Data Committee Meeting Agenda - Michigan Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, June 28, 2017 @ 1:00PM...

Data Committee Members: Committee Chair: Bill McEntee, CRA – Vice Chair: Dave Wresinski,

MDOT – Jon Start, MTPA – Bob Slattery, MML – Jennifer Tubbs, MTA – Rob Surber, MCSS

Data Committee Meeting Agenda

Wednesday, June 28, 2017 @ 1:00PM Michigan Department of Transportation Aeronautics Building

2nd Floor Commission Board Room 2700 Port Lansing Road

Lansing, Michigan 1. Welcome - Call to Order – Introductions

2. Public Comments on Non-Agenda Items

3. Consent Agenda

4.1 Approval of the June 28, 2017 Data Committee Meeting Minutes (Action Item)

4. Correspondence & Announcements 4.1. September 6 TAMC Administration, Communications and Education Committee and

Council Meetings to be held in Lapeer 4.2. 2017 Fall Asset Management Conference – Oct. 5, 2017 Marquette Holiday Inn

5. Presentation from Center for Shared Solutions – Update of Michigan Geographic

Framework Project

6. Work Program 6.1. TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program Update 6.2. FY2016 & FY2017 TAMC Budget Update 6.3. FY2018 TAMC Proposed Budget and Schedule 6.4. Data Analysis of Investment Reporting Tool (IRT) Data & Table of Queries 6.5. Data Accuracy of Submitted IRT Project Data

7. Review & Discussion Items:

7.1. Data Collection Status of 2017 PASER Collection – Belknap 7.1.1. Michigan Technological University – Center for Technology & Training - Colling 7.1.2. Indiana Asset Management Documents (Draft Plan/Formats) - Colling

7.2. Act 51 Reporting and IRT 7.2.1. Investment Reporting and Act 51 Compliance – Belknap 7.2.2. IRT-ADARS Software Updates - Holmes 7.2.3. Training Update - Holmes

7.3. Website Update - Holmes 7.4. Dashboard Update - Holmes

8. Public Comments

9. Member Comments

10. Adjournment Next TAMC Data Committee Meeting will be on August 23, 2017 at the MDOT Aeronautics Building, 2nd Floor Commission Room, 2700 Port Lansing Road, Lansing, Michigan

1

MINUTES

TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT COUNCIL

DATA COMMITTEE MEETING

June 28, 2017 at 1:00 p.m.

MDOT Aeronautics Building

2700 Port Lansing Road, Second Floor, Commission Conf. Room

Lansing, Michigan

** Frequently Used Acronyms Attached

Members Present: Bill McEntee, CRA – Chair, via Telephone Bob Slattery, MML – via Telephone

Jonathan Start, MTPA/KATS Rob Surber, DTMB/CSS

Jennifer Tubbs, MTA – via Telephone David Wresinski, MDOT - Vice Chair

Support Staff Present: Rob Balmes, MDOT Roger Belknap, MDOT

Tim Colling, MTU – via Telephone Dave Jennett, DTMB/CSS

Frank Kelley, MDOT Tyler Logan, MDOT

Hugh McNichol, MDOT Gloria Strong, MDOT

Mike Toth, MDOT

Others Present: Mark Holmes, DTMB/CSS

Members Absent: Don Disselkoen, MAC

Joanna Johnson, CRA/RCKC

1. Welcome - Call-To-Order – Introductions: The meeting was called-to-order at 1:05 p.m.

2. Public Comments on Non-Agenda Items:

None

3. Consent Agenda: 3.1. – Approval of the May 24, 2017 Data Committee Meeting Minutes (Action Item)

J. Tubbs made a motion to approve the May 24, 2017 meeting minutes with minor

corrections; J. Start seconded the motion. The motion was approved by all members present.

4. Correspondence and Announcements

4.1. – Fall Conference Proposed Date

Support staff are looking to hold the TAMC Fall Conference on Thursday, October 5, 2017, at the

Holiday Inn of Marquette.

2

5. Work Program:

5.1. – TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program Update Support staff will be giving status updates of accomplishments and tasks that TAMC is working on

at each meeting. Support staff will give an update at the next TAMC full Council meeting.

5.2. - FY 2016 and FY 2017 TAMC Budget Update R. Belknap gave a brief update on the TAMC Budget. R. Belknap has added FY 2015 and

FY 2016 columns to the budget update report to compare the trend on how monies are being spent.

Support Staff will continue to use this format for future reports.

5.3. – FY 2018 TAMC Proposed Budget and Schedule R. Belknap has created a draft FY 2018 budget which he has allocated additional funds to the

Regional Planning Organizations (RPO)/Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) for data

collection on unpaved federal aid and non-federal aid roads, asset management plan’s, and

resources to Center for Shared Solutions (CSS) and Michigan Technological University (MTU).

This will go to the ACE Committee in July. The goal is to have this budget approved by full

Council at their September 2017 meeting. It was requested to add FY’s 2015, 2016, and 2017 on

the FY 2018 draft proposed budget for comparison. CSS and MTU will provide their draft budgets

at the July Data Committee meeting.

A suggestion was made by D. Wresinski to possibly set monies aside from the additional

$250,000 that TAMC will receive to do research on TAMC using a contractor to conduct data

collection. The contractor could possibly collect data for federal-aid roads using Pavement Surface

Evaluation and Rating (PASER) and the National Highway System. TAMC will need to see what

is the most cost and time effective way to get required data collected. More discussion may take

place at a future Data Committee meeting.

5.4. – Data Analysis – R. Belknap A question was posed on how does the Investment Reporting Tool (IRT) data relate to the

PASER data? This has been added as a regular agenda item. TAMC, CSS, and MTU will be

discussing in future meetings how they can best utilize the collected data and define best

practices on how to collect the data. B. McEntee has put together a draft table that he plans to

share with the Council on what he feels need to be data analysis tasks based upon the TAMC

Work Program.

5.5. – Update on Local Agency Asset Management Plans R. Belknap shared a list of agencies that have adopted and submitted an asset management plan to

TAMC. The plans are good for three years, after which TAMC support staff notify the local agency

that their plan is expiring. Cities and villages that have an asset management plan can move more

than 50% of funds from the major street fund to the local streets fund. Cities and villages are

required to have an asset management plan in order to do the transfer; some small agencies are

submitting plans simply to be able to transfer funds. The Michigan Department of Transportation

(MDOT) is responsible for verifying if a city or village has an asset management plan and then

makes the approval to transfer funds once they have verification. The TAMC’s asset management

plan template may need to be reviewed to assure the agencies that have more miles provide more

detailed information in their plan. Data Committee members will review the current template and

any new templates to assure good asset management plans are received. MTU will be reviewing

the template as they develop training materials on how to do an asset management plan. MTU will

have their review done approximately by the end of the summer or beginning of fall. At the end of

3

fall, MTU will conduct a pilot using a draft standard template with core elements for asset

management plans developed. Asset management plans will be a regular Data Committee agenda

item. Some agencies practice asset management processes but do not have an official asset

management plan. Asset management process/plan information is currently being collected in the

IRT. R. Belknap will work with the ACT 51 team to review the asset management plans received.

Currently, MDOT does not withhold funding if agencies do not have an asset management plan.

6. Review and Discussion Items:

6.1. – Data Collection –

6.1.1. – Status of the 2017 Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER)

Collection – R. Belknap

R. Belknap gave a status update on PASER data collections. There are currently 20

counties completed and most others are in progress. Some are waiting until the

construction season and then will go out and rate their roads. R. Belknap drafted a map

using the information that he has received from the region coordinators that shows the

status of the collection on the roads. The map is available for review.

6.1.2. – Data Collection Policy Updates – J. Start/R. Belknap

J. Start provided a revised May 18, 2018, draft of a roadway surface condition data

collection policy for federal aid, non-federal aid, and unpaved roads. It was reviewed

and comments/edits were given. TAMC cannot require that there be two people in the

vehicle but can recommend it as a safe practice. Throughout the policy the “local road

agencies” should be referred to as “ACT 51 agencies.” Non-federal aid reimbursement

will be clarified by J. Start. MTU technical staff (Vicki Sage) tested it on three different

people. She asked specific questions, and reorganized the draft policy based upon the

responses. She wanted to be sure that the policy is clear and that the requirements are easy

to understand. The updated draft policy will be provided to ACE Committee and then to

full Council at their July TAMC meeting for their review and comments. The Data

Committee would like this policy, once it is finalized to be linked to other procedures, such

as the PASER training manuals on the TAMC Website.

6.2. – Michigan Tech/Local Technical Assistance Program/Roadsoft/Training Update

– T. Colling A Data Handling Process Webinar was held. There were 50 attendees. This training will be added

to the regular PASER training before the April 1 collection date.

6.3. – Act-51 Distribution and Reporting System and Investment Reporting Tool (IRT)

– B. McEntee/R. Belknap

6.3.1. – Investment Reporting and Act 51 Compliance – R. Belknap An update was provided in the packet.

6.3.2. – IRT/ADARS Software Updates – D. Jennett Due to time constraints an update was not given.

6.3.3. – Training Update – D. Jennett Due to time constraints an update was not given.

6.4. - Website Update – D. Jennett

4

CSS has now uploaded all of the 2017 draft and finalized meeting minutes to the TAMC

Website.

6.5. - Dashboard Update – D. Jennett They are looking at possibly pulling together an adhoc committee.

7. Member Comments: None

8. Public Comments: None

9. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 3:06 p.m. The next meeting will be held July 26, 2017, at

1:00 p.m.; MDOT Aeronautics Building, 2nd Floor Commission Conference Room, Lansing.

TAMC FREQUENTLY USED ACRONYMS: AASHTO AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS

ACE ADMINISTRATION, COMMUNICATION, AND EDUCATION (TAMC COMMITTEE)

ACT-51 PUBLIC ACT 51 OF 1951-DEFINITION: A CLASSIFICATION SYTEM DESIGNED TO DISTRIBUTE MICHIGAN’S ACT 51 FUNDS. A ROADWAY MUST BE CLASSIFIED ON THE ACT 51 LIST TO RECEIVE STATE MONEY.

