New Jersey Department of Transportation Extreme Weather Asset - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Prepared f d for: June 26, 2018

New Jersey Department of Transportation Extreme Weather Asset Management Pilot Study

Overview

Introduction

• Overview of Pilot Study
• New Jersey’s Climate
• New Jersey’s Transportation Assets
• New Jersey Challenges
• Summarize study approach & findings
• Next Steps

Hurricane Sandy approaching the New Jersey coastline on October 29, 2012

New Jer erse sey’s C s Climate

• 41 emergency declarations in the last 10 years

(State and Federal Declarations )

• 16 associated with flooding or tropical storms (Hurricane Sandy

in 2012, and Tropical Storm Irene the most damaging)

• 18 winter storm related
• Average annual temperatures have increased by 3

degrees F over the past century

• Highly variable precipitation with wetter than average

conditions in the last decade (Average annual precipitation = 46.01 inches, projected to increase)

• Sea level along New Jersey’s coast has risen by more

than 16 inches since 1911, double the global average (projected to rise 1 to 4 feet by 2100)

Passaic River fills street in Paterson, NJ – Hurricane Irene

New Jer erse sey’s T s Transp sportation

• 8,543 lane miles of pavement in the State Highway System (35% considered good

condition, 32% fair, 33% poor)

• 2,676 lane miles of Interstates (61% good, 38% fair, 1% poor)
• 6,702 bridges
• 2,582 NJDOT owned/maintained bridges (29%,, 59%, 12%)
• 6,096 minor bridges
• 956 NJDOT owned/maintained minor bridges (26% good, 69% fair, 5% poor)
• 4 major airports
• 3 major water ports including the largest seaport in the US in Elizabeth
• Home of 3rd largest commuter service provider (NJ Transit, bus, rail & light rail) with

weekday daily ridership totaling 928,494 (2015)

• 981 miles of freight railroad
• 360 miles of waterway

New Jersey Victory Bridge over Route 35

New Jer erse sey’s C s Cha hallenges es

• Coastal area presents its own unique challenges

(impacts from storm surges, tidal flooding, projected sea level rise, plus Tourism and associated land use development challenges - the need to “rebuild” in flood prone areas to maintain economic stability, value of “beach front property”

• Varying weather stressors
• Winter storm events are growing concern
• Inland flooding
• How to account for extreme weather considerations in

analytical tools used to predict asset performance over time (rate of deterioration)

Linking g Extrem eme Weather er a and nd Asse set M Mana nagem emen ent

• NJDOT currently establishing an Asset Management Plan/Program

and has identified extreme weather as an external environmental factor in assessing risks

• TAMP – Risk Management Process
• Identifying, assessing, evaluating risks, developing a mitigation plan and

monitoring top priority risks

• Extreme weather currently 3rd highest risk in NJDOT’s Risk Register
• Using results of pilot program to develop a strategy to implement in

TAMP Process

• 23 CFR Part 667 Evaluation

Pilot

• t O

Overview ew

2017 selected with 5 other states - Arizona, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maryland, & Texas, to participate in a Pilot Program focused on extreme weather, climate risks, and asset management

Aerial View of Study Area: I-80

Pilot

• t O

Overview ew

• Originally selected culverts as the “asset class” to investigate impacts
• f extreme weather
• Focused on “noncoastal” areas
• Could not study entire state so selected a specific study area to see

what could be learned and applied state wide

• Study refocused on identifying “root causes” of flooding in the target

area to then develop cost-effective mitigation strategies

Compile & I e & Integ egrate Da e Data

2016 DMS Rankings Snapshot

Internal Sources: External Sources: Other:

• Drainage Management System (DMS)
• Maintenance Management System (MMS)
• Culvert Inspection Reports (Bureau of Structural Evaluation

and Bridge Management, SEBM)

• Operations Region’s Input
• Crash Data (Bureau of Transportation Data and Safety, BTDS)
• Concept Development Reports from Design Team (Louis Berger)
• NOAA
• GIS

Case se Study A Area ea

New I Ini nitiatives: es: Linking E Extreme e Weather er a and nd A Asse set Managemen ent

