projects currently include CLRS on two
lane and multilane undivided highways.

Crash Data
Three Roadway Departure (RwD) Emphasis Areas
make up 75% of RwD crashes. CLRS helps reduce all
of them:
 Head-on crashes
 Rollover
 Trees

Criteria
 Centerline rumble strips are constructed at the
yellow centerline stripe, both passing & no
passing zones.
 Rural & urban 2-Lane roads & multilane undivided
highways
 Posted speed limits of 35 MPH or higher
 10 foot minimum lane width (was 11 feet)
 HMA pavement must be in good condition with a
surface distress index (SDI) greater than 3

Criteria
Centerline rumble strips shall not be constructed at
the following locations:
 Street intersections: Construct to the end of
centerline stripe.
 Along left turn slots and continuous two-way left-
turn median lanes
 Bridge decks or concrete bridge approach slabs.
 Concrete pavement
 200 feet before and after the approximate mid-
point of Weigh-in-Motion (WIM) systems in the
roadway

Fog seal surface treatment shall be
applied after construction of the
CLRS

Installation of CLRS only
Asphalt Emulsion
Fog Seal
Polymerized Maltene
Emulsion
Fog Seal
1. Remove Traffic Stripes
2. Cut Rumble Strip
3. Apply Fog Seal
4. Apply Temp. Traffic
Stripes
5. Apply Permanent
Traffic Stripes
1. Cut Rumble Strip
2. Apply Permanent Traffic
Stripes
3. Apply Fog Seal

8. APPURTANCES INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO RPM’S,
MANHOLES, INLETS, VALVE MARKERS & MONUMENT BOXES.
9. DO NOT CONSTRUCT RUMBLE STRIPS 200’ BEFORE & AFTER THE
APPROX. MIDPOINT OF W.I.M. SYSTEMS IN THE ROADWAY

CLRS Program Progress to Date
 ~497 miles of CLRS installed systemically in Federal
FY 2014.
 ~270 miles of CLRS installed systemically in Federal
FY 2015.
 All paving projects currently include centerline
rumble strips on two lane and multilane undivided
highways.

9 State & FHWA Rumble Strip Peer
Exchange: 2/18/2016
What most often prevents implementation of CLRS
on your 2-lane roads? (select the most prevalent)
 Noise concerns 66.6% (6)
 Pavement concerns 66.6% (6)
 Maintenance concerns 22.2% (2)
 Bicycle accommodation concerns 22.2% (2)
 Other 11.1% (1)
 No need 11.1% (1)

HIGH FRICTION SURFACE
TREATMENT
(HFST)
MADE EASY

What is a
High Friction Surface Treatment?
• High Friction Surface Treatments (HFST) are
pavement surfacing overlay systems with:
 exceptional skid-resistant properties that are not
typically acquired by conventional materials
 retains the higher friction property for a much
longer time.
• Commercially available resin-based products
• Generally applied in short sections to improve safety
in spot locations where friction demand is critical.

HFST Binder Materials
• Polymer binder systems
• Epoxy-resin two-part systems
• Polyester-resin three part systems
• A laminate layer
that allows for
75% aggregate
embedment depth

HFST Aggregates
• Recommended aggregate is calcined bauxite
which is highly durable & provides the highest
resistance to polishing.
Calcined
Bauxite

NCAT TESTING OF HFST AGGREGATES

Marquette Interchange
Caution
When it
Rains! Milwaukee,
Wisconsin

Marquette Interchange Wisconsin

TOTALS
Before HFST (11/08 – 8/11) 2 years, 10 months – 219 crashes
HFST Applied – 9/21/2011
After HFST (10/11 – 8/14) 2 years, 11 months – 9 crashes

Skid Numbers:
Concrete: 54.1, 50.2, 50.9
HFST: 85.8, 85.8, 83.2
Stopping Distance @ 45 mph (ft.):
Concrete: 99, 91, 101, 91*
HFST: 76, 76, 79, 76*
*Cars changed lanes
Skid testing conducted at TTI proving
grounds

Fatal Horizontal Curve Crashes
72%
Tangent
Curved

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2.21
6.7
Crashes/km Horizontal Curves and Safety
Tangent
Segments
Curves and
Transitions
Average crash
rates for
horizontal curves
is about 3 times
that of tangent
segments

23%
16%
17%
10% 31%
3%
Collectors
Minor Arterials
Principal
Arterials
Freeways or
Expressways
Local
Roads or
Streets
Principal
Arterial Interstate
Principal Arterial -Other
Horizontal Curve Fatal Crashes by
Roadway Classification

Case Studies: PennDOT District 5
“Like a Miracle”

Traffic
SR 2017 - 9,000 AADT
SR 2024 - 4,600 AADT
Crashes
3 yrs. prior to install - 26
Since installation - 1
Skid Number
Before Install - 22
After Install - 75
Pennsylvania Project Summary
Installed 10/27/12

OK DOT 2014 FULLY AUTOMATED APPLICATION

MO DOT I-44 Phelps County 2014

TYPICAL APPLICATION
AND STAGING
STAGING
1. CLEAN SURFACE
2. APPLY HFST
3. SWEEP
4. SWEEP AGAIN AFTER 36
HOURS
5. PAINT STRIPES
Where doing 2 applications
over bridge decks, do 1st
application as shown
above, then do 2nd
application with steps 2
through 5.

Recommended Distance Upstream of the
PC of Horizontal Curve
Decel. Rate = 10 ft./s2
d = 1.075 (V2 / 10 ft./s2)
V = MPH
Solve for d for V1 (Posted Speed). Then solve for d for
V2 (curve speed), Subtract V1 – V2 to get upstream
distance, or use chart below:
APPROACH
SPEED
(MPH)
CURVE SPEED (MPH)
30 35 40 45 50 55 60
35 35 - - - - - -
40 76 41 - - - - -
45 122 86 46 - - - -
50 173 138 97 51 - - -
55 230 194 154 108 57 - -
60 292 257 216 170 119 62 -
65 359 324 284 238 186 130 68

Things to consider for HFST use.
• Is safe speed on curve less than or equal to
posted speed. If yes, consider superelevating
curve and /or adding shoulder if practical. Added
shoulders and chevrons can attain a 70%
reduction in run off the road crashes (Illinois
DOT). Also place advisory speed signs.
• Chevrons can attain a 30 to 40% reduction in
crashes (Illinois DOT).
• When applying on ramps, upgrade signing
(advisory speed, chevrons, etc) and striping as
per current MUTCD).

Things to consider for HFST use.
• Clear fixed objects from clear zone such as trees.
50% of run off the road accidents involve a tree.
Trees are involved in 8 to 11 fatalities a day.
That’s 1 fatality every 2 to 3 hours in the US.
• Apply HFST on new pavement up to
approximately 3 years old. Condition rating > 3.2.
• Two applications needed for concrete bridge
decks and open graded friction course.

