FRONTAGE ROADS in TEXAS: a Comprehensive Assessment
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA/TX-0-1873-2 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date FRONTAGE ROADS IN TEXAS: A Comprehensive Assessment. October 2001 7. Author(s) 6. Performing Organization Code Kara M. Kockelman, Randy Machemehl, Aaron Overman, Marwan Madi, Jacob Sesker, Jean (Jenny) Peterman, Susan Handy 8. Performing Organization Report No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Center for Transportation Research The University of Texas at Austin 11. Contract or Grant No. 3208 Red River, Suite 200 Austin, TX 78705-2650 Research Project 0-1873-2 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Research Report Research and Technology Implementation Office 14. Sponsoring Agency Code P.O. Box 5080 Austin, TX 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project conducted in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and the Texas Department of Transportation. 16. Abstract A policy of building frontage roads alongside freeway mainlanes avoids the purchase of access rights when upgrading existing highways to freeway standards, and generally supplements local street networks. It also may affect corridor operations, land values, and development patterns. This paper seeks to provide a comprehensive evaluation of frontage road design policies by summarizing research results related to legal statutes affecting public access to roadways, discussing access policies and practices across the states, comparing land development and operations of corridors with and without frontage roads, summarizing studies on access-right valuation, and evaluating construction cost distinctions. A literature review concluded that a wide variety of options are available to agencies for limiting access to and improving flow and safety along freeway corridors. Statistical analyses of paired corridors suggested that land near frontage roads is associated with lower household incomes, lower population densities, lower percentages of bike trips to work, lower vehicle occupancies for work trips, and higher unemployment rates than those without frontage-roads. Lower employment densities along freeway corridors also emerged when frontage roads were present. Operational simulations of various freeway systems demonstrated that frontage roads may improve the operation of freeway mainlanes in heavily developed areas, but not in moderately developed areas (e.g., purely residential). Arterial systems in these simulations were supplemented by frontage roads and thus also performed better in their presence. The financial costs associated with frontage-road facilities were found to be considerably higher than those associated with non-frontage road facilities, except in cases of extremely high access- right values. It is hoped that these results, in addition to efforts by other researchers, will assist in constructing a solid, formal policy for all states and regions to follow in providing access along new and existing freeways in the decades to come. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement frontage roads, access rights, crash frequency, traffic No restrictions. This document is available to the public through simulation, freeway construction costs, corridor the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia comparisons 22161. 19. Security Classif. (of report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 192 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized FRONTAGE ROADS IN TEXAS: A COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT by Kara Kockelman, Randy Machemehl, Aaron W. Overman, Marwan Madi, Jacob Sesker Jenny Peterman, and Susan Handy Research Report Number 0-1873-2 Research Project 0-1873 Investigation of the Impact of Frontage Roads as an Element of Controlled-Access Facilities Conducted for the TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION in cooperation with the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration by the CENTER FOR TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH Bureau of Engineering Research THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN October 2001 iv DISCLAIMERS The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration or the Texas Department of Transportation. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. There was no invention or discovery conceived or first reduced to practice in the course of or under this contract, including any art, method, process, machine, manufacture, design or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, or any variety of plant, which is or may be patentable under the patent laws of the United States of America or any foreign country. NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION, BIDDING, OR PERMIT PURPOSES Kara Kockelman, P.E. (California No. C057380) Research Supervisor ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank the following individuals for supporting the work undertaken here: Julie Brown and Ed Collins (Project Director, AUS) for sponsoring this work, F. Doug Woodall (SAT) for his assistance in obtaining construction cost data, Charlie Sullivan for identifying local issues in the Texas corridor pair analysis, Alan Toppen for helping construct the initial simulation networks, Kristi Grizzle for her work on initial cost estimates, Yong Zhao for his contributions to the corridor pair analysis data and analysis, and Rachel Gossen and Eric Bollich for their assistance with final simulations. Research performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. v vi Table of Contents CHAPTER 1. Project Overview and Objectives................................................................ 1 CHAPTER 2. Legal Background and Literature Review .................................................. 3 CHAPTER 3. Department of Transportation Surveys and Synopsis............................... 19 CHAPTER 4. Case Studies .............................................................................................. 25 CHAPTER 5. Corridor Pair Analysis .............................................................................. 37 CHAPTER 6. Operational Analysis................................................................................. 51 CHAPTER 7. Costs of Frontage-Road & Non-Frontage-Road Facilities ....................... 73 CHAPTER 8. Summary and Conclusions ...................................................................... 89 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................. 93 APPENDICES................................................................................................................... 99 vii viii List of Figures Figure 4.1. Effects of Access Density............................................................................ 28 Figure 4.2 Effect of Speeding........................................................................................ 29 Figure 4.3 Effect of Speed Variance.............................................................................. 29 Figure 4.4 Effect of VMT.............................................................................................. 30 Figure 5.1 Dallas Fort Worth Regional Map with Selected Block Groups................... 40 Figure 5.2 Detail of Selected Block Groups in Corridor 1a .......................................... 41 Figure 5.3 Detail of Selected Block Groups in Corridor 1b.......................................... 42 Figure 5.4 Detail of Selected Block Groups in Corridor 1b ......................................... 43 Figure 5.5 Detail of Selected Block Groups in Corridor 2b.......................................... 44 Figure 6.1 Case One: Freeway with Frontage Roads & Diamond Interchanges........... 57 Figure 6.2 Case Two: Freeway with Frontage Roads & X Interchanges ...................... 58 Figure 6.3 Case Three: Freeway with Diamond Interchanges and Secondary Arterials but no Frontage Road ................................................................................... 59 Figure 7.1 Type A Example........................................................................................... 78 Figure 7.2 Type C Example (shown with 6 lanes) ....................................................... 79 Figure 7.3 Type C Example (shown with 4 lanes) ........................................................ 80 List of Tables Table 4.1. Case Study Data ........................................................................................... 27 Table 4.2 Speed Data.................................................................................................... 27 Table 4.3 Correlation Matrix for Explanatory Variables ............................................. 31 Table 4.4. Variable Coefficients and T-Statistics for the Initial Regression Model ..... 32 ix Table 4.5 Variable Coefficients and T-Statistics for the Preferred Regression Model .......................................................................................................... 33 Table 5.1 Corridor Pair Selections ............................................................................... 38 Table 5.2 Census Tracts and Block Groups Selected for Corridor Pair Analysis.......