Developing an Expanded Functional Classification System for More Flexibility in Geometric Design (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 37-124
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 37... ...
37 ALTERNATIVE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS EXISTING ALTERNATIVE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS The project team identified 17 recently developed systems that rethink or have developed alternatives to the current FCS. After reviewing all 17, ten were selected for detailed investigation because they had improved context definition, accommodated modes in a holistic manner, or had design guidance based on context and roadway type.
|
From page 38... ...
38 2. AustROADS Design Guide, Australia and New Zealand; 3.
|
From page 39... ...
39 the dominant position in a roadway hierarchy. More information can be found at http://www.transportresearch.info/web/projects/project_details.cfm?
|
From page 40... ...
40 system (links) and context (places)
|
From page 41... ...
41 approach to its city context. Types of streets are laid out according to their relative association with the "link" and "place" axes of the ARTISTS approach.
|
From page 42... ...
42 Figure 15 Overview of ARTISTS approach fit into a complete decision and design process Strengths and Weaknesses The ARTISTS approach main strength is flexibility. By keeping the underlying foundation of its viewpoint simple, mainly the dual attributes of "link" and "place," the ARTISTS approach facilitates its application to a wide variety of existing street classification systems, allowing agencies and users to examine their streets through a new lens without completely overhauling their existing methodology.
|
From page 43... ...
43 streets. Expansion of the concept to other contexts and roadway types may present an overly complex systems as ARTISTS identifies 25 unique place and link statuses for a singular roadway type and context.
|
From page 44... ...
44 Most rural & natural Rural, rural reserve Suburban General Urban Urban Center Urban Core Figure 16 Context categories for AustRoads road classification Road Function The guide recognizes many of the same factors in the FCS that more innovative American guidance documents have also articulated. The AustRoads Guide states "the functional classification of urban roads is usually less clear than that of rural roads, as urban roads generally are flanked by dense development that requires frequent access at the boundary of the road.
|
From page 45... ...
45 Table 4 AustRoads functional classification of rural roads Road Classification Description Arterial Roads Class 1 Those roads, which form the principal avenues for communications between major regions, including direct connections between capital cities. Class 2 Those roads, not being Class 1, whose main function is to form the principal avenue of communication for movements between: • A capital city and adjoining states and their capital cities; or • A capital city and key towns; or • Key towns Class 3 Those roads, not being Class 1 or 2, whose main function is to form an avenue of communication for movements: • Between important centers and the Class 1 and Class 2 roads and/or key towns; or • Between important centers; or • Of an arterial nature within a town in a rural area.
|
From page 46... ...
46 The last two groups are classified as vulnerable and, at times, need independent facilities, but the Guide does not include a modal hierarchy. Design Elements The AustRoads Guide de-emphasizes the use of a classification system in roadway design.
|
From page 47... ...
47 • Verifies that responsibility for the use of values within the EDD is taken corporately by the relevant road authority and is not placed on an individual designer. Table 6 Normal and EDD The Design Domain is composed of a Normal Design Domain and an EDD, as illustrated in Figure 17.
|
From page 48... ...
48 Figure 17 Design Domain concept, AustRoads Road Design Guide (2006) Figure 18 Design Domain example for shoulder width, AustRoads Road Design Guide (2006)
|
From page 49... ...
49 A major weakness is the heavy influence of U.S. standards reflected in the functional classification.
|
From page 50... ...
50 2. Defining the existing and future transportation context; 3.
|
From page 51... ...
51 • Corridors; • Non-residential uses (Areas of only commercial and office uses) ; • Residential areas with more than five dwelling units per acre; and • Residential areas with fewer than five dwelling units per acre.
|
From page 52... ...
52 Table 7 Connection between land use context and street type Land Use Context Street Types Link between Land Use Context and Street Type Activity Centers • Main Streets • Avenues • Local Streets • Main Streets serve as pedestrian oriented activity centers, walking receives the highest priority of all the transport modes although they also serve transit, bicyclists, and automobiles. • Avenues are found in a wide variety of land use contexts.
|
From page 53... ...