Weather to Apply HFST
• Min. Surface Temp.: 55 degrees
• Max. Ambient Temp.: 105 degrees
• May thru August construction
• Do not place HFST, if within 3 hours of HFST,
the National Weather Service locally forecasts
a 40 percent chance, or greater, of rain.

HFST is a great safety treatment
that happens to be a pavement!
Kansas Application

HSM: Unlocking Funding for
Safer Highways
2016 Design Summit
Questions?

Utilities
Panelists
DREW MARKEWICZ – RBA GROUP
- UTILITY RISK MANAGEMENT
KEN KERR – INFRAMAP
- SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEERING
FRANK PINTO – NJDOT UTILITIES
- ADVANCED UTILITY RELOCATIONS
JIM LEPRI – NJDOT UTILITIES
NUNZIO MERLA - FHWA
- BUY AMERICA
VINCE MARTORANA - NJDOT UTILITIES

Utility Risk Management
Ideas for Today and
Tomorrow…

Utility Risk Management –
Presentation Topics
• Utility Risk “Drivers”
Frequent causes of adverse
impacts
• Utility Risk Considerations
• Utility “Tools”
To support the Design and
Construction Phases

Utility Risk - Drivers
Transportation Agencies & Design
Consultants…Utility related “Risk Drivers”
 Utilities - Have least control over one of
the more critical design components
 Selection of Design Team by choice,
Utility Team members are given
 Proximity of Work Environment….
 Highway, Traffic, Survey,
Structures,….”under one roof”
 Utilities, electric, gas, communications,
water, sanitary, etc. ….”off premises”

Utility Company….. “Risk Drivers”
 Utility Companies have their own
established Requirements &
Criteria
 Have Limited & Specialized
Resources
 Utility Customer Demands and
unanticipated emergencies
 Specialized Technical Utility
Expertise

Utility Company…..
• Design Constraints
• Existing Condition/System
Integrity
• Outages & Emergencies
• Material Availability –
Ordering Lead Times
• Resources - Crew Availability
• Seasonal Restrictions
• Utility Staging & Sequencing
• System Shut-down
Constraints
• Tie-in Constraints

Utility Risk:
Construction Staging & Sequencing
U U
U
U UU
Existing Underground
ROADWAY

U U
U
U
Problem: Roadway and utility
construction staging not
compatible Consequences: Construction delay, temporary
utility tie-ins, multiple unanticipated utility
mobilizations, additional cost.
UU
U
UU U U U
Road Construction Stage I
U
Proposed Underground Relocation
Utility Risk:
ROADWAY

U U
U
U
Problem: Roadway and utility
construction staging not
compatible Consequences: Construction delay, temporary
utility tie-ins, multiple unanticipated utility
mobilizations, additional cost.
UU
U
UU U U U
Road Construction Stage I
U
Proposed Underground Relocation
Tie-In Location
Utility Risk:
ROADWAY

Utility Risk:
“Indirect” Utility Conflicts
U
UU
U
U
U U
U
U
U
ROADWAY

Utility Risk:
U
UU
U
U
U U
U
U
U
- SUE verified no conflict
- SUE verified conflict
ROADWAY

U
UU
U
U
U U
U
U
U
- SUE verify no conflict
- SUE verify conflict
2’ – 3’
Clearance
50 Year Old CI Main
- Indirect Conflict Area
Construction activity near cast
iron pipe can have adverse impact
Utility Risk:
ROADWAY

Utility Risk:
1
1
Excavation area
for proposed
drainage
Existing cast iron pipe
within angle of repose will
likely be a “conflict” in
the field during construction.

Utility Risk:
Cast Iron Main Failures

Utility Risk - Considerations
Approach…..
Incorporate Utility work in the highway
construction contract
Risk Consideration…..
Utility work in the highway construction
contract is an excellent approach…. however,
the required utility construction staging must
be properly integrated.

Approach…..
 Advance the utility relocation work.
 Often advancing utility work requires more than
clearing and grubbing. Upfront work such as
significant rough grading, etc.

Approach…..
 Utility Construction to follow the highway
construction staging.
 Utility Construction often drives the highway
construction staging & sequencing.

Approach…..
 A utility conflict is identified when there is a
“direct hit”
 Very often “Indirect” utility conflicts are the
cause of costly and time consuming construction
field problem….sub-grade compaction, temporary
sheeting, construction vibrations, unstable cast iron utility,
utility staging, etc.

Utility
Risk Mitigation
Strategies….
New Tools
for Utility
Engineering

…Useful Utility Tools
• Utility Risk Assessment Plan
• Utility Construction Staging & Sequencing Plan
• Utility Constraint Map

Utility Tools - Utility Risk Assessment Plan
The Utility Risk
Assessment Plan is a
design tool used to
identify and address utility
related risks during the
design phase.

