http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=Beichhorst 2026-04-28T13:49:31Z User contributions MediaWiki 1.31.5 http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Building&diff=5947 2017-06-16T20:08:45Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>:* [[Building Maintenance Facility Design|Maintenance Facility Design]]<br /> :* [[Building Design|Building Design]]<br /> :* [[Building Planning|Building Planning]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Building_Planning&diff=5946 2017-06-16T20:06:03Z

<p>Beichhorst: Created page with &quot;{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot; |- | colspan=&quot;3&quot; | '''Building Planning''' |- | colspan=&quot;3&quot; | = Primary Guidance = Primary Guidance :* Buildings should be designed to: ::* Optimize the...&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Building Planning'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> Primary Guidance<br /> :* Buildings should be designed to:<br /> ::* Optimize the functional requirements identified for only the needs of a 20-year horizon.<br /> ::* Support best practices for minimizing operations costs and energy consumption.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> == Site Considerations ==<br /> :* A building is an essential part of a transportation system, which typically comes at a significant capital cost and its design influences the daily operating costs of the system. Two primary factors should be considered through this planning process: <br /> ::* Site Consideration<br /> ::* Buildings<br /> <br /> == Building ==<br /> :* Buildings should be planned to provide efficient and reliable service and minimize system operating costs. Daily and long-term operations should be evaluated with other existing facilities to leverage efficiencies and create best value for the system as a whole. The Building should maintain, store, and deploy vehicles and personnel efficiently to support the Transportation System’s service plan. <br /> <br /> :* The building, exterior service, and storage areas location and orientation should minimize visual and operational impacts on residential and commercial neighbors. Building location on site shall facilitate sustainable, low maintenance drainage and stormwater management systems, circulation pattern, accessible access, environmental/safety concerns, and other functional and program requirements.<br /> <br /> :* Buildings should be planned with the following considerations:<br /> ::* Early program development that considers end user efficiencies and maintaining operations both during construction and upon completion. <br /> ::* Early community involvement to address concerns regarding appearance, operations, traffic, noise, and safety, to the extent practical.<br /> ::* Space layout should optimize efficiency and functionality of operation. <br /> ::* Optimize program by stacking of office space such as administrative and personnel support functions to reduce overall footprint. Shape structure and building envelope to fit operation and minimize excess volume.<br /> ::* Evaluate use of energy efficient and sustainable materials to minimize operating costs.<br /> ::* Evaluate use of pre-engineered or other cost effective building enclosures to minimize capital costs.<br /> ::* Consider LEED methodologies if they result in long-term cost savings. LEED methodologies may be incorporated even if LEED Certification is not pursued.<br /> ::* Security and access control needs to be considered.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Building&diff=5945 2017-06-16T20:04:50Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>:* [[Building Maintenance Facility Design|Maintenance Facility Design]]<br /> :* [[Building Building Design|Building Design]]<br /> :* [[Building Design|Building Design]]<br /> :* [[Building Building Planning|Building Planning]]<br /> :* [[Building Planning|Building Planning]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Building_Design&diff=5944 2017-06-16T20:04:37Z

<p>Beichhorst: Created page with &quot;{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot; |- | colspan=&quot;3&quot; | '''Maintenance Facility Design ''' |- | colspan=&quot;3&quot; | = Primary Guidance = :* Buildings shall be designed to comply with The State Mod...&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Maintenance Facility Design '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Buildings shall be designed to comply with The State Model Performance Code for State Building (MPC). (http://dhcd.maryland.gov/codes/pages/buildingcodes.aspx)<br /> :* A building should be designed for a minimum 50 year life cycle. <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> :* The following factors should be considered through this design process:<br /> ::* Daylighting and use of energy saving devices such as timers and dimmers are encouraged to minimize operating costs.<br /> ::* Using energy efficient and sustainable materials to minimize operating costs.<br /> ::* Use low maintenance materials and finishes to minimize maintenance costs. <br /> ::* Use pre-engineered or other cost effective building enclosures to minimize capital costs.<br /> ::* Security and access control need to be considered for each location and can vary depending on surroundings and potential threat level.<br /> ::* Commissioning and system intergration should be considered from the early design stage.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=File:Iframe_src.pdf&diff=5940 2017-05-31T17:50:27Z

<p>Beichhorst: File uploaded with MsUpload</p> <hr /> <div>File uploaded with MsUpload</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=File:Test_One.docx&diff=5939 2017-05-31T16:47:13Z

<p>Beichhorst: File uploaded with MsUpload</p> <hr /> <div>File uploaded with MsUpload</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=File:WikiTest.docx&diff=5938 2017-05-31T16:37:09Z

<p>Beichhorst: Beichhorst uploaded a new version of File:WikiTest.docx</p> <hr /> <div>File uploaded with MsUpload</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=File:WikiTest.docx&diff=5937 2017-05-31T16:32:59Z

<p>Beichhorst: Beichhorst uploaded a new version of File:WikiTest.docx</p> <hr /> <div>File uploaded with MsUpload</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=File:WikiTest.docx&diff=5936 2017-05-31T16:31:04Z

<p>Beichhorst: File uploaded with MsUpload</p> <hr /> <div>File uploaded with MsUpload</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Practical_Design_Implementation_Guidance:_Near_Shore_and_on_Shore&diff=5930 2017-05-26T16:20:59Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>=Planning=<br /> :* [[Near Shore and on Shore: Sea Level Resiliency|Sea Level Resiliency]]<br /> <br /> =Design=<br /> :* [[Near Shore and on Shore: Design Vehicles|Design Vehicles]]<br /> :* [[Near Shore and on Shore: Dredge Material Containment Facility (DMCF)|Dredge Material Containment Facility (DMCF)]]<br /> :* [[Near Shore and on Shore: Marine Concrete Piles|Marine Concrete Piles]]<br /> :* [[Near Shore and on Shore: Shipping Channels|Shipping Channels]]<br /> :* [[Near Shore and on Shore: Utilities|Utilities]]<br /> :* [[Near Shore and on Shore: Materials of Construction|Materials of Construction]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bridge&diff=5929 2017-05-26T16:20:06Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>=Planning=<br /> :* [[Bridge:_Horizontal_and_Vertical_Alignment|Horizontal and Vertical Alignment]]<br /> :* [[Bridge: Stream Crossings|Stream Crossings]]<br /> :* [[Bridge: Superstructure Material Selection|Superstructure Material Selection]]<br /> <br /> =Design=<br /> :* [[Bridge: Width|Width]]<br /> :* [[Bridge: Length/Span Configuration|Length/Span Configuration]]<br /> :* [[Bridge: Construction Staging|Construction Staging]]<br /> :* [[Bridge: Retaining Walls|Retaining Walls]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Roadways&diff=5928 2017-05-26T16:15:18Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> =Planning=<br /> :* [[Roadways: Facility Selection|Facility Selection]]<br /> <br /> =Design=<br /> :* [[Roadways: Roadways Medians|Roadways Medians]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Design Vehicle|Design Vehicle]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Vertical Alignment|Vertical Alignment]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Horizontal Alignment|Horizontal Alignment]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Paved Shoulders|Paved Shoulders]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Park &amp; Ride Facilities|Park &amp; Ride Facilities]]<br /> :* Hydraulics<br /> :**[[Roadways: Culverts|Culverts]]<br /> :**[[Roadways: Ditches|Ditches]]<br /> :**[[Roadways: Design Storm|Design Storm]]<br /> :**[[Roadways: Storm Drain Systems|Storm Drain Systems]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Interchange/Intersection|Interchange/Intersection]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Pavement Methods/Friction Surface Treatments|Pavement Methods/Friction Surface Treatments]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Paved Shoulders|Paved Shoulders]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Shoulder Width|Shoulder Width]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design]][[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Roadways&diff=5927 2017-05-26T16:13:49Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>=Planning=<br /> :* [[Roadways: Facility Selection|Facility Selection]]<br /> <br /> =Design=<br /> :* [[Roadways: Roadways Medians|Roadways Medians]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Design Vehicle|Design Vehicle]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Vertical Alignment|Vertical Alignment]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Horizontal Alignment|Horizontal Alignment]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Paved Shoulders|Paved Shoulders]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Park &amp; Ride Facilities|Park &amp; Ride Facilities]]<br /> :* Hydraulics<br /> :**[[Roadways: Culverts|Culverts]]<br /> :**[[Roadways: Ditches|Ditches]]<br /> :**[[Roadways: Design Storm|Design Storm]]<br /> :**[[Roadways: Storm Drain Systems|Storm Drain Systems]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Interchange/Intersection|Interchange/Intersection]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Pavement Methods/Friction Surface Treatments|Pavement Methods/Friction Surface Treatments]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Paved Shoulders|Paved Shoulders]]<br /> :* [[Roadways: Shoulder Width|Shoulder Width]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design]][[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rail:_Interlocking_Ties&diff=5926 2017-05-26T16:10:55Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Interlocking Tie'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> :* The selection of the type of ties should consider present-term and long-term advantages and disadvantages of available alternatives<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Discussion=<br /> :* Concrete ties are preferred. The selection of timber ties vs. concrete ties should be determined by a cost-benefit analysis using current price data considering long-term replacement, operations and maintenance cost to determine the most cost effective design. Timber ties will generally have a lower initial capital cost, but will require higher maintenance and replacement costs than concrete ties. Environmental requirements including handling and special measures for eventual disposal of creosoted timber ties need to be considered as part of analysis.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design]][[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> :* [[Rail: Interlocking|Interlocking]]<br /> :* [[Practical_Design_Implementation_Guidance:_Rail|Rail]]<br /> :* [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rail:_Interlocking&diff=5925 2017-05-26T16:08:44Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Interlocking'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Select universal crossover over double crossover if there are no site constraints<br /> :* All special trackwork should be on a horizontal and vertical tangent whenever possible<br /> :* Standard Details should be used in order to minimize the spare parts inventory, simplify maintenance, and eliminate manufacturing costs associated with specially made components<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> :* Where an interlocking requires a pair of crossovers, the crossovers should be set in universal crossover configuration for better operations and maintenance. If site constraints preclude universal crossover configuration, a double crossover should be used.<br /> <br /> :* All special trackwork should be on a horizontal and vertical tangent whenever possible to minimize customization manufacturing and installation costs. Replacing an existing interlocking within a curve should consider if realigning the tracks would be more cost effective than manufacturing the special trackwork.<br /> <br /> :* MTA Standard Details should be used for all interlocking special trackwork, including turnouts, single crossovers, double crossovers, and all associated components, in order to minimize the spare parts inventory, simplify maintenance, and eliminate manufacturing costs associated with specially made components.<br /> <br /> :* The distances between switch points of closely spaced turnouts in ladder tracks, universal crossovers, and other special trackwork layouts should allow for the use of standard special trackwork components without modifications. Designers should carefully consider train routings through closely spaced special trackwork and avoid track geometrics that are likely to exceed the capabilities of the vehicle, result in excessive wear, or result in a poor ride quality.<br /> <br /> :* For MARC , special trackwork design should conform to the latest requirements of the Operating Railroad, which owns the track (e.g. Amtrak or CSX). Special trackwork design on portions of track owned by MTA should conform to the latest requirements of the Operating Railroad to which the MTA portion connects.