Traveler Expectations and Future Use of Rest Areas in the Western United States

A Proposal Submitted to the Nevada Department of Transportation

Principal Investigator: Timothy J. Gates, Ph.D., P.E. Associate Professor Michigan State University Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering 428 S. Shaw Lane, Room:3573 East Lansing, MI 48824 Phone: (517) 353-7224 [email protected]

Co-Principal Investigator: Peter T. Savolainen, Ph.D., P.E. MSU Foundation Professor Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Michigan State University 428 S Shaw Ln, Room 3559 East Lansing, MI 48824 Phone: (517) 432-1825 [email protected]

PROBLEM DESCRIPTION The Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) operates and maintains a total of 35 rest areas, which serve a variety of functions for both the traveling public and drivers of commercial motor vehicles. The public tends to use these rest areas when drivers are fatigued, experience problems with their vehicles, or when an occupant needs to use the restroom. Many of these stops are unplanned, in contrast to commercial vehicle drivers who typically follow a precise, pre-planned route that may include stops at rest areas to meet federal regulation on driving time limits. Ultimately, the decision to use a rest area is dictated by a number of factors, including the availability of alternate facilities along the travel route, such as truck stops/gas stations, fast-food , and . These private facilities provide users with additional services such as gasoline, showers, lodging, and dining options as opposed to publicly maintained rest areas, which generally include only minimal services such as parking, restrooms, and vending machines. Given the rapid development of private facilities since Nevada’s rest areas were first opened, as well as the fact that many rest areas are near the end of their service lives, a critical evaluation is warranted in order to inform both short- and long-term decision-making by NDOT as it relates to its rest area program. Recent research, including several studies by the Michigan State University (MSU) team, has evaluated the economic viability of rest areas and led to the development of policy recommendations for state DOTs. Despite such efforts, additional research is warranted specific to Nevada given existing deficits in truck parking as outlined by the Freight Advisory Committee, as well as the state’s rural nature, unique climatic conditions, and the condition of the existing rest area facilities. This study will address these issues through a data-driven approach, culminating in an implementation plan and decision-support tools that provide important guidance as to NDOT’s role in managing rest areas in consideration of the needs of Nevada highway users.

BACKGROUND SUMMARY NDOT currently spends $77,000 to $124,000 per rest area per year in time/materials and contract maintenance. The average age of these facilities is 32 years, which significantly exceeds the typical building design life and has resulted in partial or full closures due to various failures. As such, approximately half of these facilities are currently candidates for replacement. Depending upon the type of facility (i.e., Rest Stop, Rest Area, or Welcome Center), the cost of replacement ranges from $1.5M to $9.9M per location. Furthermore, many of these rest areas are insufficient in terms of their ability to accommodate commercial vehicle parking and persons with disabilities. There are also both gaps and redundancies in the system when considering the spatial distribution of rest areas and alternate private facilities. These issues mirror national trends as economic considerations have led to rest area closures in more than 20 states over the past decade (1-6). Several other states have downgraded the services provided (7) or developed plans to phase out existing facilities (8). Some of these closures have occurred despite organized protests by motorists (9). Perhaps the most widely publicized rest area closures occurred in Virginia, where 19 of 42 rest areas were closed in 2009 (10). These closures were expected to save the state $9 million annually; however, due to strong public opposition, all 19 rest areas were reopened by the newly elected governor (11). Recently, other states have delayed closures in response to similar public backlash (12). These experiences are in sharp contrast to several eastern states, where public-private partnerships have allowed DOTs to turn rest area facilities into revenue generators (5). Various forms of commercialization have been proposed (13-15); however, Nevada is among those states whose rest areas went into operation after the 1956 Interstate Highway Act, which prohibits privatization or outsourcing of rest areas.

1 In light of these limitations, research is warranted to reassess the functional value of rest areas in the state of Nevada. The MSU team aims to evaluate the economic and user impacts that would be associated with the rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rest areas, the construction of new rest areas, or the closure of existing facilities. As part of this evaluation, it will be necessary to determine the functional value of rest areas, both individually and as a system. One of the initial primary functions of public rest areas was to alleviate motorist fatigue and associated crashes. NHTSA estimates that 900,000 police-reported crashes result in more than 800 deaths and 33,000 injuries on an annual basis due to drowsy driving (16). However, these figures are likely to underrepresent the true degree of this problem as such crashes are often not easily distinguishable through police crash reports. In any case, rest areas help to reduce the risks of such crashes by providing safe parking areas for tired drivers. The most effective countermeasure to driver sleepiness is to stop driving and take a short nap or use caffeine (17). Prior research has shown a relationship between rest area spacing and fatigue-related crashes. Studies in Michigan (18), Minnesota (19), and (20) showed increases in single-vehicle crashes, truck- crashes, and other crashes expected to be fatigue-related as rest area spacing increased beyond 20 to 30 miles. Similar trends were observed in a recent study by the MSU team (21-22). It is important to note that the presence of alternate service facilities (e.g., gas stations, truck stops) may also play a role in reducing fatigue-related crashes. Related to this point, in order to assess the value of rest areas, data is needed related to the level of services provided by rest areas and similar service facilities along major NDOT roadways to determine service redundancies and gaps within the rest area system. These data will also be important to determine the ability for rest areas and private service facilities to absorb the additional demand in the event that a nearby rest area is closed or to identify areas where gaps in service suggest a new rest area is justified. In order to make this determination, it is important to understand the reasons why road users select rest areas over comparable service facilities and vice-versa. Prior research has shown more than 95 percent of all drivers had used a rest area and 60 percent preferred rest areas over other similar facilities if the stop did not require gas or food (23). The benefits provided to travelers by rest areas include increased comfort and convenience, decreased travel diversion, reductions in crashes, and improvements to economic development and tourism (23). Research by the MSU team has shown that motorcyclists, drivers of recreational vehicles, vacation travelers, and persons traveling with children had the highest satisfaction levels, while commercial vehicle drivers, younger travelers, and first time rest area users showed lower levels of satisfaction (21,24). The dissatisfaction among truck drivers can be attributable, in part, to significant nighttime truck capacity issues at both rest areas and commercial truck stops. Commercial truck stops frequently exceed nighttime parking capacity and rest areas, similar to those in Nevada, are often insufficiently designed to accommodate large volumes of commercial vehicles. Collectively, the costs and benefits incurred by the traveling public can be estimated to assess the economic viability of individual rest areas or of the rest area system en masse. For example, the MSU team showed that survey respondents indicated a median value of service of $1.68 for standard rest areas and $2.21 for Welcome Center users (21,25). These values were consistent with previous research (23) and, in combination with the cost savings associated with reduced travel times and crash reductions, the Michigan rest area system was shown to deliver an overall benefit/cost ratio of 4.56, though several facilities showed B/C ratios of less than one. A similar evaluation in Nevada would provide timely information as NDOT begins planning in support of the 2021 legislative session.