53 Road Function Charlotte's Urban Streets Design Guidelines define five street types that overlay atop existing classifications as the North Carolina DOT moves away from the traditional thoroughfare planning process. The terminology used and the way in which street types are presented in the guidelines, without specific reference to the FCS, is a new classification scheme for the street network.
|
From page 54... ...
54 and Boulevards are similar to arterials, while Main Streets combine aspects of local and collector classifications. Table 8 Charlotte Guide and FCS relationship FHWA Functional Classification Charlotte Urban Streets Design Guidelines Street Types Main Street Avenue Local Street Boulevard Parkway Primary Arterial Secondary Arterial Collector Local Modal Considerations The Charlotte guidelines emphasize that streets are to be evaluated based on how they serve different groups, including motorists, pedestrians (and transit riders)
|
From page 55... ...
55 Table 9 Roadway design expectations and design elements by user group User Group Roadway Design Expectations Design Elements Developed to Address Expectations Motorists • Minimal travel delays • Minimal conflicts (affecting both delay and safety) • Consistently designed facilities • Adding through or turn lanes to increase capacity/reduce delay • Make operational changes, including providing more green signal time to streets with higher traffic volumes • Reducing the wait time at signalized intersections for those motorists on higher volume streets • Constructing grade-separated intersections and roundabouts, rather than signal or stop controlled intersections, limits motorist delay and increases traffic flow • Bus pullouts to separate stopping transit vehicles from the travel lane and help reduce delay • Turn lanes separate turning vehicles from the through traffic to potentially reduce rear-end collisions • Medians separate opposing traffic streams • Greater sight distances to "see and be seen" • Street lighting to improve overall visibility • Clear zone adjacent to the outside travel lane provides a measure of "forgiveness", should a vehicle actually leave the travel lanes Pedestrians • Short walking distances • Separation (or buffer)
|
From page 56... ...
56 Table 9 (continued) Roadway design expectations and design elements by user group User Group Roadway Design Expectations Design Elements Developed to Address Expectations Transit Riders • Accessible bus stops • Easy transfer connections • Personal comfort and security while waiting for the bus • Street and pedestrian-scale lighting • Transit stop locations that are not isolated from land uses and other people • Increased visibility through urban design (windows and doorways that face onto the street)
|
From page 57... ...
57 Figure 21 Modal orientation of street types Design Elements Once the street types are defined for a corridor, the key design control is employed. Surrounding land use context is only employed to define block lengths and creek crossings, and for distinctions between residential and office/commercial uses along local streets.
|
From page 58... ...
58 the priority design elements, design elements to consider, and inappropriate design grouped by street type. Design elements are further partitioned for intersections according to street type.
|
From page 59... ...
59 Table 11 (continued) Street types and design elements for roadway segments Street Type Priority Design Elements Appropriate / Other Design Elements to Consider Inappropriate Design Boulevard • Posted Speed: 35 - 40 mph • Design Speed: up to 45 mph • Number of Lanes: 4 • Medians, minimum 17 feet • Median Planting • Bicycle Lanes: 4 – 6 feet • Sidewalk Clear Zone: 5 feet minimum • Planting Strips: 8 feet • Street Lighting • Pedestrian Scaled depending on surrounding land use • Block Length: 1000 – 1200 feet • Pedestrian Refuges • On- street parking: 7 feet • Double tree rows • Driveways • Utilities placed underground • Bus Stops: Higher Volume local + express services • Mid-Block Pedestrian Crossings • Traffic Calming • Sidewalk Amenity Zone • Shoulder • Curb Extensions Parkway • Posted Speed: 45 - 50 mph • Design Speed: up to 55 mph • Number of Lanes: 4 – 6 • Lane Width: 11 – 12 feet • Medians, minimum 20 feet • Median Planting • Shoulder • Separated shared use path for walking / bicycling: 10 feet • Sidewalk Clear Zone: 5 feet (constrained conditions)
|
From page 60... ...