PERMITS
PERMITS RELATED TO UTILITIES
1. LICENSE TO CROSS
2. ROAD OPENING PERMITS (COVERED UNDER NJDOT PROJECTS)
3. OCCUPANCY PERMIT
4. RAILROAD CROSSING PERMIT
SPECIAL PERMITS (AS A RESULT OF MODIFIED UTILITIES)
1. POTABLE WATER PERMIT
2. TWA PERMIT
3. SEWER EXTENSION PERMIT
UTILITY RISKS
I. EXAMPLES OF DIRECT UTILITY RISKS (UTILITY DESIGN CONSTRAINTS)
1. LOADING IMPOSED ON UTILITIES FROM PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY (STAGED) ROADWAY
EXCAVATION/GRADING AFFECTING DEPTH OF BURY
2. DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE CONFLICTS
3. STRUCTURE FOUNDATION PLACEMENT AND REQUIRED EXCAVATION AND SHEETING
4. TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SHEETING REPLACEMENT
5. GUIDERAIL AND SUPPORT POST PLACEMENT
6. TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND LIGHTING CONFLICTS WITH AERIAL FACILITIES
7. TRAFFIC SIGNAL FOUNDATION CONFLICTS
8. HIGH VOLTAGE PROXIMITY CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS
9. HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE - UTILITY FACILITIES (AND ASSOCIATED PROPERTY LIMITS) THAT ARE
EITHER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ON THE STATE OR FEDERAL REGISTERS OF HISTORIC PLACES MAY
REQUIRE EXTRAORDINARY DOCUMENTED EFFORTS TO AVOID.
10. OTHER
II. EXAMPLES OF INDIRECT UTILITY RISKS (UTILITY DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS)
1. AGE OF THE UTILITY MAY RENDER IT SENSITIVE TO IMPACTS FROM ADJACENT CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES SUCH AS EQUIPMENT TRAFFIC/OPERATION, COMPACTION, VIBRATION AND
EXCAVATION.
2. UTILITY MATERIAL MAY NOT WITHSTAND ADJACENT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. SUCH
MATERIALS MAY INCLUDE TRANSITE DUCTS, WOOD DUCTS, CLAY PIPE, CAST IRON PIPE, BRICK
PIPE/MANHOLE, FIBER OPTIC.
3. SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS MAY BE REQUIRED BY UTILITY OWNERS FOR SHUT DOWNS AND
INTERRUPTION OF SERVICE.
4. TEMPORARY REDUCED DEPTH OF BURY (I.E. PAVEMENT BOX EXCAVATIONS), EXPOSING
EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES TO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC AND OPERATION.
5. COMPACTION VIBRATION OUTSIDE THE IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION AREA COULD DAMAGE
EXISTING FACILITIES.
6. UTILITY TIE-IN METHODS AND PROCEDURES MAY BE EXTENSIVE OR DIFFICULT IN THE PROJECT
LOCATION AREA.
7. CUT-OVER/TIE-IN RESTRICTION PROCEDURES FOR SOME UTILITIES REQUIRE A TEMPORARY
OUTAGE TO THE CUSTOMER. SOME CUSTOMERS CANNOT WITHSTAND TEMPORARY OUTAGE.
8. LIMITED ROW MAY RESTRICT EQUIPMENT OPERATIONS.
9. AERIAL EASEMENTS MAY BE NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE POLE CROSS ARMS, OR OTHER
ENCROACHMENTS WHERE EXISTING ROW IS LIMITED.
10. PLACEMENT OF GUY WIRES MAY REQUIRE ACCOMMODATION OR ROW EASEMENTS.
11. CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCESS, OPERATION, STORAGE AND
SERVICING.
12. NON COMPLIANCE WITH RGULATORY PROVISIONS OF THE UTILITY ACCOMMODATION POLICY
(NJAC 16:25) THE HIGHWAY OCCUPANCY PERMIT (NJAC 16:41) OR ANY OHTER STATE OR
FEDERAL REGULATIONS INVOLVING UTILITIES.
13. OTHER
SUMMARY OF UTILITY CONFLICT MITIGATION
UR-1 CONFIRMED REDUCED DEPTH OF BURY DURING PAVEMENT OPERATIONS IS ACCEPTABLE
BY UTILITY COMPANY. UTILITY MUST HAVE MINIMUM 30" OF COVER DURING PAVEMENT
OPERATIONS.
UR-2 AERAIL EASEMENT OBTAINED FOR NEW POLE LINE
UR-5 PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL FOUNDATION RELOCATED TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH
EXISTING UTILITY POLE
UR-6 GAS FACILITY SHUTDOWN IS CONFIRMED WITH GAS COMPANY TO BE FROM NOVEMBER
TO MARCH. NO GAS TIE-IN WORK CAN BE PERFORMED DURING THIS TIME FRAME.
UR-7 LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILTIES TO BE VERIFIED AS PART OF SUBSURFACE UTILITY
ENGINEERING (S.U.E.) PROGRAM. CONFLICTS TO BE MITIGATED BY DRAINAGE REDESIGN
AND/OR UTILITY RELOCATION. AT INTERSECTION. AERIAL ELETRIC LINE IS NO LONGER
CONFLICT AT THIS LOCATION.
ACTION ITEMS FOR NEXT PROJECT DELIVERY STAGE
1. OBTAIN FIBER OPTIC COMPANY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR PROTECTION DURING PAVING
OPERATIONS
2. OBTAIN LAYOUT OF FUTURE WATER MAIN PLANNED BY WATER COMPANY AND OVERLAY FOR
CONFLICT EVALUATION. PLANNED WATER MAIN FACILITY WORK TO BE ADVANCED AND
INCORPORATED INTO THE STATE'S CONTRACT.
3. REVIEW CONSTRUCTION STAGING AND LIMITS OF SHEETING AS THEY RELATE TO POTENTIAL
UTILITY IMPACTS
4. EVALUATE UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONFLICTS USING RESULTS OF S.U.E. INVESTIGATION
UTILITY RISK AREAS
UR-1 CAST IRON MAIN, OVER 80 YEARS OLD. LOCATED WITHIN ROADWAY FULL DEPTH
PAVEMENT AREA. VIBRATION OF SUBGRADE COMPACTION OPERATIONS POTENTIAL
IMPACT
UR-2 LIMITED ROW AVAILABILITY FOR PROPOSED UTILITY POLES AND GUY WIRES. ADDITIONAL
ROW AND/OR AERIAL AND GUY EASEMENTS MAY BE REQUIRED.
UR-3 FUTURE PLANNED WATER MAIN EXTENSION BY WATER COMPANY
UR-4 18 DUCT BANK FIBER TRUNKLINE. RELOCATION COSTS SIGNIFICANT.
UR-5 AERIAL ELECTRIC PRIMARY CROSSING IN VICINITY OF PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL. HVPA
CONSIDERATIONS
UR-6 GAS FACILITY SEASONAL SHUTDOWN RESTRICTION NOVEMBER THRU MARCH
UR-7 PROPOSED DRAINAGE CONFLICTS WITH UNDERGROUND UTILITY FACILITIES
UTILITY RISKS
List Of Types Of
Direct And Indirect
Utility Risks
EXAMPLE:
Project Specific
Risk Identified
EXAMPLE:
Project Specific
Risk Mitigations
EXAMPLE:
Project Specific
Action Items Of Risk
Not Yet Addressed

PERMITS
1. LICENSE TO CROSS
3. OCCUPANCY PERMIT
2. TWA PERMIT
UTILITY RISKS
10. OTHER
EXCAVATION.
LOCATION AREA.
SERVICING.
13. OTHER