2 PROPOSED RESEARCH There are two primary objectives that guided the development of the preliminary work plan that has been developed by the MSU team. First, the level of service provided by existing rest areas (including rest stops and welcome centers) will be assessed through a spatial analysis that will also consider the availability of alternate private service facilities (e.g., gas stations and truck stops). This analysis will consider the functional characteristics of these facilities, including the availability of various types of services (e.g., restrooms, parking, Wi-Fi, food, lodging) and the relationship between traffic crashes and facility spacing, as well as data summarizing driver preferences resulting from a statewide survey. Collectively, these qualitative and quantitative data will be used to identify where there are gaps and redundancies in the existing rest area network. This process is expected to lead to the identification of areas where new rest area facilities should be considered or where existing facilities may be phased out. The results will also allow for the prioritization of sites for rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts in both the short- and long-term. The second objective will provide guidance as to the types of amenities and services that should be provided by the NDOT-maintained rest areas. This guidance will be based upon: (1) the needs and preferences of drivers as to available amenities based upon the questionnaire survey; (2) the proximity of each rest area to the next closest rest areas, as well as to alternate private facilities; and (3) the costs of providing various levels of amenities, including construction, operations, and maintenance. Specific details pertaining to the activities necessary to accomplish the stated objectives are fully described in the following task descriptions.

Task 1. Review of Literature and State DOT Practice The purpose of this task is to review relevant research and current practices to determine information related to the following: 1.) appropriate methods for surveying travelers (including truckers) to determine desired amenities and services at rest areas; 2.) identifying areas of unmet need for traveler (and trucker) services, including consideration of commercial service facilities; 3.) identifying candidate locations for new rest areas, facilities for upgrade/downgrade, and facilities for permanent closure; 4.) determining the appropriate level of amenities/services provided by each rest area location; 5.) fatigue-related crash prevention; and 6.) state and federal rest area guidelines and policies. The research team has significant experience leading similar reviews for sponsors including the Michigan DOT (21) and the Ministry of Transport (26), which has resulted in content area knowledge that will create efficiencies with respect to this task. Of particular interest to this research is the experience of other states with respect to: 1.) rest area location prioritization, particularly identification of areas of unmet need within the current network of rest areas and commercial service areas; 2.) bases for selection of locations for new or upgraded rest area facilities; 3.) selection of amenities provided at each new or upgraded facility; and 4.) whether the new or upgraded facilities have met utilization expectations. Such information may not be fully documented in the research literature or in the print media. Thus, to capture the current status of rest area management throughout the United States, a state-of-the-practice survey will be performed as part of this study. The survey will be developed and circulated electronically to pre- established contacts and other relevant officials within as many of the 50 state departments of transportation as possible. Telephone follow-ups will be performed, as necessary. Responses from each of the state DOTs will be compiled and analyzed to better inform subsequent tasks and to allow for a comparison with current practices in Nevada. Particular emphasis will be given towards responses from DOTs in the western United States, as the density of rest areas, commercial service areas, and population centers more similarly reflect that found in Nevada.

3 Task 2. Inventory Data Collection A critical initial task of this study will be to catalog specific inventory data pertaining to Nevada’s entire rest area network, as well as data for comparable commercial facilities throughout the state. To obtain and assemble such data, the research team proposes to use an approach similar to that employed during the 2012 rest area study for the Michigan DOT (21). This approach will utilize GIS to combine available shapefiles and other datasets provided by NDOT, along with supplementary data collected manually by the research team. The inventory data necessary for this study will be determined in consultation with the NDOT project champions in the early project stages. At the most basic level, the research team will require shapefiles that include the following:  Nevada DOT highway map with AADT and commercial AADT and  Coordinates of each NDOT rest area.

The research team has already obtained information for each of the 35 NDOT rest areas regarding the presence of the following amenities: type of facility (rest area, welcome center, rest stop), toilets (flush, vault, or portable), running water, picnic tables, litter barrels, RV dump stations, availability of truck parking (including number of spaces), ADA access, telephones, and wireless . The following additional information will be of importance for each facility:  Additional amenities (e.g. vending machines, playground, pet area, tourist info, paths, etc);  Number of car parking spaces;  Traffic volume/commercial volume (AADT, hourly) entering rest area  Age and design life;  Most recent condition assessment and remaining service life;  Engineering design plans (where available);  Annual operational costs;  Annual maintenance costs; and  Estimated cost to reconstruct or rehabilitate the facility.

These data will be obtained from NDOT champions, available Nevada DOT online resources, or other resources. In order to determine areas of unmet need along the Nevada highway network, consideration must also be given to similar amenities afforded by commercial service facilities. All commercial service facilities with public restrooms, including restaurants, gas stations, truck stops, and casinos that are within a pre-determined distance of the mainline highway will be identified along each route. The data that will be obtained for each comparable commercial facility, which will be obtained using Google Earth or other online resources, are listed below. Contact will be established with individual businesses where necessary. Consideration will also be given to include the nearest such facilities (including rest areas) across the state border.  GPS coordinates of the facility  Type of service(s) provided (e.g., food, public restrooms, gasoline, diesel, telephone, internet, ATM, slot machines, other casino games, etc.)  Parking for /RVs and commercial trucks, including number of parking spaces and whether overnight parking is allowed  Distance of each facility from nearest or intersection along the main highway The inventory data collected as a part of this task will be used in several subsequent tasks, most notably towards quantification of the level of service currently provided by the existing network of rest areas and commercial service areas, along with identification of service gaps and redundancies along the Nevada DOT highway network.

4 Task 3. Rest Area User Survey A series of interview-style questionnaire surveys will be implemented as a part of this research. The surveys will be administered to motorists at a sample of NDOT rest areas throughout the state and also at a sample of truck stops. By sampling at both rest areas and truck stops, a comparison can be made between the needs and desires of these two groups as they relate to traveler services. The survey will be targeted to adults (age 18 and over) drivers or passengers across four primary vehicle groups: 1.) Commercial trucks; 2.) RVs (including passenger vehicles towing a camper/boat/other recreational trailer); 3.) Tour buses, and 4.) All other passenger vehicles.