60 Table 11 (continued) Street types and design elements for roadway segments Street Type Priority Design Elements Appropriate / Other Design Elements to Consider Inappropriate Design Local Commercial Streets • Posted Speed: 25 mph • Design Speed: 25 mph • Number of Lanes: 2 • Lane Width: 12 feet • Sidewalk Clear Zone: 5-8 feet • On-Street Parking: 7 feet • Curb Extensions at Mid-Block Crossings • Street Lighting • Bus Stops • Planting Strips • Driveways • Traffic Calming • Block Length: based on land use context • Sidewalk amenity zone • Medians, minimum 8 feet • Median Planting • Pedestrian Refuges • Curb Extensions • Bike Lanes • Shoulder • Mid-Block Pedestrian Crossings Local Industrial Streets • Posted Speed: 25 mph • Design Speed: 25 mph • Number of Lanes: 2 • Lane Width: 12 feet • Sidewalk Clear Zone: 5 feet • On-Street Parking: 8 feet • Planting Strips • Driveways • Street Lighting • Block Length: 1000 feet maximum • Bus Stops • Traffic Calming • Mid-Block Pedestrian Crossings • Sidewalk Amenity Zone • Medians • Median Planting • Curb Extensions • Bike Lanes • Pedestrian Refuges • Shoulder For all street types a typical cross section of design elements has been created (Figure 22 - 24)
|
From page 61... ...
61 Figure 23 Avenue typical cross section Figure 24 Boulevard typical cross section Strengths and Weaknesses The Charlotte Urban Street Design Guidelines developed a new classification scheme for urban streets and contained detailed design elements and typical cross-sections for the new street types proposed. The street type overlay terminology was used to avoid conflicts with state guidance.
|
From page 62... ...
62 City of Chicago Complete Streets Chicago was created in 2013 by the Chicago Department of Transportation to implement the city's complete streets policy. It involved a major restructuring of the agency and its project delivery process.
|
From page 63... ...
63 Table 12 Complete Streets Chicago context definition Typology Name Characteristics Typical Zoning Districts Neighborhood Residential • Single-family houses • Low-density multi-family buildings • Non-residential uses such as schools and churches RS, RT Neighborhood MixedUse • Buildings with service and commercial uses on the ground floor that serve surrounding neighborhoods • Residential or office uses above the ground floor RM, B1, B2 District Center or Corridor • Concentration of commercial uses that draw from a large area • May be stand-alone commercial buildings • May be part of mixed-use buildings RM, B2, B3, C1, C2 Downtown • High-rise mixed-use, residential, or office buildings centrally located within the city DR, DS, DC, DX Institutional or Campus • Large-scale development (2+ acres) under unified control and organized like a campus • Typically surrounded by gates and controlled-access PD Industrial • Manufacturing, wholesale and industrial uses • May be organized into a campus or industrial corridor • Requires accommodation for large trucks.
|
From page 64... ...
64 Table 13 Complete Streets Chicago road function types Typology Name Definition Characteristics Thoroughfare • Widest right-of-way • Raised medians • May have side medians, green space, large sidewalks • Serves through and local functions • Not generally commercial Lanes 4+ Target Speed 25-30 mph Blocks 660-1320 feet ADT 20k and higher Flow 2 way Connector • Main roads • May have median • Connects urban centers • May be commercial Lanes 2 to 4 Target Speed 20-30 mph Blocks 300-660 feet ADT 5-25K Flow 1 or 2 way Main Street • Serves mostly local traffic • Connects neighborhoods and commercial areas • May be commercial Lanes 1 to 3 Target Speed 15-20 mph Blocks 150-300 feet ADT 3-15k Flow 1 or 2 way Neighborhood Street • Almost all local traffic • Serve residential areas • No centerline or lane striping required Lanes 1 Target Speed 10-20 mph Blocks <300 feet ADT <6k Flow 1 or 2 way Service Way • Narrow roadway • No sidewalks • Provides a short service link between two streets Lanes 1 Target Speed 5-10 mph Blocks NA ADT NA Flow 1 or 2 way Pedestrian Way • Pedestrian passageway or walkway • Not necessarily along a typical roadway • Pedestrian access between buildings Lanes NA Target Speed NA Blocks NA ADT NA Flow NA Relationship to FHWA Functional Classification Complete Streets Chicago addresses the relationship between its typology system and the FCS. It states that coding projects by their functional class is required for federal funding, and it provides a conversion table (recreated in Table 14)
|
From page 65... ...
