White Papers for Right-Sizing Transportation Investments (2020)

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.

NCHRP Web-Only Document 263: White Papers for Right-Sizing Transportation Investments Chandler Duncan Michael Brown Metro Analytics Bountiful, UT Naomi Stein Economic Development Research Group Pittsburgh, PA David Rowe Daniel Rotert Burns & McDonnell Kansas City, MO Michael David Hurst Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. Tysons, VA Tim Lomax Texas A&M Transportation Institute College Station, TX Peter Hylton High Street Consulting Columbia, SC Hugh McGee Hugh McGee, LLC Tysons Corner, VA Anne Morris Anne Morris, LLC Columbia, SC Contractor’s Technical Appendix for NCHRP Project 19-14 Submitted February 2019 ACKNOWEDGMENT This work was sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration, and was conducted in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 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, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC 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. DISCLAIMER The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research. They are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the author(s). This material has not been edited by TRB.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing 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 committees, task forces, and panels 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 individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.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  CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP Web-Only Document 263 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lawrence D. Goldstein, Senior Program Officer Anthony P. Avery, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications Linda A. Dziobek, Senior Editor Kathleen Mion, Senior Editorial Assistant NCHRP PROJECT 19-14 PANEL Field of Administration—Finance Peter C. Martin, CDM Smith, San Francisco, CA (Chair) Ben T. Orsbon, South Dakota DOT, Pierre, SD Steven E. Bowman, Iowa DOT, Ames, IA Matthew K. Brady, California DOT, Eureka, CA Brian K. Gage, Minnesota DOT, Saint Paul, MN Elizabeth A. Robbins, Washington State DOT, Tumwater, WA John H. Thomas, Utah DOT, Salt Lake City, UT Ryan J. Westrom, Greenfield Labs, Ford Smart Mobility, Palo Alto, CA Benjamin Hawkinson, FHWA Liaison William B. Anderson, TRB Liaison

Contents 1. Introduction to Research Assessment White Papers ................................................................... 1  1.1.  Findings Related to Jurisdictional Responsibility and Ownership .......... 1  1.2.  Findings Related to Program-Level Performance Targets and Trade-Offs ................................................................................................... 7  1.3.  Findings Related to Design and Re-Invention of Facilities .................... 11  2. Jurisdictional Transfer as Right-Sizing ....................................................................................... 19  2.1.  Introduction .............................................................................................. 19  2.2.  Caltrans: Jurisdictional Relinquishment as Right-Sizing ....................... 19  2.3.  MnDOT: Jurisdictional Realignment as a Means of Right-Sizing .......... 28  2.4.  ADOT: Jurisdictional Transfer and Low-Volume Roads .......................... 38  3. Right-Sizing Through Performance Targets and Tradeoffs ....................................................... 49  3.1.  Background and Purpose ........................................................................ 49  3.2.  Define Right-Sizing for Performance Standards .................................... 49  3.3.  Current Efforts in Right-Sizing ................................................................. 51  3.4.  Who Is Involved in Right-Sizing? ............................................................. 60  3.5.  Tools of the Trade .................................................................................... 61  3.6.  DOT Guideline Takeaways ....................................................................... 65  3.7.  Record of Interviews ................................................................................ 68  4. Right-Sizing Project Design ........................................................................................................ 69  4.1.  Introduction .............................................................................................. 69  4.2.  Highway Design Paradigms and Right-Sizing ......................................... 69  4.3.  Design, Development, and Infrastructure Burdens: The Big Picture ... 74  4.4.  Right-Sizing for Greenfields: Getting it Right the First Time .................. 74  4.5.  Identifying Opportunities to Right-Size Existing Streets ........................ 81  4.6.  What Does Right-Sizing Look Like? ........................................................ 86  4.7.  Considerations for Right-Sizing Freeways .............................................. 89  4.8.  Local Design Concepts for Right-Sizing .................................................. 94  4.9.  Additional Strategies for Right-Sizing Regional Infrastructure ........... 102  This document is a technical appendix to NCHRP Research Report 917: Right-Sizing Transportation Investments: A Guidebook for Planning and Programming. Readers can find NCHRP Research Report 917 at www.trb.org.