The sample of rest areas and truck stops will be selected to provide a representative balance with respect to the number of rest areas per region and route type (interstate vs. non-interstate). Among the state’s rest areas, a sufficient number will be selected to ensure that the survey data are broadly representative of the state. This will include sampling from at least one rest area and one along each interstate highway within each of the three NDOT regions. At least two of the three welcome centers will be included in the sample. Special emphasis will be provided towards oversampling of survey data in areas of the state identified as having unmet service needs. To that end, the sample of rest areas or truck stops will include some isolated facilities where little or no comparable service facility exists within reasonable proximity, including locations off the interstate system. Furthermore, to ensure that rest areas along primary tourism routes are included in the sample, a list of primary tour and tourism routes will be determined based on review of various travel guides, online resources, and direction from the NDOT champions. The survey scheduling will be coordinated with the NDOT champions and each rest area manager/supervisor will be contacted prior to performing the surveys. Approvals for performing surveys at truck stops will be coordinated by the research team, which has experience with performing similar surveys at major truck stops (e.g., Pilot, Flying J, Loves, TA) in Michigan. The surveys will be performed on both weekdays and weekends and will not be administered at night for safety reasons. The survey will be administered on-site to travelers by teams of two surveyors. Sampling will be done on a stratified basis (e.g., by region, type of vehicle, type of route, etc.) to allow for assessment of how opinions and behavior vary among these different groups. An appropriate target sample size will be determined for each survey site to provide an acceptable margin of error. The research team is well qualified for developing such a sampling plan due to their experience in developing and administering rest area user surveys for the Michigan DOT. The survey instrument will be kept as concise as possible to encourage a high level of response. The questionnaire will be designed based on the rest area survey performed by the research team in Michigan (21), supplemented with information obtained during the state of the practice review and input from the NDOT champions. It is envisioned that multiple choice questions will be primarily used, with a Likert (5-point) scoring scale used in certain questions, where appropriate. A modified version of the survey will be developed specific to CMV drivers. Draft versions of the survey tools will be submitted to the NDOT champions for review and approval prior to conducting the surveys. The survey questions may include, but are not limited to, the following topics (note – wording will be modified, where appropriate, for surveys performed at truck stops):  Question topics related to the specific rest area and trip: o Reason(s) for stopping at the particular rest area, including why the facility was selected vs. commercial facility, and estimated duration of the stop; o Opinion of the condition, types of services provided, and location of this rest area; o Services utilized during the stop and willingness to pay for these services;

5 o Services/features that would make this rest area more desirable and willingness to pay; o Action that would have been taken had this facility been unavailable; o Type of vehicle, purpose of trip (vacation/recreation, truck haul, other work, personal business), number of persons in the vehicle, duration of travel since previous stop, expected travel time remaining for the day, and frequency of travel on this route; o Demographic information, including gender, age, home zip code;  Question topics related to the Nevada rest area network in general: o Opinion of the condition, services provided, and general location of Nevada rest areas; o Frequency of public rest-area use within Nevada; o Frequency of truck stop use within Nevada; o Services/features that should be provided at each Nevada rest area at a minimum; o Additional services/features that would be desirable if funding were available; o Are there specific locations in Nevada where a rest area is needed? If so, please list the 1-2 most prominent locations (highway number, city/town/county); o Are there specific existing rest areas in Nevada where upgraded services are needed? If so, please list the 1-2 most prominent locations (highway number, city/town/county) and the specific services/features desired; o Any issues with nighttime parking overflow at specific NDOT rest areas? o Any other comments (open ended). The survey data will provide valuable information pertaining to the reasons why motorists use rest areas versus comparable privately-owned facilities and specific locations where new or upgraded rest areas are needed. The survey will also provide details regarding desired services at rest areas, including the willingness to pay for services, which serves as a measure of economic value. The survey will also afford investigation into the differences in response due to factors including vehicle type, highway type, trip purpose, distance from comparable facilities, trip length, etc. In order to increase the sample of commercial truck drivers, it may also be necessary to consider surveying at state operated weigh stations or other government facilities frequented by truck drivers. Furthermore, although the opinions of travelers en-route are of utmost value, there may also be value in performing surveys in other public places, such as DMV offices. The team will consult with the NDOT champions to determine whether either option is feasible and/or necessary.

Task 4. Identify Areas of Unmet Need and Recommend Locations for New or Rehabilitated Rest Areas After compilation of the GIS shapefile that includes the inventory data for all rest areas and comparable commercial service facilities on the Nevada DOT highway system, a series of heat maps will be prepared to assist with visualization of areas possessing unmet needs for various traveler services. For example, such heat maps may depict routes with low (or high) concentrations of flush toilets, running water, telephones, internet, truck parking, diesel, fast food, or other amenities, while also displaying other important characteristics, such as the AADT (or commercial AADT) along the highway. The research team has extensive experience with spatial data mapping, including the Van Buren preparation of heat maps. For example, the heat map to the right, which was prepared by the research team for the Michigan DOT, depicts concentrations of winter crashes along I-94 in Van Buren County Michigan (red indicates greatest annual crash frequency).

6 From there both a “Level of Traveler Services” score and “Level of Trucker Services” score will be developed on a milepoint basis along each Nevada DOT highway. These scores will ultimately serve as metrics in a prioritization strategy to identify gaps and redundancies in traveler/trucker services along the Nevada highway network. The research team will first develop a list of potential scoring factors along with the relative importance (i.e., weight) for each factor. This initial list of factors and weights will utilize the inventory data with consideration given to the needs and desires of travelers and truckers identified during the surveys. The preliminary factors and weights will be presented to the NDOT research team for vetting at a project meeting, and may include:  Distance to nearest rest area;  Distance to nearest truck stop/fast food/gas stations/casino (separately, if necessary);  Distance to nearest flush toilet/phone/running water/internet/etc. (separately);  Number of truck stop/fast food/gas stations/casinos in XX miles (separately, if necessary);  Number of overnight truck parking spaces in XX miles;  Whether the highway is a major tourism route (or RV/Bus AADT, if available); and  AADT or Commercial AADT on the highway. The factors and associated weights will be assigned separately for traveler vs. trucker scoring. The scores will be compiled on a route/milepoint basis and will be included as a GIS layer. A series of corresponding heat maps will be generated to assist with visualization of areas with high and low levels of services. Areas with the lowest levels of service scores will be designated as the highest priority areas of unmet traveler and trucker service needs. These areas will be identified both on a statewide basis and by region and route. While many of the high priority areas will contain no existing rest area, some areas may include rest areas that are in need of expanded services, although the current level of utilization of the facility must also be considered in such cases. It will also be important to identify areas where services are abundant, as rest areas near these locations may be candidates for closure, particularly those that are older or costly to maintain. While the overall level of services scores will provide an important data aggregation strategy for prioritization of areas of unmet needs, they do not provide enough granularity to determine the specific amenities that are needed. To make these recommendations, the research team will utilize the itemized inventory information along with the traveler/trucker survey data. Although the state currently considers three levels of rest area services (rest areas, welcome centers, rest stops), it is not certain if these three levels, and the types of amenities afforded at each of the levels, remain relevant for future rest area considerations. To that end, the survey data will be utilized to determine the types of amenities that should be included at the rest areas. Specifically, the following two survey questions will be of significant value to this task:  What services/features should be provided at each Nevada rest area at a minimum?  What additional services/features would be desirable if funding were available? The responses received to these two questions will serve the specific purpose of providing 1.) a minimum set of services for all rest areas and 2.) a desired set of additional services. The results can be stratified by motorist type, highway type, and region to provide more context-specific guidelines for services that should be provided at rest areas. The research team will then utilize these new service guidelines to suggest a recommended set of amenities needed for a rest area (new or refurbished) within each of the high priority areas. An interim memo will be submitted to NDOT by early August 2020 that will include a list of recommended high priority locations for a new or refurbished rest area along with the recommended amenities. The recommendations will later be expanded to include considerations for the entire rest area network.