65 Table 14 Complete Streets Chicago and FCS relationship Modal Considerations Complete Streets Chicago uses modal hierarchies to inform design and operation decisions. There are a multitude of decisions made during the life of a project -- from project selection to lane width to signal timing to restriping -- and establishing a hierarchy ensures that the decision made supports the complete streets effort.
|
From page 66... ...
66 Figure 25 Complete Streets Chicago design tree for pedestrian mode priority and Downtown Complete Streets Chicago contains precise language on cross-section elements, intersections, and geometric/operational policies, some of which is tied to the classification schemes described above. In general, travel lanes should be 10 feet wide, with an 11-foot lane allowed for a truck or bus route.
|
From page 67... ...
67 • Thoroughfare: WB-50; • Connector: BUS-40; • Main Street: SU-30; • Neighborhood Street: DL-23 (a new design vehicle based on a United Parcel Service P-80 truck) ; • Service Way: DL-23; and • Right/left turn on red is to be limited from 6 AM to midnight along streets with the Pedestrian (P)
|
From page 68... ...
68 Overlays Complete Streets Chicago uses a series of overlays to capture external information related to street design. Overlays could be anything from state route designation to routes identified on master planning documents, to historic designation (Table 17)
|
From page 69... ...
69 Table 17 Complete Streets Chicago overlays Typology Name Source Discussion State Route Illinois DOT Approximately 37 percent of Chicago's major roadways are under state jurisdiction. This limits the city's ability to control and maintain its street network.
|
From page 70... ...
70 Strengths and Weaknesses The main strength of Complete Streets Chicago is that it is written from a practitioner's standpoint, and is currently being integrated into the agency's operations. Similar efforts to date have been somewhat esoteric and lacking in detail.
|
From page 71... ...
71 Context Definition Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares uses context zones to describe the physical form and character of a place. This includes the intensity of development within a neighborhood or along a thoroughfare.
|
From page 72... ...
72 Table 18 Context Zone description
|
From page 73... ...
73 Road Function Thoroughfare type is the primary driver of design in Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares. It governs the selection of the thoroughfare's design criteria and, along with the surrounding context, is used to determine the thoroughfare's physical configuration.
|
From page 74... ...
74 Table 19 Thoroughfare type description Relationship to FHWA Classification Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares maintains the FCS, but serves in a secondary role compared to design criteria established using thoroughfare types. Table 20 shows the relationship between thoroughfare types and the FCS.
|
From page 75... ...
75 Table 20 Thoroughfare and FCS relationships Modal Priorities Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares does not explicitly prioritize modes within the corridor; it identifies the roadway and street side/frontage elements recommended for each thoroughfare/context zone category. It recognizes that all elements may not be accommodated within a given right-of-way and provides guidance accordingly.
|
From page 76... ...
76 consists of the five stages shown in Figure 27. While this report simplifies the process into five discrete stages, the thoroughfare design process is an iterative one that requires collaboration with the public, stakeholders, and a multidisciplinary team of professionals.
|
From page 77... ...
77 Figure 27 Thoroughfare design stages Strengths and Weaknesses The principal strength of Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares is its expansion of the context zones beyond the existing binary urban/rural definition, and the expansion of the roadway design elements to include street side design. However, it does not entirely address rural contexts or all roadway categories.
|
From page 78... ...
78 Massachusetts The Highway Division of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassHighway) revised its statewide design policy manual in 2006.
|
From page 79... ...
79 Table 22 MassHighway area types and community contexts Environmental Context Area Types Land Use Considerations Built Form Considerations Rural Natural • Forest • Farmland • Open Spaces Rural Village • Low intensity – Commercial – Civic Uses – Mixed Uses • Frontages generally less than 200 feet • Right-of-way constrained by built environment Rural Developed • Low-density residential • Infrequent commercial activity • Large setbacks • Significant tree cover of property frontages Suburban High Density • Commercial strip development • Low density residential • Large setbacks for commercial development • Residential frontages less than 200 feet Village/Town Center • Moderate density – Commercial – Residential – Mixed Uses • Uniform building setbacks • Residential frontages less than 200 feet • Right-of-way constrained by built environment Low Density • Low density – Residential – Infrequent commercial • Residential frontages more than 200 feet Urban Urban Park • Open space Urban Residential • High density Residential • Common building scale • Common setbacks (flush frontages) Central Business District • High density Mixed Use
|
From page 80... ...
