# Presentation: 261771

## EFFECTIVENESS STUDY

- Transportation

- Management Plans

**Robert_Copp@dot.ca.gov**

- 1

## “PREVIOUS SUCCESSES”

**“****PREVIOUS SUCCESSES”**

** ****OLYMPIAD XXIII - 1984**
** ****Projections of Huge Traffic Jams / **
** ****Images of Stranded Tourists Missing Events**
** ****Residents “Scared” into Leaving Town **
**	****  *****Los Angeles Praised -“Great Planning!”***

** ****SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE - 1989**
** ****No Advance Warning **
** ****Motorists / Congestion Disappeared**
** ****Diversions Did Not Account for Total**
** “****Where Did They All Go??”**
**	****  *****San Francisco Praised - “Great Work!”***

- “People are Resilient
- AND Resourceful!”

- 2

**Notes:**
In one, we just scared people away. 
In the second, people disappeared (not telecommuting,
not taking alternate routes, not taking alternate modes,....)
but came back as soon as the Bay Bridge opened. 
We certainly want to use our TMP strategies, but we want 
to be cost-effective. 
 Shifts in Work Week Scheduling
  Major Firms Provided Trans., Telecommuting, etc.
  Truck Traffic Reduced during Peaks 
  Rescheduled Highway Maint.
  Exclusive Bus Lanes
  Restricted Parking 
  24-Hour Ramp Metering
  Increased Usage of CMS

## STUDY PURPOSE

** ****Evaluate District compliance with Guidelines **
** ****Evaluate Typical Measures of Effectiveness **
** ****Determine Most Effective Strategies**
** ****Evaluate Cost versus Benefit**
** ****Establish Lessons Learned**
** ****Formulate Recommendations to Improve**
**    ****TMP Process / Modify Guidelines**

- 3

## Caltrans’ Mission

- 8 of 15  of the Most Congested Cities are in California

**Caltrans’ Mission**

**To Improve Mobility****Across California**

- 4

## DEPUTY DIRECTIVE 60 (Eff. 2000)

**WHAT’S THE POLICY?**

**Construction**

**Special **
**Events**

**Encroachment**
**Permits**

**Maintenance**

**Caltrans’ commitment is to: Minimize motorist delays for **_**ALL**_** activities on the State highway system without compromising public or worker safety, or the quality of the work being performed.**

- 100% Compliance

**..but with Varying**
**Levels of Treatment..**

- 5

## TMP CATEGORIES & STRATEGIES

**TMP CATEGORIES & STRATEGIES**

-     “Blanket” TMP

-       “Major” TMP *(~5% of Projects)*

**   **
** ****No expected delays**
** ****Off peak**
** ****Low volume roads**
** ****Moving lane        closures**

** ****Significant impacts                                      caused by work      **
** ****Multiple TMP strategies **
** ****Multiple contracts**

** ****Minimal impacts  caused by work  **
** ****Lane closure  charts required    **
** ****Some mitigation measures required**

**“****Minor” TMP**
***(Majority)***

- Portable
- CMS, FSP, TMT,
- Off-peak hours

- 6

## Six TMP Strategies

- P
- M
- I
- C
- D
- A		**	**

**ublic Information**

**otorist Information**

-  **ncident Management**

-  **onstruction Strategies**

-  **emand Management**

**lternate Routes**

- 7

## How Would You Measure the Effectiveness of TMP Strategies?

** ****Overall Corridor **
** ****Public Awareness**
** ****Motorist Information**
** ****Incident Management**

**How Would You Measure the Effectiveness of TMP Strategies?**

- Personal or Mail-in
- Surveys, No. of Calls or
- Website Hits, Public
- Meeting Attendance ..

- Personal or Mail-in
- Surveys, Traffic
- Observations ..

- Accident Response /
- Removal Time,
- Pre- / Post- Accident
- Rates  ..

- Traffic Volume Counts,
- Floating Car Runs,
- Queue Lengths,
- Transit Ridership,
- Video Surveillance ..

- 8

## Measurement of Effectiveness (Cont.)

** ****Construction Strategies**
** ****Demand Management**
** ****Alternate Routes**

**Measurement of Effectiveness ****(Cont.)**

- Trip Mode Distribution,
- Park ‘n’ Ride Lot Usage,
- Carpooling Surveys,
- Employer Surveys ..

- Traffic Volume Counts
- Floating Car Runs,
- Origin/Destination
- Surveys ..

- Traffic Volume Counts,
- Floating Car Runs,
- Queue Lengths,  Lane
- Closures Set / Picked
- Up on Time ..

