Sample Executive Summary Strategy by owy17991

VIEWS: 179 PAGES: 23

Sample Executive Summary Strategy document sample

More Info
									                                                                                                                                   PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                                               January 14, 2010
Comment




                                                                                                                           Executive Summary                                                                                                                       Commenter LAO      Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
   #




          Clarification request on ES, see page 2 & 3 - : The number of PIDs are not only limited to the STIP Programming capacity. How about Locally funded and privately funded PIDs ? Also the WP should have contingency
  1       for any additional PIDs that may arise during the FY.                                                                                                                                                                                                      District                                 X

          "to identify options to share costs, lower costs, streamline procedures, and reduce delays associated with project initiation documents ." Does this report adequately cover all four items here?
  2                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 SCVTA
          "The number of PIDs are not only limited due to the STIP Programming capacity." How about locally funded and privately funded PIDs? Also, the workplan should have contingency for any additional PIDs that may arise during the FY.
  3                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 SCVTA
          The overarching principle for the recommended streamlining measures is that redundant work or unnecessary efforts are eliminated. Instead of using a “one size fits all” approach, a project-specific guideline and implementation plan can
  4       reduce delays and increase efficiency in the PID development process. . There should be a brief description on how this will be implemented and put into practice at the district level.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    SCVTA
          "The project sponsor must accept ownership; ramifications of risk associated with each project and document these efforts." Not sure what this sentence means. Can this be clarified?
  5                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 SCVTA
          "In the event that conflict over proposed scope of work arises, Project Managers from project sponsor and the Department meet and present issues to a conflict resolution committee, comprised of the local agency’s representative and the
          Department’s headquarters Design Coordinator and Project Management Liaison ." If this requires a mandatory design exception and the design coordinator does not agree with an exception to the standard, it should be end of story. This would
          have huge implications to Caltrans liability if the design coordinator is not making the decision.Page 15 includes the District’s Deputy Director responsible for PIDs. We need some consistency here.
  6                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 District



          "Continue current practice whereby Caltrans carries responsibility to fund and prepare PIDs for projects representing the highest priorities in long range plans, in collaboration with regional agencies, while allowing for others to prepare PIDs
          for self-help counties, locally funded, or developer funded projects. " This also represents an opportunity for cost sharing. The local agency can pay Caltrans for work they would have consulted out. The charter and PID risk management allows
  7       for a much better framework to work with Caltrans to develop PIDs, which may make Caltrans a more attractive alternative.                                                                                                                                 District


          We do not agree with this recommendation as Santa Clara County, a self help county, has been and continues to fund and prepare PIDs within their jurisdiction.SUGGESTED REVISION: Continue current practice whereby Caltrans, except for Self
  8       Help Counties that fund and prepare their own PIDs, carries responsibility to fund and prepare PIDs for projects representing the highest priorities in long range plans in collaboration with regional agencies.                                         SCVTA

          What is meant by reduced scope of work? Does it mean the portion of the scope that will benefit our system? Please clarify
  9                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 District
          "Sponsor to write draft Need and Purpose that will be submitted to Caltrans before the first meeting. " It is important that sponsor articulate the problem (need) and what success looks like (purpose) at the beginning. We should articulate the
 10       problem before we spend a lot of time on solutions/concepts. I do think consideration of solutions can facilitate the development of a problem statement, but we do address the Need and Purpose at the beginning.                                        District

          "With concurrence of Caltrans, the initial Purpose and Need will be incorporated in the PID Charter or other form of agreement and project sponsor. " PID Charter should not be required for less complex non contentious projects. Being a
 11       requirement for all projects will add time and expenditures to projects that may not need a charter. Cannot develop the purpose and need until the Project team is assembled and defined. PID charter is developed as first order of work once the        District
          problem identified.
          "With concurrence of Caltrans, the initial Purpose and Need will be incorporated in the PID Charter or other form of agreement and project sponsor. " This appears to be an additional task and could be viewed to be in contradiction with efforts to
 12       streamline the current PID development process. Could the PID Charter be developed at a program-wide level whereby the Charter would provide direction for all PIDs instead of being developed for each individual project?                               SCVTA

          For Non-SHOPP projects? (There should be a description for inventory of Non-SHOPP projects).
 13                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 SCVTA

 14       Page 2 • Correlate the number of PIDs developed to likely (the word, “reasonable” is used later in the report) funding sources. The number of PIDs should not be limited to STIP programming capacity                                                     District                                  X
          Page 2 , last paragraph. PID Charter should not be required for less complex non contentious projects. Being a requirement for all projects will add time and expenditures to projects that may not need a charter
 15                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  District                          X

                                                                                                                               Background                                                                                                                          Commenter    LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
          The draft could be improved by less detail and better organization. The Key Recommendations listed on Page 2 are not all-inclusive of the recommendations listed in the entire document, as listed in Attachment F. This
 16       causes some confusion. How were the key ones selected/determined...and what happens to the rest that are not “key”? Perhaps if this was reworked into more of a 'plan', as mentioned above, this would address it. Key                                     District                         X
          recommendations could be grouped together with other recommendations listed elsewhere.
          Page 19, last paragraph, just above Recommendations number 14. It is suggested to add the following sentence at the end of the paragraph: However, PIDs needed for local development impact mitigation, such as a new or
 17       modified highway interchange, should be funded by development and/or local agencies that have land-use jurisdiction.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     District                                 X

          Purpose and Objectives of PIDs; A PID should accomplish several things (page 6) - Add the bullets below: Ensure all appropriate stakeholders are involved at the earliest stages of project development; And ensure all
 18       modes are considered at the earliest stages of project development.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       HQ                                     X

          "Refer to Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM), known as the Gold Book, for more detailed guidance. There are no federal requirements regarding PIDs." There are. There is a section in HDM
 19       discussing the Federal geometric standards for interstate routes. Also, Fed is involved if the PID is interstate route PIDs
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     District




          California Department of Transportation                                                                                                                Page 1 of 23
          Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
20   Page 5 .The legal requirements are broad but general. Broad and general are nearly identical words. What about: far-reaching. Better yet, drop one of these words.                                                                   District                                 X

                                                                                                       PID Purpose and Objectives                                                                                                        Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
     Provide local agencies with Caltrans input when they propose a development or transportation project in the near or medium future so they can plan for State Highway System improvements, right of way preservation,
21   project phasing and fair share contributions.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X

     "Provide local agencies with signals that somebody wants and intends to build a project in the near or medium future so they can plan accordingly. " Is this referring to implementation of a mechanism that notifies local
22   agencies of future projects? A revised sentence would be helpful here.
     Page 2 - last paragraph - Cannot develop the purpose and need until the Project team is assembled and defined. PID charter is developed as first order of work once the problem identiifed; Page 6; A PID should
     accomplish several things: To begin projects identified in the various long and short term plans to program into the project development process and eventual implementation into the State highway system. This results in
     a Planning and Engineering decision document for the various stakeholders for the project delivery process; Define Purpose & Need clearly enough to start an environmental document and understand the project intent
23   and scope allowing for logical termini of the intended project; Lay out an initial project scope, and use it to derive reasonable ballparkplanning level estimates of delivery schedule and cost for the next project development
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                         X
     phase; layout alternatives that meet project scope and will meet project Purpose and Need, and eliminate alternatives that do not;

     (Continued) Lay out alternatives that need to be looked at, and eliminate some or many of those based on Purpose & Need; Consider whether and how the project might be broken downsegmented into more easily
     fundable segments allowing for logical termini or implantation stages; Provide project cost estimates to accuretly plan for the either the sort or long term delivery plan of the project using either an order of magnitude
24   estimate or project construction level estimate because of the need for greater accuracy if funding is outside STIP which may require cooperative agreements and developer agreements for subsequent phase of the project.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                         X



25   "See Appendix “G” for PID definitions ." PID SHELF still reads as if it is PID inventory in Appendix G. See comment on page 3 of this document.
     "After completion of Purpose and Need statement the PDT will meet to identify project alternatives that should to be considered. " Environmental needs a footprint that is established by development of the concept. I
26   don’t see concepts with footprints being available at this meeting. Often it is important to consider construction staging sites as part of the PEAR. Whether to include the construction staging areas can be decided at this       District
     meeting.
                                                                                                           Legal Requirements                                                                                                            Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
     • Page 5 – Reference is made to the 1990 Blueprint legislation and cites "Government Code 68086.5." There is no section 68086.5 in the Government Code. The Blueprint legislation was replaced by SB45 in 1997 and
27   much of the Blueprint legislation was deleted. All of page 5 – end of document should be checked for factual correctness.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X

     Need to double check all Government Codes mentioned for accuracy. This one was incorrect. Bullets did not/do not match what is in the code. The way bullet 3 was written really didn’t match. All of these should be
28   checked for consistency with the code.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District

     "Regardless, current law permits the legislature broad discretion to redirect PTS funds to non-transportation purposes with no penalty, and they have. In practice this is unreliable fund source. Historically it has worked
29   out to be a minor fund source as well. Little to no PTA is anticipated in the near future. A very small amount of federal transportation enhancement funding is also included with the STIP resulting with some minor PID            SCVTA
     demand." This section is not accurate based on the recent State Supreme Court decision on October 2, 2009 and should be deleted.
                                                                                                               LAO Issues                                                                                                                Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
     Currently, the document reads like an issue paper. To address the concerns of the LAO, suggests that the document be more of a “plan” and include recommendations to streamline the process. Suggest some
30   modification/reformatting of the document to make it more like a Strategic Plan (use of action items, timelines, etc.)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District   X

31   "The report suggested PID resources should be tied to workload needs; this includes early estimates for the workload. " Need to discuss the need to fund this activity somewhere in this document.                                     HQ

32   "• What is the criteria for selecting PID projects?" SHOPP -> The 10-year SHOPP, SHOPP HQ Program Advisors, SHOPP District Program Manager/Advisors. STIP -> DSMP, CSMP, RTP                                                           HQ
     "• The Department should provide criteria for selecting SHOPP PID projects in its PID guidance documents, and" That criteria are 10-year SHOPP programming targets with input from Program Advisors (HQ and
33   District)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ

     "• Caltrans should improve its management of PID resources and report back to the Legislature." Can use database tracking system to do this. Can tie in to CTIPS and PRSM. (See what North Region Project Management
34   has started with Project Focus)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ


35   Page 7 • The Department should provide criteria for selecting SHOPP PID projects in its PID guidance documents, and.. Not clear where this was in LAO                                                                                District

                                                                                                      Developing PID Strategic Plan                                                                                                      Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
     It is not possible to foresee every PID 3 years or even 1 year into the future. Large private development projects in our district continue to trigger the need to major interchange improvements that the COG or Caltrans
     cannot foresee. We the ability to respond to these types of projects.
36   Recomendation 1. By reviewing the Plan annually and using established removal criteria, this will improve the management of the PID shelf. Greater PID Program management resources would be needed to monitor the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District

     shelf and review all aspects of a shelf PID.
     "Instead of using a “one size fits all” approach, a project type- specific guideline and implementation plan can be useful in eliminating unnecessary steps" I believe that we already have some flexibility in the PDPM but it
37   relies on CT staff and management to know when and where to be flexible. The use of the PSR-PDS probably addresses most of what the local/regional partners are wanting to do anyways.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ




     California Department of Transportation                                                                                                 Page 2 of 23
     Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                 PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                             January 14, 2010
     Page 8, first parag. This does not match what was included in the PID Streamlining Draft Charter. I thought the overarching principle was to improve both the effectiveness and efficiency of the PID Program
38                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      District                          X


                                                                                                      Existing Policy and Process                                                                                                      Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
     Page 17 - Sponsor submits draft Need and Purpose for inclusion on the pre-PID agenda and the initial charter that will be prepared before the meeting. The Purpose and Need will be discussed and possibly edited at the
     pre-PID meeting . This provides the necessary framework for developing a clear and concise scope of work; 2. Include external stakeholders on PID Project Development Team. Hold pre-PID meeting to assess quality of
     existing data, scope of PID, and proposed responsibilities and cost sharing, and document agreement in writing; 3. At the pre-PID meeting, use a risk evaluation/register sheet - an example can be found at
39   http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/projmgmt/documents/prmhb/risk_register_sample_v105_20080401.xls - to evaluate need and value of tasks to be completed in PID phases such as: risk management for post PID work,                           District                                 X
     geotechnical issues, value analysis, stormwater reporting, and floodplain considerations; 4. Hold pre-PEAR meeting to review PEAR checklist, focus environmental work, improve communications, define expectations,
     and estimate environmental work schedule; 5. Estimate resources and cost to prepare each PID up front, and follow with a cooperative agreement before work starts if cost sharing is to be used.

     • Page 8 - Include CTC Guidelines in section.
     • Page 8, last paragraph – The sixty day requirement is only for capacity-increasing projects. This detail should be included in the text. Some legislation should be proposed to clarify the intentions of this statute.
     • Page 10, first sentence – not sure what the first three STIP PID streamlining factors are. Sixty day clock is only required for capacity-increasing projects.
     • Page 10, “Choosing Which PIDs to Prepare,” first paragraph – The ITSP is woefully out-of-date by about ten years. It is doubtful that the CTC will revisit the SB45 percentages of 15% for rural and 10% discretionary.
     Are HOV lane projects still given priority?
40   • Page 10, “Choosing Which PIDs to Prepare,” last paragraph – Presumably PIDs prepared by CT for each region are non-SHOPP and in addition to all SHOPP PIDs they must prepare. What method will be used to                        District                                 X
     identify these PIDs and how are they prioritized over any other projects in the region?
     • Page 11, first paragraph – How were the “$20M” and “$5M” thresholds arrived at?