80 Rural Suburban Urban Figure 28 Area types and built form illustrations The guide stipulates that area types be selected before choosing a design based solely on roadway type. Context is the primary influence over the types of modal considerations and the corresponding design elements to include in order to meet activity needs for each mode.
|
From page 81... ...
81 Road Function MassHighway's Project Development and Design Guide employs the FCS designations, referred to as roadway types. They are based on a facility's role in the state and regional transportation system.
|
From page 82... ...
82 Table 23 MassHighway and FCS relationship MassHighway Project Development and Design Guide Freeways Major Arterials Minor Arterials Major Collectors Minor Collectors Local Roads & Streets Interstate Freeway/ Expressway Primary Arterial Secondary Arterial Collector Local Modal Considerations Modal needs beyond vehicular traffic are considered but not prioritized in MassHighway's Project Development and Design Guide (Table 24)
|
From page 83... ...
83 Table 24 Additional modal considerations and likely volumes / activity Area Type Additional Modes Considered Corresponding Volumes / Modal Activity Rural Natural • Pedestrians • Bicyclists • Transit • Low • Low • Infrequent if at all Rural Village • Pedestrians • Bicyclists • Transit • High compared to other rural area types • Low – activity within Village • Infrequent if at all Rural Developed • Pedestrians • Bicyclists • Transit • Moderate • Low – though more than Natural areas • Infrequent if at all Suburban Low Density • Pedestrians • Bicyclists • Transit • Moderate – more than Rural Developed • Moderate – more than Rural Developed • Infrequent Suburban Town Center • Pedestrians • Bicyclists • High compared to other suburban area types • High compared to other suburban area types Suburban High Density • Pedestrians • Bicyclists • Transit • Low to Moderate (if facilities are present) • Low to Moderate (if facilities are present)
|
From page 84... ...
84 Overlays MassHighway's Project Development and Design Guide contains overlays for parkways, historic boulevards, and access control. The guide defines parkways as a unique roadway type.
|
From page 85... ...
85 Minnesota DOT Minnesota DOT is in the process of developing a Guide based on a revised classification. Its aim is to aid planning and design.
|
From page 86... ...
86 Table 25 Context definition criteria and values
|
From page 87... ...
87 Road Function Minnesota's guide recognizes the main problems with the FCS. Classification does not always reflect the roadway context or the need for multimodal considerations.
|
From page 88... ...
88 Figure 29 Matrix of context and road types Design Elements The Minnesota guide identifies a list of key principles that designers should be mindful of when developing alternative solutions. These include prioritizing community values, understanding the corridor users, selecting the lowest reasonable targeted operating speed and design vehicle, allocating space to most vulnerable road users, beginning with the smallest number of lanes with the smallest dimensions, and taking stock of how operations vary across the day.
|
From page 89... ...
89 Table 27 Typical dimension for cross section elements The guide discusses some potential impacts of modal choices on each design element. Figure 30 illustrates possible trade-offs among the modes, which affect cross section design decisions.
|
From page 90... ...
90 Figure 30 Example of alternative cross section choices
|
From page 91... ...
91 A central concern of the guide is the selection of desired (target) operating speed.
|
From page 92... ...
92 continued use of the current system in various areas (as needed) while providing additional flexibility that accounts for the varied needs of roadway types.
|
From page 93... ...
93 recommendations related to each street type, with transition steps described for some. The 13 street types, along with selected recommendations, are listed below.
|
From page 94... ...
94 Figure 32 NACTO Downtown and Neighborhood street types
|
From page 95... ...
95 Figure 33 NACTO Residential street types Road Function The NACTO USDG embeds function into the respective street types. As described below, the guide offers a wealth of design guidance that is not specific to a particular street type.
|
From page 96... ...