ADARS ACT 51 DISTRIBUTION AND REPORTING SYSTEM

BTP BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (MDOT)

CPM CAPITAL PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE

CRA COUNTY ROAD ASSOCIATION (OF MICHIGAN)

CSD CONTRACT SERVICES DIVISION (MDOT)

CSS CENTER FOR SHARED SOLUTIONS

DI DISTRESS INDEX

ESC EXTENDED SERVICE LIFE

FAST FIXING AMERICA’S SURFACE TRANSPORTATION ACT

FHWA FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

FOD FINANCIAL OPERATIONS DIVISION (MDOT)

FY FISCAL YEAR

GLS REGION V GENESEE-LAPEER-SHIAWASSEE REGION V PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

GVMC GRAND VALLEY METRO COUNCIL

HPMS HIGHWAY PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM

IBR INVENTORY BASED RATING

IRI INTERNATIONAL ROUGHNESS INDEX

IRT INVESTMENT REPORTING TOOL

KATS KALAMAZOO AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY

KCRC KENT COUNTY ROAD COMMISSION

LDC LAPTOP DATA COLLECTORS

LTAP LOCAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

MAC MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES

MAP-21 MOVING AHEAD FOR PROGRESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY (ACT)

MAR MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF REGIONS

MDOT MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

MDTMB MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY, MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

5

MITA MICHIGAN INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION

MML MICHIGAN MUNICIPAL LEAGUE

MPO METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

MTA MICHIGAN TOWNSHIPS ASSOCIATION

MTF MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION FUNDS

MTPA MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ASSOCIATION

MTU MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

NBI NATIONAL BRIDGE INVENTORY

NBIS NATIONAL BRIDGE INSPECTION STANDARDS

NFA NON-FEDERAL AID

NFC NATIONAL FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION

NHS NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM

PASER PAVEMENT SURFACE EVALUATION AND RATING

PNFA PAVED NON-FEDERAL AID

PWA PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION

QA/QC QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL

RCKC ROAD COMMISSION OF KALAMAZOO COUNTY

ROW RIGHT-OF-WAY

RPA REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY

RPO REGIONAL PLANNING ORGANIZATION

SEMCOG SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

STC STATE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

STP STATE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

TAMC TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT COUNCIL

TAMCSD TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT COUNCIL SUPPORT DIVISION

TAMP TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN

TPM TRANSPORTATION PERFORMANCE MEASURES

UWP UNIFIED WORK PROGRAM S:/GLORIASTRONG/TAMC FREQUENTLY USED ACRONYMS.03.10.2017.GMS

TAMC 2017 ‐ 2019 Work ProgramDRAFT Reporting TemplateProgress as of July 2017

Work Product Tasks

TAMC

Staff

CSS

MTU ACE

Data

Bridge

MPO

/RPO

MDO

T

Act 51

TAMC

Chair2017 2018 2019 Status Notes

Communications

1 Press ReleasesContinue publishing press releases as appropriate

X X XPress Release issued

regarding TAMC awards on May 26

Past Press Releases are on the website; 8 press releases sent since October 1, 2016

2Monthly Summary of TAMC Activities & Initiatives

Create Summary Template X X XShare this with TAMC as

potential summary template

Seek feedback on larger issues X X X ?

3 Outreach with Stakeholders Regional Coordinator Call X X X X X 4 calls this FYNow that IRT training is scheduled, Rog will put these on a regular schedule for the year

Query how is info shared with partner agencies

X X X still to do Survey monkey?

4Support TAMC Partner Agencies at Conferences

Develop schedule of conferences/topics X X XWill work to put together a

list for 2018Obtain Presentations /Displays X X √ COMPLETECoordinate TAMC attendees X X still to do

Publications

1 Annual Report Compile and submit to Legislature by May √May 2017 report completed

& submitted

Develop detailed schedule with milestones XProcess documentation

complete

Add data from IRT X X X X80% IRT compliance per Dave

J at May TAMC mtgwould like to report this on a monthly basis

Get feedback from conference attendees X Xno real feedback on annual

report at conference

Target solicitation of feedback X X X ?Marketing assessment of annual report X X X X X ?

2 Website Update Maintain website X X X X still to doCSS maintains the site; minutes of past meetings now available

Website Committee merge w/ Data X X X X √ COMPLETEDefine Support Role X X ?Training X X still to do ID a person to do this

3 "Bridge" NewsletterDevelop schedule w/ milestones & who is writing

X X schedule prepared

Focus on AM implementation X X X X X still to do

Develop content schedule X X Xdecided by authors as

appropriate

Ongoing

Ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

Ongoing

1

Work Product Tasks

TAMC

Staff

CSS

MTU ACE

Data

Bridge

MPO

/RPO

MDO

T

Act 51

TAMC


4 Other PublicationsInvestigate other opportunities to highlight TAMC

X X X X X still to do Should this be a regular agenda item?

Public Outreach

1 Promote Roadsoft as AM PlatformContinue to assist MTU‐CTT in deployment of Roadsoft

X X X X Xintentially kept IRT in concert with roadsoft to facilitate its

use2 Website Interactive Maps Overall coordination/updates X X ongoing

Update cycle related to TAMC activity X X X X ongoingContinual improvement X X X X X X X ongoing

3 Dashboards Overall coordination/updates X X X X X ongoing

Continual review of new/revised dashboards X X X X ongoing

Use analytics on current work program X X X X X X X still to come

Timely updates scheduled, define & implement

X X X X XNeed to coordinate or list all the schedules and due dates

4 Mobile Apps Maintain mobile apps Xinteractive map is now tablet

and phone friendlyUpdate as needed X X X dashboards still to come

Evaluate & present app to local agencies X √press release last year &

presented to STCLessons learned X X X X still to come Who would best evaluate this?

5 TAMC Awards Continue program X X XNeed to identify recipients for Fall Conference 2018 awards

Awards given at May 2017 conference

Evaluate & update selection process X X X raise on ACE agenda?Write up stories of award winners for website

6 Social Media Explore social media platforms X X X ?

7 BrochureCreate brochure to give to legislators w/ Annual Report

X X X X X still to come

Awareness of Asset Management1 21st CIC Monitor progress ‐ tasks TBD X X X

Track activities X X XData governance & sharing X X XUtility coordination X X X

Data Collection

1 Collect PASER Data Collect data on no less than 1/2 FA paved X X X X X X X Xdata collection now

underway

Perform QC on PASER ratings X X XQA/QC happens before uploading in December

regions evaluate completeness; MDOT evaluates for accuracy

Continue use of IRT to upload data sets X X X X X Xmonthly status update to

come

2Review Collection Methods & Reimbursement Policy for FA and Non‐FA Networks (Paved & Unpaved)

Research cost‐effectiveness of data collection effort

X X X X X X X X still to comeQuestion was raised at recent Data Committee mtg.

Dave & Joanna are involved in pilot project

ongoing

ongoing

ongoingongoingongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

2

Work Product Tasks

TAMC

Staff

CSS

MTU ACE

Data

Bridge

MPO

/RPO

MDO

T

Act 51

TAMC


Review methods of collection & reimbursement policies

X X X X X Xdraft recommended policy to

Council in AugustFocus efforts to collect data on top 125 X X X X X X FY 18 budget reflects this FA paved/unpaved, NFA paved/unpaved

3 Bridges Integrate MIBridge & IRT X X X X X X √ COMPLETE

Anticipate changes ‐ new nat'l requirements X X X

4Ensure Framework Base Map is Current

Update data sets within Framework X X X X Xframework base map and Act 51 certification maps are not the same; should be corrected as identified

Develop business needs for RFPs X X X ?

Subject matter expert input & feedback X X X X XRaters provide feedback on basemap corrections as they

find them

5 Data Collection ModelsContinue Roadsoft promotion to Act 51 agencies

X X X

Maintain Markov model in working order X X ?Explore making CPFS/Markov available for download

X X X ?

6 Federal Performance MeasuresMonitor national preferences for technological advances

X X X X X X X √MIRE, NHS pavement & Bridge measures were

finalizedTAMC decided it doesn't really have a role

7 Asset Management PlansPrep & training for development of agency AM plans

X X X X X X X XBridge workshops launching in July; pavement will model

after Bridge in 2018

Focus efforts to collect plans from top 125 X X X X X X X X still to come

Training & Education1 PASER & IRT Training Continue training X X X X X X X

Identify attendees & report results X X XMTU provides training

reports; included in council mtg packets

tracking training dates as well

Identify success/failure & report results X X X X ?

2 Local Officials Training & Workshops Training gap analysis X X X X √ Bridge

completed for bridge; pavement expected in 2018

MTU provides workshops & tools for elected officials; summarized in annual report

Informational tools X X X XUpdate as necessary X X X X

3 New AM Training Operational aspects of AM X X X X X √ Bridge

redeveloped for bridge; pavement expected in 2018

MTU provides workshops & tools for elected officials; summarized in annual report

Update as necessary X X X X XChange mgmt. & organizational culture X X X X X

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

3

Work Product Tasks

TAMC

Staff

CSS

MTU ACE

Data

Bridge

MPO

/RPO

MDO

T

Act 51

TAMC


4 Inventory‐based Rating Training Develop and deliver training program X X X X √training in Escanaba 6/13; webinar scheduled 7/14

3 webinars per year; included in 2018 UWP

5 Informational Tools Develop Asset Management "one pager" X X X X still to comePilot two 90‐second videos X X X ?

6 Continued Education w/ LegislatureCustomized pamphlet/brochure by lege district

X X X √MPOS and regions do an annual report of paser

condition

Set up event w/ legislators X X X √Presentation made to House Transpo Committee in March

7 Bi‐Annual Conference Continue coordinating conference(s) X X X XFall Conference planned for 10/5/2017 in Marquette

Identify attendees & report results X X X XIdentify success/failure & report results X X X X

Data Analysis & Resarch Opportunities

1 IRT Data Integration between PASER & IRT X X X X data committee discussing MDOT, CSS or MTU to analyze?

Data quality X X X XAnalyze Best & Worst practices X X X X

2Data Storage & Design Reports ‐ Recommendations for Optimal Use

Assessment X X X X

Update requirements working w/ stakeholders

X X X X

Report X X X Xregular reports to TAMC are

plannedCurrent state, projection & recommended changes.