UTILITY RISKS
10. OTHER
EXCAVATION.
LOCATION AREA.
SERVICING.
13. OTHER
PERMITS
1. LICENSE TO CROSS
3. OCCUPANCY PERMIT
2. TWA PERMIT
OPERATIONS.
OPERATIONS
UTILITY IMPACTS
UTILITY RISK AREAS
IMPACT
CONSIDERATIONS
UTILITY RISKS
I. EXAMPLES OF DIRECT UTILITY RISKS (UTILITYDESIGN CONSTRAINTS)
1.LOADING IMPOSED ON UTILITIES FROM PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY (STAGED) ROADWAY
2.DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE CONFLICTS
3.STRUCTURE FOUNDATION PLACEMENT AND REQUIRED EXCAVATION AND SHEETING
4.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SHEETING REPLACEMENT
5.GUIDERAIL AND SUPPORT POST PLACEMENT
6.TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND LIGHTING CONFLICTS WITH AERIAL FACILITIES
7.TRAFFIC SIGNAL FOUNDATION CONFLICTS
8.HIGH VOLTAGE PROXIMITY CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS
9.HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE - UTILITY FACILITIES (AND ASSOCIATED PROPERTY LIMITS) THAT ARE
10. OTHER
1.AGE OF THE UTILITY MAY RENDER IT SENSITIVE TO IMPACTS FROM ADJACENT CONSTRUCTION
EXCAVATION.
2.UTILITY MATERIAL MAY NOT WITHSTAND ADJACENT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. SUCH
3.SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS MAY BE REQUIRED BY UTILITY OWNERS FOR SHUT DOWNS AND
4.TEMPORARY REDUCED DEPTH OF BURY (I.E. PAVEMENT BOX EXCAVATIONS), EXPOSING EXISTING
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES TO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC AND OPERATION.
5.COMPACTION VIBRATION OUTSIDE THE IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION AREA COULD DAMAGE
6.UTILITY TIE-IN METHODS AND PROCEDURES MAY BE EXTENSIVE OR DIFFICULT IN THE PROJECT
LOCATION AREA.
7.CUT-OVER/TIE-IN RESTRICTION PROCEDURES FOR SOME UTILITIES REQUIRE A TEMPORARY
8.LIMITED ROW MAY RESTRICT EQUIPMENT OPERATIONS.
9.AERIAL EASEMENTS MAY BE NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE POLE CROSS ARMS, OR OTHER
10.PLACEMENT OF GUY WIRES MAY REQUIRE ACCOMMODATION OR ROW EASEMENTS.
11.CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCESS, OPERATION, STORAGE AND
SERVICING.
12.NON COMPLIANCE WITH RGULATORY PROVISIONS OF THE UTILITY ACCOMMODATION POLICY
(NJAC 16:25) THE HIGHWAY OCCUPANCY PERMIT (NJAC 16:41) OR ANY OHTER STATE OR FEDERAL
REGULATIONS INVOLVING UTILITIES.
13.OTHER

PERMITS
1. LICENSE TO CROSS
3. OCCUPANCY PERMIT
2. TWA PERMIT
UTILITY RISKS
10. OTHER
EXCAVATION.
LOCATION AREA.
SERVICING.
13. OTHER
OPERATIONS.
OPERATIONS
UTILITY IMPACTS
UTILITY RISK AREAS
IMPACT
CONSIDERATIONS

UTILITY RISKS
10. OTHER
EXCAVATION.
LOCATION AREA.
SERVICING.
13. OTHER
PERMITS
1. LICENSE TO CROSS
3. OCCUPANCY PERMIT
2. TWA PERMIT
OPERATIONS.
OPERATIONS
UTILITY IMPACTS
UTILITY RISK AREAS
IMPACT
CONSIDERATIONS
UTILITY RISK AREAS
IMPACT
UR-2 LIMITED ROW AVAILABILITY FOR PROPOSED UTILITY POLES AND GUY WIRES.
ADDITIONAL ROW AND/OR AERIAL AND GUY EASEMENTS MAY BE REQUIRED.
UR-5 AERIAL ELECTRIC PRIMARY CROSSING IN VICINITY OF PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL.
HVPA CONSIDERATIONS

UTILITY RISKS
10. OTHER
EXCAVATION.
LOCATION AREA.
SERVICING.
13. OTHER
PERMITS
1. LICENSE TO CROSS
3. OCCUPANCY PERMIT
2. TWA PERMIT
OPERATIONS.
OPERATIONS
UTILITY IMPACTS
UTILITY RISK AREAS
IMPACT
CONSIDERATIONS
UR-1 CONFIRMED REDUCED DEPTH OF BURY DURING PAVEMENT OPERATIONS IS
ACCEPTABLE BY UTILITY COMPANY. UTILITY MUST HAVE MINIMUM 30" OF COVER
DURING PAVEMENT OPERATIONS.
UR-6 GAS FACILITY SHUTDOWN IS CONFIRMED WITH GAS COMPANY TO BE FROM
NOVEMBER TO MARCH. NO GAS TIE-IN WORK CAN BE PERFORMED DURING THIS
TIME FRAME.
UR-7 LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILTIES TO BE VERIFIED AS PART OF SUBSURFACE
UTILITY ENGINEERING (S.U.E.) PROGRAM. CONFLICTS TO BE MITIGATED BY DRAINAGE
REDESIGN AND/OR UTILITY RELOCATION. AT INTERSECTION. AERIAL ELETRIC LINE IS
NO LONGER CONFLICT AT THIS LOCATION.

UTILITY RISKS
10. OTHER
EXCAVATION.
LOCATION AREA.
SERVICING.
13. OTHER
PERMITS
1. LICENSE TO CROSS
3. OCCUPANCY PERMIT
2. TWA PERMIT
OPERATIONS.
OPERATIONS
UTILITY IMPACTS
UTILITY RISK AREAS
IMPACT
CONSIDERATIONS
1.OBTAIN FIBER OPTIC COMPANY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR PROTECTION DURING PAVING
OPERATIONS
2.OBTAIN LAYOUT OF FUTURE WATER MAIN PLANNED BY WATER COMPANY AND OVERLAY FOR
3.REVIEW CONSTRUCTION STAGING AND LIMITS OF SHEETING AS THEY RELATE TO POTENTIAL
UTILITY IMPACTS
4.EVALUATE UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONFLICTS USING RESULTS OF S.U.E. INVESTIGATION

UTILITY RISKS
10. OTHER
EXCAVATION.
LOCATION AREA.
SERVICING.
13. OTHER
PERMITS
1. LICENSE TO CROSS
3. OCCUPANCY PERMIT
2. TWA PERMIT
OPERATIONS.
OPERATIONS
UTILITY IMPACTS
UTILITY RISK AREAS
IMPACT
CONSIDERATIONS
PERMITS
1.LICENSE TO CROSS
2.ROAD OPENING PERMITS (COVERED UNDER NJDOT PROJECTS)
3.OCCUPANCY PERMIT
4.RAILROAD CROSSING PERMIT
1.POTABLE WATER PERMIT
2.TWA PERMIT
3.SEWER EXTENSION PERMIT

Utility Tools – Utility Construction Staging &
Sequencing Plan
The Utility Construction
Staging & Sequencing Plan
identifies specific
requirements of utility
relocation/protection activities
with the overall project
construction staging and
construction activities.

Utility Tools – Utility Constraints Map
The Utility Constraints Map
is a contract document that
provides information
regarding critical utility
infrastructure within the
construction work limits.

