Region 2 Meeting Agenda
AASHTO Subcommittee on Design
July 14-17, 2008
Hotel Albuquerque Old Town
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Region 2 Meeting – Monday, July 14, 2008 1:00 PM to 5:00 PM
1.
Introductions - Officers and members present
Chair:
Mohammad Mirshahi, VA
Vice Chair:
Phil McConnell, AR
Secretary:
Jeff Jones, TN
2.
Discussion on the Draft SCOD Vision; prepare to present reactions and
questions to SCOD on July 15
3:00 – 3:15
3.
Break
Regional Topic Discussions
(see list below)
Region 2 Meeting – Wednesday, July 16 8:00 AM to 12:00 PM
1.
2.
3.
4.
Briefing from SCOD Executive Committee (Mohammad)
Technical Committee Work Plan Discussions
Proposed Research Topics
Motions or Resolutions
10:00 – 10:15
5.
6.
Break
SCOD Hot Topic Discussions (Around the Table)
New Officers
Proposed:
Arkansas, Chair
Tennessee, Vice Chair
Mississippi, Secretary
Steering Committee Rotation: Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee, Mississippi, North Carolina,
Georgia, Kentucky, Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, West Virginia, Louisiana, Puerto Rico.
7.
SCOD 2012 Host – ??
Note: On Wednesday afternoon, the Regional Chair will provide an overview of
their comments and discussions of the Technical Committees’ reports/activities,
along with results from the rotation of officers, proposed motions/resolutions, and
proposed research topics.
Regional Topics
Louisiana:
1. When adding a third lane to the median on an urban interstate, we create
2.
3.
4.
5.
a 15'
inside shoulder. Is this common?
Have any states standardized delineating this 15' inside shoulder with pavement
markers or striping (chevrons)?
On 6-lane interstates, what is the use of using chevrons (raised markers) on a 1012' outside shoulder? In our state, some locations have markings on the outside
shoulder and some do not. We don't have a policy.
The Hydraulics Unit is located in the Road Design Section at the LADOTD. This
unit is responsible for the design and/or review of all hydraulic concrete
structures. With the FHWA requiring LRFD standards for design, what have other
states done to handle the redesign of your standards for box culverts, catch basins,
and manholes? Does anyone know of any courses that deal with the use of LRFD
standards for concrete structures that are not primarily for bridges?
The LADOTD normally uses safety end treatments on sidedrain and crossdrain
pipe that are located in the clear zone or within the limits of horizontal clearance.
These items are normally used on overlay projects or in transition areas. Because
of the cost of these items, their use is being questioned on different types of
projects and on funding. Does any state have a written policy on the use of safety
end treatments for their roadways?
1. The Department is going to try to standardize our "S" or specialty items list. A
couple of our programs, "Enhancements" for example, uses a multitude of Sitems. How have other states that have standardized their specialty items dealt
with this situation?
2. Attached is a spreadsheet showing deceleration lengths from both the AASHO /
AASHTO Intersection Chapters and the Grade Separations and Interchange
Chapters (Column headings are termed "intersection" and "ramp" respectively).
The length shown is that needed to decelerate from the design speed to a stop
condition. What deceleration length does your state use in the design of turn lanes
and where is it measured from and to?
Deceleration length needed to stop (AASHTO Policy on Design of Highways and Streets)
1965
Rural
All
highways
Speed mph
20
30
40
45
50
55
1973
Urban
Ramp
235
325
425
315
435
1984
Intersection
1990
Ramp
Intersection
2001
Ramp
160
250
370
235
315
235
315
235
315
500
435
435
435
Intersection
230
330
430
550
680
2004
Ramp
235
320
385
435
480
Intersection
170
275
340
410
485
Ramp
235
320
385
435
480
3. Does your state "pavement widen" the turning roadway portion of two lane ramps
at SPUI interchanges and if so how wide do you stripe the lanes?
Arkansas:
1. For notch and widening projects with curb & gutter, how are narrow areas
handled when widening with asphalt? Is there a minimum width specified for
widening using asphalt? Are other types of materials specified for areas narrower
than the specified minimum width for asphalt?
2. How are other states handling utilities? Are the utilities moved before the project
is let? Are the utilities put in the contract? Do you have a “hammer” to force the
utility companies to move in a timely manner?
3. Are other states offering both asphalt and concrete pavement sections as alternates
for bids? If so, on what types of projects? Are life-cycle cost adjustments applied
to bids? What are your experiences?
4. How is undercut handled on projects? Is an extensive soil survey done during
plan preparation and undercut locations shown on plans? What type of backfill is
specified in undercut areas? Is undercut a separate pay item?
5. It seems that some contractors have difficulty with certain facets of
construction that are not a problem for others. Is contractor input solicited when
plans are developed, particularly as related to stage construction details? If so,
how is this done?
6. Are any states using the Interactive Highway Safety Design Model (IHSDM)
software? Do any of the states that use IHSDM use Inroads as your design
software. If so, are there any problems of compatibility?