- 9

##  Vehicle Delay

** ****Vehicle Delay**
** ****Traffic Volumes**
** ****Length of Queues**
** ****Safety**

- District 07
- I-10 Long-Life Pavement Project

- Traffic Demand on
- Interstate 10 was
- reduced by 57% (from
- 112,000 to 56,000 veh)

- Initial Estimate
- = 44 miles
- Actual Queue Length
- = 1.9 miles

- Pre-Const. Estimate
- = 1,000,000 veh-hrs
- Actual Delay
- = 16,000 veh-hrs

- No collisions or
- Employee injuries
- occurred in the
- Work Zone

_**Project Characteristics**_
- - Fast-setting Hydraulic Concrete
- - Closed 2 of 4 Lanes
- - Extended 55-Hour Closures

- Example

- 10

**Notes:**
PROJECT -- D7 - "LONG LIFE PAVEMENT AC" - EA# 1384UI
ROUTE:  I-710 (Long Beach Fwy - from SR 1 to SR 405) -- 
Start OCT 2002 -- 4.9-km segment

DELAY IF NO TMP IMPLEMENTED
Closures:  Ten 55-hour Weekend closures (10PM Fri - 5 AM Mon) - stages 3 through 6
5 weeks NB / 5 weeks SB Fwy closure / Ramp closures
full structural sections under OC to meet std. Vert. clearance
USED QUICKCHANGE MOVEABLE BARRIER

## Actual Delay in Work Zone With TMP Strategies

**Projected **
**Delay**

**Actual **
**Delay**

**(Initial Projected Delay = 1 Hour / Vehicle)**

- (Delay in minutes)	Sat.   Sun.
*Rte 30/Foothill Blvd.**	**  9       2  *
*Arrow Highway**	**  7       2 *
*Holt Ave.**	**  6       5 *
*Mission Blvd.           **	**  3       2 *
*   *_*Detour*_
*Rte 60 Freeway             **	**20      34*

- District 07
- I-10 Long-Life Pavement Project

**Actual Delay in Work Zone ****With**** ****TMP Strategies**

- Example

- 11

## ?

- 12

**Notes:**
QUICKCHANGE MOVEABLE BARRIER.

## MOST EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES 

**MOST EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES **
**- PUBLIC AWARENESS**

- Leave Earlier
- or Later ..

- Use HOV,  Bus or Rail

- “Which way
- should we
- go today..?”

*“**If you drive I-80, you *
*might want to consider*
* **an alternate route *
*this morning..”*

- Telecommute ..

- 13

## 14

*Instead of saying*
*“**Bridge Replacement *
*Project”  --...*

## District 04

- Central Freeway Replacement Project

- 78%

- 32%

_**Project Characteristics**_
- - Full-freeway Closure
- - On- and Off-Ramps Closed
- - Extensive Public Info Campaign

- Example

- 15

## - Based  on “0” delay (Const.)
- 5 -15 minutes Delay (Maint.)
- According to District Traffic Managers - eliminates about  90% of potential delay 

PROBLEMS
- Const. windows reduced
- More Night work (Urban/Rural)
- Comparative Quality?
- Comparative Safety?

***- 5 -15 minutes Delay (Maint.)***
***- According to District Traffic Managers - eliminates about  ******90%****** of potential delay ***
_***PROBLEMS***_
***- Const. windows reduced***
***- More Night work (Urban/Rural)***
***- Comparative Quality?***
***- Comparative Safety?***

**Effective Construction Strategies**

**LANE REQUIREMENT CHARTS**

- 16

## Effective Construction Strategies (Cont.)

**CONSTRUCTION STAGING**
**DELAY PENALTY --****  ****“Hammer” for the RE to charge the Contractor **_**($$$)**_** for late pick-up of the closure .**
**EXTENDED CLOSURES**** ****(e.g. 55-Hour Weekends or 72-Hour Weekdays)**
**NARROW LANE WIDTHS or USE OF SHOULDERS (PEAK PERIOD) **
**MOVEABLE BARRIERS**
**CONTRAFLOW**** ****(“Crossovers”)**
**CONTINGENCY PLANS**** ****(Redundancy)**

- 17

**Notes:**
QUICKCHANGE MOVEABLE BARRIER --
USED ON I-710 AND I-10 PROJECTS IN D7

## District 08

- I-15 Devore PCCP Reconstruction

**EXTENDED CLOSURE ****- Schedule, Cost & ****Delay Comparison**** **

_**Project Characteristics**_
- - Full-Freeway Closed - one direction
- - Extended 72-Hour Closures

- 18

- Example

## NO. OF PEAK HOUR TRIPS

**VAN POOL RIDERS**
**BUS TRIPS**
**PARK ‘N’ RIDE USAGE**

**Effective Strategies ****-- Demand Management**

- 38% increase

- 313% Increase

- 4%  Average
- Reduction

- 29% Increase

- District 05
- Cuesta Grade Project

**Strategy Cost**
**= $3,300,000**

**Strategy Cost**
**= $780,000**

- Example

_**Project Characteristics**_
- - Addition of NB / SB Truck-Climbing Lanes
- - Addition of Eight-foot Shoulders
- - Construction of massive Retaining Walls