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> :* [[Practical_Design_Implementation_Guidance:_Rail|Rail]]<br /> :* [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rail:_Interlocking&diff=5924 2017-05-26T16:04:45Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Interlocking'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Select universal crossover over double crossover if there are no site constraints<br /> :* All special trackwork should be on a horizontal and vertical tangent whenever possible<br /> :* Standard Details should be used in order to minimize the spare parts inventory, simplify maintenance, and eliminate manufacturing costs associated with specially made components<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> :* Where an interlocking requires a pair of crossovers, the crossovers should be set in universal crossover configuration for better operations and maintenance. If site constraints preclude universal crossover configuration, a double crossover should be used.<br /> <br /> :* All special trackwork should be on a horizontal and vertical tangent whenever possible to minimize customization manufacturing and installation costs. Replacing an existing interlocking within a curve should consider if realigning the tracks would be more cost effective than manufacturing the special trackwork.<br /> <br /> :* MTA Standard Details should be used for all interlocking special trackwork, including turnouts, single crossovers, double crossovers, and all associated components, in order to minimize the spare parts inventory, simplify maintenance, and eliminate manufacturing costs associated with specially made components.<br /> <br /> :* The distances between switch points of closely spaced turnouts in ladder tracks, universal crossovers, and other special trackwork layouts should allow for the use of standard special trackwork components without modifications. Designers should carefully consider train routings through closely spaced special trackwork and avoid track geometrics that are likely to exceed the capabilities of the vehicle, result in excessive wear, or result in a poor ride quality.<br /> <br /> :* For MARC , special trackwork design should conform to the latest requirements of the Operating Railroad, which owns the track (e.g. Amtrak or CSX). Special trackwork design on portions of track owned by MTA should conform to the latest requirements of the Operating Railroad to which the MTA portion connects.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> *[[Practical_Design_Implementation_Guidance:_Rail|Rail]]<br /> *[[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rail:_Guideway_Systems&diff=5923 2017-05-26T16:04:34Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Maintenance Facility Design '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* The communications network must be separated into operational and non-operational networks with connectivity to MDOT Statewide Network for the latter. Space allocations should be designed into planned facilities rather than creating new facilities for network hardware.<br /> :* Railway signaling equipment is required for safe train movement. Communications-based train control should be used when possible.<br /> :* Traction electrification costs can be reduced by considering these systems during alignment and capacity planning. Higher voltages should be used when possible.<br /> :* Two-way radio communications using MDFIRST 700 MHz Statewide trunked radio system must be provided.<br /> <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> :* Guideways are an integral component of an overall rail transit system for Metro Subway, Light Rail, and Commuter Rail. Regardless of guideway type, systems are an integral part of the design. Cost saving can be realized by integrating systems designs early in the planning and design process.<br /> <br /> :* Systems Elements may include any or all the following: <br /> ::* Communication network infrastructure; <br /> ::* Railway signaling; <br /> ::* Traffic control;<br /> ::* Traction electrification; <br /> ::* Safety features that include emergency telephones, emergency trip stations and fire management; and <br /> ::* Two-way radio communication.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> == Communications Network Infrastructure ==<br /> <br /> :* The Communications Network Infrastructure will include hardware and cabling for guideway systems communications as well as for communications of and between systems at stations, maintenance facilities, control centers, and other support facilities. Network infrastructure should include separate networks for operational (train control, traffic control, Supervisor Control, and Data Acquisition [SCADA]) and non-operational communications (CCTV, Access Control, Fare Collection, Intra/Inter-Net Access). <br /> <br /> :* Dependable, flexible and redundant communication networks should be provided for both. Redundant pathways should be considered where practical. Redundant pathways reduce the potential for cable damage resulting in loss of communications. Communications network hardware should be planned in designed facilities throughout the guideway rather than designing separate facilities for network</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rail:_Guideway_Ties&diff=5922 2017-05-26T16:03:33Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Concrete ties are preferred over timber ties.<br /> :* Prepare cost benefit analysis when evaluating timber ties versus concrete ties.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> :* Concrete ties are preferred. The selection of timber ties vs. concrete ties should be determined by a cost-benefit analysis using current price data considering long-term replacement, and operations and maintenance cost to determine the most cost effective design. Timber ties will generally have a lower initial capital cost, but will require higher maintenance and replacement costs than concrete ties. Environmental requirements including handling and special measures for eventual disposal of creosoted timber ties need to be considered as part of analysis.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rail:_Guideway_Ties&diff=5921 2017-05-26T16:00:06Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>= Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Concrete ties are preferred over timber ties.<br /> :* Prepare cost benefit analysis when evaluating timber ties versus concrete ties.<br /> <br /> = Discussion =<br /> :* Concrete ties are preferred. The selection of timber ties vs. concrete ties should be determined by a cost-benefit analysis using current price data considering long-term replacement, and operations and maintenance cost to determine the most cost effective design. Timber ties will generally have a lower initial capital cost, but will require higher maintenance and replacement costs than concrete ties. Environmental requirements including handling and special measures for eventual disposal of creosoted timber ties need to be considered as part of analysis.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rail:_Guideway_Systems&diff=5920 2017-05-26T15:15:11Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Maintenance Facility Design '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* The communications network must be separated into operational and non-operational networks with connectivity to MDOT Statewide Network for the latter. Space allocations should be designed into planned facilities rather than creating new facilities for network hardware.<br /> :* Railway signaling equipment is required for safe train movement. Communications-based train control should be used when possible.<br /> :* Traction electrification costs can be reduced by considering these systems during alignment and capacity planning. Higher voltages should be used when possible.<br /> :* Two-way radio communications using MDFIRST 700 MHz Statewide trunked radio system must be provided.<br /> <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> :* Guideways are an integral component of an overall rail transit system for Metro Subway, Light Rail, and Commuter Rail. Regardless of guideway type, systems are an integral part of the design. Cost saving can be realized by integrating systems designs early in the planning and design process.<br /> <br /> :* Systems Elements may include any or all the following: <br /> ::* Communication network infrastructure; <br /> ::* Railway signaling; <br /> ::* Traffic control;<br /> ::* Traction electrification; <br /> ::* Safety features that include emergency telephones, emergency trip stations and fire management; and <br /> ::* Two-way radio communication.<br /> <br /> == Communications Network Infrastructure ==<br /> <br /> :* The Communications Network Infrastructure will include hardware and cabling for guideway systems communications as well as for communications of and between systems at stations, maintenance facilities, control centers, and other support facilities. Network infrastructure should include separate networks for operational (train control, traffic control, Supervisor Control, and Data Acquisition [SCADA]) and non-operational communications (CCTV, Access Control, Fare Collection, Intra/Inter-Net Access). <br /> <br /> :* Dependable, flexible and redundant communication networks should be provided for both. Redundant pathways should be considered where practical. Redundant pathways reduce the potential for cable damage resulting in loss of communications. Communications network hardware should be planned in designed facilities throughout the guideway rather than designing separate facilities for network</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bridge:_Width&diff=5919 2017-05-24T20:00:28Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Bridge Width'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> *Provide a minimum bridge clear roadway width so the bridge is not classified as [http://tinyurl.com/otkjvhf| Functionally Obsolete] <br /> *Bridge lane and shoulder widths should match the approach roadway lane and shoulder widths unless it results in a Functionally Obsolete bridge <br /> *Provide sufficient bridge width to safely address bicycle and pedestrian requirements<br /> *Accommodate the needs of future capacity improvements that will occur within 20 years.<br /> *For existing bridges within capacity improvement projects, consider reducing lane or shoulder widths on the bridge to avoid the need to widen the bridge<br /> *On major bridge rehabilitation projects, consider minor deck widening to address a Functionally Obsolete designation or substandard shoulders and sidewalks<br /> *Consider widening a bridge to reduce the number of construction stages, if the widening cost is less than the additional construction stages cost<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> =Discussion=<br /> <br /> ==Functionally Obsolete==<br /> All bridges are rated for functional criteria to determine if a bridge is classified as [http://tinyurl.com/otkjvhf| Functionally Obsolete] . this includes deck geometry which evaluates a bridge’s clear roadway width (curb to curb). The required minimum bridge width is based on traffic volume, number of lanes, and the type of roadway. A rating value from 0 to 9 is assigned with any rating below a 4, resulting in the bridge being classified as Functionally Obsolete. In order to avoid jeopardizing federal funding, ensure the [https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/mtguide.pdf| minimum tolerable limit] is met for new or replacement bridges. At a minimum, establish a bridge width that will not result in the bridge being classified as Functional Obsolete.<br /> <br /> ==Lane and Shoulder Widths==<br /> When establishing bridge width, the starting point should be to first meet the minimum NBI requirements for deck geometry. Second, the lane widths on the bridge should match the approach roadway lane widths. (Refer to the Roadway - Lane Width section.) In general, shoulder widths on bridges should match the approach roadway shoulder width at the bridge if this is wider than the NBI requirements. (Refer to the Roadway - Shoulder Width section.) If the existing approach roadway narrows for a short distance (&lt;200 feet) to tie in at the bridge, then the bridge typical section should be widened to match the predominant approach roadway section beyond the short narrowed section right at the bridge. For longer bridges (length greater than 200 feet), consider carrying a reduced shoulder width across the structure, as allowed by NBI. Any reduction in shoulder width should take into consideration the functional classification of the roadway, traffic volumes including percentage of heavy trucks, accident data, sight distance for curved bridges, and the need to accommodate bicycles.<br /> <br /> ==Bicycle Compatibility==<br /> On known bicycle routes, provide a minimum 3 ft. wide shoulder to accommodate bicyclists even in locations where there are less than 3 ft. wide shoulders on the approach roadway. Providing a three foot shoulder on the bridge gives a bicyclist a refuge or buffer area on the bridge between the traffic and curb or barrier.<br /> <br /> ==Sidewalks==<br /> Where sidewalks extend along the approaches to the bridge, provide sidewalks on the bridge. Sidewalks should connect to existing facilities that have logical termini. The minimum sidewalk width shall meet ADA requirements. <br /> <br /> ==Design for Future Considerations==<br /> Prior to starting design, contact the appropriate MDOT regional planning office to identify any proposed future capacity improvements that would result in the need for a wider bridge. The time frame for the proposed improvement should be considered. If the widening is likely in the next 20 years, with planning activities and/or preliminary engineering underway, then accommodating the additional bridge width may be warranted depending on the project budget. At minimum, the bridge should be designed in such way as to accommodate the future widening (i.e. look at beam/girder spacing and pier configuration for the ultimate bridge). If the time frame is uncertain and no planning or preliminary engineering has been completed to establish the future needs, then the scope of the project should be limited to address only the current needs and requirements.