Work Zone Mobility and Safety Program
Regulation & Policy > Final Rule > Examples > MDOT Case Study

Work Zone Safety and Mobility
Statewide Peer Review Team (SPRT)

Printable Version [PDF 16 KB]
You will need the Adobe Reader to view this PDF.
Contact Information: WorkZoneFeedback@dot.gov

Project
Project Identification: CS: JN:
Route: empty cell
Location: empty cell
Work Description: empty cell
PM/TMP: Contact: Phone:
Review Date: empty cell
SPRT Members: empty cell
WZSM Thresholds
Existing:
V/C: LOS: Travel Time: Delay:
Work Zone:
V/C: LOS: Travel Time: Delay:
Let Date: empty cell
Construction Start Date: empty cell
Construction End Date: empty cell
TMP Review
TMP Summary:
Yes No
Vicinity Map:
Yes No
TTCP:
Yes No
TOP:
Yes No
PIP:
Yes No
TMP Package Complete:
Yes No
SPRT Recommendation:
Red: Do Not Proceed, Review SPRT comments; Region Engineer to discuss with COO
Yes No
Yellow: Proceed, Review SPRT comments; Office incorporate changes as appropriate
Yes No
Green: Proceed, Review SPRT comments
Yes No
SPRT Summary Comments: empty cell

Traffic/Mobility Analysis
  1. Traffic data source(s) is appropriate and reasonable.
Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. Traffic analysis methodology is appropriate and reasonable for the scope/complexity of the job/location and the results are clear and understandable.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. The delay assumptions and calculations are reasonable and the approach is consistent with current policy and practice.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. Please provide any general comments that do not appear to fit under the other questions.
Comments:

Temporary Traffic Control Plan (TTCP)
  1. The TTCP concept seems reasonable and logical given the type of work, the system level, the duration of the project, and the traffic volumes.
Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. Staging and constructability is well thought out and seems reasonable. The review team should note any show stoppers.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. There is evidence of analysis with respect to similar projects and job specific characteristics (shy distance, slopes, attenuation, horizontal/vertical sight distances, etc.); the work zone is designed accordingly.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. There is analysis of the alternatives considered, with an appropriate comparison of benefits and costs.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. There is a work zone crash analysis and comparison to crash statistics for similar project work zones and locations (prior to work zone and during work zone). Note any elements of risk for the public or highway workers that should be addressed.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. There is guidance on the development of an internal work zone traffic control plan (contractor's operation) for contractor ingress and egress.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. There is an appropriate plan to monitor safety and mobility and adjust the work zone/project during construction as needed.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. Please provide any general comments that do not appear to fit under the other questions.
Comments:

Traffic Operations Plan (TOP)
  1. The TOP is complete and reasonable. If necessary, it should include provisions for pedestrians, emergency responders, commercial vehicles, transit operations, etc.
Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. Delay mitigation techniques are evident and are applied appropriately. Please list other techniques that you would recommend the office consider be added to the project at this stage.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. There is adequate discussion of projects packaged or bundled with this project.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. There is adequate discussion and explanation of corridor impacts and/or an explanation of mobility influences beyond the project area including adjacent regions.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:

Public Information Plan (PIP)
  1. The TOP is complete and reasonable. If necessary, it should include provisions for pedestrians, emergency responders, commercial vehicles, transit operations, etc.
Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. The list of affected stakeholders is comprehensive and it is evident that stakeholders have been or will be engaged.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. Please provide any general comments that do not appear to fit under the other questions.
Comments:

General TMP Comments
  1. There are best practices in the area of mobility analysis, mitigation techniques, TTCP or TCP development evident in this TMP that should be shared with others.
Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. There are recommended areas of focus for further review by the respective office.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. There are show stoppers or areas of concern that the team feels should be documented for review by either the Region Engineer or Chief Operations Officer.
 Yes No N/A
Comments:
  1. Please provide any general comments.
Comments:

Office of Operations