7 Task 5. Traffic Crash Analysis In order to assess the impacts of rest areas on the safety of motorists, it will be necessary to collect data on driver fatigue-related crashes. Prior to crash data collection, it is first important to appropriately define a “fatigue-related” crash in light of the information available from the Nevada crash report form. In a basic sense, fatigue related crashes may be identified as a specific subset of lane-departure crashes that result in either a run-off-the-road crash or collision with another vehicle. However, not all lane-departure crashes involve driver fatigue and such crashes are often due, in part, to driver impairment, poor weather, distraction, animal avoidance, equipment failure, or other factors. Because of this, various subsets of crashes will be investigated using criteria such as type of crash and time-of-day (emphasis on crashes during late night and early morning), to identify those crashes most likely to be related to drowsy driving. The research team will rely on the Nevada DOT to provide crash data for this project. These data will be analyzed to determine if a correlation exists between fatigue-related crashes and the spacing of rest areas along a route or series of routes of a similar type. This analysis will control for the effects of other factors, including AADT, truck volumes, rest area utilization rates, proximity to privately-owned comparable services, truck parking capacity, etc. The results of this analysis will inform recommendations as to the appropriate spacing of rest areas. Evidence of a significant impact on fatigue-related crashes will be appropriately quantified in the benefit/cost analysis.

Task 6. Benefit/Cost Analysis This task will involve assessment of the economic viability of the NDOT rest area network, while giving consideration to both the life cycle costs and benefits associated with individual facilities. The results of this task will provide further guidance towards identification of rest areas for reconstruction/rehabilitation or closure. The costs will be obtained during collection of inventory data and may include construction, rehabilitation, annual operation, and annual maintenance. Consideration will be given to whether the facility is functionally necessary or obsolete based on the level of redundant traveler or trucker services nearby. Benefits may include increased comfort and convenience (i.e., travelers’ valuation of services) and crash reductions. Increased tourism spending may also be considered for welcome centers. The methodological approach will largely follow that utilized by the research team in the Michigan DOT rest area study (21) and will allow for determination of benefit/cost ratios both for each facility and the entire network. Assumptions may also be applied to the locations of newly recommended rest area facilities such that benefit/cost ratios may be estimated. The benefit/cost analysis will allow for comparison of the relative cost-effectiveness of each facility and any newly recommended facilities. Further, in addition to the traveler/trucker level of service scores, the benefit/cost results will help further inform the final recommendations for implementation and potential closure of rest area facilities.

Task 7. Develop and Submit Final Report and Other Deliverables Various deliverables will be prepared for submittal, including quarterly project reports and a final project report. An interim memo will be submitted to NDOT by early August 2020 that will include a list of recommended high priority new or refurbished rest area locations along with the recommended amenities. All deliverables will be submitted within the time schedule and format specified by NDOT. The final draft report will be submitted 90 days prior to the project end date and will include all project details including the rest area implementation plan. Following review of these materials by NDOT, the research team will revise and resubmit, with final approved materials submitted on or before the end date.

8 URGENCY AND ANTICIPATED BENEFITS It is estimated that more than half of the 35 rest areas maintained by NDOT may be in need of replacement. NDOT has estimated the costs of this replacement may range from $1.5M for minimal service rest stops to $9.9M for full-service welcome centers. As the next legislative session under which the rest area program would be considered will convene in 2021, this project would fill a critical and urgent need. This project will generate a range of quantitative and qualitative data that will be used as part of a rigorous assessment that results in estimates of the benefits derived by Nevada road users in terms of comfort, convenience, and safety. This will allow for a determination of gaps and redundancies in the system, as well as the determination of the economic viability of individual rest areas, as well as the cost-effectiveness of the entire rest area network. This research will also result in a revised rest are model, which considers the costs of providing various amenities with the perceived needs for these services from the perspective of both the general public and commercial vehicle operators. Collectively, this information will allow NDOT to assist the Nevada legislature in both short- and long-term decision-making as it relates to this statewide capital program. This project will also result in a detailed implementation plan, which will guide the proactive management of this $75M capital program. It is anticipated that personnel costs associated with this program will largely be absorbed as a part of the annual budget. Additional costs, in terms of new construction, reconstruction, and rehabilitation projects, will be dependent upon the results of the economic analyses. It is anticipated such projects would be undertaken only in cases where these efforts are shown to be economically viable. As such, this research is expected to result in significant net benefits to NDOT and the State of Nevada.

PROJECT SCHEDULE The following chart outlines the 24-month project duration and illustrates product delivery dates and key milestones. This includes the delivery of an interim memo by early August 2020 to provide NDOT with support for rest area funding requests in the 2021 legislative session. FY 2020 FY 2021 Tasks by Month O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S 1 Review of Literature and ♦ State DOT Practice 2 Inventory Data ♦ Collection 3 Rest Area User Survey ♦ 4 Identify Areas of Unmet ♠ ♦ Need and Recommend Locations for New or Rehabilitated Rest Areas 5 Traffic Crash Analysis ♦ 6 Benefit/Cost Analysis 7 Develop and Submit ♦ ● ♦ ▲ Final Report and Other Deliverables Notes: ♦ – Quarterly Progress Reports ♠ – Interim Memo Recommending Locations for New/Rehabilitated Rest Areas ● – Draft Final Report ▲– Final Report

9 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN As noted in the RFP, the NDOT Architecture Section is presenting a proposal to rebuild two Welcome Centers and one Rest Area for consideration by the 2019 Nevada legislature. At the conclusion of this project, the MSU team will deliver a rest area implementation plan that will provide support for immediate implementation (an interim version will be provided in August 2020). As such, this research would be classified at stages 4-5 of the research deployment process. The MSU will work with NDOT as necessary to develop a prioritization scheme that will guide subsequent investment decisions. This will include consideration of various scenarios, which may include the new construction, reconstruction/rehabilitation, or closure of rest area facilities. The research team has substantive experience in this domain, which includes the development of an Excel VBA spreadsheet tool for the Michigan DOT that allowed for determination of the impacts of rest area additions and closures. The team also has substantive experience in working with both DOTs and state legislatures on important policy issues and is able to provide a similar support role to ensure the successful implementation of the results of this research, including estimation of implementation costs in consultation with NDOT.