<br /> <br /> Capacity Improvement Project – Bridge Widening <br /> Major capital improvement roadway projects often include widening existing bridges. When a roadway widening project impacts an existing bridge, the initial thought may be to widen the existing bridge to match whatever roadway typical section is proposed, this may result in unnecessary cost. Depending on the proposed super elevation, widening an existing bridge may reduce the clearance over the roadway, waterway, or railroad the bridge crosses potentially turning a bridge widening into a bridge replacement significantly increasing the cost of the project. If the answer is yes to any of the following questions, then eliminating the bridge widening should be strongly considered.<br /> Is the bridge being widened just to provide shoulders? <br /> Can the wider approach shoulders be tapered in to match?<br /> Can the travel lanes be narrowed across the bridge? <br /> <br /> ==Major Rehabilitation Project==<br /> Major bridge rehabilitation projects such as bridge replacements, deck replacements, or superstructure replacements are focused on addressing bridges that are rated structurally deficient or are close to becoming structurally deficient. A bridge is classified as structurally deficient if one of its major rating elements (deck, superstructure, substructure, culvert), which are rated on a scale of 0-9, is rated a 4 or less. The goal of these projects is to address the deficient element(s) and the scope of the project should be established with this goal in mind. There are situations where minor widening of the bridge as part of the deck or superstructure replacement can address a sub-standard shoulder or sidewalk. These are instances where the bridge can be widened one to two feet by just extending the deck overhangs without widening the bridge substructure and adding additional beams/girders. The cost of this minor widening is minimal and may address a functionally obsolete element, meet ADA requirements, or improve bicycle compatibility. <br /> <br /> ==Widening to Minimize Construction Staging==<br /> Often, bridge projects involving multi-lane facilities along high volume routes that require the work to be completed in multiple stages of construction. This involves narrowing lanes and shifting traffic to one portion of the bridge while another portion of the bridge is replaced or reconstructed. Minimizing the number of stages of construction reduces cost and the overall duration of construction. In these situations, it may be advantageous to build a wider bridge during the first stage of construction so that more lanes of traffic can be shifted onto this new portion in the subsequent stage of construction. The cost of the wider bridge is offset by eliminating a stage of construction, increasing worker safety by eliminating having the work zone between split traffic, reducing the overall duration of the project six to nine months per stage of construction, and in many cases the additional bridge width will accommodate future widening of the roadway.<br /> <br /> |}<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> *[[Bridge: Length/Span Configuration|Bridge: Length/Span Configuration]]<br /> *[[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]<br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bridge:_Width&diff=5918 2017-05-24T19:59:45Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Bridge Width'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> *Provide a minimum bridge clear roadway width so the bridge is not classified as [http://tinyurl.com/otkjvhf| Functionally Obsolete] <br /> *Bridge lane and shoulder widths should match the approach roadway lane and shoulder widths unless it results in a Functionally Obsolete bridge <br /> *Provide sufficient bridge width to safely address bicycle and pedestrian requirements<br /> *Accommodate the needs of future capacity improvements that will occur within 20 years.<br /> *For existing bridges within capacity improvement projects, consider reducing lane or shoulder widths on the bridge to avoid the need to widen the bridge<br /> *On major bridge rehabilitation projects, consider minor deck widening to address a Functionally Obsolete designation or substandard shoulders and sidewalks<br /> *Consider widening a bridge to reduce the number of construction stages, if the widening cost is less than the additional construction stages cost<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> =Discussion=<br /> <br /> ==Functionally Obsolete==<br /> All bridges are rated for functional criteria to determine if a bridge is classified as [http://tinyurl.com/otkjvhf| Functionally Obsolete] . this includes deck geometry which evaluates a bridge’s clear roadway width (curb to curb). The required minimum bridge width is based on traffic volume, number of lanes, and the type of roadway. A rating value from 0 to 9 is assigned with any rating below a 4, resulting in the bridge being classified as Functionally Obsolete. In order to avoid jeopardizing federal funding, ensure the [https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/mtguide.pdf| minimum tolerable limit] is met for new or replacement bridges. At a minimum, establish a bridge width that will not result in the bridge being classified as Functional Obsolete.<br /> <br /> ==Lane and Shoulder Widths==<br /> When establishing bridge width, the starting point should be to first meet the minimum NBI requirements for deck geometry. Second, the lane widths on the bridge should match the approach roadway lane widths. (Refer to the Roadway - Lane Width section.) In general, shoulder widths on bridges should match the approach roadway shoulder width at the bridge if this is wider than the NBI requirements. (Refer to the Roadway - Shoulder Width section.) If the existing approach roadway narrows for a short distance (&lt;200 feet) to tie in at the bridge, then the bridge typical section should be widened to match the predominant approach roadway section beyond the short narrowed section right at the bridge. For longer bridges (length greater than 200 feet), consider carrying a reduced shoulder width across the structure, as allowed by NBI. Any reduction in shoulder width should take into consideration the functional classification of the roadway, traffic volumes including percentage of heavy trucks, accident data, sight distance for curved bridges, and the need to accommodate bicycles.<br /> <br /> ==Bicycle Compatibility==<br /> On known bicycle routes, provide a minimum 3 ft. wide shoulder to accommodate bicyclists even in locations where there are less than 3 ft. wide shoulders on the approach roadway. Providing a three-foot shoulder on the bridge gives a bicyclist a refuge or buffer area on the bridge between the traffic and curb or barrier.<br /> <br /> ==Sidewalks==<br /> Where sidewalks extend along the approaches to the bridge, provide sidewalks on the bridge. Sidewalks should connect to existing facilities that have logical termini. The minimum sidewalk width shall meet ADA requirements. <br /> <br /> ==Design for Future Considerations==<br /> Prior to starting design, contact the appropriate MDOT regional planning office to identify any proposed future capacity improvements that would result in the need for a wider bridge. The time frame for the proposed improvement should be considered. If the widening is likely in the next 20 years, with planning activities and/or preliminary engineering underway, then accommodating the additional bridge width may be warranted depending on the project budget. At minimum, the bridge should be designed in such way as to accommodate the future widening (i.e. look at beam/girder spacing and pier configuration for the ultimate bridge). If the time frame is uncertain and no planning or preliminary engineering has been completed to establish the future needs, then the scope of the project should be limited to address only the current needs and requirements.<br /> <br /> Capacity Improvement Project – Bridge Widening <br /> Major capital improvement roadway projects often include widening existing bridges. When a roadway widening project impacts an existing bridge, the initial thought may be to widen the existing bridge to match whatever roadway typical section is proposed, this may result in unnecessary cost. Depending on the proposed super elevation, widening an existing bridge may reduce the clearance over the roadway, waterway, or railroad the bridge crosses potentially turning a bridge widening into a bridge replacement significantly increasing the cost of the project. If the answer is yes to any of the following questions, then eliminating the bridge widening should be strongly considered.<br /> Is the bridge being widened just to provide shoulders? <br /> Can the wider approach shoulders be tapered in to match?<br /> Can the travel lanes be narrowed across the bridge? <br /> <br /> ==Major Rehabilitation Project==<br /> Major bridge rehabilitation projects such as bridge replacements, deck replacements, or superstructure replacements are focused on addressing bridges that are rated structurally deficient or are close to becoming structurally deficient. A bridge is classified as structurally deficient if one of its major rating elements (deck, superstructure, substructure, culvert), which are rated on a scale of 0-9, is rated a 4 or less. The goal of these projects is to address the deficient element(s) and the scope of the project should be established with this goal in mind. There are situations where minor widening of the bridge as part of the deck or superstructure replacement can address a sub-standard shoulder or sidewalk. These are instances where the bridge can be widened one to two feet by just extending the deck overhangs without widening the bridge substructure and adding additional beams/girders. The cost of this minor widening is minimal and may address a functionally obsolete element, meet ADA requirements, or improve bicycle compatibility. <br /> <br /> ==Widening to Minimize Construction Staging==<br /> Often, bridge projects involving multi-lane facilities along high volume routes that require the work to be completed in multiple stages of construction. This involves narrowing lanes and shifting traffic to one portion of the bridge while another portion of the bridge is replaced or reconstructed. Minimizing the number of stages of construction reduces cost and the overall duration of construction. In these situations, it may be advantageous to build a wider bridge during the first stage of construction so that more lanes of traffic can be shifted onto this new portion in the subsequent stage of construction. The cost of the wider bridge is offset by eliminating a stage of construction, increasing worker safety by eliminating having the work zone between split traffic, reducing the overall duration of the project six to nine months per stage of construction, and in many cases the additional bridge width will accommodate future widening of the roadway.<br /> <br /> |}<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> *[[Bridge: Length/Span Configuration|Bridge: Length/Span Configuration]]<br /> *[[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]<br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bridge:_Stream_Crossings&diff=5917 2017-05-24T19:31:13Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Stream Crossings'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> *This guidance covers bridges and small structures that carry streams.<br /> *Stream crossings should be at a straight section of a stream, instead of at a bend.<br /> *Box culverts should be used for small stream crossings whenever possible. <br /> *Pipe culverts should consist of concrete pipes, not metal pipes. <br /> *For structures with short spans, piers in a stream should consist of piles with a concrete cap.<br /> *For Design Storm criteria, refer to Drainage/Hydraulics – Design Storm.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Discussion=<br /> <br /> ==General==<br /> This guidance covers bridges and small structures that carry streams or other features that have been labeled as [http://tinyurl.com/qapos82| Waters of the U.S] . Bridges are defined by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as structures with clear spans of 20 ft. or greater. Small structures are defined as having a clear span length or diameter of 5 ft. up to 20 ft. Small Structures are also included in this guidance if they have a clear span length or diameter of 3 ft. up to 5 ft. with the fill over the structure being less than the clear span of the structure. For smaller culverts or culverts that carry drainage, refer to Culverts in the Roadway section.<br /> <br /> ==Stream Crossings==<br /> Where possible, bridges should cross a stream at a straight section, instead of at a bend. When a bridge is built over a stream bend, the substructure is susceptible to attack as flood flows can be directed at an abutment or pier, increasing scour potential, and the foundation costs. The bridge may also need to be lengthened to move the substructure units out of the way of the flood flows. In general, a bridge that crosses a straight section of a stream will result in a shorter and less costly bridge. <br /> <br /> ==Box Culverts==<br /> When possible, box culverts should be used for small stream crossings, since they can be constructed quickly and are virtually maintenance free. Often environmental entities object to box culverts because they do not provide a natural stream bottom, but lowering the bottom of the culvert to allow for 2 ft. or 3 ft. of siltation can address this concern. Consider precast box culverts when feasible, in order to speed up construction.<br /> <br /> ==Pipe Culverts==<br /> Pipe culverts for stream crossings should consist of concrete pipes, not metal pipes, since the metal pipes have a history of deteriorating and will require major maintenance such as installing liners or paving the inverts. Since these culverts are carrying streams or [https://www.epa.gov/cleanwaterrule/definition-waters-united-states-under-clean-water-act| Waters of the U.S], stream diversions will be necessary to construct them, requiring permitting, which adds cost to a future replacement project. Concrete pipes also have the added advantage of needing minimal cover as compared to metal pipes. <br /> <br /> ==Piers==<br /> For structures with short spans, piers in a stream or other waterway should consider piles with protective jackets and concrete caps above the water line. This will eliminate the need for a cofferdam or dewatering to construct the pier. This may not be possible for longer span bridges, which will have piers that experience larger longitudinal forces, requiring footings with multiple rows of piles and cofferdams for construction.