Florida:
1. Design Platform Diversification:
a. Due to ever increasing costs, FDOT is reviewing our current Design
Platform (products like MicroStation and Geopak). We have been
operating under a contract with the vendor for these proprietary products
since the late 1970s. We are aware that several other states are looking at
these costs and one is already committed to switching (Wisconsin). What
costs are the other agencies being asked to contract for to renew their
licenses?
2. AASHTO Greenbook Design Value Ranges:
a. As many in the Region know, FDOT was charged by its Transportation
Directors to review potential revisions to our design criteria to save
construction and right of way costs. Our published design criteria, based
on Florida conditions and the experience of our senior designers, typically
took the more conservative values within the Greenbook ranges. We have
completed a study of two rural arterial widening projects and determined
that yes there were some minor savings in construction costs. Most of the
saving realized were in right of way. However, when we looked at the
safety impacts of using less conservative design values we found them to
be of the same magnitude as the right of way savings. Our safety analysis
was in accordance with the draft Highway Safety Manual. Have other
states been asked to do similar studies of their design criteria and if so
what were their results?
3. Cable Barrier Challenges:
a. Florida is experiencing many seemingly region-specific challenges with
cable barrier. End anchorage pull exceeds the lateral capacity of the soil
they are founded in. Wasps are constructing nests in posts with a “C”
channel shape. Many of our challenges are being addressed in our
Developmental Specification and Design Bulletin on the topic. Are any
other challenges being experienced by the states that are due to the
inadequate installation of their systems or the product-specific designs?
North Carolina:
1. Bridge Program Delivery
2. How long does it take from start of study (100-200 bridges annually) until the
project is planned, designed, constructed and open to traffic?
3. How much does a typical local road bridge replacement project cost in today’s
dollar? (right of way acquisition and construction)
a. (North Carolina’s Challenge: 8000 bridges are eligible for replacement in the next
20 years (due to condition and age). 4300 are timber bridges that are 30-50
years old today.)
b. North Carolina – Annually 100-150 bridge projects, start of study (begin data
collection) to opening project to traffic = 6 years. North Carolina typically
schedules data collection to start 5 years prior to the year construction is funded.
In year 2008, we are establishing the scope of work for projects that have
construction funded in the year 2011.
c.
Local Road Bridge Replacement - Right of way acquisition, utilities, wetland and
stream mitigation costs are typically $50,000 - $500,000. Construction is
typically $ 1,000,000 - $1,500,000. We currently do not construct many arch
pipes or box culverts based on our adherence to environmental stewardship.
4. 3-D (Three Dimensional) Task Force
a. AASHTO Committee’s did not submit enough names to establish a group and
meet this year. Do you have anyone in your state that would like to work with
this group?
b. Three Dimensional Modeling for Highway Construction
1. NC – Charlie Brown, PE, PLS, State Location and Surveys Engineer
5) Value Engineering Proposals
a. What type of proposals has your state implemented over the past two years?
b. NC – 2-lane Directional Ramp at freeway to freeway interchange (3rd level)
converted to a trumpet interchange with a loop (2 – level design). Potential
Savings = $8,000,000-$15,000,000 (exact amount unknown at this time). This is
a design-build project in which the state has not opened bids.
6) Erosion and Sedimentation Control
a. Does your state have any success stories for addressing turbidity in water
discharged from borrow pits?
1. NC – Water discharge from borrow pit sites shall not cause surface
waters to exceed 50 NTU’s (nephelometric turbidity unit) in streams not
designated as trout waters and 10 NTU’s in streams, lakes and
reservoirs designated as trout waters. For lakes and reservoirs not
designated as trout waters, the turbidity shall not exceed 25 NTU’s. If
turbidity exceeds these levels due to the natural background conditions,
the existing turbidity level shall not be increased.
7) Results Based Performance Management
a. What results does your state measure at the statewide level and report to the
public?
1. NC – Crash Rate, Infrastructure Health and Performance,
Projects/Programs/Services on Schedule/Budget/and Scope of Work.
Virginia:
1) Green Book
a. Who, if anyone, has adopted the 2004 Edition of the AASHTO Green
Book? If so, why was the 2004 Edition adopted by your agency and have
you documented the differences between the 2001 Edition and the 2004
Edition?
b. Do you have your own Design Manual? If so is it based upon the Green
Book? Do you ever envision making the current version of the Green
Book your DOT’s Design Manual and having your current Design Manual
become a “Policy Guide/Manual”?
2) Design Speed and Posted Speed
a. How are posted speed limits developed and finalized in your DOT?
b. Does the road designer have input into what speed is posted based upon
the design speed of the facility?
c. Do you have situations where the posted speed is higher than the design
speed? If so, how does your DOT view this from a “torte liability”
aspect?
d. How does you DOT handle “regulatory speeds” when roadways are not
posted?