3 Forecasting Review new IRT data for forecasting tools X X X X X

Project & Invesetment Reporting

1 Update IRT TechnologyPresent potential recommendations, options, requirements & risks

X X X testing in early july

2 Fields Inquiring about AM ProcessDevelop mechanism for receiving local agency AM plans in IRT

X X X X X √

Compare & analyze AM plans & data from IRT with PASER and Bridge data

X X X X X Xdata committee working on

table of information

Analyze plan elements & components; present agencies that are high performers

X X X Xafter data committee completes analysis

Communication plan X X X Xincluded in MPOs and RPO's

2018 UWP

3 Continuing Compliance Monitoring Analysis & reporting X X X X

Continue monitoring on how compliance is being done

X X X

2018 rewrite of IRT with enhanced reporting should

address this

support staff working with MDOT Act 51 team; monthly

status updates

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

ongoing

4

Work Product Tasks

TAMC

Staff

CSS

MTU ACE

Data

Bridge

MPO

/RPO

MDO

T

Act 51

TAMC


4 Quality Control (IRT) Assess & report on quality of information X X X X X X ? ad hoc approach right now

Update 2009 Cost Investment Report X X X X X X still to comePerformance Measures1 Develop Measures for TAMC Implementation of Work Program X X X X X X X ongoing

IRT‐ADARS X Xsummary information provided monthly

Miles collected Xsummary information provided monthly

Number of Asset Management Plans rec'd Xdata committee to consider

monthly

Council budget spent/budget reporting X X Xsummary information provided monthly

Develop more as needed X X X X X

2 Develop Measures for TAMC Determine where there's duplication of effort X X X X X ongoing

5

Work Area Tasks Description Comments Staff Est Hours Est Cost CSS Notes

A. Program Management

1. Administrative / Mgmt Tasks

Time set aside for meetings, coordination of deliverables, management of staff resources, budget tracking

PM 420 $42,000

Increase in rate to cover PMO PM to manage application development through AGILE process

B. Data Support 1. PASER Data Tasks

Coordination of incoming PASER data; Correspondence with local agencies; Management of datasets; Quality Control; Preparing maps and reports; Responding to requests as needed.

Analyst 400 $38,000

2. Reporting and AnalysisAdditional reports and status features beyond initial IRT rewrite

Includes data processing and data integration from other data sources to produce new reports that are to be developed.

Programmer/Analyst

160 $15,200Was prioritized as a FY18

initiative

2. Data Preparation for MTU / Model Runs

Compilation, migration, and delivery of data for MTU Roadsoft updates, training, and model runs

May include investment / treatment data, PASER QC data, ADARS, IRT, and other related TAMC datasets

Analyst 80 $7,600 Same as FY17

3. ETL Maintenance / Support

Usage / Processing Time N/A N/A $8,000

Same as FY17. Costs could be reduced in FY18 with new

PASER Update Tools to be completed in FY17/18.

C. Application Development / Maintenance / Support

1. IRT Bug Fixes / Ongoing Maintenance / Support

Required time spent on maintaining current IRT website - troubleshooting when problems arise, handling break/fix issues, updating of geography; also includes server and/or infrastructure support to ensure online availability of application

Programmer / Analyst

160 $15,200Increase budgeted hours by 40 hours for FY18 because of launch of new IRT system

2. TAMC Website/ Ongoing Maintenance / Support

Required time spent maintaining current TAMC Website; troubleshooting when problems arise, handling break/fix issues, updating of geography; also includes server and/or infrastructure support to ensure online availability of application


120 $11,400 Same as FY17

3. Application Testing Includes functionality testing, regression testing, updating test plans, and user acceptance testing, in response to data and application updates

Analyst / Support Staff

180 $17,100Increase of 20 hours because of more application development activities in FY18 work plan.

Draft FY18 TAMC Work Plan - Central Data Agency (7-21-2017)Center for Shared Solutions

CSS Work Items

Page 1 of 4


Application Changes & Improvements

The following improvements are being itemized separately.

4. IRT v2.2 Application Updates From IRT Re-Write Backlog

Application Development for IRT v2.2 release of additional functionality that was backlogged during IRT re-write.

Some backlogged requirements need to be fully defined and may require additional hours or prioritization of what gets completed for alloted budget.

Programmer / Analyst / BA

405 $38,475

Additional functionality backlogged during IRT re-write.

To be prioritized based on available budget and immediated

needs

5. Interactive Map - Desktop

Interactive Map Updates Continued from FY17Programmer /

Analyst100 $9,500

Continued effort from FY17. Training videos were moved up

from FY18 to FY17 so some budget was reprioritized based

on that change.

6.. Mobile Strategy Assessment

Assessment/RecommendationsCreate basic tool to allow TAMC MDOT support staff to update Meetings and News area with PDFs. (Other areas if possible)


40 $3,800

7. Integrate MIBridge and IRT

Improve access to data into Bridge program. Need more defined requirements. Access to MIBridge data may present challenges.


120 $11,400

8. Program Changes / Improvements and Usability Testing

Additional Misc Support for Changes and ADA ReviewProgrammer / Analyst / BA

80 $7,600Reduced to 80 hours based on

FY17 costs

D. Help Desk, Misc Support

1. Help Desk TasksTime set aside for answering phones calls, assisting IRT users, logging issues


380 $34,200

Increased hours to support launch of new IRT through first few months and subsequent updates through functional

enhancements 2.2

2. Administrative SupportPreparation of reports, status maps, correspondence, meetings, etc., to assist TAMC staff


400 $36,000 Same as FY17

E. Training 1. Provide training via webinar and online videos, plus 4 onsite sessions

Maintain online training videos and documentation to reflect any updates to MiTRP application; Execute 4-5 training sessions via webinar, plus 3-4 onsite sessions throughout year.

Distribution of materials electronically - no hard copies.

Analyst 280 $25,350Additional hours for new

materials needed as additional functionality is added to IRT v2.2

2. ATT Teleconference Services

Webinar fee Based on new rates from AT&T of $0.32 per minute; assuming 5 sessions with average of 40 participants at 2.5 hours each

N/A N/A $9,600 Same as FY17

F. Data Access / Reporting

1. Dashboard -Maintenance

Maintenance / Support of existing dashboards currently in production and minor enhancements as needed.

Maintain data according to annual refresh cycle; Allow for a total of 40 hours work on each of the dashboards plus coordination, meeting attendance, requirements definition, etc. (Dashboards include: Pavement, Pavement Comparison, Bridge, Bridge Comparison, Traffic, Safety, Finance, Maintenance); Note - new enhancements may require additional hours


400 $38,000 Same as FY17

Page 2 of 4


2. Dashboard - Updates for New Website

Hours for development of new Dashboard section/webpage for TAMC Website .

Additional Dashboards based on development of additional reports initiative outlined under Reports and Analysis in Data Support section. Also NHS dashboard - basic statewide totals for bridge and roads using similar template as Traffic Dashboard. Requirements need to be fully defined and may require additional hours.


120 $11,400

This area also accounts for any incompatibility issues with

software when doing standard updates.

3. Excelsius LicensingFee required for use of Excelsius software used in development of dashboards

N/A N/A $175 Same as FY17

Prior Year (FY17)

FY17 MAX Estimate

Work Area Project Mgmt $37,800 $42,000Data Support $60,200 $68,800 Application Development* / Maintenance / Support $83,280 $114,475 Help Desk / Testing / Misc $66,600 $70,200 Training $27,600 $34,950 Data Access / Reporting $47,155 $49,575

$322,635 $380,000

Page 3 of 4


Additional FY17-FY19 Work Items

FY19 MIRE Strategy and Work Items

Work in partnership with Data Committee / MTU to develop strategy and tasks that support MIRE efforts

Details unknown at this time. Estimated costs may or may not cover all assigned tasks.


160 $14,400

FY19 Data Sharing Strategy and Implementation

Assessment / Further refinement of strategy with use of Dashboard

Work in partnership with Data Committee and MDOT staff to refine strategy for sharing information and data with RPO/MPO, Act51, MDOT


120 $10,800

FY19 Adding Bridge Data to the ADARS process

Unknown effort at this time - placeholder of 40 hours.

Need more defined requirements. This could potentially be added to the existing page but the user may have problems knowing if it is bridge data or road data. NOTE: Bridge Data forms in IRT have a cost field as of 2016. Will examine if cost should be required. Reminder - ADARS has high risks for any changes/maintenance.


40 $3,600

FY19 Dashboard Conversion to Mobile Platform

Unknown effort at this time TBD - At Council's discretion, may choose to include this work item if additional budget becomes available


320 $28,800

These items were identified as priorities for FY17-FY19, however, Council may assign these tasks at their discretion. Additional budget approvals are required

Page 4 of 4

Proposal Title:

Submitted To:

Principal Investigator:

Co-Principal Investigators:

Contracting Authority:

Date Submitted:

Draft 2018 Transportation Asset Management Council Education Program Work Plan Roger Belknap Bureau of Transportation Planning Michigan Department of Transportation [email protected] Tim Colling, PhD, PE Director – Center for Technology & Training 1400 Townsend Drive - 309 Dillman Hall Houghton, MI 49931 [email protected] 906-487-2102 Pete Torola, PE Research Engineer II [email protected] Chris Gilbertson PhD, PE Associate Director [email protected] Lisa Jukkila Assistant Director - Sponsored Programs Michigan Technological University 1400 Townsend Drive Houghton, MI 49931 (906) 487-2226 (906) 487-2245 fax [email protected]

Draft Submitted June 30, 2017

2018 Michigan Transportation Asset Management Council Education Program P a g e | ii

Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 TAMC Work Plan Guidelines ..................................................................................................... 2 3.0 Work Plan .................................................................................................................................. 2

3.1 Task 1– Assist in Coordinating the Michigan Transportation Asset Management Conferences ........................................................................................................................ 3 3.2 Task 2– Conduct Michigan Transportation Asset Management Workshops ............... 4 3.3 Task 3– Conduct Introduction to Transportation Asset Management for Local Officials Training ................................................................................................................. 4 3.4 Task 4 – Conduct TAMC PASER Training ....................................................................... 5 3.5 Task 5 – Conduct Inventory Based Rating™ Training .................................................... 6 3.6 Task 6 – Create IBR Booklet .......................................................................................... 6 3.7 Task 7 – Conduct Michigan Bridge Asset Management Workshop .............................. 6 3.8 Task 8: Conduct Workshop on Creating Pavement Asset Management Plans ............ 7 3.9 Task 9: Project Management & Reporting .................................................................... 8

4.0 Key Personnel............................................................................................................................ 8 Appendix A: Transportation Asset Management Council 2017-2019 Work Program. ................. 9 Appendix B: Budget and Cost Derivation ...................................................................................... 10