<br /> <br /> <br /> |}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design]][[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> *[[Roadways: Culverts|Culverts]]<br /> *[[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transit_Building_Maintenance_Facility_Design&diff=5910 2017-05-22T14:51:56Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Maintenance Facility Design '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Applicable to both Rail and Bus Maintenance Facilities and Buildings.<br /> ::* Designed to:<br /> :::* Optimize the functional requirements identified for 20-year horizon needs.<br /> :::* Support best practices for sustainability minimizing operations costs and energy consumption and providing long-term cost benefits.<br /> :* Buildings should be located on site to optimize yard operations and site access. <br /> <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> = Discussion =<br /> :* A Maintenance Facility is an essential part of a transit system, which comes at a significant capital cost, and its design influences the daily system operating costs. Design should consider the following factors:<br /> ::* Building location on a selected site.<br /> ::* Facility design that is integrated with yard operations for a rail system or site layout for a bus facility. <br /> ::* Functionality <br /> :::* Operations: <br /> ::::* Pre-Inspections; <br /> ::::* Process Flow – train movement; <br /> ::::* Maintenance – heavy, daily, cleaning, and inspections. <br /> :::* Yard Functionality: <br /> ::::* Track layout; <br /> ::::* Site constraints – drainage and storm water management, circulation patterns, program requirements, environmental requirements<br /> :::* Facility program: <br /> ::::* Provide adequate facilities for personnel and administration including parking. <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> = Site Considerations =<br /> :* A Maintenance Facility Building should be located on a relatively flat site with sufficient utility service such as power, water, and sewer available and a suitable outfall for storm drains and storm water management to minimize capital costs. The site should be integrated with operations planning to optimize future (20- year horizon) operations by minimizing dead-head runs and other operational efficiencies. The site should have sufficient highway/roadway access to allow for efficient delivery of vehicles. Highway/roadway access should not be susceptible to flooding.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transit_Building_Maintenance_Facility_Design&diff=5909 2017-05-22T14:49:57Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Maintenance Facility Design '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Applicable to both Rail and Bus Maintenance Facilities and Buildings.<br /> ::* Designed to:<br /> :::* Optimize the functional requirements identified for 20-year horizon needs.<br /> :::* Support best practices for sustainability minimizing operations costs and energy consumption and providing long-term cost benefits.<br /> :* Buildings should be located on site to optimize yard operations and site access. <br /> <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> = Discussion =<br /> :* A Maintenance Facility is an essential part of a transit system, which comes at a significant capital cost, and its design influences the daily system operating costs. Design should consider the following factors:<br /> ::* Building location on a selected site.<br /> ::* Facility design that is integrated with yard operations for a rail system or site layout for a bus facility. <br /> ::* Functionality <br /> :::* Operations: <br /> ::::* Pre-inspections; <br /> ::::* Process Flow – train movement; <br /> ::::* Maintenance – heavy, daily, cleaning, and inspections. <br /> :::* Yard Functionality: <br /> ::::* Track layout; <br /> ::::* Site constraints – drainage and storm water management, circulation patterns, program requirements, environmental requirements<br /> :::* Facility program: <br /> ::::* Provide adequate facilities for personnel and administration including parking. <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> = Site Considerations =<br /> :* A Maintenance Facility Building should be located on a relatively flat site with sufficient utility service such as power, water, and sewer available and a suitable outfall for storm drains and storm water management to minimize capital costs. The site should be integrated with operations planning to optimize future (20- year horizon) operations by minimizing dead-head runs and other operational efficiencies. The site should have sufficient highway/roadway access to allow for efficient delivery of vehicles. Highway/roadway access should not be susceptible to flooding.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transit_Building_Maintenance_Facility_Design&diff=5908 2017-05-22T14:48:15Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Maintenance Facility Design '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> *: Applicable to both Rail and Bus Maintenance Facilities and Buildings.<br /> :* Designed to:<br /> ::* Optimize the functional requirements identified for 20-year horizon needs.<br /> ::* Support best practices for sustainability minimizing operations costs and energy consumption and providing long-term cost benefits.<br /> *: Buildings should be located on site to optimize yard operations and site access. <br /> <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> = Discussion =<br /> *: A Maintenance Facility is an essential part of a transit system, which comes at a significant capital cost, and its design influences the daily system operating costs. Design should consider the following factors:<br /> ::* Building location on a selected site.<br /> ::* Facility design that is integrated with yard operations for a rail system or site layout for a bus facility. <br /> ::* Functionality <br /> :::* Operations: <br /> ::::* Pre-inspections; <br /> ::::* Process Flow – train movement; <br /> ::::* Maintenance – heavy, daily, cleaning, and inspections. <br /> :::* Yard Functionality: <br /> ::::* Track layout; <br /> ::::* Site constraints – drainage and storm water management, circulation patterns, program requirements, environmental requirements<br /> :::* Facility program: <br /> ::::* Provide adequate facilities for personnel and administration including parking. <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> = Site Considerations =<br /> :* A Maintenance Facility Building should be located on a relatively flat site with sufficient utility service such as power, water, and sewer available and a suitable outfall for storm drains and storm water management to minimize capital costs. The site should be integrated with operations planning to optimize future (20- year horizon) operations by minimizing dead-head runs and other operational efficiencies. The site should have sufficient highway/roadway access to allow for efficient delivery of vehicles. Highway/roadway access should not be susceptible to flooding.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transit_Building_Maintenance_Facility_Design&diff=5907 2017-05-22T14:43:48Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Maintenance Facility Design '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> *: Applicable to both Rail and Bus Maintenance Facilities and Buildings.<br /> :* Designed to:<br /> ::* Optimize the functional requirements identified for 20-year horizon needs.<br /> ::* Support best practices for sustainability minimizing operations costs and energy consumption and providing long-term cost benefits.<br /> *: Buildings should be located on site to optimize yard operations and site access. <br /> <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> = Discussion =<br /> *: A Maintenance Facility is an essential part of a transit system, which comes at a significant capital cost, and its design influences the daily system operating costs. Design should consider the following factors:<br /> ::* Building location on a selected site.<br /> ::* Facility design that is integrated with yard operations for a rail system or site layout for a bus facility. <br /> ::* Functionality <br /> :::* Operations: <br /> ::::* Pre-inspections; <br /> ::::* Process Flow – train movement; <br /> ::::* Maintenance – heavy, daily, cleaning, and inspections. <br /> :::* Yard Functionality: <br /> ::::* Track layout; <br /> ::::* Site constraints – drainage and storm water management, circulation patterns, program requirements, environmental requirements<br /> :::* Facility program: <br /> ::::* Provide adequate facilities for personnel and administration including parking. <br /> <br /> = Site Considerations =<br /> :* A Maintenance Facility Building should be located on a relatively flat site with sufficient utility service such as power, water, and sewer available and a suitable outfall for storm drains and storm water management to minimize capital costs. The site should be integrated with operations planning to optimize future (20- year horizon) operations by minimizing dead-head runs and other operational efficiencies. The site should have sufficient highway/roadway access to allow for efficient delivery of vehicles. Highway/roadway access should not be susceptible to flooding.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bridge:_Retaining_Walls&diff=5901 2017-05-16T20:57:52Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Retaining Walls'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> *Retaining walls should be eliminated whenever possible and replaced with slopes<br /> *Minimize the length and height of retaining walls<br /> *Consider using proprietary retaining walls to speed up construction and reduce cost<br /> *Select a wall type that can be constructed without temporary support of excavation<br /> *When environmental entities request retaining walls to avoid environmental impacts, evaluate the benefits of avoiding the environmental feature compared to the cost of the wall and alternative mitigation<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> =Discussion=<br /> <br /> ==General==<br /> The project need for retaining walls is typically identified when cut or fill slopes fall outside the State’s right-of-way. Whenever possible, these walls should be eliminated and replaced with slopes, which are less expensive and can be less intrusive than retaining walls. Generally, retaining walls should only be considered when the value of the right-of-way or other resource being impacted exceeds the cost of the wall. <br /> <br /> ==Slope Considerations==<br /> Typically, 2:1 slopes are used in roadway construction, but different slopes should be considered when attempting to eliminate walls. Depending on the circumstances: <br /> *Use Steeper Slopes<br /> Using reinforced slopes steeper than 2:1 such as riprap slopes or engineered Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) slopes to reduce or eliminate walls. These slope types can be considered unattractive, so consideration may need to be given to the importance of aesthetics for the location.<br /> *Use Flatter Slopes and Obtain Slope Easements<br /> Flattening the slope may result in larger impacts from a right-of-way perspective, but would have less visual impact and would be easier to maintain for a property owner. Instead of purchasing right-of-way for flat slopes, slope easements could be used that would still give a property owner the use of the slope area.<br /> <br /> ==Length and Height==<br /> It may not be feasible to eliminate walls completely, but even eliminating portions of walls by adjusting the slope or purchasing right-of-way can result in cost savings. Retaining walls should be kept as short as possible. When feasible, the wall should be placed at the bottom of a slope instead of along the roadway or other facility edge. Placing the wall at the bottom roadway embankment slope as opposed to at the top of the slope eliminates having to place a roadway barrier on top of the wall and eliminates the need to design the wall for an impact load, which factors greatly in the structural design of the wall. A situation where retaining walls should not be placed at the bottom of a slope is when there are storm water management facilities at the top of the slope, since it is never desirable to have water stored behind a retaining wall.<br /> <br /> ==Proprietary Retaining Walls==<br /> Proprietary retaining walls such as MSE Walls or Modular Block walls can be used as a cost-effective alternative to cast in place walls and to speed up construction; however, they are not practical for all situations. When proprietary retaining walls are used on a project, the contract documents should be specific in stating which ones will be allowed. Consider the following when using proprietary walls: <br /> *Segmental Retaining Walls (i.e. MSE, Modular Block) contain reinforcement straps that extend behind the wall face and are the most cost effective in locations where the wall is infill. When these types of walls are placed in cut areas, supporting excavation is usually required to install the reinforcement straps, which often extend back behind the wall a distance almost equal to the height of the wall reducing the cost savings as compared to a cast in place wall. These types of retaining walls may require additional right-of-way if the reinforcement straps extend beyond the right-of-way.<br /> *The aesthetic details of a project can affect the type of proprietary wall that should be specified. MSE walls typically have large flat concrete panels, which can accept a form liner pattern. The blocks in Modular Block walls are much smaller, and while they can have roughened texture or different colors, they cannot accept a form liner patterns.