• Asset Management, Extreme

Weather, and Proxy Indicators Pilot

• The research is aimed at identifying the

root cause of flooding to target the most cost-effective risk management mitigation to incorporate in lifecycle planning STRESSOR: WEATHER-RELATED RISK: IMPACT PRECIPITATION FLOODING MOBILITY SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE PRESERVATION Understanding The Problem

Prel eliminary Da Data Ana nalysi sis R Resu sults: s: I I-80 M 0 MP 5 56.43 t 43 to MP 58.22 22

EB WB Total Number of Incidents Recorded 50 Westbound 41 82% Eastbound 9 18%

Number o

• f R

Recorded F Flooding I Incidents b by Y Year

Month 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Month Total January 1 1 February 2 2 March 2 2 April 3 1 4 May 1 1 2 June 3 1 4 July 1 1 2 5 1 10 August 1 2 3 September 2 2 2 6 October 2 3 2 7 November 3 4 7 December 1 1 2 Year Total 7 4 17 8 12 2

• 2014 experienced the highest

number of recorded flooding incidents between the five- year period (2012-2017)

• 2016 experienced the second

highest number of recorded flooding incidents between the five-year period (2012- 2017)

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Incident Maintenance Activity

I-80 80 N Num umber er o

• f I

Inc nciden ents vs.

• vs. M

Mainten enanc nce A Activities es (Clea eaning) b by Year (201 2012-2017) 017)

Prel eliminary Da Data Ana nalysi sis R Resu sults: s: R

• Rt. 23 M

3 MP 4 4 to M MP 7 7

NB SB Total Number of Incidents Recorded 17 Northbound 1 6% Southbound 16 94%

• One extra incident recorded (not flooding).
• Number of incidents noting “clogged storm drain” = 7.

Route e 23 N 3 Num umber er o

• f I

Inc nciden ents vs.

• vs. M

Mainten enance A e Activities es (Clea eaning) b by Year (201 2012-2017) 017)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Incident Maintenance Activity (Cleaning)

Compariso son of Case S se Study A Area eas ( (201 2012-2017 Y 017 Yr. Period) d)

I-80 Route 23 Study area location:

• MP. 56.43 to MP 58.22 (1.79 miles)
• MP. 4.0 to MP 7.0 (3 miles)

DMS ranking (2016 data): #1 #14 AADT in one direction: 62,515 29,092 Number of recorded incidents: 50 17 Critical areas: WB between MP 57 – 57.5 SB between MP 6.8 – 62.82 Total number of maintenance activities in 5-yr. period: 18 42

• Cleaning activities

(inlets/manholes/channels ditches/pipes): 11 27

Ho How a about t the c culverts ts ? ??

• As builts and inspection reports noted

culverts were not contributing factors to flooding, drainage issues, not culverts….inlet spacing,

• Although designed and constructed

some time ago without “extreme weather” considerations, function ok today, as long as they are maintained

• Reaffirms need to identify possible

root causes of flooding, before strategies are developed to address risks of extreme weather

I-80 Culvert (located at MP 57.35 on Westbound direction)

Incorporating S Study Results i into Asset M t Management

• Root cause analysis identifies a method to evaluate and develop risk mitigation actions
• Better understanding of relationship between stressor, roadway system performance and

cause of problem

• Incorporate study’s recommendations into lifecycle planning in the planning,

design/engineering, and maintenance/operations phases

• Enhance/implement the use of GIS as a “Resiliency Management System” to be

incorporated into NJDOT’s current process

Develo lopin ing a a “Res esil ilience M Management Tool

• ol/System” – How t

to iden entify v vulner erabil ilit ities es GIS ca S can h help

• Use various digital layers to give an indication of what areas could be subject to flooding
• Project case study areas and culverts within these locations. (System can be used for any Assets)
• National flood hazard layer from FEMA.
• Soil hydrologic group layer.
• In progress: precipitation historical data and projections, and maintenance activities.
• Data shows:
• Project case study areas are in low terrain (between 50’ – 200’).
• Case study area soil group = low permeability.
• Route 23 within 100-yr flood zone.

GIS – I-80 Digital Elevation Model

GIS – I-80 Flood Hazard Zones

GIS – I-80 Soil Groups