     1. Reference to the SHOPP - The Strategic Plan should address the needs for the SHOPP within this document, rather than recommending separate policies or guidance. Since CT is responsible for programming the
     SHOPP, this section should be written from CT perspective; reference to highways “in bad condition” and “state of good repair” is inconsistent with how CT would characterize its responsibilities under this program.
     The document should recognize the moving targets for programming in the 10-Yr SHOPP, since unpredictable shifts influence priorities for SHOPP programming. To allow for this, there should be a recommendation for
41   maintaining a minimum of one viable PID per SHOPP category per District (selected by the Program Advisor). Processes and procedures, including review processes, should be evaluated to achieve greater efficiency.                District                                 X
     Recommending a “PID expert in each District” may not necessarily achieve the desired streamlining. A recommendation that is outcome oriented, rather than specifying a role for individual CT staff, may be better (e.g.,
     CT should validate the appropriate level of detail for the PID scope.) The various types of PIDs should be explored further. When PSRs are introduced in the draft, the term PID and PSR appear to be used
     interchangeably without explanation.
     (Continued) The types of PIDs (including PSR, PSSR, PSR/PDS), formats, procedures and outcomes should be carefully evaluated to determine value added and what can be reduced, eliminated or consolidated to achieve
     the desired result. The various types of PIDs should be explored further. When PSRs are introduced in the draft, the term PID and PSR appear to be used interchangeably without explanation. The types of PIDs
     (including PSR, PSSR, PSR/PDS), formats, procedures and outcomes should be carefully evaluated to determine value added and what can be reduced, eliminated or consolidated to achieve the desired result. The
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        District                                 X
     Strategic Plan should also make reference to the Project Engineering Evaluation Report (PEER). While a PEER is not part of the PID program, there is important pre-PID work that helps determine an appropriate course
     of action for a locally sponsored project. A PEER may provide a streamlined approach to the same end, depending on the cost and complexity of an improvement. Consideration of this process should be part of the
     overall strategy for managing PIDs.
     (Continued) CT and the Regions should confirm agreement annually on the priorities for PID development, even when a local agency is the sponsor (i.e., current practice seems to allow a local agency to prepare a PID
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        District                                 X
     with or without such consensus.) This agreement on priorities should be founded on a solid pre-PID work, including cost-benefit.
     Page 14. The discussion in Recommendation 5 about the project sponsor accepting ownership of risks leads me to restate an earlier bullet point: “No matter what disclaimers you attach to an estimate, you will be
42   penalized for exceeding it.”
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        District                                              X

43   There are numerous recommendations. It might be better to prioritize the recommendations and/or focus on four or five of the most important ones.                                                                                  District                                 X
     Page 8. Add
     The State as the owner operator of the State highway system has long-term interest in preservation and protection of the public highway assets. The locals making the decision in investing tax dollars and developer fees
     partner in the decision making of how and what those investments should be used for as part of improving the infrastructure systems as stakeholders and meeting the departs goal of a safe transportation system. Though
44   the STIP is divided into two parts with the regions controlling 75% through RTIP and Caltrans controlling 25% for the ITIP.                                                                                                        District                                 X
     Caltrans intends to and usually prepare PIDs when requested by local agencies for projects from regional and state long range plans when funded through the RTIP and ITIP.



     (Continued) The department performs quality assurance (QA), after local agency performs the quality control (QC) aspects. Caltrans also reviews PIDs for locally funded projects and developer-funded projects, typically
     prepared by consultants, when presented. The department efforts may also require both QC/QA for outside agencies because of a lack of verifiable QC efforts which significantly increases staff efforts for approval of the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        District                                 X
     PID. Caltrans prepares PIDs in its twelve districts and Engineeering Service Center, Structure Design, circulates and reviews them within the district office, and discusses some matters with headquarters staff, particularly
     Mandatory and Advisory Highway Exceptions per the requirements of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual for design exceptions.

     California Department of Transportation                                                                                                Page 3 of 23
     Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                    PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                                January 14, 2010
     Page 9. 4th para.
      The STIP allocates funding for projects on a North/South split, population and county minimum formulas allowing for STIP funding throughout the State. Te SHOPP current total ten-year goal-constrained need for
45   rehabilitation and operation of the state highway system is $63 billion for FY’s 2010-11 through 2019-20. This amount represents the current cost estimate for capital construction, right of way acquisition, and project            District   X
     development support. This does not include expected future escalation increases in construction costs for inflation. The SHOPP adds additional projects in the out two years of each four year cycle every two years and
     has the ability to amend projects through the CTC generally on an annual basis.
     (Continued) The data that was supplied to the LAO was an inventory of all existing approved PIDs. Some PID’s may no longer meet the identified Purpose and Need in the document due to changes in conditions. New
     projects have come through and performed work that may no longer require the work identified in the PID. The project identified in the PID my not have identified funding available and the project does not have the
     ability to be programmed or a number of additional reasons such as the right of way required for the project may not be acceptable for the project proponents and needs to be abandoned or the political commitment for the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           District   X
     project is not supporting advancing the project. Many of the PID’s may no longer be viable due to changes at the project location or adjacent to the project location thus making the PID no longer and could be considered
     stale. PID’s that are on the shelf must be updated before programming for conditions that may have changed or to update the project scope, schedule and estimate.

     (Continued) The department therefore may have adequate PIDs already on the shelf. The shelf projects should be reviewed for viability of the PID that has support of the District and/or Local Agencies. All PID’s allow
     for a no build alternative. Sometimes a PID allows for enough information for decision makers to decide not to go any further with programming additional phases of the project and allow for the idea to stop
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           District   X


     1. It will be very difficult to approve projects for construction on the SHS if the scope is not defined and analyzed sufficiently to determine the impacts on the operations of the SHS.
     2. Projects that have a PID “approved” and signed by a District Director build local momentum and are very difficult to change as issues not understood in the PID are discovered as the project moves into PA&ED.
     3. More projects will be programmed in the STIP that require increases in funding or delays in delivery as the issues not understood in the PID get discovered as the project moves into PA&ED or final design.
46                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ       X




     (Continued)4. The STIP and SHOPP will require more frequent amendments and potentially tough choices to deprogram projects to fund cost increases.
     5. The costs, scopes and schedules for projects in the STIP in advance of PA&ED will be unreliable.
     6. Serious consideration should be given to the reaction of LAO or DOF to this proposal. With the shift of workload from Planning to COS, described in this proposal, it is possible that either of these offices could                 HQ       X
     determine that the quantity of work being cut from PIDs should also be cut from PID staff resources the Department receives. The result could be the loss of quality and quantity of PIDs.

     Page 6. Current Guideline, insert:
     • State that, “All anticipated design exception approvals must be obtained prior to district approval of the Project Study Report (PSR) or any other project initiation document.” (See PDPM Chapter 9, Section titled,
     “Exceptions to Design Standards” for additional guidance)
     • State that, “All major projects (except for projects-funded-by-others) shall include the use of formal constructability reviews (CRs) during the project initiation and design phases of the project development process.”
     • State that, “The Department is mandated by law (SAFETEA-LU, title 23 USC 106) to perform a value analysis (VA) study on all projects on the Federal-aid system with a total project cost including support of $25
     million or more regardless of whether Caltrans employees, local agencies, consultants, or others are accomplishing and/or funding the work. In addition, a VA will be performed on all bridge projects with a total cost of
47   $20 million or more.”                                                                                                                                                                                                                   HQ




     (Continued)• State that, “All projects must be reviewed by the District Safety Review Committee prior to the approval of the PSR. The PID must incorporate the safety concepts that were identified during the safety review
     process unless deletion is substantiated, documented, and approved by the District Director.”
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             HQ



     Page 8 . 3rd Parag from the end.
48   I don’t' agree. A lot of these studies are required. Eg. Stormwater. Plus we need to look at District Requirement.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           District   X

     3. On page 8 the report suggest not using a “one size fits all” approach yet later on that page it states there are nine types of PIDs already identified that are simplified for specific project types. Could there be one or two
49   additional types that would meet the local needs?                                                                                                                                                                                       HQ       X

     Page 8, states that "instead of a one size fits all approach, a project specific guideline/implementation plan can be used to eliminating unnecessary steps" Comment: We don't use a one size fits all approach. We have
50   many different types of PID templates for different categories of projects. However it would not be practical to create a project-specific guideline/template for each project.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             HQ       X


     California Department of Transportation                                                                                                    Page 4 of 23
     Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                   PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                               January 14, 2010
                                                                                                             Shelf Management                                                                                                             Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
     Page 3 discusses the need to review and update Shelf PIDS on an annual basis. However there is no discussion on who is to do this (District PM, PDT or Project Sponsor?) There should be some discussion as to who
51   would pay for this annual review/update (ie Caltrans K-phase resources, or would a Supplemental CO-Op agreement be needed for local agency $ to be used to do the updates).                                                             HQ


     The shelf needs to be addressed. Page 3, 4, and Attachments, need to be reviewed to assure that the most current and up-to-date information has been used. The District has updated our 'shelf', but noticed that our
     information is not reflected correctly in the Attachment. Therefore, it is questionable whether rolled up numbers in the document are current. In other words, validate the shelf list and make sure that the document write-
52   up is corrected. There needs to be sufficient number and variety of projects on the shelf, but there are still projects listed that are obsolete and/or have no possibility of being funded. Suggests that the shelf be cleaned up
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           District                         X

     by removing those projects before the list is sent to the LAO.
     Keep in mind that the total value of these projects is based on full build out of the project. Many projects are phased in as funding is available, and there isn’t a need to program the full amount within the next STIP cycle
53   for many of these projects.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           District

     Page 3 - 1st paragraph of the secion - We have and inventory and we have viable, programmable PIDs ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) monies and the upcoming Federal Transportation Bill will
54   present additional opportunities to move projects through all phases of the project development process. Congress will be working over the next year on a new multi year Federal Transportation Bill and may significantly            District                                 X
     exceed the last three funding transportation appropriations.
     Shelf Management and Recommendation #1 (page 9).
     The language in recommendation #1 needs to reflect a greater role for regional agencies. Regional agencies want to work with Caltrans district staff directly to create and annually update the three-year strategic plan.
     Regional agencies should be in agreement with the PID work plan in order to ensure that both state and regional project priorities are being met.
55   Recommendation:                                                                                                                                                                                                                       SBCAG
     1. Create a three-year Strategic Plan, to be updated by Caltrans District staff and Regional Transportation Planning Agency staff jointly in coordination with Caltrans Office of Projects & Plans Coordination, annually
     before December 1. By reviewing the Plan annually and using established removal criteria, this will improve the management of the PID shelf.


56   "Quarterly coordinate and consult with regional and local partners for project priorities." Some rural local agencies short on staff may consider this too frequent.                                                                  District
     "Three-year Strategic Work Plan , should be updated annually by Caltrans District staff by December 1, in coordination with Caltrans’ Office of Projects and Plans Coordination and regional agencies" Are we preparing a
57   work plan or are we preparing a proposed programming plan or both?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           District

     "By reviewing the Plan annually and using established removal criteria, this will improve the management of the PID shelf ." We have two needs 1. Prepare a three year work plan and 2. Have a three year potential list of
58   viable PIDS. Not clear what we are asking
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           District

     "at $41.2 billion over the three-year period of this Plan." And is the $41.2 billion over the next three programming years or is this the completion years of the proposed or completed PID documents themselves, meaning
59   that construction dollars me be many years out past the three years of the strategic plan. You may be presenting this in a way that makes things look worse than they are shelf wise.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             HQ

     "168 projects ($9.5 billion) are proposed to be funded exclusively or partially from STIP dollars" Might be worthwhile to put in how much of the $9.5 billion is unfunded need without a source of expected funds. Is the
60   whole $9.5 billion the STIP funds portion or is that all fund sources?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             HQ


61   Page 4, 3rd paragraph. This paragraph seems to be talking about a different topic that shelf management and inventory. It needs a heading before it to show it is a different topic from the preceding one.                             HQ
     Page 9. 2nd Paragraph. Inserted
     • Passage of tax measures or other referendum;
62   • Update of the 10-year SHOPP.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             HQ



     Page 9. Last Paragraph.
     "2. Review the SHOPP PID inventory as part of the update to the 10 Year SHOPP" Can we remove this as a repeat of Item 1 above? The 10-year SHOPP programming targets tend to be in flux as a programming
63   document comes together which could end up with a lot of reviews is this is strictly followed.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             HQ

     Maybe add text the body of document mentioning that the 10-year SHOPP update is another trigger for a review. (see add to list of items in 2nd paragraph)
                                                                                               PID Preparation and Review within Caltrans                                                                                                 Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
     Page 14, Recommendation number 5. Should the RTPA group also be included with the CTC for PID Strategic Plan concurrence or is the assumption the RTPAs have participated in the process and the final document
64   assumes the RTPA's concurrence?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           District                                 X

     Strongly suggest streamlining SHOPP PIDs by moving technical studies to PS&E phase. A metric the streamlining team may want to investigate is the number / percent of programmed SHOPP projects that experience at
65   least one Program Change Request (PCR) and SHOPP Amendment. If the percent of projects with a PCR and SHOPP amendment is relatively high, there is evidence that many SHOPP projects experience significant                           District                                 X
     change despite the level of effort for the PID. If PCRs and SHOPP Amendments are the “norm”, less effort should be placed in PID development.




     California Department of Transportation                                                                                                   Page 5 of 23
     Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                              PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                                          January 14, 2010
     Local development proposals often impact State facilities. Developing PIDs in corridors or areas where development is being planned provides local agencies and developers with needed State Highway project footprints
     and costs that can be utilized in the land use approval process. Mitigation funding and right of way reservation determination plan for future needs and contribute to the costs of mitigating the impacts of growth.

     PIDs are also sometimes a necessary inclusion in a jurisdiction’s Traffic Mitigation Fee program or in assembling a list of future improvements to be included in a sales tax measure. The immediate need of a PID doesn’t
66   translate into an immediate project, but sets the stage for future funding through the program or measure.                                                                                                                                                    District                                 X

     Criteria for selecting and developing PID projects include:
     • Caltrans direction to a developer or local sponsor project requires an engineering analysis of future SHS needs


     Page 10 - It is hard to understand what is expected from the department unless a long term relationship has been established between both the local agency, consultants and Caltrans.. The first step is appropriate quality
     control by the consulting agency and the sponsor. Caltrans role is for quality assurance and that requires a internal quality control from the consultant to assure the local agency and Caltrans that the product submitted is
     complete and has met the industry standards established by the PDPM; Caltrans asserts it could save resources charged to PIDs if after completing the PID, a documented quality control program is completed before
     submitting the PID to the department. The department instead of circulating PIDs to a standard list of staff, the department examines ways to conduct more focused reviews using project review meetings, individual
     functional meetings, workshops, forwarding only to units with a substantial issue to review, and other performance enhancement and communication methods to shorten review times and efforts. It would be desirable to
67   have experienced, confident, and flexible engineering staff in the PID unit able to make independent judgment with excellent communication skills to perform the duties of providing quality assurance or production of the                                   District                         X
     PIDs; And the recommendations are;




     (Continued)4. The Region or local agency completes a documented quality control program as defined in the PDPM before submitting the PID to the department; Develop checklists for quality control of the PID to be
     completed independently of the engineer of record for the PID as part of the Caltrans submittal. Consider changes to procedures and manuals that relate to or could help streamline PID preparation and review; Increase
     training for PID staff regarding the quality assurance standards of PIDs and increased communication skill training regarding problem resolution; Formal feed back loop after completion of the PA/ED, PSE and
     Construction phases to the PID Project Development Team to understand issues that were encountered during the various phases that were not identified during the PID development and investigations; And 8. Ensure that                                       District                         X
     each Caltrans District has an experienced PID expert preferably at the Supervising Transportation Engineer level though assigned to each District Planning Division similar to the HQ Project Development Coordinators to
     guide the work of PID Project Development Teams and regional agencies’ consultants.