<br /> *Propriety retaining walls often have height limitations. A list of preapproved proprietary retaining walls is available at http://www.roads.maryland.gov/obd/MSEWallList.pdf, which includes the maximum allowable heights for these walls and can be used as a reference.<br /> *While proprietary retaining wall manufacturers provide the wall design, they often leave the wall’s global stability responsibility to the owner. This needs to be investigated to determine if the wall type is feasible or if improvements need to be made to the wall(s) foundation, which could reduce the cost savings as compared to a cast in place wall.<br /> <br /> ==Soldier Pile and Lagging Walls==<br /> Soldier pile and lagging walls consist of steel piles embedded in concrete caissons, with concrete lagging spanning between the piles. A non-structural concrete fascia can be cast on the outside face of the wall for aesthetic purposes. These walls are the most cost effective when used in areas where the wall is in a cut since they do not require a separate structure for support of excavation. Height can be a concern since these walls require tiebacks when they get tall, which can become expensive and may reduce the cost savings when comparing this wall type to others. Only concrete lagging should be used in permanent soldier pile and lagging walls. While this is more expensive than timber lagging, it will be more durable and have less maintenance problems in the future.<br /> <br /> ==Avoiding Environmental Impacts==<br /> Often environmental entities request that retaining walls be constructed to avoid impacts to wetlands, forests, floodplains, etc. Before agreeing to this, the benefits of avoiding the environmental feature should be compared to the wall cost and alternative mitigation. Consideration should also be given to whether or not the wall will actually reduce the impacts to the environment. For example, a tall retaining wall may not save a wetland if the wetland will be in the shadow of the wall, causing all the vegetation to die. Similarly, the wall may cut off the flow of water through the wetland, adversely impacting the wetland. It may make more sense to eliminate the wall and provide mitigation for the impacted wetland at another location, especially if the area of the wetland is relatively small. <br /> <br /> |}<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> <br /> *[[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bridge:_Construction_Staging&diff=5900 2017-05-16T20:54:04Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Construction Staging'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> *When a bridge is being replaced or rehabilitated, the number of construction stages should be kept to a minimum. <br /> *Whenever possible, bridges should be closed and traffic detoured during construction.<br /> *Bridge substructures and superstructures should be designed to facilitate staged construction for a future deck replacement.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> =Discussion=<br /> <br /> ==Stages of Construction==<br /> When a bridge is being replaced or rehabilitated, the number of construction stages should be kept to a minimum, which will reduce the bridge cost and construction duration. Consider reducing the number of lanes being maintained and lane widths to accomplish this. If possible, avoid a situation where there is a construction zone in between travel lanes. This would make construction more difficult, increase the cost, and decrease safety for construction personnel and the traveling public.<br /> <br /> ==Detours==<br /> Whenever possible, the bridge should be closed during construction and traffic detoured. This provides the shortest construction duration and lowest project cost while ensuring the safest project. For example, consider a detour for projects where the bridge can be constructed over the summer months when school is not in session and traffic needs are less. A detailed Maintenance of Traffic Alternatives Analysis should be performed when a detour is considered to ensure minimum mobility thresholds can be met. Consider drive by businesses that will be bypassed by the detour as well. A contractor incentive/disincentive to open the bridge to traffic on time should also be included in the project to minimize the impacts to the traveling public.<br /> <br /> ==Future Deck Replacements==<br /> In order to address maintenance of traffic during a future bridge deck replacement, all substructure units on new bridges should be designed to support full live load with portions of the superstructure completely removed. If it is not apparent how many lanes may need to be maintained in the future, assume the bridge deck will be replaced in half sections for the purpose of the design. Piers should be configured so that temporary supports of pier caps will not be needed during staged construction. Where possible, the superstructure of the bridge should be arranged so that at least three beams will be supporting the deck in each stage of construction. Supporting the deck on two beams may not be a stable configuration, especially if curved girders are involved, and should be evaluated to determine if additional supports are required. <br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> <br /> <br /> *[[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bridge:_Length/Span_Configuration&diff=5899 2017-05-16T20:53:01Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Length/Span Configuration'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> *Provide a span configuration to accommodate the needs under the bridge while minimizing the height of supporting abutments<br /> *Provide a minimum bridge horizontal under clearance so that the bridge is not classified as [http://tinyurl.com/otkjvhf| Functionally Obsolete] <br /> *The lane, shoulder, and sidewalk widths under a bridge should be consistent with the roadway configuration beyond the bridge<br /> *Provide a span configuration that provides the most cost effective structure<br /> *Consider future capacity roadway or other facility (i.e. railroad, trail, etc.) improvements under a bridge and the timeframe for when those improvements are planned when determining the bridge length<br /> *Where possible, eliminate drainage ditches and safety grading under a bridge and replace them with a concrete barrier supporting the fill slope to reduce bridge lengths<br /> *When environmental entities request lengthening bridges to avoid environmental impacts, evaluate the benefits of avoiding the environmental feature compared to the cost of constructing and maintaining a longer bridge<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> =Discussion=<br /> <br /> ==General==<br /> Bridge lengths shall be sufficient to span over the roadway or facility being crossed. Longer bridges with short abutments are preferred since they create an open structure while providing added safety in the ability to see beyond the bridge. Although this results in a bridge that is longer than it would need to be with full height abutments, the tall abutments and foundations costs generally offset the longer superstructure costs. Tall abutments, especially those located adjacent to a paved roadway, can also be visual obstructions and require additional impact damage protection. Shorter abutments make inspections easier, and the additional length provided under the bridge could be used to accommodate future widening, if needed.<br /> <br /> ==Functionally Obsolete==<br /> All bridges are rated for [http://tinyurl.com/otkjvhf| functional criteria] to determine if a bridge is classified as [http://tinyurl.com/otkjvhf| Functionally Obsolete]. This includes horizontal under clearance, which evaluates clearance from the bridge substructure unit to the through roadway. The required minimum horizontal under clearance is based on the roadway type. A rating value from 0 to 9 is assigned with any rating below a 4, resulting in the bridge being classified as Functionally Obsolete. In order to avoid jeopardizing federal funding, ensure the [http://tinyurl.com/pomq3xn| minimum tolerable limit is met for new or replacement bridges.] At a minimum, establish a bridge length that will not result in the bridge being classified as Functionally Obsolete.<br /> <br /> ==Roadway Configuration Under a Bridge==<br /> The lane, shoulder, and sidewalk widths under the bridge should be consistent with the lane, shoulder, and sidewalk widths on the roadway beyond the bridge. The exception is when determining shoulder widths under a bridge. In these cases, the starting point should be the minimum horizontal under clearance to a substructure unit or concrete barrier. In general, shoulders under bridges should match the roadway width at the bridge if this is wider than the NBI requirements. (Add clearance to railroad tracks)<br /> <br /> ==Span Configuration==<br /> The bridge span configuration should be evaluated to provide the most cost effective structure. For long bridges, options should be investigated with fewer piers, which would have lower substructure costs and higher superstructure costs, and compared to options with more piers, which would have higher substructure costs and lower superstructure costs, in order to find the most cost effective span configuration. For bridges crossing roadways, shoulder piers should be avoided since they create an obstruction and may prohibit future roadway widening. For bridges crossing waterways, piers should be kept out of the waterway if possible since they require dewatering and cofferdams for construction, are susceptible to scour, and can cause debris jams restricting flow potentially resulting in flooding. Removing debris is difficult for maintenance forces, as access to these areas is limited and often requires a permit. Keeping piers out of waterways is also a desirable practice from an environmental permitting standpoint. Refer to [[Bridge: Stream Crossings|Bridge: Stream Crossings]] for more information on Piers in waterways.<br /> <br /> ==Design for Future Considerations==<br /> Prior to and throughout design, contact the appropriate MDOT regional planning office to identify any proposed future capacity improvements for the roadway or other facility the bridge is spanning that would result in the need for a longer bridge. The time frame for the proposed improvement should be considered. If the roadway or facility widening is likely in the next 20 years, then accommodating the additional width with a longer bridge may be warranted depending on the project budget. In general, if the time frame is uncertain then the scope of the project may be limited to address only the current needs and requirements or consideration should be given to a structure design that will enable the bridge to be lengthened in the future.<br /> <br /> ==Capacity Improvement Project==<br /> Major capital improvement projects often include replacing and lengthening existing bridges. When a roadway widening, project impacts an existing overpass bridge, the initial thought may be to replace the bridge to span whatever roadway typical section is proposed, which may result in unnecessary cost. Depending on the existing bridge superelevation or profile, widening the roadway under it may reduce the vertical underclearance, making a full bridge replacement necessary. However, if this is not an issue and the bridge is in good condition and not expected to need major rehabilitation in the next 20 years, keeping the bridge may be an option. If the answer is yes to any of the following questions, then eliminating the bridge replacement should be strongly considered:<br /> *Can shoulders or lane widths be narrowed under a bridge, without impacting the overall safety of the roadway, to avoid impacting shoulder piers or abutments, thus eliminating the need to replace the bridge overpass?<br /> *Can retaining walls be added under a bridge to eliminate the need to replace the bridge overpass? <br /> *Can the profile of the roadway or facility under the bridge be modified to meet minimum vertical underclearance criteria?<br /> <br /> ==Grading Under the Bridge==<br /> Often proposed roadway typical sections include safety grading and drainage ditches, which can significantly increase bridge lengths. For bridges spanning over roadways, coordinate with the roadway designer to see if the safety grading and drainage ditches under the bridge can be eliminated and replaced with a concrete barrier at the shoulder edge that retains the fill slope. This will shorten the bridge length while still providing an open bridge. Similarly, when there are sidewalks under a bridge, consider placing a concrete barrier at the sidewalk edge with fill behind it, to help minimize the bridge length.<br /> <br /> ==Environmental Impacts==<br /> Environmental entities often request that bridges be made longer to avoid impacts to wetlands, forests, floodplains, etc. Before agreeing to this, the benefits of avoiding the environmental features should be compared to the additional construction and maintenance costs of a longer bridge. For example, simply lengthening a bridge may not save the wetland if the wetland will be in the shadow of the bridge, causing all the vegetation to die. It may be more economical to build a shorter bridge and provide mitigation for the impacted wetland at another location, especially if the area of the wetland is relatively small. Another frequent request from environmental entities is to span the entire floodplain, resulting in bridges much longer that required from a structure hydraulics standpoint. Every effort should be made to keep the bridge only as long as it needs to be to meet the design requirements, while taking into account stream geomorphology, recreational use, and wildlife requirements.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> *[[Bridge: Width|Bridge: Width]]<br /> *[[Bridge: Stream Crossings|Bridge: Stream Crossings]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Facility Selection|Roadways: Facility Selection]]<br /> *[[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transit_Building_Maintenance_Facility_Design&diff=5898 2017-05-16T19:43:46Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Maintenance Facility Design '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> *: Applicable to both Rail and Bus Maintenance Facilities and Buildings.<br /> :* Designed to:<br /> ::* Optimize the functional requirements identified for 20-year horizon needs.