Work Zone - 1.02 Process
Sections
1.02 Process
(Updated 12/3/2020)
The TMP is introduced early in the project’s life and is expanded and updated throughout the life of the project. The region / Transportation Service Center (TSC) staff determine during the early stages if a project is potentially significant or nonsignificant in relation to mobility impacts or contracting methods.
Projects are considered significant when they exceed the mobility threshold for the project or are developed using a contracting method as defined in Section 2.01 Project Significance.
The data and analysis included in the TMP varies depending on the active stage of the project. The typical project stages are summarized on Exhibit 1-1.
Exhibit 1-1: Project Development Flow Chart
INSERT PICTURE
The process defined in the policy and this manual applies to all state trunklines regardless of the type of roadway or bridge facility, and will apply to construction, maintenance and permitted activity work zones. Each type of work zone should be analyzed in the same manner to provide consistency for travelers in Michigan. The project development process is shown in the Project Development Flow Chart in Appendix A and summarized herein. Additional information on the project development process is provided in Road Design Manual (Chapter 14-Procedures).
1.02.01 Scoping Transportation Management Plan (TMP)
Projects should be evaluated for safety and mobility impacts for all road users, including non-motorized users. The scoping TMP, if utilized, must ensure the constructability of the project and propose mitigation strategies as necessary. This work should be set-up with the job when it is programmed to ensure Planisware tasks are uptodate.
If provided, the scoping TMP should be reviewed to ensure the project limits, proposed work type, and corresponding construction alternatives are accurate. The review should take place at the local office level to verify all items included are accurate and up-to-date.
1.02.02 Development Transportation Management Plan (TMP)
(Updated 12/3/2020)
The Development phase includes preliminary engineering activities initiated for the project and updates to the analysis performed in the scoping TMP.
The scoping TMP is reviewed to ensure that the proposed work type and corresponding construction alternatives are accurate and updated in the development TMP.
The Development TMP must be submitted for review, on significant projects only, to the Region Operations Engineer, after the Plan Review and prior to the Final Project Coordination (FPC) meeting. The TMP must be submitted with an appropriate link that directs the review team to the appropriate files. Any updates to the TMP material after submittal should be sent to the Region Operations Engineer.
A. Agency Coordination
Local agency officials, statewide crews and MDOT maintenance coordinators should be contacted and encouraged to attend the Plan Review, OEC Review, and preconstruction meetings to provide input regarding schedules and coordination issues. The discussion should include a review of all aspects of the TMP to determine any necessary adjustments.
TSC staff will work with local agency officials on construction schedules, coordination issues, and to obtain required permits (such as noise variances, night work, etc.), prior to construction.
1.02.03 Peer Review Team (PRT)
(Updated 12/3/2020)
To reduce delay on significant projects, all reasonable mitigation measures should be assessed to keep the delay below the project significance threshold limit as defined in Section 2.01 Project Significance. The project must be submitted to the PRT (Peer Review Team) for review when all reasonable mitigation has been implemented and the project exceeds the significance policy thresholds. The Peer Review Team (PRT) form, can be used for these reviews and can be found in Appendix J and the MDOT Forms Repository.
The PRT will be established to conduct independent reviews of projects and provide recommendations for review and approval before implementation. The team should include personnel independent of the TSC where the project was developed, and may include:
- Region Engineer
- TSC Manager
- WZMU
- Design Engineer
- Project Manager
- Construction Engineer
- Traffic and Safety Engineer
- Operations Engineer
Project reviews will be conducted as needed. Region personnel should contact the WZMU to invite a representative to the TMP review. It is the responsibility of the Region Operations Engineer or their designated representative to schedule and coordinate PRT meetings. It is recommended but not required that at least one person on the review team is from an outside region of similar traffic volumes to the project location.
1.02.04 Peer Review Team (PRT) Submittal Process
(Updated 12/3/2020)
A TMP for a significant project must be submitted for review to the Region Operations Engineer, after the Plan Review, and prior to the Final Project Coordination (FPC) meeting. The TMP should be submitted with an appropriate link that directs the review team to all the appropriate files.
If documents within or related to the TMP are modified or updated after the TMP has been submitted and before the completed review, the submitter should notify the PRT of the changes. The PRT will need a point of contact for questions during the TMP review. This can be determined once the review date and time is scheduled.