     Page 10. It is hard to understand what is expected from the department unless a long term relationship has been established between both the local agency, consultants and Caltrans.. The first step is appropriate quality
     control by the consulting agency and the sponsor. Caltrans role is for quality assurance and that requires a internal quality control from the consultant to assure the local agency and Caltrans that the product submitted is
     complete and has met the industry standards established by the PDPM.

     Caltrans asserts it could save resources charged to PIDs if after completing the PID, a documented quality control program is completed before submitting the PID to the department. The department instead of circulating
68   PIDs to a standard list of staff, the department examines ways to conduct more focused reviews using project review meetings, individual functional meetings, workshops, forwarding only to units with a substantial issue                                    District                         X
     to review, and other performance enhancement and communication methods to shorten review times and efforts. It would be desirable to have experienced, confident, and flexible engineering staff in the PID unit able to
     make independent judgment with excellent communication skills to perform the duties of providing quality assurance or production of the PIDs
     Add one recommendation after 3.
     4. Region or local agency complete a documented quality control program as defined in the PDPM before submitting the PID to the department.


     This draft PID Strategic Plan & Streamlining should be circulated to other CALTRANS critical functional units, such as Right-of-Way, Environmental Planning, etc for review.
69                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 District
     "Regions complain that Caltrans internal reviews are inconsistent, because some individual staff interpret PDPM guidance rigidly and hold every PID to the highest common denominator while others seek ways to cut corners and use the lowest
70   common " My experience is that some information from consultants, especially traffic studies, leads to lengthy and costly reviews may be inaccurate. Choice of consultant can have a very significant effect to cost and schedule.                            District

     "Ensure that each Caltrans District has an experienced PID expert preferably" Include a detailed description of how this PID expert/generalist will help streamline the current PID review process. Also, this appears to imply that each Caltrans
71   District will have one experienced PID expert. One PID expert per District will not be enough staff to support nine counties like District 4. Maybe a staff of PID experts can be formed for each district based on need using existing staff.                District

     "4. Provide additional guidance to external partners on when a PID is “ready” for review by Caltrans" Problem with this is that a perception is there that consultants throw incomplete work at Caltrans to review because they know we will fix it and it
72   saves the consultant staff time and thus they make more profit. I have seen this happen on plan reviews by the Department as comments from Caltrans will show up on the plan sets as changes when it was meant as commentary.                                   HQ


73   Clarification request on page 10 - . How do you ensure this? There are staff in the PID Offices who are working, experienced or non-experienced. Do you you suggest to move the non-experienced ones?                                                         District                                 X

                                                                                                                        Preparing PIDs?                                                                                                                           Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management




     California Department of Transportation                                                                                                                Page 6 of 23
     Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
     Page 2 - The level of detail should be the minimum necessary for programming into the next phase. Stakeholders may agree to perform and fund additional, data or work that may provide good value. (See page 21) - I
74   think minimum should be defined better. I think we should be looking for consistency with programmed projects and planning documents (e.g. Transportation Concept Reports), feasibility of the project, and examine                  District              X
     existing safety issues, which is probably well beyond what some people would consider minimum. Are we looking at design standards at this stage?
     Page 11. The funding amounts given at the top of the page: “In an urban region, that means projects up to about $20 million in cost, and in rural counties, up to about $5 million . . .” seem arbitrary, unless they are for
75   example only. For example, in District 9 we combine STIP funds from Inyo, Mono, and Kern Counties with IIP funds to create “MOU projects” that are larger than you would expect from a rural region.                                 District                                 X

     Page 11. 3rd Parag.
     Large: Consider splitting discussion - self help and non self help.
76   Last Parag.                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X
     Do potential PIDs need to meet all or one or more of these criteria?
     This criteria effectively eliminates doing PIDs based off the political environment.
     Page 16. The partial paragraph at the top of the page should be revised to reflect the discussion above regarding the need to have future components in the MPO’s constrained plan; And Recommendation 8, while
77   appropriate given the other recommendations, doesn’t address the issue of regional agencies needing cost estimates to use in their fiscally constrained plans.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X

     We would recommend rather that the instructions be for the team to evaluate the need for detailed engineering work such as: traffic and multi-modal studies, geotechnical studies, formal risk assessments, stormwater data
78   reports, floodplain mapping, value engineering, and context sensitive design as it relates to the project under consideration and defer those that are not essential to the development of a reasonable range of alternatives and    District                                 X
     their scope, schedule and cost.
     Require consideration of transit elements for each project – A listing of potential transit improvements should be added in the PID template and the PID Chapter in the PDPM. Each transit improvement on the list must
     either be an element of a project alternative or an explanation provided justifying the reasons against inclusion. This can be expanded to bicycle and pedestrian elements to fully meet Complete Street requirements. The
     bullets above in the previous section also provide support for this recommendation.
79   Require changes in the PDPM and other guidance – Changes in PID requirements must be reflected in all guidance documents. Including; The PDPM must better explain the difference between requirements and options;
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ                                     X
     Appropriate PID templates must be included in the PDPM that reflect the new streamlined documents; And include requirements for transit/multimodal alternatives and project elements.


80   "$60 million per year in Fresno, $150 million per year in Riverside, $300 million per year in Orange " Needs to be verified with local sales tax authorities                                                                         District

81   Counties or others willing to fund and/or conduct PID work should not be heavily restricted in the number of PIDs that it supports and prepares, and are willing to fund.                                                            SCVTA
     "so Caltrans needs to have several PIDs ready, and should also fund environmental studies and the project development phase for a few of these PIDs, to have projects construction-ready. " I think this is a good idea, put
82   there is nothing in the recommendation that would lead to this being accomplished
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District

83   Do potential PIDs need to meet all or one or more of these criteria? This criteria effectively eliminates doing PIDs based off the political environment.                                                                            District

84   "Project sponsor has identified a reasonable funding source " Caltrans’ direction to a developer or local sponsor project requires an engineering analysis of future SHS needs.                                                      District
     Project Priority
85   • Currently, there is no stated preference for projects having identified construction funds.                                                                                                                                        District                         X
     Recommendation: Projects having identified construction capital should be given a preference on non-SHOPP PIDs.
     Page 11 - 1st paragraph - In an urban region - This should be verified for appropriate need and funding. This sentence does not match “Purposeful Inventory of PIDs” contained in the report Next to correlate this data to
86   match.                                                                                                                                                                                                                               District                                 X

     Page 10 "Caltrans maintains at least four long-range plans: " Want to list any of these DSMP, CSMP, Interregional Blueprint, and CTP as they have had more of the limelight lately?
87                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          HQ

     Page 11 - 1st paragraph - In an urban region Don’t put in hard caps like this. I’d reword about projects with a “reasonable chance of funding” to leave in some flexibility
88                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          HQ

     Page 11 - 4th paragraph.
     ", and should also fund environmental studies and the project development phase for a few of these PIDs" Wouldn’t this be joint funded PA&ED and PS&E phases?
89   Want to mention risk of having to redo the environmental document if this sits too long?                                                                                                                                               HQ


     "With simpler PID requirements, it becomes easier to keep these PIDs updated, and some small regions might even choose to prepare a PID themselves." This sentence is not about deciding which PID to do and thus
     doesn’t belong in this section of the document. Seems like a lot of writing to get the point across. I’d look at consolidating this.
90                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          HQ


                                                                                                                Shelf Size                                                                                                               Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management




     California Department of Transportation                                                                                                  Page 7 of 23
     Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
      Page 12 - the graph should include a line that describes the PID Shelf. It could show that the shelf was "used up" when new funds arrived or that projects were removed from the shelf.
91                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      HQ

      • Page 12 - For economic emergencies like CA is in now, the general rule stated of “the lower the amount of funding available for current programming, the greater the need to prepare more PIDs” needs to be relaxed.
      While it may be true that there is a greater need to prepare PIDs during slack funding times, the period over which these projects will be constructed must of necessity be longer than during times when the economy is
      good and funding is available. If PID preparation times remain constant, then the need is not necessarily greater, but the demand for or desire to complete PIDs is greater. This does not equate with a need.
92    • Page 12, graph – While this graph depicts non-SHOPP allocations, what is needed is to overlay a graph of non-SHOPP PID completions on top. In this way an evaluation can be made of how well the Department and its           District   X
      partners are meeting the availability of funds.



      • Page 12, last paragraph – While it is desirable for present PIDs to exceed the expected programming level from the next boom cycle, there is no way to accurately predict what the size of the next boom cycle will be.
      • Page 13, second paragraph – An inventory of PIDs already exists county-by-county within MTC, and does need to be kept. This is because despite MTC completing a unified RTP each county also completes separate
93    RTPs. Hence they actively compete for the planning resources available to the District.                                                                                                                                         District   X



94    Page 3. Reviews the Shelf would be costly. Maybe we just inventory the shelf. Updating a PID is almost the same as writing a new one.                                                                                           District   X
      Page 13
95    d) Make PIDs easier to update.                                                                                                                                                                                                  District       X
      e) Respond to developer or local fee program proposals
      Page 13 - Recommendation 4 - Correlate the number of PIDs developed to likely funding sources. The number of PIDs should not be limited to STIP or SHOPP programming capacity, in order to; Be ready for funding
96    opportunities and build a programming strategy; Avoid duplication of work that will be reconsidered during later project phases; Provide information for projects to enter the environmental phase; and Make PIDs easier to     District       X
      update.
      Page 12. Graph. Should we use a projection that does not include another “Boom” event? Actual data tells one story, Projected data tells a different story.
      Page 13 3rd Parag.
      The first four years of the 10-year SHOPP should have PID’s completed or near completion since we are proposing funding for year three and four. What is the real question is between year three and year ten how many
97    additional projects should be fund? Federal Highway program is based on six year cycle. Do we match the Federal program. What is reasonable for a viable shelf of PIDs due to changing conditions and program                   District       X
      priorities from both the political direction and new program funding


      Shelf Size and Recommendation #4 (page 13).
      The collection of statements under recommendation #4 are confusing. Proposed new language is below. Clauses b, c, and d can be incorporated into recommendation #22 and a sentence from recommendation #22 is
      moved here.
98    Recommendation:
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      SBCAG          X
      4. Correlate the number of PIDs developed to likely funding sources. The number of PIDs should not be limited to STIP programming capacity, so as to be ready for funding opportunities and build a long term
      programming strategy. Work with regional agencies to prepare a variety of PIDs to be ready for any and all programming opportunities.

 99   "boom-bust cycles" If this term/concept is to used hear we should discuss what is/means. If we move this section past the detailed discussion on boom-bust cycles then this works.                                              District

100   Page 6. "Provide local agencies with signals…" Not sure about this item. I am assuming you wouldn’t start a PID unless this was already the case so I don’t think this is a result of the completed PID.                          HQ
      "A PID does not need to begin preliminary engineering or undertake engineering studies, or make detailed cost estimates based on quantity calculations." A PID does not need to begin preliminary engineering or undertake
101   engineering studies, or make detailed cost estimates based on quantity calculations.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        HQ

      "It should identify significant uncertainties but not necessarily resolve them" The PID doesn’t have to necessarily resolve them but it needs to prove that the uncertainties can be resolved. This may be a good spot to add
102   reference to design exceptions, constructability, and fatal flaw concepts.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        HQ


103   "See Appendix “G” for PID definitions" Why does this suddenly show up here without a description of why it is here?                                                                                                               HQ

104   Figure 1. Add title. Has CT Budgets reviewed this and approved?                                                                                                                                                                   HQ
      "California has been unsuccessful using programming as a tool to flatten out the boom-and-bust cycles." Have we really tried to do this? I don’t remember any time where we made a concerted effort respread the
105   STIP/SHOPP to array work out evenly by fiscal year.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        HQ

      " plus PIDs that have been programmed into the environmental or project development phase, but not into capital outlay" Once a project is programmed for any amount of funds, the PID no longer controls, it becomes the
106   Project Report which controls the future cost and schedule of the project for programming purposes. The PR is part of the outcome of the PA&ED phase.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        HQ

      "That means at a minimum, the shelf of SHOPP PIDs should amount to $6 billion" If you are going to recommend a minimum SHOPP shelf size, you should do the same for the STIP shelf even if based on less rigorous
107   criteria.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        HQ




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                Page 8 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                   PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                               January 14, 2010
                                                                                                      Risk Management/Risk Process                                                                                                       Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management

      Risk Management
      • Caltrans (DIB77) and FHWA approvals necessary to obtain PID completion are lengthy and detailed.
108    Recommendation: In addition to segregating projects into SHOPP and STIP categories, projects requiring any modifications to freeways controlled access highways should also be separated.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                              X


      Risk Management/Risk Process
      • Page 14, Recommendation – In order for the CTC to be able to evaluate risks involved in any strategic plan, it must receive a risk evaluation of each project included in the plan. Currently, a risk management chart or
109   spreadsheet, however general or specific, is not required of every project. Such a spreadsheet should be made a requirement and the format should be included in Chapter 9 of the PDPM.                                             District                                              X



                                                                                                            Conflict Resolution                                                                                                          Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      1. Risk management - While it is important that the project sponsor be willing to accept certain risks, such acceptance should include a financial commitment for costs associated with recovery from a failed risk. An
      appropriate level of engineering analysis and data is critical for a valid project scope and to determine the set of issues and degree to which they will influence the project scope and cost. Approving a PID without critical
110   data associated with geotechnical and traffic studies that are so fundamental to a project’s scope could be irresponsible (Recommendation #18). Level of detail vs. level of confidence. The work produced for a PID needs          District                                              X
      to provide a suitable confidence level for planning and programming purposes. The breadth and depth of information needs to support a specified (less than 100%) confidence level.

      The geometric reviewer has authority that is delegated to remove him from political persuasion or influence. Additionally, Congress has indicated that we cannot subjugate our authority. Therefore, any conflict resolution
111   that includes local agency representatives should concern us despite the disclaimer that the Director has final authority.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X

      Page 15, first paragraph - regarding the district's deputy director responsible for PIDs, this should be revised to say the Deputy District Directors for Planning and Local Assistance. Also, since the issue is about conflict
112   resolution and involves a project manager, it might be good to include the Deputy District Director for PPM.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X

      Conflict Resolution and Recommendation #6 (page 15).
      Conflict resolution is an extremely important element of decision making and it is very important that the agency providing the funding for the PSR has ultimate decision making authority for how its funding is used. The
      regions understand that Caltrans also has a very significant stake in how a PSR is shaped in that the ultimate project that is developed will be implemented on the State Highway system and Caltrans will carry out the work
      required for the PID. For this reason, the regions require that at a minimum final conflict resolution needs to be shared. It would be our preference that the agency funding the PID document and the agency(s) funding the
113   eventual project have final authority; however, at he PID phase the agency(s) fuding the project often may not be known. In any case, to carry out the work required Caltrans must ultimately agree with the scope of the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          SBCAG

      project as well. For this reason, the regions recommend that the final decision under conflict resolution be a shared decision between the sponsoring agency CEO and the District Director.