<br /> ::* Support best practices for sustainability minimizing operations costs and energy consumption and providing long-term cost benefits.<br /> *: Buildings should be located on site to optimize yard operations and site access. <br /> <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> = Discussion =<br /> *: A Maintenance Facility is an essential part of a transit system, which comes at a significant capital cost, and its design influences the daily system operating costs. Design should consider the following factors:<br /> ::* Building location on a selected site.<br /> ::* Facility design that is integrated with yard operations for a rail system or site layout for a bus facility. <br /> ::* Functionality <br /> :::* Operations: <br /> ::::* Pre-inspections; <br /> ::::* Process Flow – train movement; <br /> ::::* Maintenance – heavy, daily, cleaning, and inspections. <br /> :::* Yard Functionality: <br /> ::::* Track layout; <br /> ::::* Site constraints – drainage and storm water management, circulation patterns, program requirements, environmental requirements<br /> :::* Facility program: <br /> ::::* Provide adequate facilities for personnel and administration including parking. <br /> <br /> = Site Considerations =<br /> :* A Maintenance Facility Building should be located on a relatively flat site with sufficient utility service such as power, water, and sewer available and a suitable outfall for storm drains and storm water management to minimize capital costs. The site should be integrated with operations planning to optimize future (20- year horizon) operations by minimizing dead-head runs and other operational efficiencies. The site should have sufficient highway/roadway access to allow for efficient delivery of vehicles. Highway/roadway access should not be susceptible to flooding.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transit_Rail_Flood_Mitigation_and_Sea_Level_Resiliency&diff=5897 2017-05-16T19:33:34Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Flood Mitigation and Sea Level Resiliency '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Transit infrastructure flooding can occur in tidal and non-tidal areas as the result of hurricanes or tropical storms/depressions as well as other storm events that deliver significant rainfall that can overwhelm waterways and drainage systems. <br /> :* Consider the risk of flooding that could impact transit facilities and provide appropriate mitigation strategies.<br /> :* Flood mitigation may consist of permanent structural measures to prevent flood waters from entering or otherwise impacting a transit facility, temporary measures to prevent flood waters from entering a facility, and/or operational procedures to minimize the impact of flood events. Also, includes measures to ensure facility ability to withstand a flood event without damage.<br /> :* In all cases, proper maintenance must be provided for drainage systems to function as designed and for other flood mitigation measures to operate as designed when the flood event occurs.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> == Flooding Source: Storm Events ==<br /> :* Can include hurricanes and tropical storms/depressions, which may flood coastal areas due to a combination of tidal surge, wave action associated with high winds, and rainfall of significant intensity and/or duration. <br /> :* Can flood non-tidal areas due to rainfall of significant intensity and/or duration swelling rivers, streams and creeks, overwhelming drainage systems and culvert/bridge openings, and sweeping debris into waterways which can block flow paths.<br /> :* Non-hurricanes or tropical storms/depressions that deliver significant rainfall that can overwhelm waterways and drainage systems. Rapid snow or ice buildup from severe snow storms can also result in flooding. <br /> <br /> == Risk and Vulnerability ==<br /> :* Transit facility infrastructure including rail lines, stations, and other facilities should be evaluated for risk and vulnerability to possible flood events that could occur. This analysis should:<br /> ::* Identify any past experiences with flooding events including the characteristics of the storm, root cause of the flooding, resulting damage caused by the flood with the cost to repair, and impact to service, if any.<br /> ::* Include a hydrologic/hydraulic engineering study of the range of possible storm events and the elevation of resulting flood waters. <br /> ::* Develop a cost/benefit analysis complying with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations to determine the appropriate level of flood mitigation for a location.<br /> ::* Underground facilities, which will retain flood waters until they can be pumped to a safe outfall.<br /> <br /> == Flood Mitigation ==<br /> :* May consist of permanent structural measures to prevent flood waters from entering or otherwise impacting a transit facility, temporary measures to prevent flood waters from entering a facility, and/or operational procedures to minimize the impact of flood events. Flood mitigation also includes measures to ensure the ability of a facility to withstand a flood event without damage. Where designing permanent or temporary flood mitigation measures are not feasible, operational procedures should be established to close facilities in advance of expected flooding conditions.<br /> <br /> :* In all cases, proper drainage system maintenance must be provided to ensure all flood mitigation measures operate as designed when the flood event occurs.<br /> <br /> :* Key flooding mitigation measures:<br /> ::* Establish track profile, where feasible, such that bottom of rail is safely above flood elevation developed in risk and vulnerability analysis (i.e. design flood elevation) and ensure embankments inundated by these flood waters are sufficiently armored.<br /> ::* Incorporate materials able to withstand inundation up to the design flood elevation. These include mold resistant materials and coatings/additives to resist salt-water intrusion, where applicable.<br /> ::* Seal electrical service entries<br /> ::* At tunnel portals, establish track profile to create a physical barrier against inundation of floodwaters into the tunnel.<br /> ::* Regrade or provide ramps and steps so that entrances and exterior doors are at or above the design flood elevation.<br /> ::* Design ventilation grates for underground structures to be above design flood elevation.<br /> ::* Provide:<br /> :::* Structural configuration or protection elements that are a part of the overall station/facility construction that serves as a dam or barrier against flooding.<br /> :::* Waterproofing non-essential spaces at ground level that allows them to take on floodwaters without that water migrating to other spaces within the station or otherwise concentrating and/or redirecting flows inconsistent with pre-construction drainage paths.<br /> :::* Configure exit stairs so that the final run of each stair is from an elevated landing down to the street to allow the final run to be flooded without floodwater migrating to other spaces within the station or otherwise concentrating and/or redirecting flows inconsistent with pre-construction drainage paths <br /> :::* Flood gates (for vertical openings), hatches (for horizontal openings), and elevator doors that can withstand the pressure of flooding and to limit water infiltration to a rate that can be removed by the station or tunnel drainage systems.<br /> :::* Check valves at ejector pump discharges that connect to public storm drain systems to prevent flood waters from back-flowing into underground spaces.<br /> :::* Backwater valves for house drains connecting to plumbing fixtures that are above street sewer level, but below the design flood elevation.<br /> :::* Mobile pumping capacity before and during extreme events; <br /> :::* Temporary measures such as sandbags.<br /> ::* Adequately size tunnel/station ground water and storm water pumping systems to handle flood conditions where feasible.<br /> ::* Locate Critical Transit Facilities (such as Police or OCC) in areas not subject to flooding;<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bus:_Bus_Stop_Design&diff=5896 2017-05-16T18:11:54Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Bus Stop Design'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> *At minimum, bus stops shall be designed to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines<br /> *Bus stops typically include an ADA-compliant passenger boarding area and signage as well as amenities such as shelters, benches, and trash receptacles<br /> *Concrete bus pads should be constructed based on bus service frequency and transit vehicle type used<br /> *Where bus stops are a part of a park and ride or transfer facility, site access and on-site traffic for buses should be separated from automobile traffic to the greatest extent feasible<br /> <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> =Discussion=<br /> <br /> Bus stops should be designed to be distinct and easily identifiable to customers. At minimum, bus stops shall be designed to meet Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines.<br /> <br /> =Bus Stop Facilities=<br /> <br /> ===Passenger Boarding Area and Signage===<br /> At a minimum, a bus stop must meet ADA Accessibility Guidelines and should have standard signing to identify the bus stop location and the routes served. Streetscape improvements such as curb ramps and improvement of longitudinal/cross slopes should be considered to improve access for people with disabilities in accordance with the ADA. Landing pads are provided at stops where the curb service point is separated from the sidewalk by a grass strip in order to accommodate service for customers using wheelchairs.<br /> <br /> ===Bus Shelters===<br /> Bus shelters should be considered at locations with substantial boarding where space permits without impeding sidewalk use and where service quality would be improved. Basic shelter requirements would be modularity, accessibility, vandal resistance, low maintenance, and visual transparency for safety. <br /> <br /> ===Bus Pads===<br /> Bus stops should have a concrete bus pad on roadway that is typically 90 ft. long and as wide as the bus lane. Roadway pavement or bus pads for the bus stop should be evaluated for suitability for the anticipated frequency of bus traffic and to meet requirements of the local jurisdictions. Reinforced concrete pavement slabs should be considered to prevent pavement deterioration due to bus loads and the effects of braking. In situations with low frequency bus service and in consultation with the local jurisdiction, the provision of a concrete pad may be waived.<br /> <br /> ===Bus Stops at Park and Ride or Transfer Facilities===<br /> <br /> Where bus stops are a part of a park and ride or transfer facility, site access and on-site traffic for busses should be separated from automobile traffic to the greatest extent feasible. <br /> <br /> Bus stops located at park and ride or other transfer facilities should incorporate enhanced features that promote improvement in service quality and strengthen connections to other transportation modes. These enhanced features include:<br /> *Enhanced Signage for wayfinding and transfer information<br /> *Real Time Information Signage<br /> *Bicycle Storage<br /> **'''NOTE''': At BWI, no bike storage lockers are to be placed on the premises of the Airport Terminal.<br /> Shelters or Canopy:<br /> *Ticket Vending Machines<br /> *Enhanced Lighting/Ornamental Fencing for increased safety and security<br /> *CCTV<br /> *Trash Receptacles<br /> *Operator Restrooms <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> <br /> *[[Bus: Bus Stop Planning|Bus Stop Planning]]<br /> *[[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Roadways&diff=5893 2017-05-16T15:04:50Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>=Planning=<br /> *[[Roadways: Facility Selection|Facility Selection]]<br /> =Design=<br /> *[[Roadways: Roadways Medians|Roadways Medians]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Design Vehicle|Design Vehicle]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Vertical Alignment|Vertical Alignment]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Horizontal Alignment|Horizontal Alignment]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Paved Shoulders|Paved Shoulders]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Park &amp; Ride Facilities|Park &amp; Ride Facilities]]<br /> *Hydraulics<br /> **[[Roadways: Culverts|Culverts]]<br /> **[[Roadways: Ditches|Ditches]]<br /> **[[Roadways: Design Storm|Design Storm]]<br /> **[[Roadways: Storm Drain Systems|Storm Drain Systems]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Interchange/Intersection|Interchange/Intersection]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Pavement Methods/Friction Surface Treatments|Pavement Methods/Friction Surface Treatments]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Paved Shoulders|Paved Shoulders]]<br /> *[[Roadways: Shoulder Width|Shoulder Width]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design]][[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bridge:_Horizontal_and_Vertical_Alignment&diff=5892 2017-05-16T14:47:04Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Horizontal and Vertical Alignments'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> *When possible, avoid locating bridges on curved horizontal alignments, since curved bridges are more expensive<br /> *Cross slopes should be constant across a bridge<br /> *Bridges should not be located in a sump (low point) in the roadway profile<br /> *See [[Roadways: Horizontal Alignment|Roadways: Horizontal Alignment]] and [[Roadways:_Vertical_Alignment|Roadways: Vertical Alignment]]<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> =Discussion=<br /> ==Curved Horizontal Alignments==<br /> <br /> If possible, avoid locating bridges on curved horizontal alignments, since curved structures are more expensive to fabricate and are more difficult to construct than straight structures. If a bridge falls within a curved roadway [[File:Curved_Roadway_Alignment_Ordinate.jpg||420px|right|A Straight Bridge on a Curved Roadway]] alignment, see if a tangent (straight) section can be introduced into the curve that encompasses the bridge limits. If the curve radius is large enough, consider constructing the bridge with straight girders and deck and variable width shoulders. To determine if this is feasible, determine the ordinate between the inside curve gutter line and the chord created by connecting the gutter line location at the bearing center line at each abutment. If this value is less than 1 ft. 0 inches, the structure should be laid out with straight girders and deck.