- 19

## Alternate Route Strategies  (Info obtained by Survey)

- District 04
- Central Freeway Replacement Project

- Example

- 20

## BENEFITS VS. COSTS??“Bang for the Buck...”

- District 11
- I-5 / I-805 Widening Project

- Goal - Increase Van, Carpools, Bus by 5% / Change worktime by 2%

- COZEEP Cost = $1,700,000

- Example

*Strategy Cost*

_**Project Characteristics**_
- - Const. Separate Freeway Bypass
- - Const. of new Interchange / Auxiliary Lanes

- 21

## LESSONS LEARNED

** ****PUBLIC AWARENESS**
** ****Newspapers ****	****	**
** ****TV News Spots**
** **
** ****ADVANCE SIGNAGE**
** ****Before Decision Points**
** ****On Preceding Weeks / Weekends**
** ****ADHERE TO LANE REQ’MT CHARTS**
** ****Real-Time Statusing is Needed**
** ****Penalties for Late Lane Opening**
** ****KEEP LANES OPEN**
** ****Narrow Lane Widths**
** ****Shoulder Usage during Peak**

**LESSONS LEARNED**

**PUBLIC AWARENESS: MOST Effective Strategies facilitate Decision-Making by Driving Public to avoid Work Zone**

**CONSTRUCTION**
**Strategies are also very effective**

- 22

**Notes:**
PUBLIC AWARENESS -- 
 LOCAL PAPERS ETC. TO HIT SPECIFIC GROUP
 BUSINESSES -- FLYERS TO HIT LARGE GROUP

KEEP LANES OPEN -- VS. ACCIDENT RATES..??

## LESSONS LEARNED (cont.)

** ****CONSIDER OTHER STRATEGIES:**
** ****Extended Closures vs. Night Closures**
-        (“Get in & Stay in -- Get out & Stay out!”)
** ****Close Coordination w/ Locals (Detours, Signals...)**
** ****Shorten Contract Time through Incentives**
** ****COST VS. BENEFIT**
** ****$$$ on Work Zone Enforcement vs. Benefit ??**
** ****$$$ on Brochures, Ads, Flyers, vs. Benefit ??**
-  (Media Coverage -- no cost for Major Projects)
** ****Costs of TMP Strategies vs. Delay costs**
** ****OTHER ISSUES**
** ****Truck Restrictions / Closures on Parallel Routes**
** ****Cumulative Impacts due to Multiple Projects**
-        (Combine closures when advantageous)

**LESSONS LEARNED (cont.)**

- 23

**Notes:**
TRUCK RESTRICTIONS -- NARROW LANES ...
PARALLEL ROUTES -- OBSTRUCTING TRAFFIC 
	IN/OUT OF STATE

## RECOMMENDATIONS  

** ****STREAMLINE  TMP PROCESS**
** ****Blanket / Minor Projects  (Standardized Forms)**
** ****Major Projects (Brief, Standardized Reports) **
** ****Critical Monitoring Activities - Delay Counts, Runs**
** ****PROPOSED STUDIES**
** ****Detailed TMP Effectiveness - Costs vs. Benefits**
** ****Full-Freeway vs. Night Closures**
** ****Enforcement Practices (Placement, etc.)**
** ****MODIFY TMP GUIDELINES**
** ****Standardize Monitoring Practices **
** ****Standardize Reporting Practices**
** ****Include Non-Motorized Considerations**

**RECOMMENDATIONS****  **

- 24

## QUESTIONS??

- Transportation

- Management Plans

**Robert_Copp@dot.ca.gov**

- 25

## Slide 26

## Slide 27

## HANDOUTS  

** ****Relationship between Project **
**   ****Characteristics and TMP Strategies**
** ****Sample Unit Costs for TMP Strategies**
** ****TMP Strategies -- Unit cost Info**
** ****Sample Worksheet -- Blanket TMP**
** ****Sample Delay Calculations**

**HANDOUTS****  **

- A-1

## A-2

## Relationship between Project Characteristicsand Appropriate TMP Strategies

**Relationship between Project Characteristics****and Appropriate TMP Strategies**

- A-3

## Sample Unit Costs for TMP Strategies 

**Sample Unit Costs for TMP Strategies **

- A-4

## Sample Unit Costs for TMP Strategies (Cont.)

**Sample Unit Costs for TMP Strategies ****(Cont.)**

- A-5

## A-6

## A-7

## A-8

## Example

- A-9

## Sample Delay Calculations 

**Sample Delay Calculations **

- A-10