DMMC SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM. HIGHLIGHTS OF HIGHWAY COST- EFFECTIVENESS METHODOLOGY z5 Weighted Categories Of Benefits. zExisting And 20-yr Design.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

City of Hubbard Transportation System Plan Update April 25, 2012.

Advertisements

Paula J. Trigg, County Engineer Public Works and Transportation Committee April 2, 2014 OVERVIEW | SOURCE OF PROJECTS PROPOSED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT.

Funding Programs Surface Transportation Program (STP) Transportation Alternatives Program (TA) Congestion Mitigation / Air Quality (CMAQ) Highway Safety.

HSM Implementation Tools Safety Analyst

Governor’s Freight Industry Summit Draft November 12, 2012 Sandra K. Beaupre’ Wisconsin DOT Governor’s Freight Industry Summit Draft November 12, 2012.

Canadian Truck Size & Weight Harmonization New Brunswick Department of Transportation Subcommittee on Highway Transport Portland, Maine June 6-9, 2010.

May 13 th, 2014 City of Akron, Ohio Intersection Safety Study State Route 59 / Main Street / Howard Street.

Bureau of Indian Affairs December 2012 Tribal High Priority Projects Program 21st Alaska BIA Providers Conference.

11 Tunde Balvanyos, Ph.D. Bus Rapid Transit Coordinator, Pace APTA BRT May 2009.

Third State of Good Repair Roundtable TERM Lite Update Development Update and Demonstration 1.

1 6-Year Transportation Improvement Program ( ) Kit Baker, Chair ( Citizen’s Transportation Advisory Committee ) Desiree’ Winkler, P.E. ( Transportation.

LAND AREA: 688 SQ. MI. – 3RD LARGEST IN OHIO 421 C/L MILES 393 BRIDGES (275 NBIS) 1,800 CULVERTS 5,000+ SIGNS 10 RAILROAD CROSSINGS (at grade) CURRENT.

1 Paula J. Trigg, County Engineer Public Works and Transportation Committee June 25, 2014 PROGRAM RECAP AND ENDORSEMENT REQUEST PROPOSED HIGHWAY.

Congestion Management System The Mobility Management Process.

Maryland Avenue and Westminster Street Jerry Auge, PE Project Manager Ramsey County Paul St. Martin Traffic Engineer City of St. Paul September 10, 2013.

City of Little Rock Public Works – Traffic Engineering Division City of Little Rock City of Little Rock Dallas Phasing Implementation Rodney Parham Road.

Transit Signal Priority Work Group Report 7/30/13

Steve Krebs and Jed Peters– DTSD-Bureau of Technical Services July 29, 2013.

Transportation Planning Section, Transportation Development Division Oregon Transportation Plan 2005 Modeling Alternative Policy Choices Becky Knudson,

PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS OVERVIEW Lecture 2. n Provide a historical perspective of the evolution of PMS over the last 20 years n Describe the basic.

May 13 th, 2014 Portage County, Ohio Tallmadge Road Corridor and Interchange Improvement Project.

Irene Rico Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century ~ MAP-21.

Paula J. Trigg, County Engineer Public Works and Transportation Committee April 3, 2013.

Walking and Biking the Busiest Roads Around Atlanta: a Bike/Ped Plan that establishes non-motorized transportation among regional-scale priorities Regan.

Low Cost Safety Improvements Pooled Fund Study (PFS) presented by Kim Eccles, P.E. Senior Engineer, VHB.

Intersection & Interchange Geometrics (IIG) Innovative Design Considerations for All Users Module 8 Intersection- Interchange Evaluation Process.

AASHTO SCOP Linking Planning to Programming P2P Link Rural Transportation Summit January 16, 2014 ADOT Vision and Long-Range Plan Planning to Programming.

A Handbook That Outlines When traffic impact studies should be required What analyses should be included How the study should be reviewed and used Who.

From Planning to Pouring: The Evolution of Safe Routes to School Julie Walcoff, Ohio DOT, Columbus, OH Alex Smith, Columbus Public Health, Columbus, OH.