FACILITIES AND EXPERTISE The MSU team has background and technical expertise that uniquely qualifies it for this project, including completion of a statewide study of rest areas and welcome centers for the Michigan DOT under the direction of Timothy J. Gates, Ph.D., P.E. (21). Dr. Gates is an Associate Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at MSU. He has extensive research experience in transportation planning, traffic engineering, traffic safety, and economic analysis. This includes serving as PI or co-PI on more than $13.3 million of funded research from a variety of agencies. The quality of his work is reflected by a series of three Best Paper Awards from TRB committees, as well as recognition from AASHTO for a Top 5 High Value Research Project. Peter T. Savolainen, Ph.D., P.E., served as co-PI on the aforementioned rest area project for the Michigan DOT (21) and was recently a subject matter expert on a similar study conducted for the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (26). Collectively, these studies have led to a series of research publications that demonstrate the team’s expertise in this domain (21-22,24-27). Dr. Savolainen is an MSU Foundation Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, where he maintains an internationally recognized research program in transportation safety. He has served as PI or co-PI on more than $15 million worth of externally funded research, which has led to the publication of more than 100 peer-reviewed articles. The work related to this project will principally be conducted at the Spartan Mobility Village, a brand new state-of-the-art research facility at MSU. From this location, the group has access to various traffic operations and safety data sources, as well as a broad array of traffic related equipment and software available for research purposes.

PROJECT CHAMPION, COORDINATION, & INVOLVEMENT (OTHER DIVISIONS) During preparation of this proposal, the research team has communicated with NDOT Project Champion, Mr. Ross Baker, to clarify various aspects of the RFP, as well as to obtain insights as to the data that will be available from NDOT for the project, and clarify task timelines and delivery dates for interim products. In addition to Mr. Baker, the MSU team anticipates direct involvement of NDOT District Engineers (e.g., Mary Martini, Mike Fuess, Boyd Ratliff), the Deputy Administrator for Maintenance and Asset Management (Mylinh Lidder), and the Assistant Chief for Multimodal and Program Development (Kevin Verre).

10 BUDGET Project Title: Traveler Expectations and Future Use of Highway Rest Areas in the Western United States Project Duration: 10/01/19-09/30/21 Name Position / % Total Salary or Monthly Total Total Year 1 Title Fringe Fringe Wage % Salary or Monthly Benefit Benefit Hours Wage Dr. Timothy Gates - PI 7.65% $531.22 $6,944.10 $ $7,475.32 Summer Dr. Peter Savolainen - Co-PI 7.65% $568.84 $7,435.91 $ $8,004.75 Summer Graduate Assistants Grad Student $3,115.00 $3,115.00 $20,878.40 $ $23,993.40 (GA) - AY Researcher Graduate Assistants Grad Student 7.65% $532.39 $6,959.47 $ $7,491.86 (GA) – Summer hourly Researcher Student Assistants (SA) Undergrad 0% $0.00 $2,500.00 $ $2,500.00 – AY hourly Researcher Student Assistants (SA) Undergrad 7.65% $107.19 $1,401.15 $ $1,508.34 – Summer hourly Researcher Year 1 Total $4,854.64 $46,119.03 $ $50,973.67

Name Position / % Total Salary or Monthly Total Total Year 2 Title Fringe Fringe Wage % Salary or Monthly Benefit Benefit Hours Wage Dr. Timothy Gates - PI 7.65% $547.16 $7,152.43 $ $7,699.59 Summer Dr. Peter Savolainen - Co-PI 7.65% $585.91 $7,658.99 $ $8,244.90 Summer Graduate Assistants Grad Student $3,302.67 $3,302.67 $21,504.75 $ $24,807.42 (GA) - AY Researcher Graduate Assistants Grad Student 7.65% $548.37 $7,168.25 $ $7,716.62 (GA) – Summer hourly Researcher Student Assistants (SA) Undergrad 0% $0.00 $2,257.68 $ $2,257.68 – AY hourly Researcher Student Assistants (SA) Undergrad 7.65% $0.00 $0.00 $ $0.00 – Summer hourly Researcher Year 2 Total $4,984.11 $45,742.10 $ $50,726.21

Year 1 Year 2 TOTAL A. Personnel $50,973.67 $50,726.21 $101,699.88 B. Travel1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $7,000.00 C. Operating Costs (project required supplies) $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 D. Final Report Preparation and Submission $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $4,000.00 E. Other Costs $0.00 $0.00 $ F. Subcontracts (Only the first $25,000 on which indirect costs are allowed) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

G. Subtotal of Direct Costs (sum of A thru F) $57,473.67 $57,226.21 $114,699.88 H. Total Indirect Cost (56.5% of G at corresponding indirect cost rate) $32,472.65 $32,332.81 $64,805.46

I. Student Tuition and Fees $10,046.40 $10,448.26 $20,494.66 J. Subcontractor (in excess of the first $25,000) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

K. TOTAL PROJECT COSTS PER YEAR (sum of G thru J) $99,992.72 $100,007.28 $200,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $200,000.00 Notes: 1) DEPARTMENT only pays for travel that is essential for the completion of the project and cost are per state rates. Travel costs to professional and other meetings are not allowed. Out-of-state travel requires DEPARTMENT approval in advance.

