1. Corridor Management Strategies Pilot in Region 4 Findings and Recommendations Reported to HMT May 2013 By: Martin Matejsek, Laura Wipper, Steve Lindland

2. Background Issues: –Increasing demands vs. declining funds –Shift from capital improvements to maintenance and preservation –How to make efficient choices for optimum results

3. Background, continued Approach to Pilot –Much initial discussion on concept with leadership teams Clear boundaries – maintain and preserve –Approval in July 2012 by HLT Steering Team Project Team –Region 4 location – US 97 »Grass Valley-US 197 –Collect and Analyze –Develop asset management and design strategies

4. Who Was Involved? Steering Team: –Bob Bryant –Luci Moore –Laura Wipper –Steve Lindland –Kent Belleque –Dave Polly –Nick Fortey –Amanda Pietz –Dick Reynolds Project Team: –Laura Wipper –Steve Lindland –Kent Belleque –Martin Matejsek –Dave Warrick –Joel McCarroll –Della Mosier –Brad DeHart –Rick Williams –Mike Stinson –Ron Snell –Rod Cathcart –Gary Larson –Joe McAndrew

5. Planning vs. Strategies for Corridors Planning Corridor Studies –Focus on infrastructure improvements –Public involvement –Coordination with local agencies Corridor Management Strategies –Focus on preserving and maintaining –Asset management plan –Design strategies for preservation

6. Pilot Corridor – US 97 Segment Characteristics –NHS Statewide Freight Route –2010 ADT = 2,000 –Rural Two Lane Segments –Narrow Shoulders –Incorporates three smaller communities 2015 STIP Project –Grass Valley to Shaniko

7. Analysis Based Upon… Lots of Data –Asset priority list –Pavement management data –Transportation System Plans –RES/RAZ maps –Contract plans –Vehicle and truck volumes –Crashes and lane departures –Maintenance – drainage and rock fall issues

8. Analysis, continued Project team evaluation of assets and design standards Safety primary focus –Lane departures (shoulder width) –Bicyclists (shoulder width) IHSDM analysis required for corridor standards Maintenance –Rock fall (widen shoulders with disposed material) –Culverts blocked with sediment –Drainage (icing issues) Freight mobility – Maintain 12’ Lane Width

9. Corridor Management Strategies Assets and Program Areas addressed: –Bridges –Culverts –Pavement –Flashing beacons –Traffic barriers –Signs –Freight mobility –Unstable slopes or areas with rock fall –Sidewalks and ADA ramps –Shoulder widths and bike facilities –Approaches

10. Corridor Design Strategies ―Lane width ―Bridge width ―Horizontal alignment ―Vertical alignment ―Stopping sight distance ―Spiral length ―Superelevation ―Pavement design life ―Design life & mobility standard ―Sidewalk width ―Median width Compared to Highway Design Manual Generally, updated 3R standards appropriate and substantially met for

11. Design Strategy Exceptions This segment of US 97 did not meet current 3R standards for –Shoulder width Standard is 4 feet, but shoulder width ranged from 2 to 4 feet –Guardrail shy distance Standard is 2 feet, but many sections have none

12. Status Quo Question How to answer the question, Where can we live with the status quo? –Three goals provided place to start: Safety Mobility Preservation of existing infrastructure

13. Status Quo Filters Non-interstate? Rural route? Has V/C ratios below OHP targets? Has not had routine freight movement requiring traffic control 12 or more times in a year? Does not have areas requiring extraordinary maintenance efforts? Does not have critical infrastructure below acceptable condition levels?

14. Status Quo Suggested Assets/Issues Bridges Pavement Culverts Traffic Signals Traffic Barrier Sidewalks Bicycle Facilities ADA Ramps Unstable Slopes

15. Measuring Performance Suggested measure topics are as follows: –Safety Corridor miles with no top 15% SPIS sites (need to develop) Lane departure crashes, matching approach taken for 1R Program (match that in development) –Mobility Corridor V/C highs (need to develop) Freight mobility (need to choose or develop) –Preservation and Maintenance % Fair or better asset condition Risk –Unstable slopes (need to develop)

16. Comparison of Pilot Concepts Practical Design Safety Corridor Context Optimize the System Public Support Efficient Cost Corridor Management Strategies Pilot Safety emphasis Corridor Context Asset Management Plan and Design Strategies Status Quo?

17. Specifically Related to Safety Practical Design Safety will not be compromised Corridor-basis for safety improvements Low-cost mitigation encouraged Corridor Management Strategies Pilot Pilot context: Safety, Mobility, Preservation Corridor-basis for safety improvements Low-cost mitigation encouraged

18. Recommendations – Specific to Pilot Location Field verify substandard corridor elements findings Establish Corridor Design Exception for Shoulder Width and Shy Distance

19. Recommendations – Corridor Management Strategies Corridor-based design exceptions rather than corridor-based design standards Consider reviewing 4R standards Evaluate utility and appropriate application of IHSDM Continue efforts to bridge Maintenance and Project Development –Useful sharing of inventory data and issues

20. Next Steps Refine, define and establish process for programmatic corridor design exceptions analysis –Practical Design Value of Corridor Context Apply the process to warranted corridor routes Develop methods to share information regularly across business lines regarding significantly sub-standard features

21. Questions?