Chapter Trans 205

Trans 205.03(2) (2) The rural county trunk highway minimum design standards for each of the rural county trunk highway functional classifications are as shown in the following tables:

- See PDF for table

- See PDF for table

- See PDF for table

Trans 205.03 History History: Cr. Register, December, 1986, No. 372, eff. 1-1-87.

Trans 205.035 Trans 205.035 Use of alternative “3R” standards.

Trans 205.035(1) (1) The standards in s. Trans 205.03 shall be used for all county trunk highway improvement projects, unless a region director expressly authorizes, in writing, the use of the department’s “Design Criteria for Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation Projects,” also known as “3R” standards, for a resurfacing, restoration, or rehabilitation project on an existing highway located in his or her region.

Trans 205.035 Note Note: Examples of improvement projects which may be appropriate for “3R” standards include resurfacing highway pavement; grinding and repairing pavement joints; replacing or recycling pavement; widening lanes and shoulders; replacing bridge elements to correct structural deficiencies; bridge deck overlays; and other related improvements such as minor incidental subgrade work and correction of minor drainage problems.

Trans 205.035(2) (2) A region director may not authorize or approve the use of the department’s “3R” standards for the construction of a new highway or for the complete reconstruction of an existing highway.

Trans 205.035(3) (3) A request to use the department’s “3R” standards in lieu of the standards in s. Trans 205.03 may be submitted to a region director only by a county highway commissioner, or by a county highway commissioner’s designee.

Trans 205.035(4) (4) A region director shall grant or deny a request to use the department’s “3R” standards within 90 days after receiving a request.

Trans 205.035(5) (5) In determining whether to grant or deny a request to use the department’s “3R” standards in lieu of the standards in s. Trans 205.03, a region director shall consider all of the following:

Trans 205.035(5)(a) (a) Adequacy of design.

Trans 205.035(5)(b) (b) Cost effectiveness.

Trans 205.035(5)(c) (c) Safety improvement.

Trans 205.035(5)(d) (d) Environmental impact.

Trans 205.035(5)(e) (e) Social and economic impact, including dislocation or relocation of property owners.

Trans 205.035(6) (6) The rural county trunk highway minimum “3R” standards for roadway dimensions, by functional classification, and usable bridge widths are as shown in the following tables:

- See PDF for table

- See PDF for table

- See PDF for table

Trans 205.035 History History: Cr. Register, February, 1992, No. 434, eff. 3-1-92.; corrections in (1) to (5) made under s. 13.92 (4) (b) 6., Stats., Register February 2013 No. 686.

Trans 205.04 Trans 205.04 Exceptions to design standards.

Trans 205.04(1) (1) After a region director has decided whether to use either the design standards in s. Trans 205.03 or the alternative “3R” standards in s. Trans 205.035, the regional director may expressly authorize, in writing, exceptions to either of these standards, if federal or state funds are not used for the improvement project.

Trans 205.04(2) (2) Exceptions to either the design standards in ss. Trans 205.03 or 205.035 for improvement projects using federal or state funds must be approved in writing by a regional engineer and, when federal funds are used, by the division administrator of the federal highway administration.

Trans 205.04(3) (3) In determining whether to authorize exceptions to the construction standards in s. Trans 205.03 or the alternative “3R” standards in s. Trans 205.035, a region director shall consider all of the following:

Trans 205.04(3)(a) (a) Adequacy of design.

Trans 205.04(3)(b) (b) Cost effectiveness.

Trans 205.04(3)(c) (c) Safety improvement.

Trans 205.04(3)(d) (d) Environmental impact.

Trans 205.04(3)(e) (e) Social and economic impact, including dislocation or relocation of property owners.

Trans 205.04 Note Note: “Exceptions to Standards” is located at the department’s offices, in the Facilities Development Manual, procedure number 11-1-2.

Trans 205.04 History History: Cr. Register, December, 1986, No. 372, eff. 1-1-87; r. and recr. Register, February, 1992, No. 434, eff. 3-1-92; correction in (1), (3) (intro.) made under s. 13.92 (4) (b) 6., Stats., Register February 2013 No. 686; CR 22-048: am. (1) Register July 2023 No. 811, eff. 8-1-23.

Trans 205.05 Trans 205.05 Project review.

Trans 205.05(1) (1) On or before December 1 of each year, each county highway commissioner shall file with the appropriate region director a report for the county certifying that any and all county trunk highway improvement projects for which funds were expended or obligated during that year conformed to the minimum standards established under s. 84.01 (9) (b), Stats. The certification shall be on forms prescribed by the department of transportation. All county trunk highway improvement projects shall be reviewed by the region director for compliance with the standards stated in s. Trans 205.03.

Trans 205.05(2) (2) If any county has not complied with the standards, the region director shall notify the county in writing stating the items which are noncomplying. When the noncomplying projects have subsequently been made to comply with the standards, the region director shall certify compliance on forms designated for this purpose by the department of transportation. If on July 1 of any year there are in a county any remaining non-complying projects that have not been made to comply as certified by the region director, those projects shall be reported by the department of transportation to the appropriate legislative committees.

Trans 205.05 History History: Cr. Register, December, 1986, No. 372, eff. 1-1-87; corrections in (1), (2) made under s. 13.92 (4) (b) 6., Stats., Register February 2013 No. 686.