96 State Route, Sanitation Route, Snow Route, Truck Route, Ceremonial, Economic, Historic, Scenic, Bicycle Priority, Driving Priority, Pedestrian Priority, Transit Priority, Home Zone, Pedestrian District, and Transit-Oriented. Design Elements The NACTO USDG offers a number of recommendations for design elements.
|
From page 97... ...
97 Table 28 NACTO Guide design speed implications Design vehicles are tied to street type. The DL-23 (a new design vehicle)
|
From page 98... ...
98 Context Definition Crucial to defining context for urban (non-freeway) highways and arterials is assigning the OHP and urban growth boundary overlay designations, described under Overlays.
|
From page 99... ...
99 Non-designated Highways & Arterials For non-designated OHP urban highways and arterials the context categories are: • Downtown / Central Business District -- densely urbanized areas with closely spaced buildings. They may look similar to STAs but have not been designated as such by the Oregon Transportation Commission.
|
From page 100... ...
100 design standards for each context include a sidewalk with a minimum width of six feet. Wider facilities are required in more densely urbanized areas.
|
From page 101... ...
101 The nodal nature of CCs precludes defining roadway design elements; rather the focus of the manual is on internal circulation of vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. The manual states that CCs should be planned and developed to ensure the following: • Convenient circulation within the center, including pedestrian and bicycle access and circulation.
|
From page 102... ...
102 Strengths and Weaknesses Oregon's system does not deviate from the FHWA's classification model, with an urban/rural dichotomy of land use designations – although the more expansive set of types and areas promotes flexibility and roadway designs that are more responsive to local needs. Oregon's unique overlay of urban growth boundaries strengthens the distinction between urban/suburban contexts and rural areas.
|
From page 103... ...
103 definition of each category may lead to more frequent changes in design elements (recommended minimum length for a context area is 600 feet)
|
From page 104... ...
104 Roadway Types The Smart Transportation Guidebook recognizes the problems with the FCS. It indicates that according an oversized role to select characteristics (e.g., length, traffic volumes)
|
From page 105... ...
105 Figure 38 Matrix of context and road types Importantly, the proposed typology is an overlay for individual projects and does not replace the FCS. The design values and ranges recommended in the Guidebook are inconsistent with those found in the AASHTO Green Book (Table 32)
|
From page 106... ...
106 Table 31 Design matrix example
|
From page 107... ...
107 There is some discussion about the potential impacts of modal choices on each design element. For example, in determining the lane width, one needs to consider the context area, presence of bus and freight activity, and bicycle treatment.
|
From page 108... ...
108 Table 32 Cross section elements Strengths and Weaknesses A strength of the Smart Transportation Guidebook lies in its expanding of the idea of context beyond the urban/rural binary. The addition of the suburban categories, as well as town/village corridors, provides additional contexts that could facilitate improved contextual designs.
|
From page 109... ...
109 from the AASHTO Green Book in the design matrices. The inherent flexibility of the Green Book remains, but the potential tendencies to use the higher ends of the ranges may limit matrices' utility.
|
From page 110... ...
110 Table 33 Abu Dhabi street families, transport capacity, and land use context Street Family Transport Capacity Land Use Context Vehicle Priority Travel Lanes City (7stories +) Town (3-6 stories)
|
From page 111... ...
111 • Design for Pedestrians that elevates the importance of pedestrian and street landscape design while providing access for individuals with limited physical mobility. • Connections to Public Transit that improves transit access along Main Street corridors.
|
From page 112... ...
112 The manual's contextual distinctions transcend the typical rural/suburban/urban model by incorporating Transects (see discussion above in 2.3)
|
From page 113... ...
113 roadway geometry, etc.)
|
From page 114... ...
114 Descriptive characteristics of each land use context category and subcategory division will be developed to appropriately classify roadway segments. Of particular note with the WSDOT alternative is that the goal is to explicitly state defined output for each classification.
|
From page 115... ...
115 A combination of this and other strategies could also be used. For example, pedestrian activity could be defined based on adjacent land use, while existing (or proposed)
|
From page 116... ...