2018 Michigan Transportation Asset Management Council Education Program 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION The Michigan Transportation Asset Management Council (TAMC) began delivering its education program and providing technical services in 2004. Since that time, Michigan Technological University has assisted with the TAMC Education Program and continues to be a logical choice for assisting with this program because of its Center for Technology & Training (CTT). The CTT is part of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE) and is located on Michigan Technological University’s campus, which offers a wide array of resources for this project. The CTT houses various state- and federal-funded programs. For example, CTT projects funded by the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) include the Michigan Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP), Roadsoft, Michigan Engineer’s Resource Library (MERL), and Bridge Load Rating technical support program. Additionally, the CTT houses the federally-funded Environmental Protection Agency’s Region 5 environmental finance center—the Great Lake Environmental Infrastructure Center (GLEIC). This array of programs economizes upon professional, development, and support staff to make project delivery cost effective and time efficient. The CTT focuses its efforts specifically on projects related to local government agencies and transportation. In 2014, the State of Michigan required continuing education hours (CEH) for professional engineers to maintain their licenses. As an education institution, the Michigan LTAP is in the position to provide CEH for professional engineers. Alongside this ability, the Michigan LTAP can encourage the appropriate TAMC classes as a means for maintaining licensure. One of the prime challenges of effectively working with the over 600 local agencies in Michigan is keeping accurate contact information. The ability of the Michigan LTAP to contact local agency staff through e-mail, phone, and direct mail can provide a major benefit to programs that are targeted at Michigan’s local agencies, like TAMC’s training efforts. The Michigan LTAP maintains a state-of-the-art contact and event management database, which makes advertising and participant registration for local agency training events a very simple, cost-effective process. In addition, because LTAP is a nationally recognized program working to educate local agencies, events advertised through the Michigan LTAP can take advantage of state and national agreements between partner organizations—such as County Road Association (CRA) of Michigan, National Association of County Engineers (NACE), National Association of Counties (NACO), Michigan Township Association (MTA), American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC), and Michigan Municipal League (MML)—for access to their contact databases. These agreements allow the Michigan LTAP access to these partner organization mail lists at no cost. Access to these same mail lists outside of LTAP partner organization agreements can have a substantial cost, sometimes as high as $0.10 to $0.20 per contact.


Events that are co-sponsored with the Michigan LTAP benefit by utilizing the wealth of local agency contact information that is stored in the Michigan LTAP contact and event management system and from the no-cost access to Michigan LTAP partner organization mail lists. They also benefit by taking advantage of the infrastructure that the Michigan LTAP has for registering and invoicing participants, event tracking, and training records retention. By not duplicating these efforts, the arrangement results in an economy of scale through cooperation among programs that educate local agency transportation staff. Since its inception, the TAMC training program has been and continues to be coordinated as a co-sponsored training event with the Michigan LTAP.

2.0 TAMC WORK PLAN GUIDELINES The tasks for this proposal were identified from educational priorities outlined by TAMC in the TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program (See Appendix A). Tasks are referenced to the appropriate items in the TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program. A detailed cost proposal will be included as Appendix B as support for budgeted task amounts in the final proposal; however, it is not included in this draft due to University policy.

3.0 WORK PLAN This draft work plan is for discussion purposes only to assist TAMC in budgetary planning. It does not represent a firm quote, and it does not commit University personnel, facilities, or funds. Final terms and conditions of this sponsored activity are subject to University review and authorization of a formal proposal or agreement. This work plan and budget are for the period beginning January 1, 2018 and ending December 31, 2018. The total estimated budget for this project is $235,000. A more precise and detailed cost estimate will be provided with the final proposal should TAMC accept this scope of work at the budgetary level in Appendix B. The work plan consists of the following major tasks as outlined by the TAMC Draft 2017-2019 Work Program:

• Task 1: Assist in Coordinating the Michigan Transportation Asset Management Conferences

• Task 2: Conduct Michigan Transportation Asset Management Workshops


• Task 3: Conduct Introduction to Transportation Asset Management for Local Officials Training

• Task 4: Conduct Michigan Transportation Asset Management Council PASER Training • Task 5: Conduct Inventory Based Rating™ Training • Task 6: Conduct Michigan Bridge Asset Management Workshop • Task 7: Conduct Workshop on Creating Pavement Asset Management Plans • Task 8: Project Management and Reporting

A nominal registration fee will be assessed to participants for attending training events delivered under this program consistent with Michigan LTAP policy. Registering and failing to show at an event per Michigan LTAP cancelation policy will result in a fee for participants. Registration fees are calculated to break even for on-site expenses, which include consumables that participants use or take with them (such as facility rental, webinar and phone line expenses, food and refreshments, handouts, and rental of audio visual equipment). Registration fees help to offset the load on the program for on-site activities. The absence of a registration fee (i.e., free training) has been shown to increase no-shows and decrease attendance at training programs because it is assumed that “free” training has some other profit motive and requires no commitment on the part of the participant. Participants in training events offered under this program will be issued certificates of completion for continuing education hours (CEH) required for maintaining a Michigan professional engineer license where applicable. Every attempt will be made to ensure that trainings provided in this program are eligible for CEH credit for attendees.

3.1 Task 1– Assist in Coordinating the Michigan Transportation Asset Management Conferences TAMC 2017-2019 Draft Work Program Item: Training and Education Item 7, Bi-Annual Conference (see Appendix A). CTT staff will participate in organizing both conferences, including participation in organization meetings, distribution of promotional material, handling of participant registration, printing of folder handouts, active facilitation of the conferences, and provision of on-site audiovisual and logistical support. CTT staff will also record audio and screen captures of presentations, which will be built into a Flash or video format that can be streamed over the web. CTT staff will collect the registration fee set by TAMC, mail invoices, and return collected fees back to TAMC to defray on-site and facility expenses.


The currently planned events are: Assist at one, one-day conference Lansing, Michigan, Spring 2018 Assist at one, one-day conference Upper Peninsula, Michigan, Fall 2018

3.2 Task 2– Conduct Michigan Transportation Asset Management Workshops TAMC 2017-2019 Draft Work Program Item: Training and Education Item 2, Local Officials Training and Workshops (see Appendix A). This task consists of presenting two full-day sessions of the Asset Management Workshop. This workshop has been ongoing since 2006 and has met most audience needs. Two sessions per year should be sufficient to meet the demand for new local agency employees or participants new to asset management. The locations of the workshop will be distributed statewide to minimize participant drive time. This task does not include a budget for reimbursement for participants, RPO coordinators, TAMC members, or TAMC staff, or for any revision, editing, or enhancements to the Asset Management Guide for Local Agencies or presentation material. The currently planned events are: Conduct two, one-day sessions, Fall 2018

3.3 Task 3– Conduct Introduction to Transportation Asset Management for Local Officials Training TAMC 2017-2019 Draft Work Program Item: Training and Education Item 2, Local Officials Training and Workshops (see Appendix A). The training presentation material will be updated to reflect any changes in legislation and TAMC policies. Whenever possible, participation by RPO coordinators, TAMC members, and TAMC staff is strongly encouraged. This task includes presentation of five sessions of the three-hour training events, Asset Management for Local Officials. Historically, these sessions have been offered at a local agency office, with that agency offering to “host” the event. Hosted training events typically target the elected officials in the immediate jurisdictions. Hosted training events will be delivered during


morning, afternoon, or evening as the site’s host agency expresses interest. In addition to hosted sessions, several “open enrollment” sessions will be planned that are not associated with a host agency. Open enrollment events will be advertised to all elected officials statewide. This budget includes facility costs (if any), handouts, participant registration, CTT instructor time, and travel costs. This budget does not include any reimbursement for participants, RPO coordinators, TAMC members, or TAMC staff. Host agencies are responsible for break refreshments. The currently planned events are: Conduct five workshop sessions at approximately three-hours each.

3.4 Task 4 – Conduct TAMC PASER Training TAMC 2017-2019 Draft Work Program Item: Training and Education Item 1, PASER Training (see Appendix A). The presentation material will be updated to reflect data collected in 2017, quality-control results, and any changes in legislation and TAMC policies. Training will also be further adapted to the use of audience response systems (I-Clickers) based on the continued success of the usage of this technology. This technology was found to engage attendees, provide instant and accurate feedback, and produce data that can be used to further assess training techniques. Training dates will be coordinated with TAMC’s data collection start date. TAMC needs to notify the CTT of any changes in its collection training requirements and policy by December 1, 2017. It is otherwise assumed that start dates and training policy will remain the same as the last approved start dates and policy. This task includes facility costs (if any), printing of handouts, purchase of PASER Manuals, participant registration, CTT instructor time, and travel costs. This task does not include any reimbursement for participants, RPO coordinators, TAMC members, or TAMC staff. This task includes the distribution of the Local Agency Asset Management Survey, which will be delivered in its current format to all local agency participants at the on-site PASER training sessions. The currently planned events are: Conduct four, three-hour distress identification webinars; conduct nine half-day on-site PASER training sessions; conduct one full-day combined PASER and distress identification workshop for newly hired staff; conduct one, two-hour webinar for RPO’s and MPO’s on using the Roadsoft data process.


3.5 Task 5 – Conduct Inventory Based Rating™ Training TAMC 2017-2019 Draft Work Program Item: Training and Education Item 4, Inventory Based Rating Training (see Appendix A). The Inventory Based Rating™ (IBR) system for unpaved roads was developed in 2015 at the request of the TAMC. In 2016, the tools in Roadsoft were released to allow agencies to collect and analyze unpaved road condition data efficiently. The TAMC currently has a draft data collection policy language, which includes mandatory collection of the IBR data for unpaved roads on the federal aid eligible road system that will take effect in 2018. In order to collect this data, it will be necessary to train staff from agencies that own gravel roads. This task will update and deliver training that will allow local agencies to make consistent use of the tools and systems that TAMC has developed over the years for unpaved roads and will allow them to collect data for their own use and for reporting to TAMC. The currently planned events are: Update and conduct three, two-hour webinars on use of the IBR system for rating unpaved roads.

