This document discusses context sensitive solutions and design flexibility approaches used by the New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT). It provides details on NMDOT's level 4 rating for meeting criteria for CSS approaches, including written policies, staff training, and public involvement. It also discusses frameworks for measuring CSS success and integrating CSS into the project development process. Additionally, it covers considerations for characterizing roadways and land use, identifying design controls, and applying flexibility in design to address sustainability and community needs and roles.

1. Context Sensitive Solutions
And Design Flexibility
Moderator: Joe J. Sanchez, PE. NMDOT
Chris Baca, P.E. PB
Carlos Padilla, P.E., LBG

2. NMDOT CSS Status
• Context Sensitive Solutions
– Transportation Solutions +
Community
• Integrated Transportation
Services
– Value Engineering
– Professional Services Contracting
– Environmental and Urban Design

3. What Makes NM a CSS DOT?
• FHWA CSS CRITERIA Level 4
– Level 4: Meets CSS/CSD Criteria
– (from the 2/27/2003 CSS/CSD Game Plan)
Criteria A - there is a written commitment or policy.
Criteria B - technical staff is trained in CSS approach,
both in field and central offices and across disciplines
(planning, environment, design, right-of-way,
operations, maintenance).
Criteria C - most projects are being implemented using
CSS approach, tools, and methodologies.
Criteria D - there is early, continuing, and iterative public
involvement throughout the project development
process.
Criteria E - interdisciplinary teams are involved in the

4. Measurement Framework for CSS
Multi-disciplinary teams
Community engagement
Agreement on project problems &
needs
Alternatives analysis
Construction
Training
Manuals
Policies
Motivation
Timeframe and Budget
Stakeholder satisfaction
Achievement of Project Vision & Goals
Stakeholder satisfaction
Quality Assurance Review

5. Integrating CSS into the
Location Study Procedures
Location Study Procedures
Phase One C
Formal NEPA
Document and
Decision Document
Phase One B
Detailed Evalaution
of
Alternatives
Phase One A
Initial Evalaution
of
Alternatives
CSD/CSS Model
Traffic and
Engineering
Issues and
Constraints
Environmental
Issues and
Concerns
Evaluate
Alternatives,
Select and
Document
Develop
Alternatives

6. We all remember this chart
Arterials ( Rural/Urban)
higher mobility
low degree of access
Collectors (Rural/Urban)
balance between mobility
and access
Locals (Rural/Urban)
lower mobility
high degree of access

7. What’s that Chart got to do with
Me?
• Characterize the Roadway and Land Use
– Cars
– Cars & Trucks
– Cars/Trucks/People
– Cars/Trucks/People/Farms &
Ranches/Industry/Zoning
– Cars/Trucks/People/City Life/Industry/Zoning

9. Designing for the Facility
• Identify Design Controls
– Functional Classification
– Terrain
– Location ( Rural/Urban-mixed)
– Traffic Volume
– LOS
– Design Driver and Vehicle
• Speed
• Project Type
– New Construction
– Reconstruction of Existing
– 3R ( Resurfacing, Restoration, & Rehabilitation

10. Role of the Design Professional
• Develop safe, effective, creative alternatives
• Communicate Stakeholder concerns & issues for
Decision Makers
• Participate in the Project Decision Process
• Incorporate Public Input w/Env. Doc’s
• Document Project Decision’s
• Assure Community Issues are addressed
through the construction phase

11. Applying CSS in Terms of Design
And Flexibility
• Sustainability
– Adapt to Facility
– Resources ( Public/Agency)
– Community Traditions and Roles

12. Are we to smart for our own good?
• The Engineers Trap.
– We really want to help!
– We think we can solve everything!
– We think we can design a solution right away!
• Do our stakeholders really what us to help that
much?
– Stakeholders want to be heard!
– Stakeholders want to understand why we design the
way we do!
– This doesn’t mean giving up responsible engineering
charge!

13. Which brings us to the Question:
When is the right time for choosing
Higher or Lower Design Standards?
Chris, would
you like to fill
us in?