In May 2002, Virginia's commonwealth transportation commissioner directed the Virginia Transportation Research Council (VTRC) to develop an improved method to estimate the project costs of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). After an effort to look across the United States and within VDOT for proven estimation methods, the study group found that VDOT's Fredericksburg district had been using an estimation worksheet for several years that produced consistent and reliable results. The study group concluded that no other methods examined had the specificity and inclusive nature of this tool. VTRC staff and the Fredericksburg staff who had developed the model expanded it by collecting extensive project data and obtaining evaluations of VDOT project management personnel statewide. The existing worksheet with roadway and bridge estimates was expanded to include construction engineering, to be applicable for Interstates and to generate estimates for right-of-way and utilities costs. Data on completed projects were collected from all VDOT districts to help calibrate the model further to account for cost variations across the state. The study group recognized early that a strong focus on project scoping was essential to ensuring accurate project estimation. Therefore, the group relied on input from the VDOT scoping committee that had been charged with exploring and developing recommendations for improving the scoping process. Testing of the tool was completed in the summer of 2003. Analyses of many completed VDOT construction projects showed that the estimation model yielded results that on average differed from actual final project costs by 22%.
In 2009, 19 Virginia Interstate safety rest areas (SRAs) were closed for a savings of approximately $9 million per year for the Virginia Department of Transportation. These closures were opposed by those concerned with the possible effects on traveler safety, tourism dollars, and the commonwealth's business reputation. Virginia's SRAs were reopened in the spring of 2010, but not before the Virginia General Assembly passed House Joint Resolution 126 and Senate Joint Resolution 99 in early 2010 to investigate new and feasible nonpublic funding options for the continued operation of Virginia's SRAs. Federal law (Title 23, U.S. Code, Section 111: agreements relating to use of and access to rights-of-way on the Interstate system) prohibits federal-aid highways from offering any type of commerce for “serving motor vehicle users” at SRAs located on the Interstate Highway System right-of-way unless the establishment was in existence before 1960 and is owned by a state. Accordingly, commercial enterprises in Virginia and elsewhere are located at Interstate interchanges, and changes to the aforementioned federal code are consistently opposed. The nonpublic funding options presented were identified through a review of state and federal law, surveys of Virginia rest area users, interviews with industry groups, an assessment of initiatives by state departments of transportation for Interstate SRA funding, and questionnaires distributed to these state agencies. In the short term, simple options include the expansion of vending items, indoor advertising, and facility sponsorship. Complex options include relocating facilities under regional management and commercial facilities outside the Interstate right-of-way. In the long term, modification of the provisions of Title 23, U.S. Code, Section 111, or the repeal of Title 23, U.S. Code, Section 301: Freedom from tolls, would allow states additional nonpublic funding for Interstate SRAs.
Citizens have higher expectations for meaningful involvement in decision making than ever before. The Virginia Department of Transportation’s (VDOT’s) use of the open-forum hearing format was assessed in response to pending legislation requiring the use of the traditional format for all highway location hearings. VDOT staff were concerned that substantial public input might be lost if this occurred. A comprehensive review of the literature on hearing formats, a survey completed by 235 citizens, and a survey on hearing formats completed by 84 transportation professionals representing 43 states are included. Citizens’ preferences for the ways in which hearings are conducted—one-on-one interaction, flexible scheduling, and the opportunity to comment in private—supported VDOT’s continued use of the open forum. The open-forum format does not, however, typically provide two features that some citizens want: the formal presentation about the project and the opportunity to hear the comments that others (“neighbors”) make for the record. The open forum was also the format of choice among transportation professionals. It was rated more highly (often substantially more highly) than either the combined format or the traditional format on seven of eight dimensions included in the survey. The exception was “providing what interest groups seem to want.” A compromise bill was engineered in the 2000 legislative session of Virginia’s General Assembly that would require VDOT to incorporate a public comment component into a location hearing upon the request of the local governing body or 25 or more citizens.
Details are given of the business relocation program at the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), with a focus on the adequacy of federal payment ceilings for reestablishment and in-lieu-of-moving-costs (ILO) benefits. Under the federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, relocated businesses have two payment options: reimbursement of actual moving costs and business reestablishment expenses or an ILO payment. The act specifies a $10,000 maximum, or ceiling, for reestablishment payments and a $20,000 maximum for ILO payments. Reports and policies on business relocations were reviewed, and interviews with relocation professionals in Virginia, other states, and the Federal Highway Administration were conducted. The study also included a mail survey of businesses relocated by VDOT. Statistical analyses were performed using VDOT business relocation data to estimate ( a) what the average reestablishment and ILO payments would have been without the federal limits and ( b) how much higher the limits would need to be to ensure that the majority of relocated businesses were compensated adequately. Substantial evidence was found that the federal limits on reestablishment and ILO payments are too low. For businesses relocated by VDOT, a maximum reestablishment payment of $26,534 and a maximum ILO payment of $31,112 would provide much more assurance that most businesses were being compensated for their true relocation costs (both values unadjusted for inflation since 1987)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.