MnDOT-ACEC Annual Conference March 5,  Capital planning and programming at MnDOT  Major considerations  A more transparent and collaborative.

Ron Hall Tribal Technical Assistance Program Colorado State University

INVEST (Infrastructure Voluntary Evaluation Sustainability Tool) FHWA’s Sustainable Highways Initiative And Self-Evaluation Tool Constance Hill Galloway.

NETWORK LEVEL EXAMPLES OF PMS İNŞ.YÜK. MÜH. VEYSEL ARLI.

2009 ACEC/ODOT CONFERENCE ODOT’S 1R PROGRAM Liz Hunt, P.E. ODOT Pavement Services Engineer.

1 Validation and Implication of Segmentation on Empirical Bayes for Highway Safety Studies Reginald R. Souleyrette, Robert P. Haas and T. H. Maze Iowa.

2-1 LOW COST SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS The Tools – Identification of High Crash Locations – Session #2.

Broward Complete Streets Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Meeting Monday August 10, 2015.

Advanced Preempted Crossings – A Case Study Tim Oster Railroad Project Manager City of Fort Worth Mid-States Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety Conference.

Energy Law, Fall 2010 Natashia Holmes

Regional Grant Funding Coordination for Implementation of Watershed Management Plans Project Clean Water Summit July 15, 2004 David W. Gibson SDRWQCB

Local Rural Highway Investment Program (LRHIP)

Safety management software for state and local highway agencies: –Improves identification and programming of site- specific highway safety improvements.

PROJECT UPDATE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #3 OCTOBER 17 4:30 PM – 6:30 PM Dakota County Northern Service Center.

Data Palooza Workshop May 9, 2013 Rabinder Bains, FHWA – Office of Policy and Government Affairs.

I-70 Second Tier Environmental Studies SIU #7 Presentation to TEAM September 16, 2004.

9-1 Using SafetyAnalyst Module 4 Countermeasure Evaluation.

Forecasting and Evaluating Network Growth David Levinson Norah Montes de Oca Feng Xie.

HBP Warranties – The Cost Benefit Evaluation Begins By: Jay Goldbaum, P.E. Colorado Department of Transportation Pavement Management and Design Program.

County of Fairfax, Virginia Department of Transportation Potential Fairfax County Photo Red Light Program Board Transportation Committee December 10, 2013.

The Fargo/Moorhead Area Interstate Operations Study Opportunities and Planned Activities Presentation for the Mn/DOT Travel Demand Modeling Coordinating.

Utah Research Benefits Value of Research Taskforce July 29, 2015 Cameron Kergaye Utah Department of Transportation.

Traffic Management System Status Update February, 2008.

Small Cost – Big Impact: Lessons in Low-Cost Safety Improvements Gustave Scheerbaum, PE Complete Streets Safety Engineer ARLE Grant Programs Manager City.

© 2014 HDR, Inc., all rights reserved. North Country Access Improvements Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting No. 9 January 19, 2016.

Oregon’s All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) Program Zahidul Siddique, Ph.D., PE, PTOE Oregon Department of Transportation October 26, st International.

INTEGRATING ASSESSMENT OF THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IN PROJECT-LEVEL ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Meiwu An, Pikes Peak Area Council.

1 DuPage Mayors & Managers Conference S urface T ransportation P rogram Policies and Procedures of the DuPage Council June 22, 2011 Lombard Village Hall.

Road Safety Audits Road School, 2011 Rick Drumm, P.E. Safety Engineer Federal Highway Administration.

Connecting South Dakota and the Nation Access Management Training Brooke White, Access Management Engineer.

Federal Highway Administration University Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Publication No. FHWA-HRT Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning.

SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE MEASURES, RANKING AND PRIORITIZATION CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PLANS INCORPORATION INTO STIP & TIP STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR.

Virginia House Bill 2 – Funding the Right Projects Intelligent Transportation System Activities May 19, 2016.

LOW COST SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS Practitioner Workshop The Tools – Identification of High Crash Locations – Session #2.