      (Contunied) Ultimately, if either party is uncomfortable with the PID, the sponsoring agency could opt to use a consultant to complete the work or Caltrans could opt to not prepare the requested PID. Proposed changes to
      this section and recommendation are highlighted below. Often times, an implementing or sponsoring agency and Caltrans have conflicting interests in the amount and type of work that needs to be done during the PID
      phase. These conflicts may arise at the pre-PID meeting or during the development of the PID. Caltrans doesn’t have a conflict resolution process in the PDPM. But there are processes for specific issues like cooperative
      agreements and relinquishments that can serve as models. The conflict resolution process would begin with Project Development Team disagreeing on which work items are necessary to study the purpose and need. The
      implementing agency’s project manager and the department’s project manager for the project would present the issues to a committee which consists of the HQ Design Coordinator, the HQ Project Management Liaison,
      the district’s deputy director responsible for PIDs and up to three local agency representatives. This committee would make a recommendation to the District Director and the implementing or sponsoring agency’s Chief             SBCAG
      Executive Officer or his/her designee who would decide on the scope of work. The District Director and the Chief Executive Officer or designee from the sponsoring agency, together have final authority for the decision
      for project.
      Recommendation:


      (Continued) 6. In the event that conflict over proposed scope of work arises, Project Managers from the project sponsoring agency and the Department meet and present issues to a conflict resolution committee,
      comprised of up to three regional and/or local agency representatives and the Department’s headquarters Design Coordinator, Project Management Liaison and the district’s deputy director responsible for PIDs . The                SBCAG
      Chief Executive Officer or designee from the sponsoring agency and the District Director together have final authority for the decision.
      Page 16 - Implies that PID streamlining would change the level of cost estimate accuracy form "$9.375 mill" with a detailed PID to "$9.6 mill" with a streamlined PID. Comment: In reality I don't see that we're "splitting
      hairs" like this. I see it more as a $9.6 mill project estimate vs. say a $ 6 or $12 million estimate (with a less detailed PID) - which is significant in terms of successful project delivery.
114   Page 16 - Recommendation to shift the baseline for cost control from PID cost estimates to PA&ED/PR stage. Comment: While this works (currently) for longer term, more complex STIP projects, using the PSR(PDS)                      HQ
      process, I don't see how this would work for shorter term (single programming cycle) STIP or SHOPP projects.


115   What is considered disagreement? One person on the team disagreeing? As usual, the details of the language are important.                                                                                                           District




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                  Page 9 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
      "The Caltrans District Director has final authority..." What if the engineer of responsible charge does not agree with the decision and refuses to stamp the report? Issue may arise where regional/local agency engineer or
116   consulting engineer is asked to stamp all or part of the design/report where Caltrans staff is producing the PID but regional/local agency requests some kind of streamlining. This issue may be too "what if" for this               HQ
      document but it still something to be aware of in the future if regional/local agencies pursue "streamlining" very agressively.
      Page 15. Recommendation 6 should include District representation; The discussion on the development spectrum introduces the concept of “ballpark estimates of schedule and cost….” I can’t state strongly enough how
      this is contrary to the purpose and objective of a PID as well as legislative intent (“reliable cost estimates”); Under Programming and Environmental Phases it is stated most correctly “Program cost control is important…”,
      all the more reason to have a reliable cost estimate; And At the end of this section is an unfair and misleading example, “Regional agencies worry less about whether a project will cost $9.375 million as determined in a
117   detailed PID or $9.6 million as estimated in a simplified PID than whether the PID overlooked an entire cost component, such as traffic handling, drainage, or soundwalls.” I say unfair because attributing a detailed PID         District                                 X
      with a 2% difference ignores the reality that we have all faced with gigantic scope, cost and schedule changes that can be directly attributed to a lack of appropriate effort in the PID development.


                                                                                                      Plan/Program/Project Delivery                                                                                                      Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      I. Where anticipated programming will be for the PA&ED phase only, streamline PID requirements, based upon risk analysis and concurrence of project sponsor. Use existing information (as much as possible) to make
      reasonable ballpark estimates of cost, scope, and schedule for the PID. The level of detail should be the minimum necessary for programming into the next phase. Stakeholders may agree to perform and fund additional,
      critical data or work that may be necessary to define the project. (Recommendation #17).
118   Any additional work, such as traffic studies, stormwater reports, value engineering, and risk assessments should clearly be designated as optional, to be deferred until the preliminary engineering/environmental phase,           District                                 X
      unless the information is essential for scope or cost (Recommendations #18 and #20).
      Shift the baseline for cost control from PID cost estimates to PA&ED/Project Report stage (Recommendation #8).
      Stakeholders may agree to perform and fund additional, critical data or work that may be necessary to define the project (Recommendation #17).
      Page 15
      In essence, the PID serves as a bridge from the long range plan to programming/funding/project implementation. Once programmed and funded, project work proceeds through project approval and environmental studies,
119   project development, right of way, and construction. Programming represents the transition between planning/concept development and project development phases. The PID is a transition document to begin the projects
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District

      identified in the various long and short term plans to program into the project development process and eventual implementation into the State highway system.
      (Continued) This results in a Planning and Engineering document for the various stakeholders for the project delivery process.                                                                                                      District
      Page 15 - The PID is a transition document to begin the projects identified in the various long and short term plans to program into the project development process and eventual implementation into the State highway
      system. This results in a Planning and Engineering document for the various stakeholders for the project delivery processand the PID clearly falls on the planning side of that line; And the majority of the staff expenditures
120   are generally performed by engineering staff in the Districts or by consultants for externally funded projects with support from both the Environmental Planning staff for development of PEAR and Right of Way staff for           District                                 X
      development of the Right of Way data sheet. Work in HQ Office of Planning is used to support and monitor the production and resource expenditures of the statewide program.


121   The Planning-Programming-Project Development Spectrum (Page 15) - Add a fifth bullet - What transit, complete streets, and multimodal features are included in the project?                                                           HQ                                     X
      The Planning-Programming-Project Development Spectrum (Page 15) - "PlD work in the planning units..." PID work is done by all branches in Caltrans with the lead engineers being located in Traffic, Design, Planning
122   and Maintenance.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ

      The Planning-Programming-Project Development Spectrum (Page 15) "but at the PID phase, it is not critical to establish a detailed cost estimate, particularly for more complex projects that will go through extensive
      environmental review" The whole point of doing the PID is for this purpose. I don’t think the CTC believe that you should be coming back and amending the programming, if you don’t know what to program in the first
123   place then should only program PA&ED and thus use a PSR-PDS.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ


                                                                                                    Programming/Environmental Phase                                                                                                      Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      Recom. 7. Hard to understand.
124   7. Idenfy specific areas in the project that may be a barrier and specific areas that may be an opportunity in the "Programming and funding Section" of the PID
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                         X

      The risks of moving into PA&ED without reasonable estimates of design, right-of-way, and construction costs are many (and, again, we have historical experience with this). For example, just to get out of PA&ED, you
125   need to have future components in the MPO’s constrained plan[1]. If you program “ballpark” estimates, “no matter what disclaimers you attach to an estimate, you will be penalized for exceeding it.” The end result is,            District                                 X
      you will have a large number of projects with a programmed component, but not fully funded.
      Page 16 - Recommendation 7 & 8 - Identify barriers and opportunities for programming and funding during PID work, to pinpoint projects where lower cost alternatives or staging segmentation of the corridor may allow
      a stage construction for the project over multiple funding cycles or stagesmay be critical; And shift the baseline for construction cost control from PID cost estimates to PA&ED phase/Project Report stage.. By
126   incorporating the use of the PSR/PDS format for locally funded Non-SHOPP projects only project development support for PA/ED is required to scoped and allows the conceptual geometric design approval of the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X

      proposed project.
      PID Scope and Variations (Page 20) - Under the Recommendations section add a new bullet - Include transit alternative(s) and transit/multimodal elements in PID or explanations as to why they are not viable.
127                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         HQ                                     X




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                Page 10 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
      "Depending on the risks that are identified and how the project sponsor chooses to address the identified risks, the PID scope of work may call for more or less detailed studies. range from a very basic PID with limited
128   detail to a very complex PID with detailed engineering and environmental studies. " This is setting the department up for allowing a local agency to put all work off in the PID stage by saying they are “ok” with the risk         HQ
      and that is not what risk management is supposed to be about.
      "Each project sponsor and team will have different approaches to managing risks. Some will have an aggressive approach. This may include developing PIDs with less detail and foregoing or postponing certain studies
      while others may take a conservative approach and develop very detailed and complex PIDs...." I would like to see this paragraph rewritten to be less permissive with the project sponsor being able to decide how detailed
129   to PID is going to be. The types of studies and level of detail needed in the PID should be defined by the purpose and need and not based on the whims of a politician at a region/local agency.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ



      "In short, several factors should determine the PID scope of work. The project sponsor, project manager, and project team should be prepared to balance these factors in a way that optimizes the scope of work to prepare
130   the PID... " This paragraph is talking about scope of work and not risk management. I suggest deleting it.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ

      "1. Seek concurrence from the California Transportation Commission (CTC) on the annual PID Strategic Plan, and a reduced scope of work …" This paragraph is talking about scope of work and not risk management. I
131   suggest deleting it. The point of risk management is not to find a way to keep from doing any work it is for deciding the best way to deal with unknowns in the project that will affect the outcome of the project.                 HQ


      "2. Document the purpose and need in the PID Charter with concurrence of Caltrans and project sponsor. This provides the necessary framework for developing a clear and concise scope of work.." Need to tie this to risk
132   management since that is what this section is supposed to focus on.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ

      • Page 16 - Agencies/ sponsors need to realize that if they are working on a capacity-increasing project the yardstick is necessarily 20 years post-construction. Otherwise, they should change their purpose-and-need to
      make only “operational improvements.” These types of projects are not faced with the burden of evaluating traffic 20 years post-construction; they only need to demonstrate a benefit over current conditions.
      • Page 16, Recommendation – Item 8 is not realistic in that capital costs for larger projects are routinely used to estimate zero and one phases (COS) resources and schedules. Also, the higher end cost estimates are what is
133   typically used for these estimates.                                                                                                                                                                                                District                                 X




      Programming and Evironmental phases. Page 16.
134   "build generous cost contingencies" Of course, this is contrary to what the locals want where you just throw a “ballpark” estimate at the PID and call the work done. I agree with this language. To do what the locals appear       HQ
      to want will result in very large contingencies again unless a PSR-PDS is done where you only program PA&ED.
      Programming and Evironmental phases. Second Paragraph. "Caltrans and the CTC have set cost control ... " This whole paragraph needs to be rewritten to introduce the concept of the PSR-PDS and show where it is
135   appropriate to use and what limitations are set on it programming wise. This is misleading as it is written
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ

                                                                                                       Pre-PID/Pre-PEAR Meetings                                                                                                        Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      • Page 17, paragraph 2, second sentence – Replace “for each alternative” with “which covers all alternatives or alternative with maximum environmental impact”.
      • Page 17 - Recommendation 13 – Currently, the vast majority of co-op resources are provided to COS during the zero and one phases. The co-op workload needs to be recognized by HQ and appropriate resources
136   provided to the K-phase.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         District                         X


      Page 2. last parag.
      This would be ok for projects over $20 milliion. Otherwise it would increase time and cost.
      Page 17. 1st parag.
137   A local agency will not sign a cooperative agreement until the costs are defined out.                                                                                                                                              District                         X
      Page 17. Recom 13.
      This takes a long time (3-6 months). Local have to take to board.
      Clarification needed on page 16 - By this recommendation, are you suggesting that the PID will only program the support cost for the next phase of project development?
138   Page 17 - This might not be doable, since alternatives are studied/added/rejected during PID. Pre PEAR mtg will only identify the possible Environmental Document . estimation of environmental work will be too                   District                                 X
      premature.
      Page 17. In the second paragraph, the Strategic Plan recommends that Caltrans Environmental Division prepare a PEAR, based on the information available following a pre-PID meeting. Then the paragraph continues to
139   describe a “pre-PEAR meeting”. We do not understand how this, or the steps in Recommendation 11, are going to work, given the information that will be available before significant data collection is done for the PID.           District                                 X

      Reword recommendation #6 to be consistent with discussion that precedes it - In the event that conflict over proposed scope of work arises, Project Managers from project sponsor(s) and the Department meet and present
140   issues to a conflict resolution committee, comprised of the local agency’s sponsor’s representative, Planning and/or Program Project Management Deputy District Director, and the Department’s headquarters Design                 District                                 X
      Coordinator and Project Management Liaison. The District Director has final authority for the decision. (page 15)
      Page 16 - Add one recommendation - Prepare a draft executable cooperative agreement as part of the completion of the PID before final approval for preparation of the PA/ED phase and include adequate schedule time
141   and staff resources for this work to be performed as part of the PID approval process.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         District                                 X

      Pre-PID and Pre-PEAR Meetings and Agreements (Page 17) - Under #11 in the Recommendations section add the bolded - At the pre-PID meeting, provide checklists for risk managements, geotechnical issues, value
142   analysis, stormwater reporting, transportation planning, and…
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ                                     X



      California Department of Transportation                                                                                               Page 11 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                   PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                               January 14, 2010
      "Include external stakeholders on PID Project Development Team. Hold pre-PID meeting to assess quality of existing data" This could be a significant amount of work. There appears to a lot of pre-K phase work and it
143   will need to be estimated and resourced.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District

      "Estimate resources and cost to prepare each PID up front, and follow with a cooperative agreement before work starts if cost sharing is to be used" It should be noted that cost sharing will probably significantly delay
      work if no work can be done before the cooperative agreement is signed. If we do it for free, we can start immediately. However, if we are expected to receive some payment we can’t start until we get an agreement?
144   Caltrans needs to take some risks at least with local agencies. While it may prudent to set a milestone date for the cooperative agreement to be signed or work will desist, Caltrans should be willing to start work
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District

      recognizing there could be a significant benefit to Caltrans.
                                                                                                      Cost Sharing & Reimbursement                                                                                                       Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
       It should be noted that cost sharing will probably significantly delay work if no work can be done before the cooperative agreement is signed. If we do it for free, we can start immediately. However, if we are expected to
145   receive some payment we can’t start until we get an agreement?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District              X

      Given the bleak general funds budget outlook for fiscal years 2009-10 and 2010-11, and the foreseeable future, the LAO, the Legislature, and the Administration generally agree that the regions should share in the costs of
146   developoing PIDs on the state highway system. The transportation community continues to debate the need for a policy that requires regional and local agencies, who have their own bleak budgets, reimburse Caltrans for            District              X
      the majority of PIDs for state highway projects.
      • Page 18, last paragraph, first sentence – Add hyphen between “all” and “STIP.”
      • Page 19, second paragraph, first sentence – Given the requirements of GC 65086.5 (for capacity-increasing projects, only), there is no incentive for cost sharing with the Department on these projects. An effort should be
      made to rewrite this section of the Government Code.
147   • Page 19, third paragraph – It is not factually correct that there is no funding mechanism. Counties/CMAs are provided planning monies consistent with population and lane-miles of roadway in the federal aid system.             District              X
      These are often identified as “P” or “PPM” monies in OWPs of MPOs. An investigation of what counties/CMAs currently spend their “P” or “PPM” monies on is warranted.
      • Page 19, recommendations – Item 15 necessarily requires the development of workload norms. This would allow a set number of hours per level 5 (WBS) activity or product.