Utility Innovation - Examples
North Bergen Rail Station
Two 24” Iron Gas Mains
Encased in Steel Casing
Future NJ Transit
Tonnelle Avenue
Light Rail Station

North Bergen Rail Station

Raritan River Fiber Cable Crossing

Raritan River Crossing at
the Driscoll Bridge
Use of an abandoned gas
main as conduit to pull 7000’
of fiber optic communication
lines across the Raritan River
A “WIN-WIN”
Saved utility company
$250,000
Provided Gas Company with
20 years of rental revenue
for the “leased” conduit

Utility Risk Mitigation - “Take-Away”
Frequent Statement…..
 Utility Companies are delaying the project.
Reality Often is …..
 An unanticipated “utility related” field issue ,not
properly identified during design, is the cause of
project delay.

Utility Risk Management
Effective Utility Risk Management
starts with an appropriate level
Subsurface Utility Engineering
(SUE) Investigation.
The presentation to follow will dig
deeper into the use and benefits
of SUE.

Subsurface Utility
Engineering
ACEC NJDOT FHWA Design Summit
May 18, 2016

“…is a professional service and branch of engineering
that involves…
• managing certain risks associated with utility
mapping at appropriate quality levels,
• utility coordination,
• utility relocation design and coordination,
• utility condition assessment,
• communication of utility data to concerned parties,
• utility relocation cost estimates,
• implementation of utility accommodation policies, and utility design.”
What is Subsurface Utility Engineering?

Quality Level D – Information derived from existing utility records
or oral recollections.
Quality Level C – Surveying visible above-ground utility surface
features such as valves, pole drops, meter pits, and using
professional judgment in correlating this information to QLD
information.
Quality Level B –Using surface geophysical methods to
determine the existence and approximate horizontal position of
subsurface utilities.
Quality Level A – Using minimally intrusive excavation equipment
at a specific point to obtain vertical information along with type,
condition, size and material.
Depiction of Utilities as Quality Levels

Visual Evidence of Subsurface Utilities

Why use Subsurface Utility Engineering?
It’s been proven Cost Effective…..
COST SAVINGS ON HIGHWAY PROJECTS UTILIZING SUBSURFACE
UTILITY ENGINEERING
Prepared by Purdue University Department of Building Construction
Management, December 1999 Prepared for the Federal Highway
Administration, Washington, DC 20002 FHWA Contract Number
DTFH61-96-00090
The Pennsylvania Transportation Institute of the Pennsylvania State University
(PSU) conducted an in-depth benefit-cost analysis in 2007 of 10 SUE projects
executed by PennDOT Districts. The PSU research shows that, in comparison
with projects not utilizing SUE, the total cost savings of SUE projects may range
from 10% to 15% on a typical project.
“On January 10, 1996, a routine capital improvement project
caused damage to an electric cable at Newark International
Airport, resulting in more than $1 billion of impacts, including
hundreds of cancelled and re-routed flights, disruption of
travel to tens of thousands of people, and complete closure of
the airport for more than 24 hours. “
ACRP – Airport Cooperative Research Program Synthesis 34,
March 2012
THE ROOT CAUSES OF DELAYS IN HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION
• The purpose of the survey was to obtain input from working professionals
concerning the most frequent causes of construction delay and delay
avoidance measures.
• Utilities and Utility Related Activities were #1 and #2

Benefits
“Since 1991, FHWA has been encouraging
the use of SUE on Federal-aid and direct
Federal highway projects as an integral part
of preliminary engineering.”
SUE then…… 1990’s

ASCE 38 - Standard Guideline for the
Collection and Depiction of Existing
Subsurface Utility Data (2016)
SUE now………
Will address:
1. Civil 3D
2. Geographic Information
System (GIS)
3. Innovations
4. Commentary

ASCE XX - Utility As-Built Standard
SUE now………
Newly installed or exposed
underground utility
infrastructure and related
appurtenances at or below
grade.
 Collection
 Administration
 Exchange

Utility Locating Equipment and Technology

EML – Electromagnetic - Conductive and Inductive

Ground Penetrating Radar

Limitations – Ground Penetrating Radar
Subsurface Material
Air (excellent)
Concrete
Fresh Water
Sea Water
Dry Sand
Saturated Sand
Limestone
Shales
Silts
Clays
Granite
Ice
•GPR is limited by the depth and size
of the object you are trying to find.
•Limited ability to identify the utility
without other locating equipment.
•Even under ideal conditions, 20% -
70% documented success rate

Insert a conductive metallic
snake or sonde into a non-
conductive pipe.
Utility Locating Equipment and Techniques
Metallic Snakes and Sondes

Locate 15-foot dia. sanitary sewer
50-feet below the Gowanus Expressway
Non-Destructive Excavation was Critical
InnovationsInnovations – Underwater Utility Mapping

Innovations – Underwater Utility Mapping

The Final Word by
Federal Highway Administration
Using Subsurface Utility Engineering on Design Projects will:
• Reduce unforeseen utility conflicts and relocations
• Reduce claims and change orders
• Reduce delays due to utility cuts
• Lower project bids
• Reduce redesign costs
• Reduce project delays due to utility relocations

What’s is Advanced Utility
Relocations?
• Utility relocation before
construction
• Saves time & money

Why Do Advanced Utility Relocations?
■ Convenience to motoring public
■ Time Saving
■ Systematically Beneficial (Makes Sense)
■ Avoid Conflict (Utility Company & Contractor)
■ Avoid potential delay claims

What is Needed for Advanced Utility
Relocation?
Utility
Company
Commitment

Relocation?
Approved
Environmenta
l Documents
&
Permits

Relocation?
ROW
acquired
&
Access to
property

Relocation?
Executed
Utility
Agreement
s
&
Authorized
Constructio
n Funds

Relocation?
Constructio
n Oversight
&
Coordinatio
n Meetings

Advanced Utility Relocation Process
■ Design
– Advanced Utility relocations decided early
■ Pre- Construction
– No Contractor on-board
– NJDOT Resident assigned to the project
■ Coordination
– Monthly or bi-weekly meetings should be held

Reasons not to do Advanced
Utilities
■ Does not make sense for
construction staging
■ Does not save money
■ Too Disruptive to public/community
■ Highly sensitive area
■ Utility Company Seasonal
Restrictions

Common Advanced Utility Relocation
Issues
Clearing
and
Grubbing

Common Advanced Utility Relocation
Issues Existing
pole
line
Proposed
relocated pole
line
Existing road
-Stage I Construction
Work Zone
Existing
Utility in conflict
- Advanced utility work
not feasible
Problem: Utility relocation work can not be advanced
due to significant grade changes.
Proposed
Utility
Roadway Construction
Stage I Work Zone
Construction Staging

FHWA - Buy America
Law:
The FHWA's statutory provisions for
Buy America are found in Title 23
United States Code, Section 313

FHWA - Buy America
23 C.F.R. 635.410:
• All permanently incorporated steel or
iron materials made USA
• State has standard contract provisions
for made USA
• If State to include foreign, not to
exceed one-tenth of one percent (0.1
percent) of the total contract cost or
$2,500, whichever is greater.