3.6 Task 6 – Create IBR Booklet TAMC 2017-2019 Draft Work Program Item: Training and Education Item 4, Inventory Based Rating™ Training (see Appendix A). The Inventory Based Rating™ (IBR) system for unpaved roads will be an active part of TAMC data collection in 2018. The CTT first presented classes on the collection of data for IBR in 2017 and will again present these classes in 2018 under Task 5. While most of the instructional materials (power point presentations and notes) for the IBR class have been created, there is no single manual that describes this rating system, the premise behind it, or the process for collecting data using IBR. The lack of a printed IBR manual means that raters must strongly rely on the training they receive and that there are limited resources available when questions arise. The intent of this task is to create a 10- to 20-page standalone IBR technical manual that is similar in design and use to the TAMC PASER Manual. The IBR technical manual will outline the premise of the rating system, provide details on the quantification of rating factors, and provide examples of unpaved road rating using the IBR System. The manual will be an aid to people rating roads in the field as well as a guide that can be used during training.

3.7 Task 7 – Conduct Michigan Bridge Asset Management Workshop TAMC 2017-2019 Draft Work Program Item: Training and Education Item 2, Local Officials Training and Workshops (see Appendix A).


The Bridge Asset Management Workshop was modified during the 2016 TAMC Education work plan and was presented for the first time as part of the 2017 TAMC Education work plan. The new workshop includes two two-hour webinars that present bridge asset management principles and one five-hour on-site workshop that provides participants with a hands-on how-to session for developing an agency’s bridge asset management plan. The details for the requirements of the revised workshop were outlined by the Bridge Committee. This task will provide time and expenses for a CTT instructor to present the webinar and workshop series on three occasions. This task does not include a budget for reimbursement for participants, RPO coordinators, TAMC members, or TAMC staff, or for any revision, editing, or enhancements to handouts or presentation material. The locations of the workshop will be distributed statewide to minimize participant drive time and to maximize attendance. The currently planned events are: Conduct three sets of two two-hour webinars and three five-hour, on-site sessions

3.8 Task 8: Conduct Workshop on Creating Pavement Asset Management Plans TAMC 2017-2019 Draft Work Program Item: Training and Education Item 2, Local Officials Training and Workshops (see Appendix A). While there is currently no formal requirement for local agency to have a written asset management plan, there is a strong indication that this may be a future requirement. Regardless of whether asset management plans become a formal requirement, asset management plans are positive signs of implementation of asset management principles at an agency level and are considered a best practice. Under the 2017 TAMC Education work plan, a training program centered on the creation of local agency pavement asset management plans will be developed and tested. This task will deliver this newly created training and continue minor upgrades to the training program. The completion of this task is contingent on the successful completion and testing of the workshop development in 2017. The currently planned events are: Present four, four- to six-hour workshops with associated training materials for on-site delivery.


3.9 Task 9: Project Management & Reporting This effort covers all management of the project, project reporting, project-specific interaction with Michigan Tech administration, and relations with the sponsor. Monthly Reports Monthly progress reports will include a list of trainings conducted (date, location) and an estimate of percent completion by task. Estimates of percent complete are based on aggregate hours worked—not based on budget expended—so these estimates are not intended to be used for auditing invoices by the sponsor. Quarterly Reports Quarterly progress reports will include trainings conducted (date, location), a cumulative list of training participants, and an estimate of percent completion by task (these estimates will not be used for auditing invoices). Quarterly reports will be submitted in place of a monthly report by the last day of the month following the end of the calendar quarter. Annual Training Report At the end of each calendar year, CTT staff will compile a comprehensive training report that will summarize the performance of all TAMC training events. The report will include historical attendance figures as compared to the current year, spatial summary maps of attendees for the TAM conferences, and feedback received from participant evaluations. Annual Survey of Local Agency Asset Management Implementation Report Following the completion of PASER training, CTT staff will compile a comprehensive training report that will summarize the results of the Local Agency Asset Management Survey collected during the annual PASER collection and will compare current and historical results.

4.0 KEY PERSONNEL Tim Colling, PhD, PE, Director – PI Pete Torola, PE, Research Engineer II – Co-PI Chris Gilbertson, PhD, PE, Associate Director – Co-PI Names of Employees and Positions for this Service Chris Codere, Sr. Project Manager, Training & Operations Tim Colling, PhD, PE, Director – PI Cynthia Elder, Workshop Coordinator Chris Gilbertson, PhD, PE, Associate Director Victoria Sage, MS, Technical Writer/Training Coordinator Peter Torola, PE, Research Engineer II


Appendix A: Transportation Asset Management Council 2017-2019 Work Program.

TO BE INCLUDED IN FINAL PROPOSAL, NOT PRESENT IN DRAFT


Appendix B: Budget and Cost Derivation


Proposal Title:

Submitted To:

Principal Investigator:

Co-Principal Investigators:

Contracting Authority:

Date Submitted:

Draft 2018 Transportation Asset Management Council Technical Assistance Activities Program Work Plan Roger Belknap Bureau of Transportation Planning Michigan Department of Transportation [email protected] Tim Colling, PhD, PE Director – Center for Technology & Training 1400 Townsend Drive - 309 Dillman Hall Houghton, MI 49931 [email protected] 906-487-2102 Mary Crane Sr. Software Engineer [email protected] Lisa Jukkila Assistant Director - Sponsored Programs Michigan Technological University 1400 Townsend Drive Houghton, MI 49931 (906) 487-2226 (906) 487-2245 fax [email protected]

DRAFT Submitted June 30, 2017

2018 Michigan Transportation Asset Management Council Technical Assistance Activities Program ii

Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 TAMC Work Plan Guidelines ..................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Work Plan .................................................................................................................................. 1

3.1 Task 1: Attend and Participate in TAMC Council Meetings ................................................................ 2 3.2 Task 2: Attend and Participate in TAMC Committee Meetings .......................................................... 2 3.3 Task 3: Review of the Data and QC Collection Results ....................................................................... 2 3.4 Task 4: Maintain Roadsoft – IRT Data Submission Protocols ............................................................. 3 3.5 Task 5: Maintenance of TAMC PASER Training Certification Testing Instruments and Records........ 3 3.6 Task 6: Undefined Staff Support ......................................................................................................... 4 3.7 Task 7: Project Management and Monthly Reporting ....................................................................... 5

4.0 Key Personnel............................................................................................................................ 5 Appendix A: Transportation Asset Management Council Draft 2017-2019 Work Program. ......... 6 Appendix B: Budget and Cost Derivation ........................................................................................ 7

2018 Michigan Transportation Asset Management Council Technical Assistance Activities Program 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION The Michigan Transportation Asset Management Council (TAMC) began delivering its education program and providing technical services in 2004. Since that time, the Center for Technology &Training (CTT) has assisted the TAMC with its education programs and technical assistance services. The CTT is a logical choice for this program because, in addition to the TAMC Education Program, the CTT houses other programs funded by the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) including the Michigan Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP), Roadsoft, Michigan Engineer’s Resource Library (MERL), and the Bridge Load Rating Program. This array of programs economizes upon professional, development, and support staff to make project delivery cost effective. The CTT focuses its efforts specifically on projects related to local government agencies and transportation. The CTT is part of the Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE) department on Michigan Technological University’s campus.

2.0 TAMC WORK PLAN GUIDELINES The tasks for this proposal were identified from priorities outlined by TAMC in the TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program (See Appendix A). Tasks are referenced to the appropriate items in the TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program. A detailed cost proposal will be included as Appendix B as support for budgeted task amounts in the final proposal; however, it is not included in this draft due to University policy.

3.0 WORK PLAN This draft work plan is for discussion purposes only to assist the TAMC in budgetary planning. It does not represent a firm quote, and it does not commit University personnel, facilities or funds. Final terms and conditions of this sponsored activity are subject to University review and authorization of a formal proposal or agreement. This work plan and budget is for the period beginning October 1, 2017 and ending September 30, 2018. The total proposed budget for this project is approximately $106,000. A more precise and detailed cost estimate will be provided with the final proposal should the TAMC accept this scope of work at the budgetary level in Appendix B. The work plan consists of the following major tasks as outlined by the TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program:

• Task 1: Attend and Participate in TAMC Council Meetings


• Task 2: Attend and Participate in TAMC Committee Meetings • Task 3: Review of the Data and QC Collection Results • Task 4: Maintain Roadsoft –IRT Data Submission Protocols • Task 5: Maintenance of TAMC PASER Training Certification Testing Instruments and

Records • Task 6: Investment Reporting Project Cost Study • Task 7: Undefined Staff Support • Task 8: Project Management and Monthly Reporting

3.1 Task 1: Attend and Participate in TAMC Council Meetings This task includes attendance at TAMC Council Meetings to brief members on activity to date, to participate in on-site work, and to take direction from council members and staff. This task also includes time and expenses for CTT staff to attend four on-site ‘person-meetings’1 and six conference-call meetings2. Discussion with the sponsor’s project manager and the TAMC staff coordinator will determine which meetings will be attended and which personnel will attend.

3.2 Task 2: Attend and Participate in TAMC Committee Meetings This task includes attendance at TAMC Committee Meetings (including monthly meetings with RPO and MPO staff to brief members on activity to date), participation in on-site work, and taking direction from TAMC members and staff. This task also includes time and expenses for the CTT staff to attend two on-site ‘person-meetings’1 and eight conference-call meetings2. Discussion with the sponsor’s project manager and the TAMC staff coordinator will determine which meetings will be attended and which personnel will attend.

3.3 Task 3: Review of the Data and QC Collection Results TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program Item: Data Collection Item 1, Collect PASER data (see Appendix A). Understanding the cases where data collection team ratings differ from the quality control (QC) ratings is critical for instilling confidence in the data collection process and in guiding the direction of training efforts. This task involves review of the most recent Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER) data (2017) and comparing them to historical data sets and the QC ratings for the same years. The focus of this effort is to identify areas where PASER data collection training can be augmented to address QC issues. 1 A “person-meeting” is one person attending one meeting 2 As a cost saving measure, the number of on-site meetings and associated travel cost have been reduced, with the assumption that teleconference meetings will meet the TAMC’s needs as they have over the last several years.


MDOT must provide QC data, 2006-2017 PASER data, and QC photos (if available) to the CTT by the end of January 2018 for this task to be completed in time to guide the annual training events. The raw data QC file provided to the CTT needs to conform to the historical format of the data provided in 2011 (i.e., CSV or XLS file with columns for each year of QC and rating data for each road segment ) when the data were last received by the CTT. An example of the required format can be provided upon request.