      Page 2. 2nd Paragr from the end.
148   If we do this, I would recommend a fee structure agreed by the local that does not require a cooperative agreement. Example: locals pay 10k for a PID between $0-3 million
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District              X

      I have seen support costs for oversight of consultant work to be quite high. QC/QA rarely exists on consultant prepared studies.
149   Page 3 :Some argue that cost sharing and reimbursement is necessary and will require that Caltrans and the regions work together to streamline the PID requirements. Developing Cooperative Agreements is costly and                District                          X
      time consuming. Cost sharing has a baseline cost to the state and creates delays.
      Page 18. Last Parag.
      Requiring the all STIP and other non-SHOPP related PIDs to be ….
      I don’t agree with this statement. This only takes over the preparation of the PID. Caltrans still has final decision by reviewing and approving the PID. Owner/operator role is not delegated.
150   Page 18. Recom 14. 15.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                         X
      These comments are inconsistent. This document should make a conclusion one way or another.
      Document is silent on oversight reimbursement. This should be address along with QA, QC, and IQA definitions should reimbursement of oversight be required by the legislator
      Risk Management/Risk Process and Recommendation #5 (page 14).
      *Add clarification to the end of the recommendation that cost sharing responsibilities may still be negotiated.
      *Cost Sharing and Reimbursement and Recommendations #14 and #15 (page 19).
      *The reality is that many regional and local agencies provide funding for PID development, especially for regional project priorities. In this arrangement Caltrans staff provide oversight at no cost to the sponsoring agency.
151   Caltrans should remain responsible for oversight because Caltrans has discretion over the time, effort and level of oversight provided. We continue to support the inclusion of the language in recommendation #14. The             SBCAG                                    X
      regions propose new language for recommendation #15 below.
      Recommendations:



      (Continued)*15. Provide for cost sharing and reimbursement, whereby regional and local agencies could reimburse Caltrans for developing a streamlined PID document as defined elsewhere in this report, as may be
      agreed to at the time of the pre-PID meeting. Project sponsor and Caltrans District staff may negotiate cost sharing terms for any additional work that may be agreed to at the pre-PID meeting (or may become necessary
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          SBCAG                                    X
      later). Cost of PID oversight and review shall be the responsibility of Caltrans, so that scope, cost, and management of oversight and review does not become subject to negotiation.

      3) Recommendation: Support cost sharing and reimbursement where local agencies would reimburse CT for developing an agreed upon PID document with reduced scope of work.
      Comment: Is this for lower priority projects in the long range plan? (previous bullet indicated that CT had the responsibility to fund and prepare PIDs for the highest priority projects, so I don't quite understand this
152   recommendation).
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ                  X

      Recommendation 21 - a cost-estimating database would not be an easy thing to create as stated on page 22. It would take 2 years at least as the department does not have the data in an easy to use form.




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                 Page 12 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
      "The project sponsors will have the flexibly to negotiate cost sharing terms with Caltrans districts for any additional work." We do not agree with this recommendation for same reason stated in the previous comment.
153   Santa Clara County and perhaps other Self Help Counties are already supporting this cost sharing proposal by funding and even preparing their own PIDs in cases. Does this recommendation mean that the Self Help                   SCVTA
      Counties will have to pay for Caltrans staff time to review the PIDs as well? This recommendation needs more attention.
      "Cost sharing and reimbursement policy may also create an environment where regional and local agencies have less incentive to invest their dollars on the state highway system. .." These comments are in conflict with
154   earlier comments about Caltrans shouldering the burden. I don’t buy this argument. In many cases agencies must invest dollars on the State system because that is what was included in Measures approved by voters.                 SCVTA


155   Document is silent on oversight reimbursement. This should be address along with QA, QC, and IQA definitions should reimbursement of oversight be required by the legislator                                                        District
      "• Support cost sharing and reimbursement whereby regional and local agencies would reimburse Caltrans" What about regional/local agencies paying the cost for QA/QC on consultant prepared PIDs for projects on the
156   SHS?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ

      Streamlined or optimized, yes, reduced, no. Using this term seems risky. The engineer of responsible charge needs to evaluate the project in question and determine using his or her judgement, what aspects of the report do
157   not apply and can be skipped. It is also the responsibility of the support units to the "design squad" to work smart in using their judgement to decide what level of detail is necessary. The idea here is not to skip work for      HQ
      the sake of being cheap but to do the level of detail appropriate for the type of PID and type and complexity of project being done.
      Page 18. Last Parag. "Requiring the all STIP and other non-SHOPP related PIDs to be funded by regional agencies in essence turns control of the major improvements on the system solely to the regional agencies."
      This is only partially true, Caltrans has to accept the improvement since we own the SHS so we should have leverage there assuming we don’t back down politically from a project trying to be forced on the State for which
158   the State does not agree with.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ


      Page 18. Last Parag. I am having a hard time following this discussion and think that it should be removed. If you want to keep it in the document then I think the paragraph needs to be rewritten to illustrate the point
159   better. Item 1 reads to me like the author is saying that the only reason the locals talk to Caltrans is because we do work for free for them. And item 2 is on a different topic altogether that is more along the line of           HQ
      streamlining instead of cost sharing.
      Page 19. First Parag.
      Needs to be rewritten. Locals need to invest on the state highway to be economically viable and continue to grow. This reads like a lot of overreaction to me.
160   I do understand the point of shifting saying 100 PYs of work on the locals as being unfunded to date on their part and may be difficult to fund due to economic times. So may want to rewrite the paragraph to make that              HQ
      specific point and tone down the rest.

      "In addition to the lack of resources to fund PIDs, most regions lack staff expertise to prepare PIDs, especially if preliminary engineering work is included" So they consult out the work which costs them even more money
161   than for Caltrans to do it. Consulting out work at a higher cost already happens though so this argument seems invalid so I suggest it be deleted.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ

162   What about the ideas of joint funded PIDs where Caltrans pay part and the locals pay for part of the PID development as a way to sell this as partnering?                                                                             HQ

163   Page 19. Recomm 15. "PID document with reduced scope of work" Reimbursement should not be contingent upon being allowed to skip doing required work until PA&ED.                                                                      HQ

                                                                                                          PID Scope & Variance                                                                                                           Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      First, I fully agree that any document whether a PID or not should be produced with the minimum content and effort that achieves the functions of the document. A also agree that Caltrans Project Delivery should be less
      concerned with the cost and schedule of a project where the Department is not committing to the delivery of the project with Department staff. Other stakeholders such as the Division of Programming and CTC may still
164   have concerns with quality of the scope and cost development at the time of programming. The scope of the project is of greater importance since it ultimately determines the impacts and benefits to the SHS.                        HQ
      The document references streamlining of PIDs, but goes much further.

      (Continued)The modifications proposed under streamlining propose fundamental changes the two basic functions of the PID. The first function as described in CTC resolution dated December 8, 1999 states “They (PSRs
      and project study report equivalents) must provide a sound basis for commitment of future state funding and project delivery.” The PIDs has a second function of obtaining concurrence on the scope and obtaining
165   Caltrans approval for a project on the SHS. The modified PID concept proposed in the DRAFT PID Strategic Plan and Streamlining document may reduce the time and cost of some PIDs but it will have several                            HQ
      consequences that need further discussion. - Terry Abbott

      Page 20, PID and Scope Variations - second paragraph - What I've seen is that, more often than not, local agencies or their consultants want to do more detail than is needed for a PSR(PDS) because they want an accurate
166   construction cost and or a more firm commitment from CT on the scope of the work which we would approve (they don't like the range of costs,provided by the PDS).                                                                   District


      • Page 2, third bullet - The requirement that the PID provide the "minimum necessary to program the next phase" is important. It is a departure from the past. In the past, the PID often became a mini-PA&ED, trying to
      design all alternatives and make an alternative selection. The new requirement means that the PID should have a good estimate of the PA&ED (0-Phase) cost if the project is a ND or EIR and cost through RTL (1-Phase)
167   for CEs. Construction costs should be given as ranges (e.g., $10 M to $20 M). The State of Washington has adopted the use of construction cost ranges and received enormous legislative and local support once people               District
      grasped the idea. When they considered the facts, legislators and other elected officials realized that single-point estimates are almost always exceeded. Ranges increased the DOT's credibility. It took some marketing, but
      it has become a great success.




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                Page 13 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
      Page 14. Recom. 5.
      What's a reduced scope of work? It sounds like you want to reduce the scope of work and cost on each PID. This does not make sense.
      Page 20. 1st Para.
168   It can if the project is simple. Most local jobs are not simple. Otherwise they would be a permit job.                                                                                                                            District   X
      Recom. 17
      If we take out studies then we need to keep risk agreement. This is not labor intensive.

      Clarification needed on recommendations page 20 - Is the programming of the capital cost suggested by ballpark cost estimate? May be it is more safe to fund the support cost for the next phase only.
      Recommendations, page 20 - Defer the detailed engineering work such as: traffic and multi-modal studies, geotechnical studies, formal risk assessments, stormwater data reports, In some Districts like D-7, this task is
169   mandated and should be part of the PID.floodplain mapping, value engineering, and context sensitive design to subsequent stages of project development.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        District       X

      Recommendations:
      Page 21 - Update the Caltrans PDPM to discuss the objectives and philosophy of the PID. The guidance should call for the minimum level of detail necessary to gain an understanding of the intended project. It should
170   include the project’s general cost define the general cost, and time line. Update the PDPM to discuss the PID funding purposes. Currently, all the PIDs except the PSR-PDS recommend funding the capital cost. How are            District       X
      you planning to fund the capital cost with ballpark cost estimate as it is suggested in this strategic plan?
      Page 19. PID Scope and Variations. The document makes some good observations on the need to clarify the PDPM Manual and that should be one of the recommendations; And at the end of the first paragraph one of
171   the reasons listed for a less detailed PID is “…projects change too much during project development,”. Actually this statement supports the argument for detailed PIDS and the continued efforts for Change Control that          District       X
      the department has been making.
      I don’t understand the objective of Recommendation #5. If the intent is a certain level of transparency, maybe there is some value. I am not seeing any relationship between this recommendation and “Risk Management /
172   Risk Process’ pursuant to discussion on pages 12 and 13. The objective of Recommendation #5 and the value and expectation of CTC concurrence should be better documented.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        District       X

      Page 20 - The locals should use the STIP programming model of funding subsequent project development requirements in phases. By following a phased approach of project delivery for PA/ED milestone, PSE
      milestone, and Construction milestone the stakeholders can make informed decisions at each major milestone of the project and perform only the required studies and engineering analysis that is required to program the
      next phase of the project development phase; Currently locally funded projects are required to produce a Project Study Report (PSR), for all projects not funded through the STIP. If the locals would prefer to use the
173   PSR/PDS format a formal request must be made to the local District Director for approval. Most local agencies do not request this reduced PID document and are required then to complete the full PSR PID to allow for            District       X
      programming through construction phase of the proposed project. The PSR/PDS allows for the conceptual HDM design approval of the proposed project; And add recommendation...for local sales tax measure and local
      development PIDs. The use of the PSR/PDS format should be allowed at the choice of the local agency. The PSR/PDS used instead of the more detailed PSR will reduce the requirements of the more engineering and
      environmental support studies. The PSR/PDS will also gain the conceptual HDM design approval of the proposed project.
      Page 20. 1st Para.
      "and Caltrans staff that review PIDs tend to hold each PID to the highest standard from prior PIDs, not the minimum standard necessary to estimate scope, schedule, and cost." Though this requirement may appear to vary
      from District to District Caltrans PDPM guidance is consistent throughout the State. D-12 does not agree. This may be a district or staff specific issue.
      2nd Para.
174    Currently locally funded projects are required to produce a Project Study Report (PSR), for all projects not funded through the STIP. If the locals would prefer to use the PSR/PDS format, a formal request must be made        District
      to Caltrans District Director for approval. Most local agencies do not request this reduced PID document and are required then to complete the full PSR PID to allow for programming through construction phase of the
      proposed project.
      new recomm.. The use of the PSR/PDS format should be allowed at the choice of the local agency. The locals should use the STIP programming model of funding subsequent project development requirements in phases.


      "Defer the detailed engineering work such as: traffic and multi-modal studies, geotechnical studies, formal risk assessments, " If one of the goals is to shorten the process, then critical path tasks such as surveys should
175   be started in the PID phase. The does not mean the completion of the PID should be delayed until the work is completed, but it does mean we will be doing detailed work in the PID phase and if the information is timely,        District
      it may help in the PID phase.
      "Any additional work, such as , stormwater reports, value engineering, and risk assessments should clearly be designated as optional, to be deferred until the preliminary " Traffic studies are principle in defining purpose
176   and need and developing a proposed project alternative without traffic studies it is impossible to determine need
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        District

      Page 20. 2nd Parag.
177   "projects change too much during project development." Wouldn’t this be because of a poorly defined purpose and need? And doesn’t PM procedures specifically cover scope creep? Perhaps those principals need to be                 HQ
      revisited and brought back into the forefront.
      Page 20. 2nd Parag.
178   "thus PIDs are highly inefficient" Is it that the PID process is inefficient or that application of the PID process needs improving?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          HQ

      Page 20. 3rd Parag.
      "The practice of front-loading engineering studies that are going to have to be done anyway, from the project development budget into the PID/planning budget is also attractive." Is there proof of this? This was not the
179   case in District 3. If you do more detail in the PID stage for a particular deliverable, you should be able to spend less resources on that deliverable in the PA&ED because you are doing an update instead of the work in its
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          HQ

      entirety but these decisions of timing should be made on a case by case basis for what is necessary to produce a quality PID for the specific project being worked on.