<br /> <br /> ==Cross Slopes==<br /> <br /> The preferred minimum cross slope on a bridge deck is 2 percent, which will facilitate travel lanes drainage and help avoid an icy bridge deck. Constant cross slopes are preferred across the entire bridge length to reduce complex deck construction operations. It is possible to accommodate transitional cross slopes in a bridge deck; however, the transition from normal crown (2 percent in each direction from the crown) to plane incline requires a longitudinal joint at the crown/pivot point and complicated camber in the girders to account for the unusual deflections that will occur. It is also possible to have transitioning superelevation across a bridge, which would occur if it was in a reverse curve. This should be avoided when possible, since it will result in a flat area on the deck when the superelevation is 0 percent, which does not facilitate the travel lanes water drainage and can lead to safety and maintenance issues. If it is not possible to adjust the alignment so the bridge is not within the area of transitioning superelevation, scuppers should be placed on either side the flat area to capture bridge deck drainage before it reaches this point. <br /> <br /> ==Sumps in Roadway Profile ==<br /> <br /> Bridges should not be located in a sump (low point) in the roadway profile. Bridge deck sumps will result in an area where water will collect and can lead to safety and maintenance issues. Even when the sump is moved off the bridge, the roadway elevations should be checked to ensure the bridge deck is not essentially flat as you approach the sump. If it is not possible to avoid a bridge sump, scuppers should be placed at and on either side of the sump to ensure sufficient drainage.<br /> <br /> |}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> *[[Bridge: Width|Bridge: Width]]<br /> *[[Roadways:_Vertical_Alignment|Roadways: Vertical Alignment]]<br /> *[[Practical Design Implementation Guidance|Practical Design Implementation Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rail:_Rail_Station_Design&diff=5889 2017-05-12T19:14:28Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Rail Station Planning'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Locations should be evaluated based on meeting specific criteria <br /> :* Are usually placed at major passenger generators and major transfer points .<br /> :* The minimum distance between existing and new systems will vary according to land use,population/employment generators, and the nature of the service.<br /> :* Underground stations are very expensive and should be reserved for high-density urban areas.<br /> :* Platform configuration should achieve a balance between passenger flow and system infrastructure and operations costs.<br /> :* Capacity should consider passenger LOS and passenger demand projected through a 20-year horizon.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Discussion=<br /> :* Each Rail Station requires additional capital and operating costs and increased travel time for patrons. Planning should consider the factors below to determine if a station is warranted. <br /> <br /> :* Rail Station Locations<br /> Location should be evaluated for the following criteria:<br /> ::* Improves service quality and reliability;<br /> ::* Strengthens intermodal connections;<br /> ::* Aligns with existing or emerging employment, education and other community related services;<br /> ::* Aligns with existing or emerging residential density; and<br /> ::* Achieves ADA accessibility between the services point and the passenger destinations/generators.<br /> <br /> Rail Station Spacing and Positioning <br /> Close spacing hortens walk distance for passengers, but increases transit trip time due to more stops and starts by the trains. Stations are usually placed at major passenger generators and major transfer points. Closer spacing (1/2 mile or less) is appropriate where adjacent land uses and population/employment densities warrant. <br /> <br /> Spacing also depends on the nature of the service. Long distance commuter service generally has stations that are further apart, while short-hop local service has stations that are closer together.<br /> <br /> :* Rail Station Type and Configuration <br /> ::* A transit system’s alignment, in part, determines whether the stations are at-grade, aerial or underground. <br /> :::* At-grade stations are cost effective and provide more flexibility for access than aerial stations. <br /> :::* Underground stations are very expensive with limited opportunities for access. They are usually reserved for dense urban settings with a higher ridership demand or locations with restrictive surface requirements. <br /> :::* Aerial stations are less expensive than underground stations, but more expensive than at-grade stations. Aerial stations achieve the operational benefits of underground stations, but can sometimes have negative impacts on the urban environment. <br /> :::* Stations can be configured with either side or center platforms to achieve a balance between passanger flow and system infrastructure and operations costs. Elevators, escalators and ventilation systems should be considered when choosing station type.<br /> <br /> :* Rail Station Capacity <br /> ::* Stations should be planned to accommodate capacity based on projected demand 20 years beyond the day of opening. The primary areas used for passenger waiting and circulation should be sufficiently sized to accommodate peak passenger demand without compromising safety or convenience. <br /> <br /> :* LOS for rail stations is defined by the Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (TCRP Report 165), which describes the different LOS criteria for each design element such as a walkway, platform, and stairs.<br /> <br /> :* In cases where an acceptable LOS for the forecasted patronage cannot be achieved with an acceptable station size and cost, other system characteristics such as more frequent trains (reduced headways) may be considered. However, reduced headways will require purchasing more trains, more operators, increased traction power requirements, and possibly a larger storage yard.<br /> <br /> =See Also=<br /> [[Rail: Rail Station Planning|Rail Station Planning]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rail:_Rail_Station_Design&diff=5888 2017-05-12T19:14:07Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Rail Station Planning'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> :* Locations should be evaluated based on meeting specific criteria <br /> :* Are usually placed at major passenger generators and major transfer points .<br /> :* The minimum distance between existing and new systems will vary according to land use,population/employment generators, and the nature of the service.<br /> :* Underground stations are very expensive and should be reserved for high-density urban areas.<br /> :* Platform configuration should achieve a balance between passenger flow and system infrastructure and operations costs.<br /> :* Capacity should consider passenger LOS and passenger demand projected through a 20-year horizon.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Discussion=<br /> :* Each Rail Station requires additional capital and operating costs and increased travel time for patrons. Planning should consider the factors below to determine if a station is warranted. <br /> <br /> :* Rail Station Locations<br /> Location should be evaluated for the following criteria:<br /> ::* Improves service quality and reliability;<br /> ::* Strengthens intermodal connections;<br /> ::* Aligns with existing or emerging employment, education and other community related services;<br /> ::* Aligns with existing or emerging residential density; and<br /> ::* Achieves ADA accessibility between the services point and the passenger destinations/generators.<br /> <br /> Rail Station Spacing and Positioning <br /> Close spacing hortens walk distance for passengers, but increases transit trip time due to more stops and starts by the trains. Stations are usually placed at major passenger generators and major transfer points. Closer spacing (1/2 mile or less) is appropriate where adjacent land uses and population/employment densities warrant. <br /> <br /> Spacing also depends on the nature of the service. Long distance commuter service generally has stations that are further apart, while short-hop local service has stations that are closer together.<br /> <br /> :* Rail Station Type and Configuration <br /> ::* A transit system’s alignment, in part, determines whether the stations are at-grade, aerial or underground. <br /> :::* At-grade stations are cost effective and provide more flexibility for access than aerial stations. <br /> :::* Underground stations are very expensive with limited opportunities for access. They are usually reserved for dense urban settings with a higher ridership demand or locations with restrictive surface requirements. <br /> :::* Aerial stations are less expensive than underground stations, but more expensive than at-grade stations. Aerial stations achieve the operational benefits of underground stations, but can sometimes have negative impacts on the urban environment. <br /> :::* Stations can be configured with either side or center platforms to achieve a balance between passanger flow and system infrastructure and operations costs. Elevators, escalators and ventilation systems should be considered when choosing station type.<br /> <br /> :* Rail Station Capacity <br /> ::* Stations should be planned to accommodate capacity based on projected demand 20 years beyond the day of opening. The primary areas used for passenger waiting and circulation should be sufficiently sized to accommodate peak passenger demand without compromising safety or convenience. <br /> <br /> :* LOS for rail stations is defined by the Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (TCRP Report 165), which describes the different LOS criteria for each design element such as a walkway, platform, and stairs.<br /> <br /> :* In cases where an acceptable LOS for the forecasted patronage cannot be achieved with an acceptable station size and cost, other system characteristics such as more frequent trains (reduced headways) may be considered. However, reduced headways will require purchasing more trains, more operators, increased traction power requirements, and possibly a larger storage yard.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transit_Building_Maintenance_Facility_Design&diff=5887 2017-05-12T18:43:40Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Maintenance Facility Design '''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Primary Guidance =<br /> *: Applicable to both Rail and Bus Maintenance Facilities and Buildings.<br /> :* Designed to:<br /> ::* Optimize the functional requirements identified for 20-year horizon needs.<br /> ::* Support best practices for sustainability minimizing operations costs and energy consumption and providing long-term cost benefits.<br /> *: Buildings should be located on site to optimize yard operations and site access. <br /> <br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> <br /> = Discussion =<br /> *: A Maintenance Facility is an essential part of a transit system, which comes at a significant capital cost, and its design influences the daily system operating costs. Design should consider the following factors:<br /> ::* Building location on a selected site.<br /> ::* Facility design that is integrated with yard operations for a rail system or site layout for a bus facility. <br /> ::* Functionality <br /> :::* Operations: <br /> ::::* Pre-inspections; <br /> ::::* Process Flow – train movement; <br /> ::::* Maintenance – heavy, daily, cleaning, and inspections. <br /> :::* Yard Functionality: <br /> ::::* Track layout; <br /> ::::* Site constraints – drainage and stormwater management, circulation patterns, program requirements, environmental requirements<br /> :::* Facility program: <br /> ::::* Provide adequate facilities for personnel and administration including parking. <br /> <br /> = Site Considerations =<br /> :* A Maintenance Facility Building should be located on a relatively flat site with sufficient utility service such as power, water, and sewer available and a suitable outfall for storm drains and stormwater management to minimize capital costs. The site should be integrated with operations planning to optimize future (20- year horizon) operations by minimizing dead-head runs and other operational efficiencies. The site should have sufficient highway/roadway access to allow for efficient delivery of vehicles. Highway/roadway access should not be susceptible to flooding.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Tunnel_Rehabilitation&diff=5886 2017-05-12T17:08:44Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot; <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Rehabilitation'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> :* Assume only nighttime tunnel closure windows will be available to complete the proposed work.<br /> :* Coordinate with appropriate tunnel operations staff.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> == General ==<br /> :* The following MDOT TBUs own and maintain transportation tunnels:<br /> ::* Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA)<br /> ::** Fort McHenry Tunnel (FMT) – Interstate 95 under the Patapsco River<br /> ::** Baltimore Harbor Tunnel (BHT) – Interstate 895 under the Patapsco River<br /> ::* Maryland Transit Administration (MTA)<br /> ::** Baltimore Metro – Baltimore Metro Subway under Baltimore City<br /> <br /> === Fort McHenry and Baltimore Harbor Tunnels ===<br /> :* Rehabilitation project designs must be closely coordinated with the appropriate tunnel operations staff. In almost all cases, shutting down a tunnel bore for an extended period is not possible due to the resulting severe traffic impacts from the reduced traffic capacity. Operations staff for both tunnels develop and maintain weekly nighttime closure schedules for the tunnel bores. <br /> ::* BHT: weekly nighttime closures Monday through Thursday only, from 9:00 am to 4:30 am<br /> ::* FMT: southbound closures 7:00 pm to 4:30 am; northbound closures 8:00 pm to 4:30 am. <br /> :* Routine maintenance work is scheduled to coincide with nighttime closure schedules and needs to be accounted for during project design. While closure schedules and maintenance operations are subject to change, they must be used as a basis for developing how proposed rehabilitation work can be performed and sequenced.