1.02.05 Construction Transportation Management Plan (TMP)
The Construction TMP includes a review and update of the Development TMP and the Work Zone Traffic Control Plan (WZTCP).
The TMP should be reviewed prior to implementation to verify that field adjustments are not required. The TMP may also be discussed during the preconstruction meeting with the contractor and the local office overseeing the project to ensure all aspects of the plan are understood by all parties.
A. Transportation Management Plan (TMP) Implementation
The Construction Engineer overseeing the project is responsible for ensuring all aspects of the TMP are implemented in accordance with the WZSM Policy during the construction of the project.
Statewide, regional, and local maintenance personnel should be notified when construction, lane, roadway, or bridge closures are planned or implemented within their jurisdiction. Maintenance and permit projects may be conducted within the work zone. The Local Agency should be notified of on-going MDOT projects within their jurisdiction.
Work zone management occurs during the construction, maintenance or permitted activity construction phases. The TMP provisions should be implemented. The work zone should be monitored, measured, and documented using field observation and other pertinent methods.
B. Work Zone Construction Peer Review (WZCPR)
A WZCPR is a project field review of safety and mobility issues conducted to offer guidance and advice for improving safety and mobility on construction projects. Peer team reviews should be conducted after the local office has implemented mitigation measures and is still experiencing either mobility thresholds or crash rates that are exceeding the anticipated design analysis. The WZCPR Team will submit their findings and recommendations to the Region Engineer for review. The review will also be used to ensure consistent statewide mobility treatments and findings may be used as reference for crash mitigations for future projects.
Members of the WZCPR Team should consist of multidisciplinary personnel, similar to that of the PRT to ensure all aspects of the project are considered during the review. The team should be led by a member of the Work Zone Management Unit (WZMU), with at least one construction representative of the project under review.
1.02.06 Design Build Transportation Management Plan (TMP) Reviews
(Updated 12/3/2020)
Design build projects require a modification to the traditional method for developing and reviewing a TMP. Therefore, the process will be modified as noted herein and referred to as a DB TMP.
The TMP review for a DB project should take place prior to the contract advertisement. The requirements detailed in the Design Build Book 2 (Project Requirements) Section 18 (Maintenance of Traffic) will be reviewed as the DB TMP. The following positions are considerations to be present for the DB TMP review:
- TSC Manager
- Work Zone Delivery Engineer, or designated representative(s)
- MDOT Project Manager, or designated representative (Chair)
- MDOT Deputy Project Manager
- MDOT Construction Engineer
- Region or TSC Operation Engineer
- Region or TSC Traffic and Safety Engineer/Technician
Personnel from the Region or TSC in which the project is in should be used to reduce the review time required by staff due to project awareness.
The TSC Project Manager or a designated representative will Chair the review team and approve the contents of Design Build Book 2 (Project Requirements) Section 18 (Maintenance of Traffic). The submittals required per section 18.4 Deliverables, once reviewed and approved will be considered official documentation of the TMP. Plans must be approved by MDOT prior to any restriction in traffic or pedestrian access. These documents shall be signed and sealed by the Design Lead Traffic Engineer and signed by the Maintenance of Traffic Manager. These documents can be approved separately and are not required to be all inclusive in one submittal.
1.02.07 ATC Transportation Management Plan (TMP) Reviews
(Updated 5/28/2021)
Alternate Technical Concept (ATC) projects allows contractors the opportunity to propose changes to an advertised project that are equal to, or better than the advertised design. For this reason, the standard PRT and TMP process is modified as detailed herein for these types of projects. The required documents for this process will be referred to as an Innovative TMP.
During the development of an ATC project MDOT is responsible for selecting a base MOT design. To document any concerns during development, the Template Alternate Concept Traffic Plan (TACT Plan) will be required to be filled out and placed in the RID (Reference Information Documents). See the TACT Plan Creation Guidelines located in Appendix N or contact the WZDE for additional information on the TACT Plan. The Goal of the TACT Plan is to share project related limitations or restrictions, improving the overall quality and likelihood that an ATC submittal will be considered and approved.