116 impacts of classification on design. These were the initial objectives of the system, and at the workshop the project team presented a preliminary framework of key objectives for additional refinement and evaluation.
|
From page 117... ...
117 After the meeting additional systems were identified and reviewed, and these were presented in the previous sections. The alternatives presented and discussed included: 1.
|
From page 118... ...
118 Table 34 Scoring of alternative classification systems Alternative Classification System Composite Total Context Definition Modal Priorities Ease of Use Relate to FCS Rural/ Urban Project/ System Pennsylvania/ New Jersey 4.38 3.38 4.31 3.75 2.25 3.25 21.31 Washington State 4.33 3.67 2.33 2.50 3.67 2.67 19.17 AustRoads 3.25 3.06 2.56 3.25 3.31 2.75 18.19 UKY/NN System 2.75 4.38 2.75 2.75 3.00 2.50 18.13 Massachusetts 3.38 2.38 3.25 3.75 3.25 1.75 17.75 California 4.00 3.25 1.69 3.00 3.50 2.13 17.56 Abu Dhabi 4.25 4.88 3.50 1.75 1.00 1.75 17.13 Oregon 4.00 2.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 17.00 NACTO 3.81 3.81 3.75 1.25 1.25 2.00 15.88 Design Domains 4.00 3.06 2.25 1.00 3.25 2.00 15.56 Charlotte 3.44 3.75 3.50 0.75 1.75 2.00 15.19 ARTISTS 3.50 2.13 2.75 1.88 1.88 2.25 14.38 Minnesota*
|
From page 119... ...
119 • Direct Relation to FCS -- Pennsylvania/New Jersey and Massachusetts. • Rural/Urban Applications -- California and Washington State.
|
From page 120... ...
120 Concluding comments from the advisory group members focused on the need for an alternative classification system, what it must achieve and how it might work. The consensus was that none of the alternatives reviewed would suffice in their entirety.
|
From page 121... ...
121 Table 35 Summary of alternative classification systems Cl as sif ica tio n Sy st em Ro ad F un ct io n Co nt ex t D ef in iti on Mo da l C on sid er at io ns De sig n El em en ts Ob jec tiv es CD MP EU RF S/ P RU AR TI ST S Fo ur ca teg or ies di vid ed in ar ter ial an d n on ar ter ial an d i n ro ad s/w ay s a nd st re ets Fiv e c ate go rie s b as ed on ro ad loc ati on (N ati on al, C ity , D ist ric t, Ne igh bo rh oo d, Lo ca l)
|
From page 122... ...
122 Table 35 (continued) Summary of alternative classification systems No tes : CD : C on tex t d efi nit ion ; M P: M od al pr ior itie s; EU : E as e o f u se ; R F: R ela tio n t o F CS ; R U: R ur al/ ur ba n co ve ra ge Me ets ob jec tiv e; P ar tia lly m ee ts ob jec tiv e; Do es no t m ee t o bje cti ve Cl as sif ica tio n Sy st em Ro ad F un ct io n Co nt ex t D ef in iti on Mo da l C on sid er at io ns De sig n El em en ts Ob jec tiv es CD MP EU RF S/ P RU Ma ss ac hu se tts Tr ad itio na l cla ss ific ati on sy ste m of ar ter ial , c oll ec tor , loc al Ni ne co nte xt lev els ba se d o n l an d us e a nd ur ba n f or m (U rb an Ce ntr al Bu sin es s D ist ric t; Ur ba n re sid en tia l; U rb an pa rk; S ub ur ba n hig h d en sit y; Su bu rb an vil lag e/t ow n c en ter ; S ub ur ba n l ow de ns ity ; R ur al de ve lop ed ; R ur al vil lag e; an d N atu ra l)
|
From page 123... ...
123 As Table 35 indicates, several systems achieve the objectives identified by the project team and WAG, though in different ways. These differences raise the following discussion points.
|
From page 124... ...
124 Ease of Use Of all the objectives, ease of use was only met by one alternative, the Pennsylvania/New Jersey system. While the total number of new context definitions is significant (7)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.