      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                Page 14 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
      "PID effort must be simplified and streamlined and engineering studies remanded back to the project development phase" And how do you simplify the document and not sacrifice quality? I think the idea here that is
180   trying to be expressed is the idea of working smarter. Know which studies are critical to be done up front or at all and do those. That idea needs to be explained here. May wish to rewrite to get away from the “he said, she       HQ
      said” style that is presented here. Seems juvenile in a way, just present the facts and move on.
      Page 20. Recomm 16.
181   "The level of detail should be the minimum necessary to ensure a viable project for programming into the next phase" No, it needs to be the minimum necessary to provide for a viable project. This means, design                     HQ
      exceptions, constructability, no fatal flaws, etc.
182   Recomm 17. This is fundamentally wrong. Again, work smarter instead of skipping work altogether. This needs to be rewritten or removed.                                                                                               HQ
      Page 20. Recommendations 16 and 17. These recommendations are where we disagree with the direction of this document. .See our earlier discussion regarding “ballpark”, “programming into the next phase”, and
183   deferring detailed engineering work. As stated above these recommendations are in direct opposition to the department’s policy on Change Management and will erode confidence in the department and the progress made               District                                 X
      in developing dependable PID’s for programming.
      Page 20, Recommendation 17 – Traffic and multi-modal studies are a requirement on all projects that are capacity-increasing or which modify access control. This forms a strong argument for separating this class of
184   projects from other PIDs. It is not possible to defer SWDRs for the SFRWQCB. This is a requirement of every annual report of District 4.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X

      I don’t understand the objective of Recommendation #16 (reimburse Caltrans for standard PID), seems to Conflict with Recommendation #15 (Caltrans carries responsibility to fund and prepare PIDs). Please clarify.
185                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       District                                 X

                                                                                                   Update the PDPM Guidance for PIDs                                                                                                     Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      Update the PDPM Guidance for PIDs
      • Page 21, Recommendation 19 – It is not possible to defer traffic studies for capacity-increasing projects. The Department cannot delegate it’s authority on capacity increasing projects. These studies need to be
186   performed if only to designate what the cost/benefit ratios will be 20 years post-construction. For non-capacity increasing projects (aux lanes, ramp widening, TOS, etc.) studies can be deferred.                                 District                                 X
      • Page 21, Add Recommendation - Guidelines for attachments for each PID type (e.g., PSR, PSSR, PSR(PDS) need to be included in PDPM.

      Page 21. Last Parag.
187   We need to be careful. If we make it optional, the local agencies will almost always not iclude those studies. CT will have an agreement if these items need to be included.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X

      Page 21. Reword recommendation 19 to recommend that the need for detailed engineering work such as: traffic and multi-modal studies, geotechnical studies, formal risk assessments, stormwater data reports, floodplain
188   mapping, value engineering, and context sensitive design be evaluated to determine how it relates to the project under consideration and defer those items that are not essential to the development of a reasonable range of       District                                 X
      alternatives and their scope, schedule and cost.
      Page 21 - PDPM Guidance - The "as accurate as possible" is for PSR type document since the document is used to fund the project through construction. In a PSR/PDS type documents an "order of magnitude estimate" is
      used since the document is being used to program only PA/ED phase of the project; It would be an advantage to all stakeholders to find and define with flexibility the type of the project estimate required in the PID. If
      must be determined what the proposed project is programming, PA/ED or if the project is to fund all phases of the project development process and construction. Local agencies may have a need for a more accurate
189   project estimate due to the need for long-term budget planning or if the locals are working with local developers. Recently with the passage of the State constitutional amendment 1B transportation projects were funded           District                          X
      with completed PIDs through the Transportation Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF) program. Some of these projects were funded through construction only with PID level PSR/PDS cost estimates.

      (Continued)The programmed projects are not allowed additional funding through the TCIF bond program and if costs exceed the allocated funding, the region is responsible for the additional funding. Proponents of
      "order of magnitude estimate" may not provide adequate construction cost estimates to determine and make informed programming decisions. Order of Magnitude should not be used in all cases depending on the phase of
      project development being requested for programming; estimate is excessive at the PID stage, and the "order of magnitude” estimate does not provide enough detail to inform programming decisions.
190                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       District                          X



      (Continued) Page 21. Recommendations; 27. Guidelines included in the PDPM regarding the Caltrans Policy regarding “Complete Streets and Context Sensitive Solutions” for inclusion in the PID as a part of the FHWA
      requirements 28. Some areas of the PID resources are better served by using line item percentage estimates in project cost estimate and brief descriptions within the PID to validate those assumptions for the project that the
      items were considered for the next phase of project development. 29. Caltrans should develop a training program staff for quality assurance and checklists including metrics to assist externals agencies and consultants of
      the departments’ expectations of PID content and quality.

      Update the PDPM Guidelines for PIDs (Page 21) - Add to the end of the first paragraph: Include transit alternative(s) and transit/multimodal elements in PID or explanations as to why they are not viable; And Add
191   requirements to the PDPM that ensure PDT teams assess how to address complete streets.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ                                     X

      Page 15 - States that the PID phase should involve the PDT and the "eventual Project Manager". Comment: "eventual" implies that there is no PM assigned at the PID phase. This is not the case.
192                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         HQ                              X

      Page 21 . Update the PDPM Guideline "help strategize fitting a project into a competing group of projects" It also needs to be the minimum necessary to provide for a viable project. This means, design exceptions,
193   constructability, no fatal flaws, etc
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ

      Page 21.2nd Paragraph. "We need to identify and use a means of estimation that is somewhere between these two types. " Reword this section to say that the PID needs to have enough detail for the responsible engineer
194   to make a cost estimate that is in line with the contingency associated with the type of PID document being produced.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ



      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                Page 15 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                 PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                             January 14, 2010
195   Page 21, 4th Parag. This inference is wrong. I recommend deleting the sentence. Projects are too varied and complicated to make this kind of gross generalization.                                                                 HQ

                                                                                          Different Guidelines for SHOPP PIDs and STIP PIDs                                                                                           Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      Page 22 - Different guidelines for SHOPP and STIP - The PID is a transition document to begin the projects identified in the various long and short term plans to program into the project development process and eventual
      implementation into the State highway system. This results in a planning and Engineering document for the various stakeholders for the project delivery process. The PDPM specifies at least ten different kinds of PIDs,
      most of them for specific kinds of SHOPP projects, and provides some different guidance for SHOPP PIDs. SHOPP projects are different. Regions do not fund them. Caltrans develops all of them in-house, and should
      have more discretion over what it wants and needs to know for a SHOPP programming decision. Many SHOPP projects are exempt environmentally, and allow for project approval as part of the document to allow the
196   project to move directly to the design phase. Often the scope and priority of a SHOPP project relies to some extent on engineering studies and analysis required to determine scope, schedule and estimate and no additional     District                                 X
      value is added by performing a separate project PA/ED phase.



      (Continued)Those types of projects should be appropriately being done during the PID phase. Caltrans also bears tort liability not in a state of good repair. The department should quantify its long-term need to keep track
      of locations in need of preservation, restoration or repair with a PID-quality assessment of what it would take to restore a state of good repair. Caltrans asserts that SHOPP is severely underfunded today, and it becomes
197   easier to back up that assertion and pursue higher levels of funding if Caltrans has a shelf of PIDs for projects that are needed and it would build now - except that funding cannot be found or programming priorities are     District                                 X
      moved to other areas of need within the State highway system. The State transportation improvement plan divides the funding between a formula method into two parts with the regions controlling 75% through the RTIP
      and Caltrans controlling 25% for the ITIP. The PDPM guidelines apply to both elements of the STIP.
      Different Guidelines for SHOPP PIDs and STIP PIDs. 2nd Paragraph. "Many SHOPP projects are exempt environmentally, and the line between PID and project development becomes blurry." It is clearly defined in the
198   PDPM.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         HQ

199   There needs to be more thought about streamlining SHOPP PIDs and Non-SHOPP PIDs that are expected to be used for more than programming PA&ED.                                                                                    District                                 X
      Suggest identifying specific streamlining opportunities for non-SHOPP PIDs where programming is expected to be more than the PA&ED phase. Simplify and streamline the STIP and SHOPP PID requirements to the
      minimum necessary to guide programming and provide a platform to move projects into the environmental phase, as laid out in more detail below. Work with regional agencies to prepare a variety of PIDs to be ready for
      programming opportunities (Recommendation #23).
200   Ensure that each Caltrans District has an experienced PID expert to guide the work of PID Project Development Teams and regional agencies’ consultants. (Recommendation #3).
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       District                                 X
      Identify barriers and opportunities for programming and funding during PID work, to pinpoint projects where lower cost alternatives or staging may be critical (Recommendation #7).

      (Continued)Document the purpose and need in the PID Charter with concurrence of Caltrans and project sponsor. This provides the necessary framework for developing a clear and concise scope of work
      (Recommendation #9).
      Include external stakeholders on PID Project Development Team (Recommendation #10).
      Hold pre-PID meeting to assess quality of existing data, scope of PID, and proposed responsibilities and cost sharing, and document agreement in writing. (Recommendation #11).
201   At the pre-PID meeting, provide checklists for risk management, geotechnical issues, value analysis, stormwater reporting, and floodplain considerations for the pre-PID meeting, to help assess whether to report or            District                                 X
      investigate significant and likely risks and prescribe any specific studies for the PID. (Recommendation #12).
      Hold pre-PEAR meeting to review PEAR checklist, focus environmental work, improve communications, define expectations, and estimate environmental work schedule. (Recommendation #13).

      (Continued) Estimate resources and cost to prepare each PID up front, and follow with a cooperative agreement before work starts if cost sharing is to be used. (Recommendation #14).
      Update the Caltrans PDPM to discuss the objectives and philosophy of the PID. The guidance should call for the minimum level of detail necessary to gain an understanding of the intended project. It should include the
      project’s general cost, and time line (Recommendation #19).
202   Issue management policy directive(s) to drive interim implementation of PID Strategic Plan and streamlining measures. (Recommendation #25).                                                                                      District                                 X
      Ask CTC to revise its PSR Guidelines to reflect this PID Strategic Plan and streamlining measures. (Recommendation #26).
      Revise Project Development Procedures Manual to incorporate PID Strategic Plan and streamlining recommendations. Include a short discussion of PID philosophy, objectives, and policy. (Recommendation #27).


                                                                                                             Cost Estimating                                                                                                          Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      Caltrans should consult with each regional agency to assemble that region’s share of the PID inventory. Suggesting that $5M to $20M is a good range does not account for all funding sources and in many cases grossly
      under represents the need and capacity to fund projects. I would suggest we move away from defining a dollar value.
      Caltrans and CTC have set (can you define this?): {cost control objectives } for programming and for project managers, and presently the baseline for cost control is the programmed amount which stems from the cost
      estimate in the PID. I disagree with this first sentence. A Project Manager is tasked with managing the cost, scope and schedule defined in the PID once a work plan is created and PA&ED begins. I do not understand the
203   idea or cost control and baseline when the PID does not include and is not resourced to develop a work plan prior to starting PID studies.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       District                                 X

      PID overlooked an entire cost component, such as traffic handling, drainage, or soundwalls. A reasonably accurate cost estimate is needed to properly define COG programming capacity and project priorities; thus, we
      need a good cost estimate to come out of the PID.



      California Department of Transportation                                                                                               Page 16 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                     PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                                 January 14, 2010
      Page 23 - Add one recommendation - Increase the use of lump sum items in the PID estimate using a percentage of the project construction major elements to identify items of work for the project but not perform in-depth
204   engineering analysis and studies for these elements. Caltrans office of Office Engineer compiles data about unit costs and various similar contract elements can be summarized to provide a range of percentage of contract         District                                 X
      to cover various elements of work.
205   "Shift the baseline for construction cost control from PID cost estimates to PA&ED phase ." Best idea of this effort.                                                                                                               District
      "Create a PID cost-estimating database . Use bell-shaped curves to inform PID unit cost estimating by PID Project Development Teams" Caltrans already has a cost database available on the intranet. Cost estimating
      does not consume a lot of resources and it is sensitive to local conditions such as number and distances to gravel pits so this idea of bell-shaped curves is not useful. What does consume resources is calculating quantities,
206   and that is where we can save significant money. In the early 90’s Caltrans developed a planning level cost estimating guide for various quantities based on the quantities of some core quantities such as roadway
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District

      excavation, e.g. drainage costs are 40% of the roadway excavation/borrow costs for an interchange reconstruction project.
207   FYI: Cost estimating dialog has been presented in a lot of places with recommendations regarding down scoping etc.                                                                                                                    HQ
      Cost Estimating. 2nd paragraph. "PIDs need something in between: ballpark cost estimates based on unit costs (such as cost per mile for earthwork or pavement, or cost per square foot for structures)" I disagree, less
      detailed perhaps but the estimate needs to appropriate for the amount of contingency associated with the PID document being completed. This is what I define as appropriate for a planning level estimate for long range
      planning documents.

208   The term unit cost is defined here differently in how it is defined at Caltrans for estimating purposes. Unit costs should be defined as the cost per bid price unit (i.e. $ per Ton, $ per Cubic Yard, $ per Each, etc.) this        HQ
      description is based more on cost norms or something.

      This needs to be rewritten.


      "Caltrans’ Office Engineer already collects a lot of data about unit costs, which it uses to calculate the Construction Cost Index and examine contractor’s bids; it could relatively easily repackage those data into ranges of
209   unit costs for use in PID cost estimating." We already have a cost database with unit costs in it that is used to come up with the engineer’s estimate and we adjust based on the CCI as detailed in the existing engineer’s          HQ
      estimate certification process policy memo.
      Recommendation "21. Create a PID cost-estimating database. Use bell-shaped curves to inform PID unit cost estimating by PID Project Development Teams"
       We already have a unit cost estimating database that is used to develop cost estimates based on material quantities needed for a project. We need to educate staff on the level of detail needed for cost items based on
      project scope, location, etc. and the contingency in the type of document being produced.

210   This is all about using sound engineering judgement.                                                                                                                                                                                  HQ


      Any grosser estimation would be useful only for feasibility studies, long range planning documents or in certain cases, where risk is low, capital estimates for PSR-PDS documents only.

      A rough cost estimate can be updated easily if the vision is to capture cost increase and not update insignificant itemes.
211   Recom 21. What are you saying? Clarify!
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                                 X

                                                                                                  Streamling PIDs vs. Preparing Fewer PIDs                                                                                               Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      Page 23 - 4th paragraph - Rewrite of the Federal Transportation Bill will present additional opportunities to move projects through all phases of the project development process. On Sunday December 13, 2009 the Senate
      passed a $41 billion dollar appropriation bill for Transportation. This appropriation exceed by $400 million the funds requested by the President. Congress will be working over the next year on a new multi year Federal
      Transportation Bill and may significantly exceed the last appropriation. It is important to have some projects that are ready to forward from PID phase and be in the capital program and various project development phases
212   so as to be shelf-ready to build; Page 28 add one more recommendation. Provide focus training for Caltrans staff, self help counties and consultants local agencies for implementation of new polices and directives as             District                                 X
      implemented for the development of PIDs.