During the advertising period contractors will be able to submit alternate designs for review and approval as detailed in the MDOT ATC Procedure Guide. If approved, contractors can submit a bid based on that approved MOT design. The review and approval of the ATC’s submitted by the contractor will qualify as the Innovative TMP review. The review team can be made up of members from the local TSC. The low bid and project award will determine which alternative was deemed most applicable for the project.
If the MDOT base design is selected, then the TACT Plan, and the base MOT design will be considered the official Innovative TMP for the project files. If another MOT alternative is awarded the approved submittal will be added to the TACT Plan as an addendum and these documents will be considered the official Innovative TMP.
A. ATC Review Team
(Added 5/28/2021)
ATC’s are reviewed by a group of people that are knowledgeable of the project, maintaining traffic, and the Innovative Transportation Management Plan (TMP). The exact makeup of the ATC Review Team will vary, but at a minimum should include the following positions:
- MDOT Project Manager (Chairperson)
- Innovative Contracting Staff Engineer
- TSC Manager
- Work Zone Delivery Engineer, or their delegate
- TSC Operation Engineer
- TSC Traffic and Safety Engineer
- Region Traffic and Safety Engineer
- MDOT Construction Engineer
- FHWA Area Engineer (on RBP projects only)
- Design Engineer (MDOT or Consultant)
B. Staff Time
The ATC/DBB process is time sensitive for the PM and the Review Team during the advertisement/procurement period. The PM should account for additional time needed at key points of the process for all key team members. This is critical when receiving, evaluating and responding to Initial ATC and ATC submittals.
1.02.08 Decision Tree Justification Process
(Added 5/28/2021)
The MDOT Safety & Mobility Decision Tree (located in Appendix O) was created to ensure that MDOT considers safety of all road users, including road workers, in Maintenance of Traffic decisions. This Decision Tree encourages the use of detours, crossovers, and positive protection to safely guide traffic through the work zone and past work crews as they engage in rebuilding, repairing, and/or maintaining our infrastructure.
Use of the Decision Tree is mandatory for all MDOT projects on existing 70 mph or greater posted roadways, with optional use for all other projects. This Flowchart is to be used to evaluate MOT options and promote a Culture of Safety for all. The Decision Tree should be used in conjunction with Engineering judgement, as it is documented that the use of these MOT concepts may be difficult to apply typically statewide and may have regional considerations that must be evaluated.
In some scenarios, it may not be practical for a project office to follow the specific guidance as listed in the MDOT Decision Tree. The Work Zone Management Unit is required to report these deviations from the Decision Tree monthly to the Work Zone Safety Task Force, composed of MDOT employees, MITA members, and consultants. For this reason, the Decision Tree Justification process has been established to address Project office deviations. Some example circumstances are listed below, but this is not an all-inclusive list:
- When a Detour is practical, but is not utilized
- When a crossover is practical, but is not utilized
- When Night work is performed without positive protection
When the decision is made to deviate from the Decision Tree, it is expected that the Base Plan Meeting or Plan Review Meeting would include a discussion about the alternatives considered and the reasons for deviation from the Decision Tree. Upon the commencement of this conversation, the Project Manager must develop a memorandum explaining why the Decision Tree was not practical for the purposes of this project. This memo must be approved by the Traffic and Safety or Operations Engineer from the Region, and sent to the Region Engineer for the respective region as well as the Field Operations Engineer in the Work Zone Management Unit within 7 calendar days of the Base Plan Review Meeting or Plan Review Meeting for monthly reporting, and also copied to the project file in Supporting document. The memo must include:
- Job Number
- Route
- Work Type
- Expected Letting Date
- MOT Alternative selected
- MOT Alternative predicated by the Decision Tree
- Rationale for selected MOT Alternative
- Additional items included in the project to enhance work zone safety (if applicable)
- Suggested improvement to the Decision Tree for future updates
For MDOT projects on existing 70 mph or greater roads, any changes to Maintenance of Traffic that are requested after project award which change the scope of MOT (in a manner that deviates from either that suggested by the Decision Tree or that accepted during Base Plan Review or Plan Review Meeting) should be communicated in writing to the Work Zone Safety Management Unit for compilation and stored in Supporting Documents on Projectwise.
Creation of this document is intended to add value and guide our thinking process as we balance safety and mobility. As such, the MDOT Safety & Mobility Decision Tree and this justification process will be iterative with reassessment at 6 months and 12 months from publication in this manual based on our lessons learned.