3.4 Task 4: Maintain Roadsoft – IRT Data Submission Protocols TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program Item: Data Collection Item 1, Collect PASER data (see Appendix A). TAMC dedicates a significant portion of its efforts to collecting the pavement data and construction history information (completed and planned investments) necessary for driving asset management processes at the local, regional, and state levels of government. TAMC data collection activities require sharing of data between these three levels of government in a meaningful format for each stakeholder. To facilitate this data collection, sharing, and reporting, the TAMC relies on interfaces between Roadsoft (asset management software) developed by the Michigan LTAP and the Investment Reporting Tool (IRT) developed by the Center for Shared Solutions (CSS). Development for both of these tools is ongoing as user requirements change, software interfaces and underlying data systems are maintained, and data collection policies are modified. This task is specifically important during the upcoming work program as there are plans to rewrite and update the IRT during 2017-2018 work program year. The data transfer protocols and interactivity between Roadsoft and the IRT need to be updated and tested annually to ensure that quality data are passed between the two systems and that changes or updates during the prior year have not resulted in data transfer irregularities. This task should be completed close to the start of data collection activities in April. However, due to the impending rewrite of the IRT, testing will be ongoing according to the rewrite schedule. This task will include annual testing and verification of the Roadsoft export of PASER data to the IRT, and import and export of planned and completed treatments (investment reporting) from Roadsoft to the IRT and from the IRT to Roadsoft. The task also includes a budget for making small changes to the import and export protocols should they be necessary; however, at the time of the submission of this proposal, it is not clear what the extent the changes will be.

3.5 Task 5: Maintenance of TAMC PASER Training Certification Testing Instruments and Records. TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program Item: Data Collection Item 1, Collect PASER data (see Appendix A).


In 2012, the TAMC instituted a PASER Training certification process, which reduced the need for qualified raters to attend training every year. As part of this certification process, raters are required to have a minimum level of past training attendance and pass a knowledge-based exam. During the 2012 work program, testing instruments (i.e., written test and associated slideshow of testing graphics) were created and tested on a control group at the CTT. This task includes modification to the existing testing materials to be sure that past testing instruments are not identical to current testing instruments for the upcoming year. The task will also cover administration of the certification program, tracking and notification of eligible participants, and maintenance of certification records for the roughly 400 participants in the PASER Training program. The time needed accomplish this task before beginning training efforts requires this task to be present in the TAMC Activities work program.

3.6 Task 6 Investment Reporting Project Cost Study TAMC 2017-2019 Work Program Item: Data Analysis Item 3, Forecasting (see Appendix A). The TAMC has been collecting investment project data for several years now and has received increased compliance with Act 51 agencies in reporting this data. With the strengthening of reporting requirements in 2016, a repository of information is being generated that can be analyzed and extrapolated to provide treatment cost and treatment volume data to better inform TAMC’s network-level pavement model on the local system. In this task, CTT staff will work with TAMC support staff and CSS staff to analyze data from the IRT and the Act 51 Distribution and Reporting System (ADARS) on the local road system. Research staff will develop descriptive statistics for the cost and volume (number of lane miles) of the four treatment classes (i.e., Light CPM, Heavy CPM, Rehabilitation, and Reconstruction) for different subsets of the data. Subsets may include items such as pavement types, geographic regions, and road classification. Where user entered data is present, the team will attempt to isolate cost and volume data by individual treatments. For example, sealcoat would be a likely individual treatment under the Heavy CPM class. Methods will be developed for the extrapolation of treatment volume data (e.g., number of lane miles of treatment per year) to account for under-reporting of data due to non-reporting agencies. The output of this task will be: 1) a subdivided table of average treatment costs that can be used for planning the cost of future projects or modeling the local road network; 2) a subdivided project volume for each treatment class that is extrapolated to account for under-reporting and can then be used as model input for TAMC’s network-level model; and 3) a report detailing methods and findings from #1 and #2 with recommendations for the implementation of processes that will routinely produce these results from the raw data in future years.


3.7 Task 7: Undefined Staff Support This task provides support to the TAMC for items that cannot be identified at this time but are deemed critical to be completed in a short timeframe. Historically, this task has covered data management or critical changes to programs. This task allocates approximately 150 hours of staff time to tasks as requested by the Council or its sub-committees. Specific work activities are determined through discussion with the sponsor’s project manager, the TAMC staff coordinator, or the TAMC chairperson.

3.8 Task 8: Project Management and Monthly Reporting This task covers all management of the project, project reporting, and project-specific interaction with Michigan Technological University administration and relations with the sponsor. Monthly progress reports will include a list of activities conducted and an estimate of percent completion by task. Estimates of percent complete are based on aggregate hours worked, not based on budget expended; so, these estimates are not intended to be used for auditing invoices by the sponsor.

4.0 KEY PERSONNEL Tim Colling, PhD, PE, Director – PI Mary Crane, Sr. Software Engineer– Co-PI Names of Employees and Positions for this Service Tim Colling, PhD, PE, Director Gary Schlaff, Sr. Project Manager, Development & IT Chris Codere, Sr. Project Manager, Training & Operations Mary Crane, Sr. Software Engineer Cynthia Elder, Workshop Coordinator Andrew Manty, PE, Research Engineer II Luke Peterson, Principle Software Engineer Carole Reynolds, MS, CRM Administrator Victoria Sage, MS, Technical Writer/Training Coordinator Peter Torola, PE, Research Engineer II


Appendix A: Transportation Asset Management Council 2017-2019 Work Program.



Appendix B: Budget and Cost Derivation


As of 7‐12‐17

FY15 Budget FY15 Actual FY16 Budget FY16 Actual FY17 Budget

(most recent invoice date) $ Spent $ Spent $ Spent BalanceI. Data Collection (Federal‐Aid System) & Regional‐Metro Planning Asset Management Progam Battle Creek Area Transporation Study (5‐22‐17) 20,000.00$ 11,450.94$ 20,000.00$ 9,774.58$ 20,000.00$ 6,247.99$ 13,752.01$ Bay County Area Transportation Study 20,000.00$ 9,620.95$ 20,000.00$ 6,988.87$ 20,000.00$ ‐$ 20,000.00$ Central Upper Peninsula Planning and Development (5‐4‐17) 40,471.00$ 40,471.00$ 40,471.00$ 40,471.00$ 40,471.00$ 16,832.43$ 23,638.57$ Eastern Michigan Council of Governments (6‐19‐17) 95,995.00$ 95,995.00$ 95,995.00$ 95,995.00$ 95,995.00$ 51,309.51$ 44,685.49$ Eastern Upper Peninsula Regional Planning & Devel. (5‐4‐17) 20,000.00$ 20,000.15$ 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$ 4,552.08$ 15,447.92$ Genesee Lapeer Shiawasse Region V Planning Com. (6‐22‐17) 39,423.00$ 36,599.95$ 39,423.00$ 39,026.20$ 39,423.00$ 7,467.49$ 31,955.51$ Grand Valley Metropolitan Council (7‐10‐17) 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$ 4,837.31$ 20,000.00$ 2,211.68$ 17,788.32$ Kalamazoo Area Transportation Study (5‐15‐17) 20,000.00$ 16,434.05$ 20,000.00$ 12,024.73$ 20,000.00$ 9,190.41$ 10,809.59$ Macatawa Area Coordinating Council 20,000.00$ 1,598.50$ 20,000.00$ 3,910.09$ 20,000.00$ ‐$ 20,000.00$ Midland Area Transportation Study (6‐1‐17) 20,000.00$ 17,709.01$ 20,000.00$ 19,068.43$ 20,000.00$ 934.77$ 19,065.23$ Northeast Michigan Council of Governments (4‐10‐17) 37,916.00$ 37,916.00$ 37,916.00$ 37,916.00$ 37,916.00$ 17,253.00$ 20,663.00$ Northwest Michigan Council of Governments (5‐4‐17) 61,316.00$ 61,316.00$ 61,316.00$ 61,316.00$ 61,316.00$ 26,813.59$ 34,502.41$ Region 2 Planning Commission (5‐4‐17) 37,940.00$ 13,509.54$ 37,940.00$ 16,714.49$ 37,940.00$ 9,646.12$ 28,293.88$ Saginaw County Metropolitan Plannning Commission 20,000.00$ 16,975.33$ 20,000.00$ 7,172.10$ 20,000.00$ ‐$ 20,000.00$ Southcentral Michigan Planning Commission (5‐4‐17) 53,162.00$ 35,879.53$ 53,162.00$ 31,370.58$ 53,162.00$ 9,732.27$ 43,429.73$ Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (6‐14‐17) 135,680.00$ 37,030.00$ 135,680.00$ 88,357.55$ 135,680.00$ 86,053.09$ 49,626.91$ Southwest Michigan Planning Commission (5‐17‐17) 37,030.00$ 32,396.00$ 37,030.00$ 37,029.76$ 37,030.00$ 14,057.41$ 22,972.59$ Tri‐County Regional Planning Commission (5‐4‐17) 33,786.00$ 33,646.28$ 33,786.00$ 14,081.44$ 33,786.00$ 2,809.59$ 30,976.41$ West Michigan Regional Planning Commission (4‐24‐17) 82,467.00$ 54,650.62$ 82,467.00$ 54,674.06$ 82,467.00$ 45,559.99$ 36,907.01$ West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Com. (6‐8‐17) 46,781.56$ 38,158.62$ 46,781.56$ 47,181.18$ 46,781.56$ 22,408.35$ 24,373.21$ Western Upper Peninsula Regional Planning & Devel. (4‐24‐17) 34,867.00$ 34,867.00$ 34,867.00$ 34,867.00$ 34,867.00$ 10,754.70$ 24,112.30$ MDOT Region Participation & PASER Quality Control (5‐22‐17) 185,191.00$ 62,177.00$ 88,000.00$ 22,702.00$ 62,750.00$ 24,728.00$ 38,022.00$