FHWA - Buy America
MAP 21 Changes:
• Federal Funding used in any phase of
project, all phases must conform to Buy
America
MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century

FHWA - Buy America
FHWA's policy provides for:
• Using USA manufactured steel or iron
products
• Minimal usage criteria for non-
domestic products

Incorporating Buy America
(Utilities) into DOT Projects
• Letter of
Concurrence
• NJDOT utility
Buy America
process

Incorporating Buy America
(Utilities) into DOT Projects
• UECAs
• Paragraph 16 UECA Form
• “All steel and iron products provided for
permanent incorporation in the Project,
were made from steel and iron that was
melted and manufactured in the United
States including the application of
coatings which protect or enhance the
value of the material.”

Committing to Buy America
• Commitment Letter

• Assurance Plan
 Maintain the Records of Certification
• suppliers
•Fabricators
•manufacturers
– Lack of compliance = Nonpayment

• Certification of Compliance
(DC-17U)

Buy America – Utility
Challenges
• Utility Company Compliance
• Material Availability

Addressing Challenges
Challenge: Utility Company Compliance
Solution: early and often
communication

Addressing Challenges
Challenge: Material Availability
Solution:
– proactively investigate
– Seek USA made substitute

The Utility Engineering and Survey
Institute (UESI) will be recognized
as the premiere professional forum
providing opportunities for all
those interested to collaborate in
advancing the technical and
professional practices of utility
engineering and surveying.

Established in 1966,
what was the 1st state
transportation agency
in the United States?

George Washington crossed the
Delaware on which holiday?

Where is the Blueberry
Capitol of the World?

Acting Commissioner
Richard Hammer went
to high school with what
New Jersey rocker?

What is the longest
highway in NJ?

What is the shortest
highway in NJ?

What popular television series
opening credits show shots of or
from the New Jersey Turnpike in the
areas of exits 13, 14-14C and 15W?

This renowned engineer is
responsible for the design of
such bridges as the
George Washington Bridge,
Bayonne Bridge, and
Verrazanno Narrows Bridge
to name a few.

This is the home of the 2nd
largest waterfall east of the
Mississippi

What is the Garden
State Parkway’s
designated, but
unsigned, route
number?

As of 2015, this
movable swing
bridge is considered
the busiest span of its
kind in the Western
Hemisphere,
carrying between
150,000 and 200,000
passengers per day.

The street names in what
board game are all named
after actual streets in Atlantic
City?

What New Jersey interstate was
named the “James J. Howard
Interstate Highway” on 4/6/1988
by President Ronald Reagan
after the late Chairman of the
House Public Works and
Transportation Committee?

This is a
map of
which
historical
highway?

According to a
popular
bumper sticker,
you will never
catch a Jersey
Girl doing
this…..

Where is the oldest
operating lighthouse in
the nation?

This is the YEAR that the
American Association of
State Highway Officials
(AASHTO) was
formed……

What law established the
President’s Council on
environmental quality &
was signed into law by
President Richard Nixon
on January 1, 1970?

In what New Jersey town is
it illegal to dance or wear
shorts on Main Street?

New Jersey is proud to have the designation of
DINER CAPITAL OF THE WORLD!!

……in this very Jersey tune
………

What is the original route
designation for Route 31?

How many
miles of the
Atlantic Ocean
coastline are in
New Jersey?

New Jersey’s oldest
functioning bridge,
Route 206 over the
Stony Brook, was
constructed in which
year?

What agency has the
3rd largest bus, rail, &
light rail transit
ridership in the
United States?

What is the wealthiest
community in New
Jersey with a per capita
income of over $114,000
as of the 2000 census?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Which family participated
in the engineering and
building of many of the
region’s suspension
bridges?

This exit will take
you from the
NJ Turnpike
to the Garden State
Parkway…. as you
“head down the
shore”……

What is the
current
federal gas
tax rate per
gallon?

The Jersey Barrier was
developed in the 1950’s by the
New Jersey State Highway
Department and what New
Jersey engineering school?

This is home to the first AND
longest boardwalk in the world!

According to the plaque on the
Pulaski Skyway, who was the
“Bridge Engineer” when it was built?

According to
Wikipedia,
What is Port
Newark’s rank in the
US by cargo volume
in 2013?

New Jersey is infamous for
its traffic circles or rotaries.
In which town was the 1st one built?

Sugar sand
is common
in the Pine
Barrens…
Which
industry used
this
raw material?

New Jersey’s
hockey team is
named for this
supernatural
creature that is
supposed to
haunt the Pine
Barrens.

What was the nation’s
first major airport?

Prior to 1963, the official name of the
John F. Kennedy International Airport
was the New York International Airport,
but no one called it that………….
What was its popular name?

What FHWA initiative is a state-
based model to:
identify and rapidly deploy proven
but underutilized innovations
to shorten the project delivery
process
enhance roadway safety
reduce congestion
improve environmental
sustainability?

What city was a popular location
for shooting silent movies before
filmmakers moved to
Hollywood?

This
transportation
themed group had
a hit with this song.

The First Ever Traffic Light was
Installed Here…………….

According to
the
Appalachian
Trail
Conservancy,

Practical Design By Definition

Current Transportation Challenges
• Limited Resources
• Aging Infrastructure
• Growing Population

Practical Design Philosophy
• Address Core Purpose & Need
• Eliminates Non Essential Project Elements
• Results in Lower Costs & Improve Value
• Stretches Scarce Resources to best Meet
Transportation System Needs

Key Values of Practical Design
Delivering the “Right” Solution, in the
“Right” Place, at the “Right” Time

Practical Design Panel
Presenter
Richard Jaffe, NJDOT
Topic
NJDOT Practical Design
Approach
Case Study I – Rt 23
Realignment
Case Study II –
Rt 76/676/130
Performance Based
Practical Design
Robert Lee, NJDOT
Tam Sillick, WSP/PB
Sharad Rana, NJDOT
Hong Sun, LBG
Robert Mooney, FHWA
Presenter
Richard Jaffe, NJDOT
Topic
NJDOT Practical
Design Approach

NJDOT Practical Design Evolution
Context Sensitive Design – Community Partnering
Route 18 New Brunswick

Value Solutions/Value Engineering
Route 46 & 3 Concept Plan Route 46 & 3 Value
Engineering Plan