11 REFERENCES 1. Bergal, J., Why Old-Fashioned Highway Rest Stops are Disappearing, USA Today, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/04/01/highway-rest-stops- disappearing/99868368/, Accessed June 25, 2019. 2. Michigan Department of Transportation, MDOT Closing I-275 Westland Rest Area in Wayne County Nov. 14, https://www.michigan.gov/som/0,4669,7-192-29907-479910--,00.html, Accessed June 25, 2019. 3. Henderson, B., NC Saved $1M Building a Rest Area in the Middle of I-77. But is it Safe for Drivers? https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article220151895.html, Accessed June 25, 2019. 4. KMVT-TV, Jerome Rest Area to Permanently Close, https://www.kmvt.com/content/news/Jerome-rest-area-to-permanently-close- 500187541.html, Accessed June 25, 2019. 5. Eaves, A., As Some States Close Highway Rest Stops, Others See Roadside Revenue, Stateline: State Policy & Politics, http://pew.org/1LCtecO, Accessed June 25, 2019. 6. Bello, M., States Close Rest Areas to Save Money, USA Today, http://www.usatoday.com/travel/2009-07-16-reststop_N.htm, Accessed June 25, 2019. 7. Smith. J., Welcome to CT, the Land of Bathroom Penny Pinchers, News Times, https://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Welcome-to-CT-the-land-of-bathroom-penny- 13724445.php, Accessed June 25, 2019. 8. Iowa Department of Transportation, Your Input is Needed to Determine the Future of Iowa’s Rest Areas, https://www.news.iowadot.gov/newsandinfo/2018/06/your-input-is-needed-to- determine-the-future-of-iowas-rest-areas.html, Accessed June 25, 2019. 9. Gardinier, B., State Closes Rest Stops Despite Protest, Times Union, http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/State-closes-rest-stops-despite-protest-778836.php, Accessed June 25, 2019. 10. McNally, S., Virginia Closes 18 Rest Stops: State Eases Parking Restrictions, https://www.ttnews.com/articles/virginia-closes-18-rest-stops, Accessed June 25, 2019. 11. Hochberg, A., Virginia Highway Rest Stops to Reopen, https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122799590, Accessed June 25, 2019. 12. Vasta, D., Dale-Area Rest Stops to Remain Open for Now, Dubois County Herald, https://duboiscountyherald.com/b/dale-area-rest-stops-to-remain-open-for-now, Accessed June 25, 2019. 13. Euritt, M.A., R. Harrison, and S. Grant. Feasibility of Safety Rest Area Commercialization in Texas: Final Report. University of Texas – Austin, Center for Transportation Research, Texas DOT, FHWA, Austin, TX, 1992. 14. Kress, E.N. and D.M. Dombusch. Commercialization of Rest Areas in California. In Transportation Research Record 1326. Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 1991. 15. Phillips, A.W.M. and M.A. Perfater. Opportunities for the Privatization of Virginia’s Rest Areas and Welcome Centers: Final Report. Virginia Transportation Research Council, Charlottesville, VA, 1991. 16. National Center for Statistics and Analysis. Drowsy Driving 2015 (Crash•Stats Brief Statistical Summary. Report No. DOT HS 812 446). Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2017.

12 17. De Valck, E., and R. Cluydts. Slow-Release Caffeine as a Countermeasure to Driver Sleepiness Induced by Partial Sleep Deprivation. Journal of Sleep Research, September, 2001. 18. Taylor, W.C., N. Sung, K. Kolody, and A. Jawad. A Study of Highway Rest Area Characteristics and Fatigue Related Truck Crashes. Michigan State University, July 1999. 19. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. “Interstate Highway Safety Study: Analysis of Vehicle Crashes Related to Safety Rest Area Spacing”. Minnesota Department of Transportation, July 2007. 20. Banerjee, I., J. Lee, K. Jang, S. Pande, and D. Ragland. Rest Areas: Reducing Accidents Involving Driver Fatigue. UC Berkeley Traffic Safety Center, California Department of Transportation, May 2009. 21. Gates TJ, PT Savolainen, TK Datta, RG Todd, and S Boileau, Evaluating the Appropriate Level of Service for Michigan Rest Areas and Welcome Centers Considering Safety and Economic Factors, Report to Michigan DOT No. RC-1570, 135 pgs., 2012. 22. McArthur, A., J.J. Kay, P.T. Savolainen, and T.J. Gates, “The effects of public rest areas on fatigue-related crashes”, Transportation Research Record, 2386, 16-25, 2013. 23. King, G.F. Evaluation of Safety Roadside Rest Areas. NCHRP Report 324. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1989. 24. Todd R.G., T.J. Gates, and P.T. Savolainen, “Evaluating traveler preferences and values for public rest areas”, Transportation Research Record, 2358, 49-56, 2013. 25. Gates T.J., P.T. Savolainen, T.K. Datta, and R.G. Todd, “Economic assessment of public rest areas and traveler information centers on limited-access freeways”, Transportation Research Record, 2346, 63-71, 2013. 26. SPR Associates, Inc., Final Report: Southern Ontario Rest Area Study, Ontario Ministry of Transportation, Toronto, ON, 2018. 27. Kay J.J., T.J. Gates, P.T. Savolainen, A. McArthur, and B.J. Russo, “Empirical models of demand levels and turn-in rates at roadside rest areas”, Transportation Research Record, 2430, 200-206, 2014.

13 Timothy J. Gates, PhD, PE

Associate Professor (517) 353-7224 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering [email protected] Michigan State University 428. S. Shaw Ln., Room 3573 East Lansing, MI 48824

EDUCATION  PhD, Civil Engineering (Transportation), University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 2007  MS, Civil Engineering (Transportation), Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 2000  BS, Civil Engineering (Transportation), Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 1999

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE  Associate Professor, Civil Engineering, Michigan State University, 2015–present  Assistant/Associate Professor, Civil Engineering Wayne State University, 2007–2015

SELECTED RESEARCH PROJECTS (boldface indicates rest area related)  Synthesis of National Best Practices on Pedestrian and Bicycle Design, Guidance and Technology Innovations, PI, April 2019 – Sept 2020, ($205,909).  Performance and Safety of the US-23 Flex Route Managed Lanes, co-PI, March 2019 – June 2020 ($187,678).  Evaluating the Impacts of the 2017 Legislative Mandated Speed Limit Increases, co-PI, March 2019 – March 2022 ($230,246).  Research on the Effectiveness of Crash Fact/Safety Message Signs on Dynamic Message Signs, co-PI, March 2019 – April 2020 ($127,023).  Research on Collision Avoidance & Mitigation System (CAMS) on Winter Maintenance Trucks, co-PI, Oct 2017-Sept 2018 ($180,265).  Research on the Operational Costs and Benefits of Speed Feedback Signs, PI, July 2018-June 2020 ($200,704).  NCHRP 17-76: Guidance for the Setting of Speed Limits, Subcontractor to Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI), co-PI, Dec 2016–May 2019 ($50,000).  Research on Assessment of Countermeasure Gaps, Predictive Crash Analysis and Engineering Safety Programs in Michigan, PI, Dec 2016-Dec 2018 ($328,885).  Michigan Rural Safety Performance Functions Development and Support, PI, Oct 2015–Sept 2017 ($311,355).  Michigan Urban Trunkline Segments SPF Development and Support, PI, Mar 2014–Aug 2016 ($210,019).  Michigan Urban Trunkline Intersections SPF Development and Support, PI, Sep 2013–Jun 2015 ($250,000).  Balancing the Costs of Mobility Investments in Work Zones, co-PI, Apr 2013–June 2015 ($250,000).  Evaluating Differential and Non-Differential Freeway Truck and Bus Speed Limits; Outcomes of Raising All Vehicle Speed Limits; and Research Support Services to I-94 Corridor Safety Study, PI, Feb 2013–Jul 2015 ($410,060).  Evaluating Non-Freeway Rumble Strips – Phases 1 & 2, co-PI, June 2010–June 2012, Feb 2013–Sept 2014 ($512,830).  Roadside Corridor Planning, PI, June 2012–June 2013 ($190,000).  Transportation Reliability and Trip Satisfaction, PI, Oct 2011–Sept 2012 ($172,901).  Evaluating the Appropriate Level of Service for Michigan Rest Areas and Welcome Centers Considering Safety and Economic Factors, PI, April 2011–April 2012 ($183,181).