<br /> <br /> === Baltimore Metro Subway Tunnel ===<br /> :* Rehabilitation project design must be closely coordinated with Metro Operations. Any work inside the tunnel tubes is considered “fouling” the track and typically requires track outage to perform the work. The typical available track outage hour is from 1:00 am to 3:30 am weekdays and 1:00 am to 4:30 am weekends. <br /> ::* The design should consider:<br /> :::* Scheduling the work that can be completed in the track outage hour or can be stabilized for the train service to resume until the next track outage hour. <br /> :::* The storage area and transporting path for the materials and equipment.<br /> :::* The distance between the access point and the work zone. Work inside the underground stations, vent shafts, cross passages, emergency stairs that does not foul the track may not be subject to the track outage restriction. Peak-hour work restrictions, however, will apply to the work in the public area. If access to these ancillary areas requires passing through the tunnel tubes, the track outage restriction will still apply.<br /> <br /> === Single Tracking Operations or Service Shutdowns ===<br /> :* Single tracking operations or service shutdowns may be available to provide longer track outage hour, but is subject to MTA’s approval. <br /> ::* Single tracking operations: <br /> :::* Provide a longer track outage hour in one tunnel tube without shutting down the Metro service. <br /> :::* Typically, creative single tracking operations during the off-peak hour will result in minimum service impacts while providing long enough track outage to perform the work. For this reason, it is the preferred option. <br /> ::* Service shutdowns:<br /> :::* If service shutdowns are necessary, first considerations should be to weekends or other periods during low ridership. <br /> :::* A feasibility study for construction sequencing, operations impact, service impact, and budget impact should be performed when a service shutdown is proposed. Additional operational cost such as a bus bridge, transit ambassadors, additional field supervision, service schedule change, and revenue loss should all be considered as part of the project budget impact. <br /> :::* An hour-to-hour construction activity schedule (including the testing and certification activities) should be developed to estimate the required shutdown time. <br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Tunnels&diff=5885 2017-05-12T16:30:36Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>:* [[Tunnel Rehabilitation|Rehabilitation]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Tunnel_Rehabilitation&diff=5884 2017-05-12T15:47:02Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>{| class=&quot;wikitable&quot; style=&quot;color:#000000; background-color:#FFF5E8;&quot;<br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> '''Rehabilitation'''<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> =Primary Guidance=<br /> :* Assume only nighttime tunnel closure windows will be available to complete the proposed work.<br /> :* Coordinate with appropriate tunnel operations staff.<br /> <br /> |-<br /> | colspan=&quot;3&quot; |<br /> = Discussion =<br /> == General ==<br /> :* The following MDOT TBUs own and maintain transportation tunnels:<br /> ::* Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA)<br /> ::** Fort McHenry Tunnel (FMT) – Interstate 95 under the Patapsco River<br /> ::** Baltimore Harbor Tunnel (BHT) – Interstate 895 under the Patapsco River<br /> ::* Maryland Transit Administration (MTA)<br /> ::** Baltimore Metro – Baltimore Metro Subway under Baltimore City<br /> <br /> === Fort McHenry and Baltimore Harbor Tunnels ===<br /> :* Rehabilitation project designs must be closely coordinated with the appropriate tunnel operations staff. In almost all cases, shutting down a tunnel bore for an extended period is not possible due to the resulting severe traffic impacts from the reduced traffic capacity. Operations staff for both tunnels develop and maintain weekly nighttime closure schedules for the tunnel bores. <br /> ::* BHT: weekly nighttime closures Monday through Thursday only, from 9:00 am to 4:30 am<br /> ::* FMT: southbound closures 7:00 pm to 4:30 am; northbound closures 8:00 pm to 4:30 am. <br /> :* Routine maintenance work is scheduled to coincide with nighttime closure schedules and needs to be accounted for during project design. While closure schedules and maintenance operations are subject to change, they must be used as a basis for developing how proposed rehabilitation work can be performed and sequenced.<br /> <br /> === Baltimore Metro Subway Tunnel ===<br /> :* Rehabilitation project design must be closely coordinated with Metro Operations. Any work inside the tunnel tubes is considered “fouling” the track and typically requires track outage to perform the work. The typical available track outage hour is from 1:00 am to 3:30 am weekdays and 1:00 am to 4:30 am weekends. <br /> ::* The design should consider:<br /> :::* Scheduling the work that can be completed in the track outage hour or can be stabilized for the train service to resume until the next track outage hour. <br /> :::* The storage area and transporting path for the materials and equipment.<br /> :::* The distance between the access point and the work zone. Work inside the underground stations, vent shafts, cross passages, emergency stairs that does not foul the track may not be subject to the track outage restriction. Peak-hour work restrictions, however, will apply to the work in the public area. If access to these ancillary areas requires passing through the tunnel tubes, the track outage restriction will still apply.<br /> <br /> === Single Tracking Operations or Service Shutdowns ===<br /> :* Single tracking operations or service shutdowns may be available to provide longer track outage hour, but is subject to MTA’s approval. <br /> ::* Single tracking operations: <br /> :::* Provide a longer track outage hour in one tunnel tube without shutting down the Metro service. <br /> :::* Typically, creative single tracking operations during the off-peak hour will result in minimum service impacts while providing long enough track outage to perform the work. For this reason, it is the preferred option. <br /> ::* Service shutdowns:<br /> :::* If service shutdowns are necessary, first considerations should be to weekends or other periods during low ridership. <br /> :::* A feasibility study for construction sequencing, operations impact, service impact, and budget impact should be performed when a service shutdown is proposed. Additional operational cost such as a bus bridge, transit ambassadors, additional field supervision, service schedule change, and revenue loss should all be considered as part of the project budget impact. <br /> :::* An hour-to-hour construction activity schedule (including the testing and certification activities) should be developed to estimate the required shutdown time. <br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=MDOT_701.01_Implementation_Guidance&diff=5882 2017-05-11T16:48:07Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div> [[Category:Practical Design]]<br /> &lt;font face=&quot;arial&quot;&gt;Original Date: November 15, 2016<br /> Revised: N/A<br /> Effective November 15, 2016<br /> &lt;font face=&quot;arial&quot;&gt;Note:There may be formatting differences between the electronic document and the signed document. <br /> '''MDOT signed policy supersedes all information provided on this page.''' <br /> Printed copies of this page only valid for this date: {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}<br /> <br /> == MDOT Wide Guidance ==<br /> <br /> == Facilities ==<br /> * [[Bridge]]<br /> * [[Building]]<br /> * [[Bus]]<br /> * [[Near Shore and OnShore]]<br /> * [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance: Near Shore and on Shore|Near Shore and on Shore]]<br /> * [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance: Rail|Rail]]<br /> * [[Roadways]]<br /> * [[Transit]]<br /> * [[Tunnels]]<br /> * [[Security]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bridge&diff=5880 2017-05-11T16:35:11Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>=Planning=<br /> *[[Bridge:_Horizontal_and_Vertical_Alignment|Horizontal and Vertical Alignment]]<br /> *[[Bridge: Stream Crossings|Stream Crossings]]<br /> *[[Bridge: Superstructure Material Selection|Superstructure Material Selection]]<br /> =Design=<br /> *[[Bridge: Width|Width]]<br /> *[[Bridge: Length/Span Configuration|Length/Span Configuration]]<br /> *[[Bridge: Construction Staging|Construction Staging]]<br /> *[[Bridge: Retaining Walls|Retaining Walls]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Building&diff=5879 2017-05-11T16:32:54Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>:* [[Building Maintenance Facility Design|Maintenance Facility Design]]<br /> :* [[Building Building Design|Building Design]]<br /> :* [[Building Building Planning|Building Planning]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Building&diff=5878 2017-05-11T16:32:42Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>:* [[Building: Maintenance Facility Design|Maintenance Facility Design]]<br /> :* [[Building: Building Design|Building Design]]<br /> :* [[Building: Building Planning|Building Planning]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transit&diff=5877 2017-05-10T15:58:06Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>:* [[Transit Rail Flood Mitigation and Sea Level Resiliency|Flood Mitigation and Sea Level Resiliency]]<br /> :* [[Transit Building Maintenance Facility Design|Maintenance Facility Design]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=MDOT_701.01_Implementation_Guidance&diff=5876 2017-05-10T15:57:11Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div> [[Category:Practical Design]]<br /> &lt;font face=&quot;arial&quot;&gt;Original Date: November 15, 2016<br /> Revised: N/A<br /> Effective November 15, 2016<br /> &lt;font face=&quot;arial&quot;&gt;Note:There may be formatting differences between the electronic document and the signed document. <br /> '''MDOT signed policy supersedes all information provided on this page.''' <br /> Printed copies of this page only valid for this date: {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}<br /> <br /> == MDOT Wide Guidance ==<br /> <br /> == Facilities ==<br /> * [[Bridge]]<br /> * [[Building]]<br /> * [[Bus]]<br /> * [[Flood Mitigation and Sea Level Resiliency]]<br /> * [[Near Shore and OnShore]]<br /> * [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance: Near Shore and on Shore|Near Shore and on Shore]]<br /> * [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance: Rail|Rail]]<br /> * [[Roadways]]<br /> * [[Transit]]<br /> * [[Tunnels]]<br /> * [[Security]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=MDOT_701.01_Implementation_Guidance&diff=5875 2017-05-10T15:56:34Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div> [[Category:Practical Design]]<br /> &lt;font face=&quot;arial&quot;&gt;Original Date: November 15, 2016<br /> Revised: N/A<br /> Effective November 15, 2016<br /> &lt;font face=&quot;arial&quot;&gt;Note:There may be formatting differences between the electronic document and the signed document. <br /> '''MDOT signed policy supersedes all information provided on this page.''' <br /> Printed copies of this page only valid for this date: {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}<br /> <br /> == MDOT Wide Guidance ==<br /> <br /> == Facilities ==<br /> * [[Bridge]]<br /> * [[Building]]<br /> * [[Bus]]<br /> * [[Flood Mitigation and Sea Level Resiliency]]<br /> * [[Near Shore and OnShore]]<br /> * [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance: Near Shore and on Shore|Near Shore and on Shore]]<br /> * [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance: Rail|Rail]]<br /> * [[Roadways]]<br /> * [[Transit]]<br /> * [[Transit Building]]<br /> * [[Transit Rail]]<br /> * [[Tunnels]]<br /> * [[Security]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=MDOT_701.01_Implementation_Guidance&diff=5874 2017-05-10T15:55:44Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div> [[Category:Practical Design]]<br /> &lt;font face=&quot;arial&quot;&gt;Original Date: November 15, 2016<br /> Revised: N/A<br /> Effective November 15, 2016<br /> &lt;font face=&quot;arial&quot;&gt;Note:There may be formatting differences between the electronic document and the signed document. <br /> '''MDOT signed policy supersedes all information provided on this page.''' <br /> Printed copies of this page only valid for this date: {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}<br /> <br /> == MDOT Wide Guidance ==<br /> <br /> == Facilities ==<br /> * [[Bridge]]<br /> * [[Building]]<br /> * [[Bus]]<br /> * [[Flood Mitigation and Sea Level Resiliency]]<br /> * [[Near Shore and OnShore]]<br /> * [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance: Near Shore and on Shore|Near Shore and on Shore]]<br /> * [[Practical Design Implementation Guidance: Rail|Rail]]<br /> * [[Roadways]]<br /> * [[Transit]]<br /> * [[Tunnels]]<br /> * [[Security]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]]</div>

Beichhorst http://policymanual.mdot.maryland.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transit&diff=5872 2017-05-10T15:54:43Z

<p>Beichhorst: </p> <hr /> <div>:* [[Transit Building Maintenance Facility Design|Maintenance Facility Design]]<br /> :* [[Transit Rail Flood Mitigation and Sea Level Resiliency|Flood Mitigation and Sea Level Resiliency ]]<br /> <br /> [[Category:Practical Design Guidance]][[Category:Secure]]</div>

Beichhorst