Smart Sizing/Right Sizing
Route 70 Manasquan River Bridge and River Road

ROUTE 23 SUSSEX BOROUGH REALIGNMENT
AND PAPAKATING CREEK
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
NJDOT Practical Design Approach - Scope
Reduction
Presented by
Robert Lee and Tam Sillick, PE
Owner: New Jersey Department of
Transportation
Designer: WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff

PROJECT LOCATION
Sussex
Borough &
Wantage
Township,
Sussex County

PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED
Provide a safe roadway system

Provide a more efficient and continuous
flow of traffic

Replace Route 23 Bridge over
Papakating Creek

Minimize social and environmental impacts

FINAL SCOPE CONCEPT –
COST PROHIBITIVE

ONE-WAY COUPLE CONCEPT –
SMART SIZED

ENHANCE SAFETY
Route 23 NB Route 23 SBEach bound
allows for:
• Left Shoulder
• 12’ Lane
• Right
Shoulder/
Bike Lane
• 6’ Sidewalk

ENHANCE SAFETY
Complete
Streets:
• Sidewalks
and bicycle
lane
throughout
project limits
• ADA-
compliant
ramps and
crosswalks

CONTINUOUS & EFFICIENT
TRAFFIC FLOW

REPLACE EXISTING BRIDGE
Route 23
Bridge over
Papakating
Creek
(Structure
No. 1904-154)

NEW ROUTE 23SB BRIDGE OVER
WETLANDS
Precast
Members =
Expedited
Construction
to Minimize
Impacts to
Wetlands

MINIMIZE SOCIAL &
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
• Reduced ROW takes
• Reduced Business
Relocations
• Maintained Character &
Function of Community
• Minimized Impacts to
Freshwater Wetlands
and Potential Bog
Turtles
• Historic Downtown
Area & SHPO

MINIMIZE SOCIAL &
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

SMART-SIZING
BENEFITS
• Bigger is not
always better
• Implemented
Complete Streets
throughout project
limits
• Reduced
construction costs
by 30%

297
PROJECT 1: I-76/676 BRIDGE DECK REPLACEMENTS
(BRIDGES WERE ASSIGNED TO LOUIS BERGER UNDER TP-757)
BRIDGE LOCATION PLAN

298
I-76/676 Bridge Locations
Bridge Location Map
for Three (3) I-76 & I-676 Design Projects
through Three (3) Separate Solicitations

299
PROJECT 2: I-676 BRIDGES OVER N BRANCH NEWTON CREEK
(BRIDGES WERE ASSIGNED TO DEWBERRY UNDER TP-031)

300
PROJECT 3: I-76 BRIDGES OVER ROUTE 130
(PROJECT IS PENDING SELECTION UNDER TP-104)

Benefits of Logical Extension of Project Scope

302
SAVE MONEY
SAVE TIME
MINIMIZE TRAFFIC IMPACT
TO TRAVELLING PUBLIC
IMPROVE SAFETY OF
CORRIDOR
BENEFITS

303
As per New Scope:
- I-76/I-676 Roadway Pavement to
be milled once only
- I-76/I-676 Roadway Pavement to
be overlayed once only
- Traffic Control/MPT to be
installed and removed once only
- No reconstruction is needed for
work required by the Direct
Connect contract.
- Prolong life of substructures by
eliminating deck joints now to
avoid replacing entire bridges in
15 years (conducted life cycle
cost analysis)
As per Original Scope:
- I-76/I-676 roadway pavement
to be milled twice
to be overlayed twice
installed and removed twice
- Work completed under Direct
Connect contract would need
to be reconstructed:
- O.H. Sign Structures
- Median Barriers
- Drainage Structures
- Roadway Paving
Total cost saving: $4.5 million
SAVE MONEY

304
As per New Scope:
- I-76/I-676 Roadway Pavement
to be milled once only
- I-76/I-676 Roadway Pavement
to be overlayed once only
installed and removed once only
- One permit only needed for 3
projects
to be milled twice
to be overlayed twice
- Separate permits required for
each project
Total time saving: 14 months
SAVE TIME

305
As per New Scope:
installed and removed once for
both pavement milling and
overlay
- Accelerated Bridge
Construction (ABC) – less than
1 year construction
- Improve rideability now on the
bridges
for both pavement milling and
overlay
- Traditional construction
method - 3 years construction
MINIMIZE IMPACT TO THE TRAVELLING PUBLIC

306
As per New Scope:
- Improve the safety of corridor including
the unsafe conditions caused by
original scope
- Improve safety now – vertical
clearances, shoulders, etc.
- Part of PBPD and VE solutions to
improve the overall system
performance
- Safety analysis/evaluation of overall
system (e.g. both deck condition and
superstructure condition of the bridge)
- Traffic analysis/simulation of the
system (e.g. VISSIM was used for
traffic impact analysis in the corridor-
quantitative analysis on the overall
travel time, queues and delays)
- Improve the safety of
individual bridges or
roadway only
- Other unsafe conditions to
remain in-between the
bridges and within project
limits
- Safety analysis/evaluation of
individual elements (e.g.
deck condition)
- Isolated traffic
analysis/simulation
IMPROVE THE SAFETY AND OPERATION OF CORRIDOR
AND SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

307
MAXIMIZE BENEFITS OF EVERY DOLLAR SPENT

Performance Based
Practical Design
May 18, 2016
Robert Mooney
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

PBPD is a decision making approach
that helps agencies better manage
transportation investments
and serve system-level needs
and performance priorities
with limited resources.
WHAT IS PBPD?

New Policy, Regulation, or Requirement
Opportunity to disregard long-term
needs:
For short term cost savings
Overlooking future development
Compromising on safety, user needs
(bike, ped, etc.), or accommodation of
freight to save money
PBPD IS NOT:

Flexible Design
Open Roads
Practical Solutions
Performance Based
Practical Design
 Practical
Engineering
 Practical
Improvements
 Common Sense
Engineering
PRACTICAL DESIGN, aka…

PBPD OVERVIEWS
15 Executive Overviews Delivered
DC
WA
OR
CA
AK
MT
ID
NV
UT
AZ
HI
NM
CO
WY
ND
SD
NE
KS
OK
TX
MN
IA
MO
AR
LA
WI
IL
MI
IN
KY
TN
MS
AL GA
FL
SC
NC
VA
OH
WV
PA
NY
NJ
CT RI
VT
NH
ME
MD
DE
MA
PR
VI
3 Executive Overviews Planned

PBPD WORKSHOPS
9 Workshops Delivered
DC
WA
OR
CA
AK
MT
ID
NV
UT
AZ
HI
NM
CO
WY
ND
SD
NE
KS
OK
TX
MN
IA
MO
AR
LA
WI
IL
MI
IN
KY
TN
MS
AL GA
FL
SC
NC
VA
OH
WV
PA
NY
NJ
CT RI
VT
NH
ME
MD
DE
MA
PR
VI
4 Workshops Planned