0 Freight Activities: Year in Review Dec. 12 th 2015.

Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District DRAFT Water Resource Management Plan Review

Using CMFs in Planning for Virginia’s Project Funding Prioritization

SCOHTS Meeting June 15-17, 2011.

STP Shared Local Fund: Project Evaluation Criteria

SCOHTS Meeting June 15-17, 2011.

Interlocal Cooperative Agreement FY 20

Presentation transcript:

DMMC SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

HIGHLIGHTS OF HIGHWAY COST- EFFECTIVENESS METHODOLOGY z5 Weighted Categories Of Benefits. zExisting And 20-yr Design Traffic Scenarios. zCompare Build Vs. No-build For Each Traffic Scenario. zUse of Algorithm that Combines Pavement Surface Condition with Volume/Capacity Ratio. HCS or SYNCHRO for intersections. zReview latest CRF’s and Countermeasure research for application in determining Accident Reduction Benefit. zRelative Scaling Of Benefits. zFinal Cost-effectiveness Score.

RELATIVE WEIGHTING OF HIGHWAY BENEFIT CRITERIA

HIGHWAY PROJECT APPLICATION ESSENTIALS zMandatory Coordination With IDOT On Design Parameters & Project Limits. zPerform Geotechnical Survey If In Doubt About The Need For Reconstruction. zProvide 3-year Accident History By Severity Of Accident. zInclude Current ADT (& Peak Hour Turn Movements For Major Inter-sections That Will Be Improved). zCoordinate With CMAP On 20-yr. Design Traffic Projections.

ADT PROJECTIONS FOR STP PROJECTS REQUEST LETTER CONTACT: Mr. Don Kopec Chicago Metropolitan Area for Planning (CMAP) 233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800 Chicago, IL TECHNICAL QUESTIONS: Ms. Claire Bozic Tel: PROVIDE: 1. Brief Description of Project (Reference DMMC STP Program) 2. Location Map 3. Existing ADT’s (include peak hour data if available) 4. Pertinent Land Use/Development Information START THIS PROCESS EARLY !!!

RECURRING HIGHWAY COST-EFFECTIVENESS RANKING ISSUES 1. Obtaining CMAP-approved Traffic Forecasts. 2. Scope-of-work (Cost) Changes. a. Insufficient Geotechnical Investigation. b. Unfamiliarity w/IDOT Design Criteria & Policies. c. Project Limits Not Extended Far Enough. d. Unresolved Local Issues. 3. Annual Updates Of Traffic & Accident Data. 4. Adjusting Project Cost For Inflation (Allowable Cost Increase Includes Inflationary Effects).

HIGHWAY APPLICATION REMINDERS 1.For street segment improvements, crash data should be only for the approaches being improved at termini or mid-block intersections. 2.Include traffic and geometric/traffic control data for adjacent intersections if your project anticipates a diversion effect. 3.If the project includes signalized intersections that are part of a closed-loop system, include peak and off-peak system cycle lengths with the application.

MINIMUM TCM ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA zMunicipal Or County Sponsor zCommitment For Local Match zCommitment For On-going Maintenance and/ Operation. zConsistent With Local/Regional Plans zNot A Recurring Or Areawide Program zEligible Project Type zSatisfies Minimum Design Criteria / Warrants zSpecial ITS Eligibility Criteria

TCM EVALUATION CRITERIA yEmissions Reductions (X2) yBenefit Area (X2) yTime To Realize Benefits (X1) yCongestion Mitigation (X1) yProject Innovation (X1) yPriority Target Area (X1) (currently “Transit)

FEASIBILITY STUDIES & DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS PROJECT ELIGIBILITY Not a stand-alone design or construction engineering project. Satisfies minimum Fed, State, Regional, DMMC guidelines. May have to meet a minimum (threshold) evaluation score established by DMMC. PROJECT EVALUATION Projects rated low to high on a scale of 1 to 5 on the following criteria: -Project Innovation -Application for Other Areas -Implementation Potential -Priority Target Area