Fed. Aid Data Collection & RPO/MPO Program Total 1,082,025.56$ 728,401.47$ 984,834.56$ 705,478.37$ 959,584.56$ 368,562.47$ 591,022.09$ II. 2017 PASER Data Collection (Paved, Non‐Federal‐Aid System) Road Commission of Kalamazoo County ‐ 285.40 miles 3,324.91$ ‐$ 3,324.91$ City of St. Clair Shores ‐ 160.00 miles Jackson CRC 9,201.47$ Marquette CRC 5,130.33$ 1,864.00$ ‐$ 1,864.00$ Kent County Road Commission ‐ 752.36 miles Port Huron 1,176.66$ St. Joseph CRC 2,647.68$ 8,764.99$ ‐$ 8,764.99$ Washtenaw County Road Commission ‐ 429.66 miles Harper Woods 439.08$ Presque Isle CRC 1,570.78$ 5,005.49$ ‐$ 5,005.49$ City of Novi ‐ 152.00 miles Whitehall 221.35$ Mount Morris ‐$ 1,770.80$ ‐$ 1,770.80$ Lapeer County Road Commission ‐ 239.28 miles Montague 198.05$ Allegan CRC ‐$ 2,787.61$ ‐$ 2,787.61$ City of Flushing ‐ 26.95 miles North Muskegon 209.70$ GVMC Urban Cities ‐$ 313.97$ ‐$ 313.97$ City of Lincoln Park ‐ 116.10 miles Tawas City 209.64$ Tuscola CRC 2,854.25$ 1,352.57$ ‐$ 1,352.57$ Manistee County Road Commission ‐ 243.00 miles Van Buren CRC 7,076.68$ 2,830.95$ ‐$ 2,830.95$ Oscoda County Road Commission ‐ 93.00 miles 1,083.45$ ‐$ 1,083.45$ Otsego County Road Commission ‐ 298.00 miles 3,471.70$ ‐$ 3,471.70$ City of Iron River ‐ 41.00 miles 477.65$ ‐$ 477.65$ Alpena County Road Commission ‐ 82.00 miles 955.30$ ‐$ 955.30$ Monroe County Road Commission ‐ 580.00 miles 6,757.00$ ‐$ 6,757.00$

2017 PASER PNFA Data Collection Total 13,808.96$ 11,655.95$ 36,780.33$ 19,279.72$ 40,760.39$ ‐$ 40,760.39$ III. TAMC Central Data Agency (MCSS)

Project Mgmt (7‐11‐17) 37,800.00$ 37,800.00$ 36,862.00$ 37,800.00$ 28,767.00$ $9,033.00Data Support (7‐11‐17) 60,200.00$ 60,200.00$ 58,343.00$ 60,200.00$ 27,021.00$ $33,179.00Application Development / Maintenance / Testing (7‐11‐17) 50,880.00$ 83,280.00$ 104,221.50$ 83,280.00$ 15,457.00$ $67,823.00Help Desk / Misc Support (7‐11‐17) 81,300.00$ 66,600.00$ 75,162.00$ 66,600.00$ 47,932.00$ $18,668.00Training (7‐11‐17) 19,800.00$ 27,600.00$ 26,761.50$ 27,600.00$ 10,831.00$ $16,769.00Data Access / Reporting (7‐11‐17) 36,000.00$ 47,155.00$ 29,898.25$ 47,155.00$ 15,445.00$ $31,710.00

Investment Reporting Tool Re‐write ‐ $241,000 (7‐11‐17) 15,000.00$ ‐$ 241,040.00$ 288,465.00$ ($47,425.00)TAMC Central Data Agency (MCSS) Total 285,980.00$ 263,500.00$ 337,635.00$ 331,248.25$ 322,635.00$ 433,918.00$ 129,757.00$

IV. TAMC Training & Education (MTU) Calendar Year Z4 (6‐27‐17) 177,909.00$ 171,696.00$ 176,133.44$ 176,133.00$ 210,000.00$ 79,201.55$ 130,798.45$ V. TAMC Activities (MTU) Z5 (6‐27‐17) 99,345.00$ 99,345.00$ 99,980.00$ 95,543.00$ 70,000.00$ 20,184.53$ 49,815.47$ VI. TAMC Expenses

Fall Conference Expenses (3‐31‐17) n/a n/a 6,000.00$ 6,141.00$ 6,000.00$ 8,312.40$ 2,312.40$ Fall Conf. Attendence (65 x $25) Fees + sponsorship Fees (3‐31‐17) n/a n/a n/a n/a ‐$ 2,625.00$ 2,625.00$ Net Fall Conference (3‐31‐17) n/a n/a n/a n/a 6,000.00$ 312.60$ Spring Conference Expenses (7‐11‐17) n/a n/a 8,000.00$ 6,320.99$ 8,000.00$ 6,721.80$ 1,278.20$ Spring Conf. Attendence Fees + sponsorship Fees (7‐11‐17) n/a n/a n/a n/a ‐$ 6,140.00$ 6,140.00$ Net Spring Conference (7‐11‐17) n/a n/a n/a n/a 8,000.00$ 4,861.80$ Other Council Expenses (3‐31‐17) n/a n/a 2,286.23$ 3,589.01$ 3,915.29$ 3,439.00$ 476.29$

TAMC Expenses Total 8,330.00$ 20,733.00$ 16,286.23$ 16,051.00$ 17,915.29$ 16,300.80$ 13,068.89$ Total Program 1,667,398.52$ 1,295,331.42$ 1,651,649.56$ 1,343,733.34$ 1,620,895.24$ 484,249.35$ 1,136,645.89$ Appropriation 1,626,400.00$ 1,626,400.00$ 1,626,400.00$

FY17 Year to Date

2015 PNFA Program 2016 PNFA Program

DRAFT 4/14/17

$ % of ProgramI. Regional/Metropolitan Planning Organization Asset Management Support* Battle Creek Area Transporation Study $20,500.00 1.84% Bay County Area Transportation Study $21,100.00 1.89% Central Upper Peninsula Planning and Development $47,000.00 4.21% Eastern Michigan Council of Governments $111,000.00 9.94% Eastern Upper Peninsula Regional Planning & Development Commission $23,100.00 2.07% Genesee Lapeer Shiawasse Region V Planning Commission $46,000.00 4.12% Grand Valley Metropolitan Council $25,000.00 2.24% Kalamazoo Area Transportation Study $22,000.00 1.97% Macatawa Area Coordinating Council $20,200.00 1.81% Midland Area Transportation Study $21,000.00 1.88% Northeast Michigan Council of Governments $46,000.00 4.12% Northwest Michigan Council of Governments (Networks Northwest) $72,000.00 6.45% Region 2 Planning Commission $42,000.00 3.76% Saginaw County Metropolitan Plannning Commission $22,200.00 1.99% Southcentral Michigan Planning Commission $57,300.00 5.13% Southeast Michigan Council of Governments $174,000.00 15.59% Southwest Michigan Planning Commission $41,000.00 3.67% Tri‐County Regional Planning Commission $40,000.00 3.58% West Michigan Regional Planning Commission $91,000.00 8.15% West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission $54,000.00 4.84% Western Upper Peninsula Regional Planning & Development Commission $40,000.00 3.58% MDOT Region Participation $80,000.00 7.17%

Regional/Metro Support to TAMC Total $1,116,400.00 59.50%II. TAMC Central Data Agency (MCSS)

Project Mgmt $40,000.00 10.53%Data Support $65,000.00 17.11%Application Development / Maintenance / Testing $100,000.00 26.32%Help Desk / Misc Support $75,000.00 19.74%Training $50,000.00 13.16%Data Access / Reporting $50,000.00 13.16%

TAMC Central Data Agency (MCSS) Total $380,000.00 20.25%III. TAMC Training & Education (MTU) Calendar Year Z4 $250,000.00 13.32%IV. TAMC Activities (MTU) Z5 $100,000.00 5.33%V. TAMC Expenses

Fall Conference Expenses $10,000.00Spring Conference Expenses $10,000.00Other Council Expenses $10,000.00

TAMC Expenses Total $30,000.00 1.60%Total Program $1,876,400.00Appropriation $1,876,400.00 *

*Pending approval of TAMC Budget increase of $250,000

FY'18 Proposed Budget

TAMC Investment Reporting – Data Analytics Queries DRAFT 7/21/17

1

Statewide IRT

#of Projects Lane Miles $$$$’s Invested $$$’s per lane mile Light CPM Heavy CPM Rehabilitation Reconstruction

Totals

By Surface Type

Concrete #of Projects Lane Miles $$$$’s Invested $$$’s per lane mile Light CPM Heavy CPM Rehabilitation Reconstruction

Totals

Asphalt #of Projects Lane Miles $$$$’s Invested $$$’s per lane mile Light CPM Heavy CPM Rehabilitation Reconstruction

Totals

Composite #of Projects Lane Miles $$$$’s Invested $$$’s per lane mile Light CPM Heavy CPM Rehabilitation Reconstruction

Totals

Project Costs Per Lane Mile

$$$ Mean Mode Median Average Light CPM Heavy CPM Rehabilitation Reconstruction

TAMC Investment Reporting – Data Analytics Queries DRAFT 7/21/17

2

NFC Lane Miles # of Projects Project Lane Miles

$$$ Invested

Interstate Freeway Principal Art Minor Art Major C Minor C Local

Asset management info page:

7 yes/no questions how many yes by question, how many no by question

How many plans submitted.

1

Belknap, Roger (MDOT)

From: Joanna Johnson <[email protected]>Sent: Monday, July 03, 2017 8:24 AMTo: Belknap, Roger (MDOT); William McEnteeSubject: RE: Data Analysis table

Happy Monday. Can’t recall if I responded to this. I think this is good. In the Asset Management Plan section, I would like to know how many cities/villages submitted the plans for acceptance by the department according to; PA 51 MCL 247.663:

“…(6) Money returned under this section to a city or village shall be expended on the major and local street systems of that city or village. However, the first priority is the major street system. Money returned for expenditure on the major street system shall be expended in the priority order provided in subsection (3) except that surplus money may be transferred for preservation of the local street system. Major street money transferred for use on the local street system shall not be used for construction but may be used for preservation. A city or village shall not transfer more than 50% of its annual major street funding for the local street system unless it has adopted and is following an asset management process for its major and local street systems and adopts a resolution with a copy to the department setting forth all of the following:

(a) A list of the major streets in that city or village.

(b) A statement that the city or village is adequately maintaining its major streets.

(c) The dollar amount of the transfer.

(d) The local streets to be funded with the transfer.

(e) A statement that the city or village is following an asset management process for its major and local street systems.