COMMON THEMES OF PBPD:
Project decisions are based on critical
examination of geometric elements
Select/size elements that serve priority needs
Reduce or eliminate those that don’t
Choices made to serve project priorities
while trying to save money
Project savings benefit System Needs

PBPD focuses on performance
improvements that benefit both project and
system needs.
Agencies make sound decisions based upon
performance analysis.
By scrutinizing each element of a project’s
scope relative to value, need, and urgency, a
PBPD approach seeks a greater return on
infrastructure investments.
NOTABLE ATTRIBUTES

PBPD – OVERLAPPING
Context
Sensitive
Solutions
Value
Engineering
System Performance

Practical Design Savings
Item Original Cost Practical Cost Savings
Pavement Design
Reduce driving lane from 12' to 11' $3,600,000 $3,300,000 $300,000
Minimize Underdrain Depth and locations $120,000 $60,000 $60,000
Shoulder Design
Reducing shoulder Aggregate width 4' to 1' $160,000 $40,000 $120,000
Reduce to 3:1 Side Slopes and V-bottom ditches $775,000 $525,000 $250,000
Utilities
Relocate 8" gas line to lower elevation $3,000,000 $500,000 $2,500,000
Move OH utilities inside Clear Zone:
Reduce trees to be removed $232,000 $132,000 $100,000
Reduce area of mitigated wetlands $500,000 $400,000 $100,000
Reduce number of mitigated trees $50,000 $10,000 $40,000
Structures
Modify instead of replace most large structures $700,000 $200,000 $500,000
Structure Removal $120,000 $20,000 $100,000
Minimizing Cover Depth at Crest Curves $40,000
Structure Backfill $60,000 $20,000 $40,000
TOTAL PROJECT SAVINGS: $4,150,000

PERFORMANCE BASED PRACTICAL DESIGN
EXAMPLE

EXAMPLE
Roadway Element Existing SR 264
Alternative
A
Alternative
B
Lane Width 12 feet 12 feet 12 feet
Shoulder Width 1 foot 5 feet 8 feet
Construction Costs $0 $16.5 mil $26.3 mil
2016-2036 Expected
Total # of Crashes
636 532 504
% Reduction of
Crashes over Existing
Conditions
N/A 17% 21%
Benefit-Cost Ratio N/A 2.3 1.9

EXAMPLE
Severity Number Percent
Fatal 13 0.8%
Incapacitating Injury 29 1.8%
Non-Incapacitating Injury 135 8.3%
Possible Injury 324 20.0%
No Injury (PDO) 1,120 69.1%
Total 1,621 100.0%
Highway 10 2013 AADT (vehicles per day)
1. Ramsey West 33,500
2. Armstrong
Boulevard
33,500
3. Ramsey Boulevard 38,500-44,000
4. Sunfish Lake
Boulevard
44,000-47,500
5. Anoka 47,500-60,000

EXAMPLE
Groups
Analyzed
Estimated #
of Crashes
Reduced
Percent
Benefit of
Freeway
Alternative
1 136 19%
1-2 428 60%
1-3 494 70%
1-4 623 88%
1-5 663 94%
1-6 683 96%

ALL ENGINEERING CHOICES
HAVE TRADE-OFFS
Cost
Value
(Operations,Safety,Efficiencyetc.)
MinimumStandards
Below Design
Criteria
Meets or Exceeds
Design Criteria
Same Cost,
Better Value
Same
Value,
Lower
Cost
Which One Would You Choose?

Total K A B C PDO
254.4 0.9 2.6 18.6 54.2 178.112 12 12
201.310 293.9 1.3 3.1 22.9 65.3
63.4 210.1
2 12
12 12 293.6 0.8 2.3 16.8
Estimated Crash Statistics
Estimated average crash freq. during Study
Period, crashes/yr:
dth Outside Shoulder Width
INTERACTIVE EXERCISE:
EXPANDING FREEWAY CAPACITY
No Build
Add lane by reconfiguring widths
Construct new lane(s) and shoulders
Given the same
traffic volume, which
of these three
options will the HSM
predict:
1. Fewest total
crashes?
2. Fewest fatalities?

Total K A B C PDO
254.4 0.9 2.6 18.6 54.2 178.112 12
201.310 293.9 1.3 3.1 22.9 65.3
63.4 210.112 293.6 0.8 2.3 16.8
Estimated Crash Statistics
Estimated average crash freq. during Study
Period, crashes/yr:
Outside Shoulder Width
12’ 12’ 12’ 12’12’
11’ 11’ 12’ 12’ 10’4’
12’ 12’ 12’ 12’12’
12’ 12’ 12’ 12’12’ 12’
Can we make
more out of our
alternatives?Can we
have the
best of
both?

OPERATIONAL BENEFITS OF SHOULDER
RUNNING
Before
After

SHOULDER USE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE
HSM
1.07
1.03
1.00
0.97
0.93
1.06
1.04
1.00
0.963 0.963
1.53
1.33
1.15
1.00
0.87
0.75
0.75
0.85
0.95
1.05
1.15
1.25
1.35
1.45
1.55
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
CrashModificationFactor
Width of Feature (Ft)
CMF's for Freeways
Inside Shoulder Width
Lane Width
Outside Shouder Width

Effective May 5, 2016 -- Controlling Criteria for NHS
Design Speed ≥ 50 mph:
1. Design Speed
2. Lane Width
3. Shoulder Width
4. Horizontal Curve Radius
5. Superelevation
6. Stopping Sight Distance
7. Maximum Grade
8. Cross Slope
9. Vertical Clearance
10.Design Loading Structural Capacity
CONTROLLING CRITERIA
Low Speed Roadways
(Design Speed < 50 mph):
1. Design Speed
2. Design Loading Structural Capacity

The new policy eliminated:
Bridge Width
Vertical Alignment
Lateral Offset to Obstruction
And renamed:
Horizontal Alignment → Horizontal Curve
Radius
Grade → Maximum Grade
Structural Capacity → Design Loading
Structural Capacity
WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV

FHWA is prepared to support States
as they develop projects with a
system performance mindset
using data-driven methods
FHWA WILL BE A GOOD PARTNER

WWW.FHWA.DOT.GOV/DESIGN/PBPD/
ROBERT MOONEY
202-366-2221
ROBERT.MOONEY@DOT.GOV
GEORGE MERRITT
404-562-3911
GEORGE.MERRITT@DOT.GOV

2016 master slides

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (12)

Similar to 2016 master slides (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

2016 master slides