      Streamlining PIDs vs. Preparing Fewer PIDs and Recommendation #22 (page 24).
      This recommendation should be modified to incorporate clauses from recommendation #4.
213   22. Simplify and streamline PID requirements to the minimum necessary to guide programming, provide information to move a project into the environmental phase, avoid duplication of work that will be reconsidered                 SBCAG                            X
      during later project phases, and make PIDs easier to update, as described in more detail elsewhere in this report.

      "Simplify and streamlining the STIP PID requirements to the minimum necessary to guide programming, obtain conceptual geometric design approval, and provide a platform to move projects into the project
214   report/environmental document phase…" Is this recommendation detailed enough for readers to understand what “simplify and streamline” means? It might be helpful to provides examples of steps of simplifying and                   District
      streamlining the current PID requirements.




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                   Page 17 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                   PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                               January 14, 2010
      "Use existing information (as much as possible) to make reasonable “ballpark” " There are two things going on here that I want to comment on. My gut reaction is to break the sentence into two different topics and rewrite
      because… 1) “Ballpark” estimates are already allowed in the case of the PSR-PDS. You only need a detailed estimate for support resources for PA&ED and PS&E. (Or PA&ED only if you don’t plan to program PS&E
215   until after completion of the Project Report). For a “regular” PSR or PSSR, I still contend that you need more than what is later described as the “ballpark” estimate or you need to make the contingency greater than 20-          HQ
      25% that is allowed for in the engineer’s estimate. It should already be standard practice that all engineers starting a new PID should utilize materials such as as-builts, aerial photography, existing surveys as a starting
      point for work on creation of a PID.
      Streamling PIDs vs. Preparing Fewer PIDs. 3rd Paragraph
      "Regions assert that the STIP PIDs include excessive requirements, providing far too much detail for programming, which is their main purpose" If this is the case, why do we talk about scope creep being an issue during
216   project development?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ

      The purpose of the PID is to detail the cost, scope and schedule for the project
      Streamling PIDs vs. Preparing Fewer PIDs. 4th Paragraph
217   "Ballpark estimates that are carefully thought out are more important than detailed engineering estimates that may well change during environmental and preliminary engineering phases." Not if project is scoped properly           HQ
      and purpose and need is sound.
      Streamling PIDs vs. Preparing Fewer PIDs. 4th Paragraph
      It is not an us vs them fight between planning and project development, it is about producing a quality document with the correct amount of detail.

      If we push all the studies out to PA&ED it will make project delivery cost even more than it should because you will be considering alternatives at a higher level of detail in PA&ED than during PID development that end
218   up not being viable.                                                                                                                                                                                                                 HQ

      You need to reevaluate the argument. You need to work smart and use significant engineering judgement to figure out the level of work necessary to produce a quality PID for the specific project being undertaken.



      Streamlining PIDs vs. Preparing Fewer PIDs. 5th Paragraph
219   "Mindful of the need to use PID resources efficiently and not wastefully, …" It's about quality too. We don't want to sacrifice quality for quantity. Prop 1B, I believe, does not allow cost increases and scope changes, the       HQ
      same with tax measures. Quality can’t be ignored.
      Recommendation 22.This is not in line with the topic for this section on streamlining vs. preparing fewer PIDs. Change to:
       Simplify and streamline the STIP PID requirements to all responsible engineer to develop PIDs in a responsible manner with a level of detail appropriate to the amount of accepted risk and the minimum necessary to
220   ensure a viable project and to guide programming so that more PIDs can be produced than would be otherwise possible thus maximizing the potential to utilize all funding opportunities in the future. and provide a
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ

      platform to move projects into the environmental phase, as laid out in more detail below.
      "That approach helps in the near term but can only go so far, because of institutional culture, individual habits, and the tendency to creep back toward excessive thoroughness each time a PID does not turn out well " No,
221   policy doesn’t expire.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ

      Streamlining PIDs vs. Preparing Fewer PIDs
      Page 23. 3rd Para
      Viability of projects on the SHELF was also mention in the report and called out specifically
      Page 24. 1st Parag.. The more engineering work that is done during the PID phase, where it is done in a blanket planning budget, the less we know about the true cost of project development
222   This is not accurate. We have EAs for every PID we are working on and can track the cost of each one. The only difference from COS is we do not have as much detail on the actual work item in our WBS for K phase.                District                          X
      Updating WBS for K phase expenditures should be considered as a recommendation
      Page 24. 2nd Parag.. "political reasons"
      PID selection criteria stated prior in this document could preclude PIDs for political reasons


                                                                                             State Highway Operation and Protection Program                                                                                             Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      State Highway Operation and Protection Program. Page 24
223   Why is this section in here? No recommendations or discussion of PIDs.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ

      State Highway Operation and Protection Program. 5th Paragraph
224   Maybe use this elsewhere to defend the need for shelf.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           HQ

                                                                                                              Funding Levels                                                                                                            Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      Page 25 & 26 - In an environment of erratic funding levels, compounded by a plethora of funding source’s each with unique rules and restrictions that limit discretion for certain policy or political aims regardless of real
      needs it is little wonder the logical outcome is a series of boom and bust cycles and misplaced expectations. The loss or delay of one funding source will increase cost and can delay or kill a programmed project. In this
225   environment planning large transportation projects, projects that typically take three to seven years to plan and design, often ends up becoming out of sync with funding. Recognizing that things aren’t likely to improve,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         District                         X

      the challenge is to plan a appropriate shelf of PID’s of appropriate project characteristics to meet the next boom cycle.

      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                Page 18 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
      (Continued)And it behooves us to do shorten our project development process and be prepared to take advantage of additional funding. This means: Shortening the time from the project development schedule from start
      of a PID to awarding of the project. Ensuring the project development schedule is not unduly increased because of PID development, i.e additional time to devlop a PID could negatively affect the value to the project or
226   lead to the project’s demise. Considering working on critical path activities in the PID phase in order to shorten the project development schedule and increase the chances of successful completion of a project.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                         X


      Page 13. On the same subject as the comment above, the discussion in the second paragraph regarding the compilation of PID’s by county needs to be revised to account for regional coordination on projects.
227                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       District                                 X

228   RE: Funding Table -- Providing definitions for acronyms would be helpful.                                                                                                                                                           SCVTA

229   "each phase of PID development" Do you mean project development? PA&ED, PS&E, R/W and CON. I am not sure what phases you mean here.                                                                                                   HQ
      Funding Levels. Page 25
230   This whole section appears to be background information. What purpose is it supposed to serve in PID streamlining and shelf management?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ

      Funding Level Section. The STIP:
231   2nd Parag. "Other funding sources and program ..." This is good and concise, might use it elsewhere.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ

                                                                                                          Performance Measures                                                                                                           Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management

      Page 28. In Recommendation 23, the first performance measure might be more effective if it was average hours spent in PID preparation, rather than average time from beginning to end. If we assign enough people to it,
232   we can get a PID done quickly, but that isn’t streamlining.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District                         X

      Page 28 - Recommendation 23 - Final accounting of support dollars expended on the production of individual charges to PIDs document; Project cost estimate at the PID compared to at PA&ED/Project Report, as a
233   measure of the effectiveness of ballparkplanning level cost estimates for programming decisions if a PSR document is completed. If the PSR/PDS is the programming document a comparison of the project work plan                    District                                 X
      contained in the PID should be compared against the final PA/ED expenditures.
      Recom 23
234   "• Estimated time line for environmental studies (to PA&ED) in PIDs compared to actual time lines to complete the environmental phase, as a measure of the effectiveness of schedule estimating". What does this mean                 HQ
      exactly?
      "• Percentage of PIDs in each county that become programmed projects within one, three, and five years of PID completion, as a measure of the number of PIDs compared against a county’s commitment to implement
235   them" Normalized by dollar amount or some such thing.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ

      "• Number of PIDs that become programmed projects within one, three, and five years within each category of projects, as a measure of whether the right mixture of PIDs is being prepared" Need to determine non-SHOPP
236   categories then
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ


                                                                                                     Implementation and Streamlining                                                                                                     Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      1) Recommendation: streamline the PID process based upon risk analysis and develop minimum level of detail needed to program the next phase.
      Comment: While this sounds good, we (the Department) generally do a poor job of realistically assessing the level of risk, particularly at the early (PID) stages, since the scope generally isn't well developed. With District
      directors having to commit to a cost/scope/schedule for delivery, based on PID (programming) data I fear that our project delivery will suffer if we "dumb-down" the PIDs too much. Remember what our delivery record
237   was back in the 1980's-early 1990's before we increased the level of detail required for programming.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ                                                  X




      Page 28, Recommendation 23 suggests that average time to complete a PID and estimated timeline for completing PA&ED vs actual be used as PID performance measures. I would argue that each project is unique so
      there's no good baseline for measuring time. These would not be good performance measures as the time line is a function of a project's complexity, responsiveness of the staff preparing and reviewing the PID and
      associated technical studies, ability of CT and local agency staff to agree on a project scope, etc. as well as the availability of resources (K-phase) to work on the PID. Recommendation 23 also suggests that the percentage
      of PIDs programmed (in a given county) within 1, 3 & 5 years vs a county's commitment to implement, and the number of PIDs programmed within each category of projects, be used as additional PID performance
238   measures. I would argue that these are bad performance measures since unforeseen $ becoming available for congestion relief, pavement preservation, ADA, etc. types of projects would have a huge impact on the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HQ                             X

      numbers of projects which get programmed within any given category and or county.


      Reduce cost of PID at PID stage could increase delays at PA&ED and PS&E.
239   Page 28. Implementation and Streamlining                                                                                                                                                                                            District                         X
      We need to look at what the cost saving is to the program for "less than" thorough PIDs VS "thorough" PIDs. Are we saving pennies that will cost us millions later on in future Phases.




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                Page 19 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                    PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                                January 14, 2010
      • Seek concurrence from the California Transportation Commission (CTC) on the annual PID Strategic Plan, and a reduced scope of work and associated cost estimates. The project sponsor must accept ownership;
      ramifications of risk associated with each project and document these efforts. (See pages 13-14) Sometimes, greater detail in the PID is the most cost effective means of addressing a project. Often, the outcome of a
      PID is the no project or no-build alternative. In some cases, the PID costs are much greater than the COG funding capacity and the PID is held for 5 and 10 years as funding is reprioritized. Reducing the scope of PID
240   studies can have exceptionally negative consequences that show up later in PA&ED where the cost to study the project is much greater. If a project is presumed to be fundable but later determined to be too costly during           District                         X
      PA&ED, we will spend much more money in PA&ED when detailed analysis is occurring across many disciplines. As such, I am concerned with the general concept that reducing studies is uniformly a good decision and
      that the risk created can be transferred to the project sponsor. We should all be concerned about partnership and risk transfer as it relates to under scoping PID studies.


      We are concerned that the approach recommended in the Strategic Plan – reducing the level of effort, as characterized by the use of the term “ballpark” – takes us back to a time when the Department did just that type of
      document. They were called “environmental only”, or “project development support”, and they led to a situation where we had large numbers of projects that were through the environmental process, but did not have
241   capital dollars identified. Some of the lessons we should have learned from that experience are: Accurate project scope early in the process is critical; No matter what disclaimers you attach to an estimate, you will be          District                                 X
      penalized for exceeding it; And you need those technical studies that are necessary and sufficient to develop a defensible scope, schedule and cost estimate.


      The document has very good suggestions for improving the PID development process, but seems to be lacking for specific streamlining opportunities for SHOPP PIDs and non-SHOPP PIDs where programming would be
      for the entire project.
      I. Where anticipated programming will be for more than the PA&ED phase, streamline PID requirements, based upon risk analysis and concurrence of project sponsor. Use existing information (as much as possible) to
242   make reasonable ballpark estimates of cost, scope, and schedule for the PID. (Recommendation #17).                                                                                                                                   District                                 X
      Are there additional streamline suggestions for full PIDs? It is unreasonable to expect that programming of all non-SHOPP projects will be for the PA&ED phase only.
      Team should be encouraged to look at streamlining SHOPP PIDs as well.


                                                                                                                  Conclusion                                                                                                              Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management

243   When will the actual streamlining changes be written then? This is all high level stuff presented so far.                                                                                                                              HQ
      Paragraph 3
244   "PEAR, scope of work, stormwater" PEAR is covered a little with the pre-PEAR meeting discussion, scope of work is only discussed within the context of not doing any and stormwater is not discussed at all.                           HQ


                                                                                                                    Other                                                                                                                 Commenter   LAO   Cost Sharing   Admin   Other   Risk Management
      There needs to be a discussion on the acceptable level of pre-PID work that can be funded under the 40.50 program. On Page 6 "Purpose and Objective of the PID", and Page 10-11, suggest that this section be expanded
      to include the point that the PID (40.50) program includes more than developing the PSR for STIP and SHOPP projects. We need to develop scoping documents that can be used for non-traditional funding sources, like
      grants, as well as engineering feasibility studies to refine broad planning concepts in order to assist in determining technically, financially and/or environmentally feasible alternatives or stages to project proposals (pre-
245   PID). The direction this document is going, along with the recommendations, is leading to simplified or streamlined PSRs; in which case there would be less technical engineering and other data to support decisions about
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           District                                 X
      future investments. This emphasizes the need to do better pre-PID work, thereby increasing the ability to deliver successful PIDs and to better prioritize and select the right projects for future investment.

      We need to be accountable for the projects that are being chosen to work on. Does the 3-year Strategic Plan represent the types of projects we need to be working on? If we’re more selective about which projects to work
246   on, would there be sufficient funds to do Regional work without requiring reimbursement? What’s an acceptable level? Is there a level, beyond which, we should require reimbursement? The issue of reimbursed work                   District                                 X
      should be addressed in the document.
      So what if there is no agreement on Need and Purpose? Why this may seem unlikely, poorly written Need and Purpose statements are the norm and has caused us problems. I find that most people have solutions, but find
247   it difficult to articulate the problem and what the project is suppose to do to solve the problem. Sometimes it’s because a well written Neep and Purpose may not lead to their favored solution.                                    District                                 X

      While it may prudent to set a milestone date for the cooperative agreement to be signed or work will desist, Caltrans should be willing to start work recognizing there could be a significant benefit to Caltrans.
248                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        District              X

       It is important that sponsor articulate the problem (need) and what success looks like (purpose) at the beginning. We should articulate the problem before we spend a lot of time on solutions/concepts. I do think
249   consideration of solutions can facilitate the development of a problem statement, but we do address the Need and Purpose at the beginning.                                                                                           District                                 X

      The revised focus on the next phase requires that a workplan be prepared and loaded into XPM as part of the PID. PIDs should be required to use the programming sheet in project focus, and that programming sheet
250   should be attached to the PID (see http://pfocus/pd/psheet/). Creating a workplan requires that a Project Manager be assigned at the beginning of the PID and continue with the project into the next phase.                         District                                 X




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                 Page 20 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                    PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                                January 14, 2010
      If a requirement for a detailed construction estimate is retained, we should not require PIDs on locally-funded projects. PIDs are required by law for the STIP and they arguably have value for the SHOPP where the CTC
      wants to know how much to program. They delay locally-funded projects, but do not provide a benefit to the local agency. Requiring a PID on locally- funded projects can hurt the Department because it implies
251   Departmental approval of the project. The "build/no build" decision is a part of the environmental process and should be kept in PA&ED. We should bear in mind that there were no PIDs until the late 1980s. PIDs were              District   X
      introduced to get a good cost estimate and address concerns about cost overruns in a 1987 Assembly study. They have morphed into project approval documents, which was not the original intent.