(7) A city or village that has not adopted an asset management plan shall obtain the concurrence of the department to transfer more than 50% of its major street funding to its local street system. The department may provide for pilot projects that would allow a city or village that has adopted an asset management plan under subsection (6) to combine their local and major street funds into 1 street fund and to submit a single report to the department on the expenditure of money on the local and major street systems…”

From: Belknap, Roger (MDOT) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 9:29 AM To: Balmes, Rob (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Tansil, William (MDOT) <[email protected]>; William McEntee <[email protected]>; Collins, Ebony (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Curtis, Rebecca (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Berridge, David (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Jennett, Dave (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Wresinski, David (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Kelley, Frank (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Chesbro, Gil (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Strong, Gloria (MDOT) <[email protected]>; McNichol, Hugh (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Joanna Johnson <[email protected]>; Jonathan Start <[email protected]>; Jennifer Tubbs <[email protected]>; Williams, Kelcy (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Kent, Polly (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Toth, Mike (MDOT) <[email protected]>; [email protected]; PE Tim Colling PhD ([email protected]) <[email protected]>; Surber, Rob (DTMB) <[email protected]>; Bob Slattery <[email protected]>; Belknap, Roger (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Vibbert, Ron (MDOT) <[email protected]>; Logan, Tyler (MDOT) <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; derek bradshaw <[email protected]>; Gary Mekjian <[email protected]>

2

Subject: FW: Data Analysis table Importance: High TAMC Data Committee Members, Mr. McEntee shared with me his Data Analysis table of information that was discussed at yesterday’s meeting. This includes summary tables for IRT data that has been uploaded by our agencies as well as an area that will report the responses entered on the new “Asset Management Information” tab of the IRT. More to come as this will be a standard agenda item for discussion. We ask that you please take a look at this and perhaps develop some of your own questions that you would like to have answers to for reporting purposes and further analysis. Thanks, Rog Roger A. Belknap, TAMC Coordinator Michigan Department of Transportation Ph: (517) 373‐2249 Cell: (517) 230‐8192 [email protected] www.michigan.gov/tamc

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 5:31 PM To: Belknap, Roger (MDOT) <[email protected]> Subject: Data Analysis table Rog: Attached are the tales I mentioned today. I am hoping you have an e-mail list you can use to send this out. Bill

1

Belknap, Roger (MDOT)

From: Kent, Polly (MDOT)Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 9:54 AMTo: Belknap, Roger (MDOT); Balmes, Rob (MDOT); Jennett, Dave (MDOT); Wresinski, David

(MDOT); Toth, Mike (MDOT); Vibbert, Ron (MDOT)Cc: Collins, Ebony (MDOT); Strong, Gloria (MDOT); Williams, Kelcy (MDOT)Subject: RE: Data Analysis table

My only thought on this is that wouldn’t it be easier if it was in Excel? From: Belknap, Roger (MDOT) Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 9:29 AM Cc: [email protected]; derek bradshaw <[email protected]>; Gary Mekjian <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Data Analysis table Importance: High TAMC Data Committee Members, Mr. McEntee shared with me his Data Analysis table of information that was discussed at yesterday’s meeting. This includes summary tables for IRT data that has been uploaded by our agencies as well as an area that will report the responses entered on the new “Asset Management Information” tab of the IRT. More to come as this will be a standard agenda item for discussion. We ask that you please take a look at this and perhaps develop some of your own questions that you would like to have answers to for reporting purposes and further analysis. Thanks, Rog Roger A. Belknap, TAMC Coordinator Michigan Department of Transportation Ph: (517) 373‐2249 Cell: (517) 230‐8192 [email protected] www.michigan.gov/tamc

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 5:31 PM To: Belknap, Roger (MDOT) <[email protected]> Subject: Data Analysis table Rog: Attached are the tales I mentioned today. I am hoping you have an e-mail list you can use to send this out.

IRON

DELTA

LUCE

CHIPPEWA

KENT

MARQUETTE ALGERGOGEBIC

BAYHURON

SANILAC

LAKE

BARAGA

IONIA

ONTONAGON

MACKINAC

OAKLAND

CASS

ALLEGAN

WAYNE

HOUGHTON

IOSCO

SAGINAW

EATON

CLARE

TUSCOLA

ALCONA

NEWAYGO

BARRY

LAPEER

SCHOOLCRAFT

LENAWEE

ST. CLAIR

JACKSON

ALPENA

CALHOUN

INGHAM

DICKINSON

OTTAWA

MASON

ANTRIM

GENESEE

EMMET

OSCODA

CLINTON

GRATIOT

BERRIEN

OCEANA

MONTCALM

OGEMAW

MONROEBRANCH

OTSEGO

ISABELLA

OSCEOLA

MIDLANDMECOSTA

HILLSDALE

WEXFORD

GLADWIN

WASHTENAW

KALKASKA

MANISTEE

VAN BUREN

MACOMB

MISSAUKEE

CRAWFORDBENZIE

PRESQUE ISLE

ST. JOSEPH

ARENAC

MENOMINEECHEBOYGAN

LIVINGSTON

KALAMAZOO

MUSKEGON

ROSCOMMON

SHIAWASSEE

MONTMORENCYLEELANAU

CHARLEVOIX

KEWEENAW

GRAND TRAVERSE

7

9

81

1213 11

4

14

3

10

2

56

2017 - PASER Status by County As of June 28· Map indicates completion status of TAMC sponsored Federal Aid PASER Data Collection as reported by Regional Planning AgencyCoordinators on May 11, 2017 on the Regional Asset Management Coordinator conference call. Data may alsoinclude updates from previous calls and from quarterly reports found with invoices and IRT files uploaded.

PASER Collection Completed - Federal Aid

PASER Collection In Progress

PASER Collection Status Unknown

Michigan Planning Region Boundary

www.Michigan.gov/TAMC

1

Pavement Asset Management Plan

This Pavement Asset Management Plan satisfies State Funding Requirements. This plan must

include the complete pavement inventory of the local agency.

Agency Name: ______________________________________________________________

Contact Name: _____________________________________________________________

Address: _________________________________________________________________

Email: __________________________________________________________

Phone: _________________________________________________________

(If applicable)

Consultant Agency: ______________________________________________________________

Consultant Contact Name: ________________________________________________________

Consultant Address: ________________________________________________________

Consultant Email: _______________________________________________________________

Consultant Phone: ________________________________________________________________

3

1. Pavement Asset Inventory

A. Provide the below information for the complete Road Inventory.

Designation

Roadway – Name and Suffix

From – Name and Suffix

To – Name and Suffix

Length – Miles

Width - Feet

Number of lanes

Surface Type – asphalt (no other substitutions), concrete, chip seal, gravel, brick,

unimproved (e.g. dirt)

Rating

Year Rated

Functional Classification

Example Table – See Table 1 in Appendix

B. Develop a list of proposed treatments by ratings by year for the next five years. Provide the

below items.

Rating

Treatment Used

Estimated Cost per Mile

Estimated Miles

Estimated Cost

Example Table – See Table 2 in Appendix

2. Objectives and Measures

A. Define the Agency performance goals and expected level of service for pavements.

B. Define the rating system used (PASER, PCI, etc.)

C. Describe the process used to develop a work plan.

D. Describe the monitoring program and plan for making updates and adjustments.

4

E. Describe drainage and ROW conditions.

5

Appendix

Table 1 – Road Asset Inventory

Designation Roadway From To Length Width Number of Lanes

Surface Type

Rating Year Rated

Functional Classification Name Suffix Name Suffix Name Suffix

Table 2 – Road Treatment Summary – For the next 5 years

Year Rating Treatment Used Estimated Cost per Mile Estimated Miles Estimated Cost

Town of Purdue Pavement Management Plan

Objectives and Measures

A. Define the Agency’s performance goals and expected level of service for pavements.

A key component to any kind of planning process, whether it is a retirement plan or an exercise work out plan, is to set some goals, performance measures, or targets.

“It is the Town of Purdue’s goal to reduce the amount of poor roads from 50% to 25% over

the next 10 years.”

Or

“It is the Town of Purdue’s goal to use the Inventory and Condition ratings to develop a

Pavement Management System that helps extend the life of the town’s pavements.”

Or

“It is the Town of Purdue’s goal to keep as many roads in fair condition in fair condition and

the keep as many roads in good condition in good condition by applying pavement

preservation techniques. It is also part of the Town of Purdue’s goals to move as many poor

roads to good condition through rehabilitation and reconstruction.”

B. Define the Rating System.

Define the pavement rating system. Somewhere in your narrative, how your roads where assessed should be explained. Some agencies even copy and paste what the descriptions of the ratings here as well.

“The rating system used to provide condition ratings for the roads is PASER. The PASER

system was developed by the Wisconsin LTAP and is utilized statewide by local agencies in

Michigan, as well as many others throughout the country and is the system taught by the

Indiana LTAP.”

C. Describe the process used to develop a work plan.

This section should describe how and why the segments of roads where created and the process for the data collection. Ideally a new staff member could read this section and know what they need to collect the data in the future as well as be able to recreate the road inventory if needed.

“The Town of Purdue created the road inventory by breaking the roads into segments using

the following criteria:

1) From Intersection to Intersection

2) Where the width of the road changed or the number of lanes changed.

3) Where material type of road changed (ie. Asphalt, Concrete, Gravel, Seal Coat).

The lengths of the road segments where determined from (GIS, Google Earth, Wheel

measured,…). The width of the roads where determined from (Google Earth, wheel

measured, tape measured,…).

The process for the collection of the condition ratings included (a print of our road inventory

and writing the condition ratings as we surveyed the roads, or using our laptop and putting

the condition ratings right into our GIS map for each segment, or we utilized ABC Software,

…). “

D. Describe the monitoring program and plan for making updates and adjustments.

An Asset Management Plan is a living and breathing document that needs to be updated periodically. This section is intended to describe the methodology in updating the condition ratings, the 5 year plan, and the objective and measures. An agency could develop different rating schedules for different routes. Primary roads or roads with high ADT’s could be rated more frequently than an agencies local roads…

“In order to capture the rate of deterioration of the Town of Purdue’s roads as well as to

capture the effectiveness of the pavement preservation treatments the condition ratings will

re‐evaluated on a ( 1 year, 2 year, 3 year cycle).”

E. Describe drainage and ROW conditions.

Part of House Enrolled Act 1001 required asset management plans to include drainage and ROW. This could be done in a general statement or with each segment of road.

“The Town of Purdue’s Right of Way (ROW) information is stored in our GIS system. For

specific widths and locations please refer to our GIS map. Prior to any project the Town of

Purdue will acquire any additional ROW required to complete the project. During the project

development phase, any drainage area in the project limits will be evaluated and addressed

and corrected if need be during design and construction.”

“The town of Purdue has limited ROW on most of the roads. Drainage on these segments is

generally good with about 10% having poor drainage due to lack of ditches. Some of the

segments have curb and gutter and drainage is adequate on these sections.”

Date post:	29-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vokiet
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times