Wisconsin Legislature: Trans 209.07(3)(a)6.

(a) Provide policy and program choices for the department by evaluating and comparing the benefits and costs of various alternatives for preserving, rehabilitating and improving the highway system.

(b) Furnish information to assess whether available revenues can provide adequate highway and bridge facilities over the long term.

(c) Define a specific program as a target for departmental efforts that ensures efficient use of staff and funds and which accounts for the lead times involved in project development.

(d) Ensure that investment decisions are consistent with statewide objectives by developing systematic criteria and procedures for identifying deficiencies, developing proposed solutions, and selecting projects.

(e) Facilitate the implementation of the department’s policy and system plans.

(f) Inform the public of the department’s intentions and provide an opportunity for public review and comment.

(g) Provide a basis for coordinating the department’s efforts with the planning, programming and budget activities of other state, national, regional, and local agencies.

History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81.

Trans 209.06 Programming guidelines.

(1) The department shall develop a program within estimated levels of revenue for a prescribed time period as part of a four level decision-making process that includes broad policy planning, system planning, programming and project development (Figure 1).

(2) The programming process shall define a means of project evaluation and selection utilizing the following basic guidelines where appropriate:

(a) Considering alternative program levels to illustrate the cost impacts and benefits of varying program levels.

(b) Utilizing indicators that measure deficiencies to identify candidate improvement projects and the appropriate level of improvement, considering the variation in fund availability.

(c) Achieving adequate surface renewal projects to preserve the overall system serviceability and rideability. The level of surface renewal mileage is defined through analysis of the pavement serviceability index and pavement age.

(d) Replacing or rehabilitating deficient bridges by considering load carrying capacity, physical condition and restrictive or dangerous widths, clearances or approach roadways and coordination with other programmed work.

(e) Distributing funds equitably statewide.

(f) Considering major projects where benefit/cost analysis is favorable, where there is the possibility of significant social and economic benefits and where there is a high degree of public support and acceptability.

History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81.

Trans 209.07 Candidate project identification process.

(1) General description. Candidate project identification is accomplished within the overall framework of developing the highway and bridge improvement program. The department shall identify both the surface, structure, safety, geometric or capacity deficiencies, singly or in combination, and the alternative improvement levels to correct or reduce the deficiencies.

(2) Responsibilities. The transportation region offices, with the guidance from the central office, shall take the lead role in identifying candidate projects for the resurfacing, reconditioning, reconstruction, interstate, major and bridge program areas. The regions shall provide the regional and local viewpoints and knowledge of unique local conditions to program development.

(3) Collect and develop data. The department shall maintain a system of uniform data collection for segments of the highway system. This data shall be used for comparison and evaluation purposes to assist in determining that the most appropriate and beneficial candidate projects and improvement levels are selected. This data shall be updated, as necessary, for the recycling of the program. The following data will be collected and developed where appropriate:

(a) Highway data

1. Pavement surface type

2. Year surfaced

3. Widths: right of way, travel lane, pavement, shoulders, median, and parking lane

4. Lanes: travel and parking

5. Driveways

6. Posted speed

7. Pavement serviceability index (PSI)

8. Accident information

9. Curves with limited stopping sight distance

10. Steep grades

11. Percent no passing zone

12. Average daily traffic

13. Forecast average daily traffic

14. Hourly vehicle data and hourly capacity

15. Parking restrictions

16. Terrain

17. Access control

18. Maintenance problems

(b) Bridge data

1. Deck condition: expansion and construction joints

2. Superstructure: main load carrying members, floor system

3. Substructure condition: abutments, piers, bents

4. Waterway condition: adequacy of opening, flooding, debris present

5. Approaches condition: roadway condition, horizontal and vertical sight distance

6. Capacity condition: design, inventory and operating load, posting, maximum vehicle weight, load rating basis, overburden depth

7. Field inspection and office appraisal rating

1. Land use

2. Right-of-way required

3. Housing and business units required

4. Farms affected

5. Land required: agricultural, wetland and upland habitat

6. Habitat replaced

7. Endangered species

8. Air quality effects

9. Noise level impacts

10. Energy consumption

(4) Identify candidate projects. Candidate projects may originate from the following sources:

(a) Segments which have one or more deficiencies based on the analyses of the data collected and developed.

(b) Projects considered or included in the last programming cycle.

(d) Projects recommended by elected officials, citizens, local units of governments, regional planning commissions, county highway committees, county traffic safety commissions, etc.

(e) Projects coordinated with planned development.

(f) Projects that must be coordinated with other projects.

(g) Projects identified as a part of the interstate cost estimate.

(h) Projects which constitute a gap in an existing system.

(i) Projects in high priority corridors with large past investment.

(j) Projects that are eligible for special discretionary federal funding.

(k) Projects that are compatible with and serve to implement state or local transportation plans.

(5) Project deficiency analysis. Candidate projects shall be analyzed at the transportation region office for resurfacing, reconditioning and reconstruction projects and at the central office for bridge, interstate and major projects. Primary criteria used to indicate deficiencies on candidate projects are:

(a) Accident rate or occurrence that is greater than the statewide average.

(b) Volume to capacity ratio that is greater than .8 in the 100th hour at level of service “C’.

(d) Pavement serviceability index that is less than 2.5 on the interstate system, less than 2.25 on a road functionally classified principal arterial or less than 2.0 on all other roads.

(e) Pavement age that is more than 20 years on portland cement concrete or more than 15 years on bituminous pavements.

(f) Pavement width that is less than 21 feet.

(g) Shoulder width that is less than 4 feet.

(h) Bridges that have a sufficiency rating less than 50 or have a condition or load rating of 3 (basically intolerable condition requiring high priority of repair).

(6) Develop alternative project improvement types and cost estimates. The department shall identify a range of practical improvement types for each candidate project. The range of alternatives for highway projects may include: patching and maintenance resurfacing (the equivalent of the “no build” option); improvement resurfacing; minor and major reconditioning; and reconstruction (See Figure 2). Alternatives for bridges shall be: maintenance; rehabilitation; or replacement.

(a) The department shall consider the following factors for the range of alternative improvement levels of a given project:

1. The nature, number and severity of the deficiencies present;

2. The overall budget available;

3. The cost estimate for each alternative;

4. The associated federal-aid eligibility requirements;

5. The existence of other related projects;