14 SELECTED PAPERS (boldface indicates rest area related)  Stapleton, S, Ingle, A, Chakraborty, M, Gates, T., Savolainen, P. Safety Performance Functions for Rural Two-Lane County Road Segments. Transportation Research Record, TRB, 2018.  Kay, J.J., Gates, T.J., Savolainen, P.T. Raising Speed Limits on Rural Highways: A Process for Identification of Candidate Non-Freeway Segments. In Transportation Research Record 2618, TRB, 2017. Received “Best Paper Award” from the TRB Operational Effects of Geometrics Committee.  Stapleton, S., Kirsch, T., Gates, T.J., Savolainen, P.T. Factors Affecting Driver Yielding Compliance at Uncontrolled Midblock Crosswalks on Low Speed Roadways. . In Transportation Research Record 2661: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, TRB, Washington, D.C., 2017. Received the “Best Paper Award” from the TRB Committee on Pedestrians.  Hamzeie R., Savolainen P., Gates, T. Driver Speed Selection and Crash Risk: Insights from the Naturalistic Driving Study. In Journal of Safety Research, November 2017.  Russo, B.J., Savolainen, P.T., Gates, T.J., Kay, J.J. and Frazier, S. Driver Speed Selection on High- Speed Two-Lane Highways: Comparing Speed Profiles between Uniform and Differential Speed Limits. In Traffic Injury Prevention, Vol. 18, Issue 5, 2017.  Hamzeie, R., Vafaei, B., Kay, J.J., Savolainen, P.T., and Gates, T.J. A Short-Term Evaluation of the Transition from a Differential to Uniform Speed Limit for Trucks and Buses on Two-Lane Highways. In Transportation Research Record 2637: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, TRB, Washington, D.C., 2017.  Russo, B., Savolainen P.T., Gates, T.J., and Kirsch T. Development of Crash Modification Factors for Installation of High-Tension Cable Median Barrier. In Transportation Research Record 2588, TRB, 2016.  Gates, T., P. Savolainen, and J. Kay, Economic Analysis of 65-mph Speed Limits on Rural Nonfreeways. In Transportation Research Record 2597, TRB, 2016.  Gates, T. and P. Savolainen Economic Analysis of Freeway Speed Limit Policy Alternatives. In Transportation Research Record 2597: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, TRB, 2016.  Davis, A. E. Hacker, P.T. Savolainen, and T.J. Gates. A Longitudinal Analysis of Rural Interstate Fatalities in Relation to Speed Limit Policies. In Transportation Research Record 2514, 2015.  Russo, B.J., E. Rista, P.T. Savolainen, T.J. Gates, and S. Frazier. Analysis of Vehicle Speed Characteristics among States with Uniform and Differential Speed Limit Policies. In Transportation Research Record 2492: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, TRB, Washington, D.C., 2015.  Kay, J.J., P.T. Savolainen, T.J. Gates, T.K. Datta, J. Finkelman, and B. Hamadeh. Safety Impacts of Michigan’s Centerline Rumble Strip Program. Transportation Research Record 2515, 2015.  Kay J.J., T.J. Gates, P.T. Savolainen, A. McArthur, and B.J. Russo. Empirical Models of Demand Levels and Turn-in Rates at Roadside Rest Areas. In Transportation Research Record 2430, 200- 206, 2014.  McArthur, A., J.J. Kay, P.T. Savolainen, and T.J. Gates. The Effects of Public Rest Areas on Fatigue-related Crashes. In Transportation Research Record 2386, 16-25, 2013.  Todd R.G., T.J. Gates, and P.T. Savolainen. Evaluating Traveler Preferences and Values for Public Rest Areas. In Transportation Research Record 2358, 49-56, 2013.  Gates T.J., P.T. Savolainen, T.K. Datta, and R.G. Todd. Economic Assessment of Public Rest Areas and Traveler Information Centers on Limited-access Freeways. In Transportation Research Record 2346, 63-71, 2013.  Gates, T.J., P.T. Savolainen, T.K. Datta, R.G. Todd, B. Russo, and J. Morena. Use of Both Centerline and Rumble Strips on High-Speed Two-Lane Rural Roadways: Impact on Lateral Lane Position and Passing Maneuvers of Vehicles. In Transportation Research Record 2301, TRB, 2012. Received “Best Paper Award” from the TRB Operational Effects of Geometrics Committee.

15 Peter T. Savolainen, PhD, PE

MSU Foundation Professor (517) 432-1825 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering [email protected] Michigan State University 428. S. Shaw Ln., Room 3559 East Lansing, MI 48824

EDUCATION  PhD, Civil Engineering (Transportation), Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 2006  MS, Civil Engineering (Transportation), Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 2004  BS, Civil Engineering (Transportation), Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, 2002

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE  MSU Foundation Professor, Civil Engineering, Michigan State University, 2018–present  Associate Professor, Civil Engineering, Iowa State University, 2014–2018  Assistant/Associate Professor, Civil Engineering Wayne State University, 2006–2014

