Trans 209.05(1)(1) The department shall perform project evaluation and selection as a necessary component of its programming process in the following general areas: bridge projects, 3R (resurfacing, recondition and reconstruction) highway projects, interstate projects, and major projects. The objectives of the programming process shall be to: Trans 209.05(1)(a)(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. Trans 209.05(1)(b)(b) Furnish information to assess whether available revenues can provide adequate highway and bridge facilities over the long term. Trans 209.05(1)(c)(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. Trans 209.05(1)(d)(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. Trans 209.05(1)(e)(e) Facilitate the implementation of the department’s policy and system plans. Trans 209.05(1)(f)(f) Inform the public of the department’s intentions and provide an opportunity for public review and comment. Trans 209.05(1)(g)(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. Trans 209.05 HistoryHistory: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81. Trans 209.06(1)(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). Trans 209.06(2)(2) The programming process shall define a means of project evaluation and selection utilizing the following basic guidelines where appropriate: Trans 209.06(2)(a)(a) Considering alternative program levels to illustrate the cost impacts and benefits of varying program levels. Trans 209.06(2)(b)(b) Utilizing indicators that measure deficiencies to identify candidate improvement projects and the appropriate level of improvement, considering the variation in fund availability. Trans 209.06(2)(c)(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. Trans 209.06(2)(d)(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. Trans 209.06(2)(f)(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. Trans 209.06 HistoryHistory: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81. Trans 209.07Trans 209.07 Candidate project identification process. Trans 209.07(1)(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. Trans 209.07(2)(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. Trans 209.07(3)(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: Trans 209.07(3)(a)3.3. Widths: right of way, travel lane, pavement, shoulders, median, and parking lane Trans 209.07(3)(b)5.5. Approaches condition: roadway condition, horizontal and vertical sight distance Trans 209.07(3)(b)6.6. Capacity condition: design, inventory and operating load, posting, maximum vehicle weight, load rating basis, overburden depth Trans 209.07(4)(4) Identify candidate projects. Candidate projects may originate from the following sources: Trans 209.07(4)(a)(a) Segments which have one or more deficiencies based on the analyses of the data collected and developed. Trans 209.07(4)(c)(c) Projects which address problem areas identified by departmental staff. Trans 209.07(4)(d)(d) Projects recommended by elected officials, citizens, local units of governments, regional planning commissions, county highway committees, county traffic safety commissions, etc. Trans 209.07(4)(j)(j) Projects that are eligible for special discretionary federal funding. Trans 209.07(4)(k)(k) Projects that are compatible with and serve to implement state or local transportation plans. Trans 209.07(5)(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: Trans 209.07(5)(a)(a) Accident rate or occurrence that is greater than the statewide average. Trans 209.07(5)(b)(b) Volume to capacity ratio that is greater than .8 in the 100th hour at level of service “C’. Trans 209.07(5)(d)(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. Trans 209.07(5)(e)(e) Pavement age that is more than 20 years on portland cement concrete or more than 15 years on bituminous pavements. Trans 209.07(5)(h)(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). Trans 209.07(6)(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. Trans 209.07(6)(a)(a) The department shall consider the following factors for the range of alternative improvement levels of a given project:
/exec_review/admin_code/trans/209
true
administrativecode
/exec_review/admin_code/trans/209/07/3/a/4
Department of Transportation (Trans)
administrativecode/Trans 209.07(3)(a)4.
administrativecode/Trans 209.07(3)(a)4.
section
true
