Performance-Based Analysis of Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP REPORT 785 Performance-Based Analysis of Geometric Design of Highways and Streets Brian L. Ray Erin M. Ferguson Julia K. Knudsen Kittelson & AssociAtes, inc. Portland, OR i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h Richard J. Porter University of UtAh Salt Lake City, UT John Mason Auburn, AL Subscriber Categories Design • Highway TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2014 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 785 Project 15-34A ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-30800-7 Library of Congress Control Number 2014949183 © 2014 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was developed through the NCHRP Project 15-34A, “Performance-Based Analysis of Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.” The project team consisted of Brian L. Ray (principal investigator), Erin M. Ferguson, and Julia K. Knudsen, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (prime contractor); Dr. R.J. Porter, University of Utah; and Dr. John Mason. Ralph Bentley and Rowena Ona of Kittelson & Associates, Inc. assisted with exhibits and production. The project research team benefited greatly from the patience and guidance of the project panel. This group helped assess and prioritize early project work efforts while being open to new ideas and updates as the project advanced under the revised project research team. The project panel was accepting of the project research team’s fundamental models and approaches to conveying the principles of performance- based design. The principal investigator found it was a pleasure to work so closely and collaboratively with the project panel and the research team. CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 785 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Christopher Hedges, Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program B. Ray Derr, Senior Program Officer Andréa Parker, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Senior Editor NCHRP PROJECT 15-34A PANEL Field of Design—Area of General Design James O. Brewer, Kansas DOT, Topeka, KS (Chair) Douglas T. Morse, New York State DOT, Poughkeepsie, NY Lucinda E. Gibson, DuBois & King, Randolph, VT Allan Kwan, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB Reza Marshal, Momentum Engineering Corporation, Torrance, CA Barbara Reenan, California DOT, Redding, CA Nikiforos Stamatiadis, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY Ray Krammes, FHWA Liaison Stephen F. Maher, TRB Liaison

This report presents ways to incorporate performance-based analysis into the project development process. This process framework begins with setting desired project multi- modal outcomes and design controls. Geometric design decisions that can influence those outcomes are identified as well as analysis tools that can be used to estimate the impacts of those decisions. The report includes six project examples illustrating how this framework can be applied to actual projects. The report will be useful to geometric designers in making informed decisions about the tradeoffs inherent in design. Most highway and street design processes rely on standards that set minimum values or ranges of values for design features. These standards are intended to provide opera- tional safety, efficiency, and comfort for the traveler, but it is difficult or impossible for the designer to characterize quantitatively how the facility will perform. For both new construc- tion and reconstruction of highways and streets, stakeholders and decision makers increas- ingly want reasonable measures of the effect of geometric design decisions on the facility’s performance for all of its users. Each agency has its own process for designing a highway or street. Three critical stages in the process are project initiation (i.e., setting the project’s purpose, need, and scope), preliminary design (e.g., analyzing alternative designs and environmental impacts and set- ting design criteria), and final design (i.e., preparing the construction plans); these stages may have different names in different agencies. Although the expected performance of the facility is only one of the factors that must be considered in designing a highway or street, a better understanding of the expected performance should result in better decisions dur- ing these stages. Research was needed to provide the designer with the tools to evaluate the performance of different design alternatives objectively. NCHRP Project 15-34A completed the work begun under NCHRP Project 15-34. In that project, Pennsylvania State University and Kittelson & Associates, Inc. described the geo- metric design decisions that occur throughout the project development process and identi- fied performance metrics that are sensitive to those decisions. They also reviewed tools that are available for evaluating the performance of a particular design. This work culminated in the interim report that also presented a plan for developing a process framework. In NCHRP Project 15-34A, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. and the University of Utah devel- oped the process framework. The framework includes both an approach for integrating performance-based analysis into geometric design decisions and information on the effects that different geometric elements have on project performance measures. It is expected F O R E W O R D By B. Ray Derr Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

that future research will build upon the latter to improve designers’ abilities to assess the performance of a design. Supplemental material (including a summary of the work done in both projects, sug- gested future research, and draft text for AASHTO’s A Policy on Geometric Design of High- ways and Streets) is available on the TRB website (http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/TRBNetPro jectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=3322).

1 Summary 2 Chapter 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Role of Performance-Based Analysis in Transportation Activities 3 1.2 Role and Value of Geometric Design of Highways and Streets 3 1.3 Guiding Principles of the Approach 4 1.4 Fundamental Model of the Approach 5 1.5 Overall Project and Geometric Design Performance 7 1.6 References 8 Chapter 2 Geometric Design Decision Making and Performance 8 2.1 Overview of Geometric Design Decision Making 9 2.2 Relationship between Project and Geometric Design Performance 11 2.3 Geometric Design and the Project Development Stages 13 2.4 Geometric Design and Environmental Evaluations and Clearance 14 2.5 Context-Sensitive and Flexible Design Approaches 15 2.6 References 16 Chapter 3 Project Outcomes 16 3.1 Audience and Goals 20 3.2 Project Performance 22 3.3 Geometric Design Performance 29 3.4 Summary 29 3.5 References 31 Chapter 4 Geometric Design Elements 31 4.1 Introduction 32 4.2 Geometric Sensitivity 33 4.3 Relationships between Geometric Design Elements and Performance Categories 37 4.4 Performance Categories and Measures 43 4.5 References 44 Chapter 5 Process Framework 44 5.1 Introduction 45 5.2 Project Initiation 50 5.3 Concept Development 52 5.4 Evaluation and Selection 56 5.5 Environmental Review Process 59 5.6 Summary 59 5.7 References C O N T E N T S

61 Chapter 6 Project Examples 61 6.1 Introduction 63 6.2 Project Example 1: US-21/Sanderson Road Intersection 70 6.3 Project Example 2: Richter Pass Road 80 6.4 Project Example 3: Cascade Avenue 91 6.5 Project Example 4: SR-4 99 6.6 Project Example 5: 27th Avenue 110 6.7 Project Example 6: US-6/Stonebrook Road 121 6.8 References Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.