SELECTED RESEARCH PROJECTS (boldface indicates rest area related)  Synthesis of National Best Practices on Pedestrian and Bicycle Design, Guidance and Technology Innovations, PI, April 2019 – Sept 2020, ($205,909).  Effectiveness of Green Strobes on Winter Maintenance Vehicles and Equipment, co-PI, ($110,857).  Performance and Safety of the US-23 Flex Route Managed Lanes, co-PI, March 2019 – June 2020 ($187,678).  Evaluating the Impacts of the 2017 Legislative Mandated Speed Limit Increases, co-PI, March 2019 – March 2022 ($230,246).  Research on the Effectiveness of Crash Fact/Safety Message Signs on Dynamic Message Signs, co-PI, March 2019 – April 2020 ($127,023).  Research on Collision Avoidance & Mitigation System (CAMS) on Winter Maintenance Trucks, co-PI, Oct 2017-Sept 2018 ($180,265).  Michigan Rural Safety Performance Functions Development and Support, co-PI, Oct 2015–Sept 2017 ($311,355).  SHRP2 - The Interrelationships between Speed Limits, Geometry and Driver Behavior; Phases 1-3, PI, Feb 2015-Sept 2020 ($1,000,000).  Michigan Urban Trunkline Segments SPF Development and Support, co-PI, Mar 2014–Aug 2016 ($210,019).  Michigan Urban Trunkline Intersections SPF Development and Support, co-PI, Sep 2013–Jun 2015 ($250,000).  Evaluating Differential and Non-Differential Freeway Truck and Bus Speed Limits; Outcomes of Raising All Vehicle Speed Limits; and Research Support Services to I-94 Corridor Safety Study, co-PI, Feb 2013–Jul 2015 ($410,060).  Study of High Tension Cable Barrier on Michigan Roadways, PI, Oct 2011-Sept 2014 ($223,898)  Evaluating Non-Freeway Rumble Strips – Phases 1 & 2, co-PI, June 2010–June 2012, Feb 2013–Sept 2014 ($512,830).  Roadside Corridor Planning, co-PI, June 2012–June 2013 ($190,000).  Transportation Reliability and Trip Satisfaction, co-PI, Oct 2011–Sept 2012 ($172,901).  Evaluating the Appropriate Level of Service for Michigan Rest Areas and Welcome Centers Considering Safety and Economic Factors, co-PI, April 2011–April 2012 ($183,181).  Timing Issues for Signals Interconnected w/Railroad Crossings, co-PI, Jul 2011–Aug 2012 ($89,758)  Safety of Work Zone Drum Steady Burn Warning Lights, co-PI, Nov 2010–Dec 2011 ($200,000) 16 SELECTED PAPERS (boldface indicates rest area related)  Russo, B.J. and P. T. Savolainen, A Comparison of Freeway Median Crash Frequency, Severity, and Barrier Strike Outcomes by Median Barrier Type, In Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 117, 216- 224, 2018.  Wang, B., S. Hallmark, P.T. Savolainen, and J. Dong, Crashes and Near-crashes on Horizontal Curves along Rural Two-lane Highways: Analysis of Naturalistic Driving Data, In Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 63, 163-169, 2017.  Hamzeie, R., I. Thompson, S. Roy, and P.T. Savolainen, State-level Comparison of Traffic Fatality Data in Consideration of Marijuana Laws, In Transportation Research Record 2660, 78-85, 2017.  Stapleton, S, Ingle, A, Chakraborty, M, Gates, T., Savolainen, P. Safety Performance Functions for Rural Two-Lane County Road Segments. In Transportation Research Record, TRB, 2018.  Kay, J.J., Gates, T.J., Savolainen, P.T. Raising Speed Limits on Rural Highways: A Process for Identification of Candidate Non-Freeway Segments. In Transportation Research Record 2618, TRB, 2017. Received “Best Paper Award” from the TRB Operational Effects of Geometrics Committee.  Stapleton, S., Kirsch, T., Gates, T.J., Savolainen, P.T. Factors Affecting Driver Yielding Compliance at Uncontrolled Midblock Crosswalks on Low Speed Roadways. . In Transportation Research Record 2661, TRB, Washington, D.C., 2017. Received the “Best Paper Award” from the TRB Committee on Pedestrians.  Hamzeie R., Savolainen P., Gates, T. Driver Speed Selection and Crash Risk: Insights from the Naturalistic Driving Study. In Journal of Safety Research, November 2017.  Russo, B.J., Savolainen, P.T., Gates, T.J., Kay, J.J. and Frazier, S. Driver Speed Selection on High- Speed Two-Lane Highways: Comparing Speed Profiles between Uniform and Differential Speed Limits. In Traffic Injury Prevention, Vol. 18, Issue 5, 2017.  Hamzeie, R., Vafaei, B., Kay, J.J., Savolainen, P.T., and Gates, T.J. A Short-Term Evaluation of the Transition from a Differential to Uniform Speed Limit for Trucks and Buses on Two-Lane Highways. In Transportation Research Record 2637, TRB, Washington, D.C., 2017.  Gates, T., P. Savolainen, and J. Kay, Economic Analysis of 65-mph Speed Limits on Rural Nonfreeways. In Transportation Research Record 2597, TRB, 2016.  Gates, T. and P. Savolainen Economic Analysis of Freeway Speed Limit Policy Alternatives. In Transportation Research Record 2597, TRB, 2016.  Davis, A. E. Hacker, P.T. Savolainen, and T.J. Gates. A Longitudinal Analysis of Rural Interstate Fatalities in Relation to Speed Limit Policies. In Transportation Research Record 2514, 2015.  Kay, J.J., P.T. Savolainen, T.J. Gates, T.K. Datta, J. Finkelman, and B. Hamadeh. Safety Impacts of Michigan’s Centerline Rumble Strip Program. Transportation Research Record 2515, 2015.  Kay J.J., T.J. Gates, P.T. Savolainen, A. McArthur, and B.J. Russo. Empirical Models of Demand Levels and Turn-in Rates at Roadside Rest Areas. In Transportation Research Record 2430, 200- 206, 2014.  McArthur, A., J.J. Kay, P.T. Savolainen, and T.J. Gates. The Effects of Public Rest Areas on Fatigue-related Crashes. In Transportation Research Record 2386, 16-25, 2013.  Todd R.G., T.J. Gates, and P.T. Savolainen. Evaluating Traveler Preferences and Values for Public Rest Areas. In Transportation Research Record 2358, 49-56, 2013.  Gates T.J., P.T. Savolainen, T.K. Datta, and R.G. Todd. Economic Assessment of Public Rest Areas and Traveler Information Centers on Limited-access Freeways. In Transportation Research Record 2346, 63-71, 2013.  Gates, T.J., P.T. Savolainen, T.K. Datta, R.G. Todd, B. Russo, and J. Morena. Use of Both Centerline and Shoulder Rumble Strips on High-Speed Two-Lane Rural Roadways: Impact on Lateral Lane Position and Passing Maneuvers of Vehicles. In Transportation Research Record 2301, TRB, 2012. Received “Best Paper Award” from the TRB Operational Effects of Geometrics Committee.

17