      Strategic Plan workload estimate and prioritization
      • While the Strategic Plan appendices catalog the anticipated projects for the next three fiscal years, it does not make any effort at estimating either the PID oversight or completion workload incumbent with such a catalog.
      The implication is that the Department can address all of the demand for projects in the catalog, however, with the Department's current workload and buget, this may not be feasible.
      Recommendation: Some effort should be made to estimate the workload associated with the catalog and prioritizing projects across regions.
      Refine Resource Allocation among WBS Elements
      • Resource allocation among Planning Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) elements needs to be refined. Currently, cost coding is accomplished within a range of five general 150 work elements.
252   Recommendation:                                                                                                                                                                                                                     District       X
      o A greater number of elements with tangible products (PEAR, SWDR, design exceptions or design checklists, APS, six page cost estimates, etc.) need to be identified at the “five” level in order to effectively track costs
      and expenditures.
      o PID workplans should be evaluated on a semi-annual frequency (January 9 and July 9) consistent with COS workplans.




      Need for Guidelines on District Resource Allocation - The State’s economic emergency necessitates a prioritization of projects among the many competing for resources. Clear guidelines on resource allocation should be
      provided to Districts from DOTP, including workload norms. Without such guidelines performance measurements would be meaningless; And Recommendation: As the Department is responsible for maintenance and
253   operation of the SHS, and this is the top priority for the State Highway Account, a workable proposal would see 66 % of all PID PYs given over to SHOPP project initiation.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District           X


      (Continued)This is consistent with the “fix-it first” policy established by the SF Bay Area’s Metropolitan Transportation Organization (MTC) in their most recent Regional Transportation Plan (RTP 2009). Workload
      norms established for each SHOPP program would allow an upper ceiling of projects to be listed for each FY, along with provided each District/ Region their staffing plans. Just like in STIP allocations, counties would
      be allowed to transfer resources to outer years in any four-year SHOPP cycle, and could also swap resources with counties/MPOs that have resource needs in earlier years of any cycle. For non-SHOPP projects, a sizable
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          District           X
      portion of the remaining 34 % of all PID resources should be distributed by STIP share to each county, perhaps up to 70%, with the remaining 30% of the 34% being held in reserve by the Department for use at its
      discretion. Again, workload norms could be used to establish a benchmark for workplans by project and District, and allow evaluation of District, Department, and MPO efficiencies from year to year.

      Consistency with CMIA priorities
254   • Acceptance of project ownership by sponsors should be consistent with CMIA priorities (e.g., projects within CMIA corridors, projects within TCIF corridors, etc.).                                                               District       X

      Fund Source Training
      • A draft PID contained reference to project funding from the TSM program, which ceased to exist in 1998. On inquiry, I found that PID authors had been copying this statement for 11 years without knowing what it
255   meant.                                                                                                                                                                                                                              District       X
      Recommendation: Authors of PIDs and PID staff should receive training in the likely fund sources.

       The document is wide ranging as it contains a great deal of information and ideas, but the lack of organization makes it difficult to follow. It also tends toward a more conversational rather than professional writing style.
      The Table of Contents and the presentation of the recommendations illustrate this. There are 10 key recommendations (listed as bullets) in the Executive Summary, 26 numbered recommendations throughout the
256   document and 27 recommendations listed in Appendix F. The stream-of-consciousness approach is difficult to reconcile. Appendices: The listing of projects is difficult to absorb, in part because it is not clear how they          District       X
      are organized (which makes it appear they are in random order.) Features of the table are not explained (a legend may help.) Reference to the PEAR should probably be made to “environmental scan” or “environmental
      screening” since all readers will not have a point of reference to the acronym (the definition for which is not easily located in the document.)
      1. Overall - The draft document provides very good background information and facts that provide an accurate context for the PID program and basis for a strategy. Providing the right level of effort in preparation for
      unpredictable future programming cycles is critical. The focus for future programming should be considered in terms of dollar value rather than a number of PIDs. The Strategic Plan should describe the bridge needed
257   between long-range planning and project development. Some of the trouble speaks more to a gap between the long-range planning and PID stages than the PID itself. The Strategic Plan refers often to a “reduced scope”              District       X
      for a PID; the need is to have an “adequately scoped” PID. It is not always clear in the report when “reduced scope” refers to the report (PID) or the project. They are not mutually exclusive.

      Any additional work, such as traffic studies, stormwater reports, value engineering, and risk assessments should clearly be designated as optional, to be deferred until the preliminary engineering/environmental phase,
258   unless the information is essential for scope or cost. This is a Wordsmithing issue, move the “unless the information is essential for scope or cost” to the front of the sentence.                                                 District       X




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                 Page 21 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                 PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                             January 14, 2010
      We are also concerned that the Strategic Plan only discusses PIDs. We feel that the document should also address Major Investment Studies and Feasibility Studies, both of which are funded with advanced planning funds
259   and are an important part of developing effective PIDs. The Planning-Programming-Project Development Spectrum section of the document would be a good place to acknowledge that PID resources are also used for                 District   X
      Feasibility and Major Investment Studies.
      Suggest reducing the number of recommendations and grouping implementation steps. The recommendations listed in the Draft streamlining document are a mix of recommendations for DECISIONS and
260   recommendations for implementation actions. I suggest the recommendations that require policy decisions be clearly identified (should below with Roman Numerals) with the recommendations on how to implement                   District       X
      listed separately (should below as bullets). See below.
      I. Create a three-year Strategic Plan, to be updated annually by Caltrans District staff, December 1, in coordination with Caltrans’ Office of Projects and Plans Coordination and regional agencies (Recommendation #1).
      Review the SHOPP PID inventory as part of update of the 10 Year SHOPP (Recommendation #2).
261   Correlate the number of PIDs developed to likely funding sources. The number of PIDs should not be limited to STIP programming capacity (Recommendation #2).                                                                    District       X
      Maintain separate policy, process, guidance, and controls for SHOPP and STIP PID projects (Recommendation #21).

      General comments:
      Suggest clearly laying out the two,options for funding streamlined, reduced cost PIDs:
      1. CT is responsible for PIDs on SHS, with allowance for local funding of PIDs when CT lacks resources, or a more robust document is desired by the local agency.
      2. CT has responsibility for base level of PIDs for SHOPP and IIP projects, but regions are responsible for on system RIP and other funding resourced projects
       Then the finding between the two, depending on how it all shakes out.
      Suggest some additional discussion of the need for PIDs to provide CT future right of way preservation and system improvements eliminating from developer activities. These PIDs do not necessarily result in a
262   "programmed" project, but are critical to planning for future needs and a phased approach to an implementation plan. This is an important point that may not be clear in the programming based world.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      District       X

      Should include some discussion of the need for prePID work with the regions in the form of Major Investment Studies, Corridor Studies, Feasibility Studies, General Plan Updates, etc. This is another point of CT
      contribution to regional planning efforts that is funded from CT Planning resources.




263   It would also be prudent to put additional contingencies in the estimate with reduced work in the PID phase.                                                                                                                    District
      Overall comment - It is vital that any streamlining of the Project Initiation Document (PID) process includes updates in the Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM) to ensure the changes are incorporated in our
      guidance and that multimodal features and analysis requirements are included at the appropriate project development stage. Since streamlined PIDs will be completed with less detail, it is imperative procedures are set up
264   to ensure transit, bicycle, and pedestrian improvements are not excluded from projects before completing the proper studies. The need for including multimodal analysis is supported by Complete Streets efforts,                 HQ       X
      greenhouse gas reduction legislation, and the precedent set with the lawsuit Caltrans recently lost due to a lack of transit alternatives in the Sacramento 50 Bus-Carpool Lane and Community Enhancements Project.

      Require consideration of a transit alternative for all capacity increasing projects – The PDPM should be updated with a transit alternative section. Either the PID includes a transit alternative or a thorough explanation
      as to why one was not included must be provided. Recent trends point towards the Department considering greater investment in transit to alleviate congestion: Complete Streets legislation (SB 1358) and Deputy
      Directive 64 R1 requires: “Department manuals and guidance outline statutory requirements, planning policy, and project delivery procedures to facilitate multimodal travel, which includes connectivity to public transit
      for bicyclists and pedestrians.“ and District Directors are required to “Ensure projects are planned, designed, constructed, operated, and maintained consistent with project type and funding program to provide for the
265   safety and mobility needs of all users with legal access to a transportation facility (DD 64 R1).”; The Department recently lost a lawsuit on the Sacramento 50 Bus-Carpool Lane and Community Enhancements Project               HQ           X
      because the Department did not consider a transit alternative.



       (Continued) The Department agreed to a settlement with ECOS (Environmental Council of Sacramento) and NAST (Neighbors Advocating Sustainable Transportation) that includes allocating and additional $7.5 million
      to fund expanded light rail service along the corridor; With the passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 32, Senate Bill (SB) 375, and other legislation, there is a need to fund more transit projects to achieve the greenhouse gas
      reduction levels demanded of local and regional agencies. Requiring the consideration of transit alternatives in all projects will assist the local and regional agencies in meeting their goals. Including projects that can
      improve the performance of our highways and reduce greenhouse gas emissions can lead to great partnerships with local agencies; In a letter from the Office of Attorney General Edmund G. Brown to the San Joaquin                HQ           X
      Council of Governments dated May 2, 2007, the California Department of Justice used AB 32 as a basis to criticize the agency’s Regional Transportation Plan as being insufficient to curb an increase in vehicle miles
      traveled (VMT) and decrease the production of greenhouse gases. As with the bullet above, ensuring transit projects and transit improvements are considered in PIDs will assist regional agencies in identifying projects
      that will reduce VMT;

      (Continued) The development of High-Speed Rail (HSR) in California and associated funding opportunities are investments that must be incorporated into the existing transportation system. Linking local transit services
      with the Statewide HSR can improve the performance of the State Highway System and local circulation. Integration must occur during both planning and project development stages, including PIDs; And the
      Department, regional agencies, and local cities and counties should maximize the potential benefits of the Transit-Oriented Development movement by considering multimodal improvements that improve the mobility                 HQ           X
      options of residents.




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                               Page 22 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning
                                                                                                                  PID Strategic Plan Comments for Draft 2
                                                                                                                              January 14, 2010
      Require consideration of transit elements for each project – A listing of potential transit improvements should be added in the PID template and the PID Chapter in the PDPM. Each transit improvement on the list must
      either be an element of a project alternative or an explanation provided justifying the reasons against inclusion. This can be expanded to bicycle and pedestrian elements to fully meet Complete Street requirements. The
266   bullets above in the previous section also provide support for this recommendation.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       HQ       X


      Performance Measures (Page 21) - Under the Recommendations section add a new bullet: Number of PIDs that address complete streets, improve multimodal transportation, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
267                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    HQ       X

      1. The document doesn’t include one of the items identified in the budget language that states the department will assemble a team to “identify options to share costs, lower costs, streamline procedures and reduce delays
268   with project initiation documents”. There isn’t a portion of the document that clearly identifies the options that were identified whether they were viable or not.                                                              HQ   X

      2. The document uses terms such as significant and critical that are difficult to distinguish. Page 6 states that significant uncertainties need not be resolved critical ones should be addressed. Although some examples are
269   given there will be confusion at the staff level to distinguish between the two terms.                                                                                                                                           HQ       X

      4. On the same subject of not using a “one size fits all” approach one of the key recommendations is to “develop an agreed upon standardized PID document with a reduced scope of work”. This will create confusion to
270   those implementing this recommendation.                                                                                                                                                                                          HQ       X

      5. The document describes the PID as taking a planning project “..to a real individual project with sight-specific scope and adjusted costs that takes into account those site conditions, well defined for programming
271   purpose.” Other sections refer to these same activities a developing “ball park” estimates.                                                                                                                                      HQ       X

      Overall the document doesn't recognize the Department's approval of a scope. The report only addresses the PID as a programming document..
272   The words significant and critical, and others, are used as if they mean something different from one another, e.g. page 6, 8, & 21.                                                                                             HQ       X

      In District 3 we use the risk management plan on all STIP projects that I can remember. It is typically not used on the SHOPP side. At the PID stage, we are setting the cost and schedule though so I don’t know if I agree
273   with this statement. This would make more sense post-programming to me.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       HQ

      "Often the scope and priority of a SHOPP project relies on engineering studies and analysis of conditions hidden from view, so it is appropriate that those studies be done for the PID" I don’t like the way this sentence is
274   written. Pavement condition or structure condition or vertical clearance issues are not hidden from view. Perhaps it should be deleted altogether?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       HQ

      "The SHOPP is severely underfunded today, and it becomes easier to pursue higher levels of funding if Caltrans has a shelf of PIDs for projects that are needed, ready to programbuild , and only lack funding" A SHOPP
275   PID is not ready to build but is ready to program. You are not ready to build until the PS&E is complete.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       HQ

      "20. Maintain separate policy, process, guidance, and controls for SHOPP and STIP PID projects" Maybe the result of this section should be to develop X number of STIP PSR examples to mimic how it is done in SHOPP
276   based on project type? These templates could then give specific guidance on studies not necessary in the PID for certain types of projects. It would need to be investigated first to see if viable before committing to this    HQ
      course of action.
      "Chart A (strata chart) illustrates this over time." The STIP secion
277   Is this what I listed as Figure 1 earlier?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       HQ

278   Some appendices are mentioned in the body of the document and some are not. C is listed as C1 and C2 in the body and Appendix L is listed in the body while this list goes only to G.                                            HQ
      "Appendix F – Table of Recommendations" May wish to make this Appendix A and reference it in the execute summary so management knows they can flip directly to that section and review all the recommendations.
279                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    HQ




      California Department of Transportation                                                                                                Page 23 of 23
      Division of Transportation Planning

								
To top