Utah Department of Transportation Division of Asset Management taking care of what we have

Utah Department of Transportation Division of Asset Management taking care of what we have Utah Department of Transportation State of Utah Update Rocky Mountain Pavement Preservation Partnership October 28 30, 2008 Albuquerque, New Mexico

Today s Agenda Challenges Facing Utah Pavement Management QIT New Pavement Preservation/Rehabilitation Strategy Future

Pavement System Health Statewide Pavement Condition % of miles Fair or Better 100% 90% 80% 70% % of Miles 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year based on "Half Car" IRI and Historical Ride Index Interstate Arterial Collector

Historic Ride Statewide Pavement Condition based on IRI & dtims Ride Quality Index 100% Interstate System 935 miles Arterial System 3135 miles Collector System 1755 miles 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 % of Miles Good (Ride Index > 70) Fair Poor (Ride Index < 50)

Construction Costs CCCI Regression 30 Year Period 7 Major Components Composite Construction Cost Index 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 30 Year Expon. (30 Year) 165.6 175.6 163.4 153.1 150.6 153.0 152.5 146.1 143.1131.9 134.9 123.3 128.2126.3126.2 127.2 100.8 109.4 110.0110.1 111.5112.1 101.2 93.0 96.9 100.0 y = 83.215e 0.0316x 78.2 R 2 = 0.7367 Calculated Rate 4.82% per year 259.5 315.80 293.8 252.0 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 YTD Calendar Year

Effect of Inflation on Pavement Funding YEAR 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Construction Cost Increase 22% 22% 22% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% Pavement Cost (Millions) $151.4 $185 $225 $275 $302 $333 $366 $403 $443 Construction Cost Increase 22% 22% 22% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% Pavement Cost (Millions) $151.4 $185 $225 $275 $286 $297 $309 $322 $334 Construction Cost Increase 22% 22% 22% 10% 9% 7% 7% 7% Pavement Cost (Millions) $151.4 $185 $225 $275 $302 $330 $353 $377 $404 Current Program $161 $184 $189 $194 $200?

Pavement Management QIT Policy Decisions: Will redefine classification system for State Roads Will maintain highest functioning roads in near current condition Will redefine condition levels for remainder of system Will define maintenance strategies to meet condition targets

Pavement Management QIT Six Teams: Current STIP recommendations Route Prioritization / Hierarchy Materials / Pavement Design Research and Innovation Construction / Maintenance Targets / Pavement Condition Index

Pavement Management QIT Significant Recommendations: Examined 27 Projects on STIP and Revised the Scope on 7 Projects Scope changes included Cold In-place Recycling, as well as different surface Seal treatments. The remaining projects were already using the most cost effective treatments.

Pavement Management QIT Significant Recommendations: Interstate Regardless of AADT Miles ~ 935, 16% VMT ~ 53% ESALS ~ 59% Level 1 AADT > 2,000 and or Combination Truck volumes > 500 +/- Miles ~ 2,150, 37% VMT ~ 42% ESALS ~ 39% Level 2 AADT < 2,000 Miles ~ 2,750, 47% VMT ~ 5% ESALS ~ 2%

Pavement Management QIT Significant Recommendations: Put Together a Pavement Management Strategy Team to Write New Policy and Tie all Recommendations Together Recommendations from 3 Sub-QIT Teams Reviewed and discussed by the Strategy Team The Strategy Team will Recommend the most Promising Ideas for Implementation

Pavement Management QIT Significant Recommendations: New Targets and Goals 100% 2007 Ride Quality 80% % of Miles 60% 40% 20% 0% Interstate Level 1 Level 2 935 miles 2,150 miles 2,750 miles Good (IRI < 95) Fair (IRI 95 to 170) Unacceptable (IRI > 170)

Pavement Management QIT Significant Recommendations: Point of Diminishing Returns Analysis Incremental Benefit Cost Incremental Benefit Dollars Spent 10-YR 15-YR 18-YR

Future Complete New Pavement Management Policy Present Policy to Senior Leaders and Transportation Commission for Approval Implement, Hopefully on Short Term Basis Continue Selling the Need for More Pavement Preservation/Rehabilitation Money

Thank You!

Utah Department of Transportation Division of Asset Management taking care of what we have Monitoring Pavement Preservation Treatments, Documenting Cost & Performance Rocky Mountain Pavement Preservation Partnership October 28 30, 2008 Albuquerque, New Mexico

Today s Agenda Plan for Every Section (PFES) Agile Assets Pavement Module Automated Distress Collection dtims CT Pavement Management Model

Plan for Every Section (PFES) Region Pavement Management Engineers Maintain Information in PFES Update Maintenance Sections and Route Definitions Construction History Stores Time Based Treatment Schedule by Maintenance Section Stores Pavement Condition Information by Maintenance Section

Transitioning to Agile Assets PFES Needed Some Work UDOT Maintenance is Implementing Agile for There OMS Natural Fit to use Agile PM Module to Replace PFES Agile PM Module will be a Storage Data Base Only, No Modeling Implementation by January 2009

Automated Pavement Distress Collection Vendor - Mandli Collect Profile - IRI, Rutting & Concrete Faulting Collect Pavement Distress Environmental & Wheel Path Cracking, Skin Patching, etc Collect Photo Log/Road View Images Use Crack Detection Software to Process Images Fully QC d Data Delivered Biweekly Internet Access Issues Still Need to be Resolved

Automated Pavement Distress Collection System Wide Annually One Lane One Direction Except on Divided Highways Collect Same Lane Same Direction Every Year Post Processed at One or Tenth Mile Interval

Data Uploaded to dtims CT For Analysis IRI, Rutting & Concrete Faulting Environmental & Wheel Path Cracking and Skin Patching Functional Class AADT Year of Last Surface Treatment Safety Index

dtims CT Modeling Results Statewide Pavement Condition forecast with 206 Million Baseline Funding 98 M Int, 92M Art, 16M Col Interstate System 935 miles Arterial System 3135 miles Collector System 1755 miles 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2015 2016 2017 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2015 2016 2017 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2015 2016 2017 % of Miles Good (Ride Index > 70) Fair Poor (Ride Index < 50)

Thank You!