DOCSLIB.ORG

Safety Roadside Rest Area Master Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Safety Roadside Rest Area Master Plan FINAL TASK 5 REPORT STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS Safety Roadside Rest Area Master Plan Prepared for The California Department of Transportation Contract No: 65A0334 By Dornbusch Associates April 2011 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE TR0003 (REV. 10/98) 1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION NUMBER 3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NUMBER 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NUMBER 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER 12. SPONSORING AGENCY AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED California Department of Transportation Division of Research and Innovation, MS-83 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE 1227 O Street Sacramento CA 95814 15. SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES 16. ABSTRACT 17. KEY WORDS 18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION (of this report) 20. NUMBER OF PAGES 21. PRICE Unclassified Reproduction of completed page authorized Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 1 I. BACKGROUND & INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 2 II. OPPORTUNITIES FOR AND CONSTRAINTS ON AMENDING THE SRRA SYSTEM ............. 3 A. OVERVIEW OF NEW PROGRAMS, POLICIES, AND INITIATIVES ................................................... 3 B. STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE THE SRRA SYSTEM .............................................................................. 16 III. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXISTING SRRAS ........................................................................... 30 A. CRITERIA USED TO EVALUATE EXISTING SRRA LOCATIONS ..................................................... 30 B. INTERSTATE 5 ..................................................................................................................................... 36 C. INTERSTATE 8 ..................................................................................................................................... 60 D. INTERSTATE 10 ................................................................................................................................... 64 E. INTERSTATE 15 ................................................................................................................................... 70 F. INTERSTATE 40 ................................................................................................................................... 72 G. INTERSTATE 80 ................................................................................................................................... 74 H. INTERSTATE 280 ................................................................................................................................. 79 I. U.S. HIGHWAY 97 ................................................................................................................................ 80 J. U.S. HIGHWAY 101 .............................................................................................................................. 81 K. U.S. HIGHWAY 199 .............................................................................................................................. 89 L. U.S. HIGHWAY 395 .............................................................................................................................. 90 M. STATE HIGHWAY 36 ........................................................................................................................... 95 N. STATE HIGHWAY 44 ........................................................................................................................... 97 O. STATE HIGHWAY 46 ........................................................................................................................... 99 P. STATE HIGHWAY 58 ......................................................................................................................... 100 Q. STATE HIGHWAY 70 ......................................................................................................................... 101 R. STATE HIGHWAY 99 ......................................................................................................................... 104 S. STATE HIGHWAY 111 ....................................................................................................................... 108 T. STATE HIGHWAY 299 ....................................................................................................................... 109 IV. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROPOSED NEW STOPPING OPPORTUNITIES ................... 113 A. CRITERIA USED TO IDENTIFY NEW STOPPING OPPORTUNITY LOCATIONS......................... 113 B. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HIGH NEED AREAS .......................................................................... 115 C. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ALL OTHER LOCATIONS ................................................................. 132 APPENDICES A. TASK 1 REPORT. BACKGROUND RESEARCH & ANALYSIS B. SRRA CLOSURE GUIDELINES C. SRRA MASTER PLAN MAP Task 5 Report: Strategic Recommendations| Dornbusch Associates DISCLAIMER STATEMENT This document is disseminated in the interest of information exchange. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California or the Federal Highway Administration. This publication does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. This report does not constitute an endorsement by the Department of any product described herein. For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in Braille, large print, audiocassette, or compact disk. To obtain a copy of this document in one of these alternate formats, please contact: the Division of Research and Innovation, MS-83, California Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 942873, Sacramento, CA 94273-0001. Task 5 Report: Strategic Recommendations| Dornbusch Associates EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report recommends strategies to enhance the safety roadside rest area (SRRA) system while also assessing the use/parking needs of existing rest areas and the locations where new rest area services are most needed. The following summarizes some of the key findings of this report: • Based on data obtained by SRRA traffic count surveys, average annual daily traffic (AADT) at existing SRRAs ranges widely, between 56 and 3,007 vehicles per day, with average AADT for all 87 SRRAs of 859 vehicles per day. • Vehicle count surveys performed as part of this analysis and count data from previous surveys performed by Caltrans indicate that on average 74% of vehicles entering SRRAs are autos and 26% are trucks and buses. • It is estimated that over the next 20 years, 52 of the 87 SRRAs (or 60% of all SRRAs) will require some level of additional parking to meet forecasted parking demand. Projected 20- year SRRA parking deficiencies range between 1 and 76 spaces, with an average parking deficiency of 20 spaces. • A total of nine SRRAs were identified as being potential candidates for closure or replacement due to low utilization rates, close proximity to other SRRAs or stopping opportunities, and other factors. In considering SRRA closures, Caltrans should consult the SRRA closure evaluation guidelines specified in Section IIA Part 6 and Section B of the Appendix of this report. • A total of 22 highway segments were identified as being in need of new rest area services, with 11 high priority regions identified. • Developing public/private partnerships to provide rest area services is judged to represent one of the most effective long-term strategies for simultaneously increasing the level of rest area services statewide and reducing rest area development and operating costs incurred by the state. • Federal and state laws continue to prohibit the provision of commercial services at SRRAs located within the right-of-way of federally funded highways. These laws limit the options available in developing public/private partnerships at SRRAs. • Considering the limitations created by federal and state laws, it is recommended that Caltrans seek to implement public/private SRRA partnerships which offer commercial services exclusively at off-line locations, outside the highway right-of-way. • The Federal Interstate Oasis program is judged to represent the public/private partnership model that yields the best chance of being successfully implemented in California. It is recommended that Caltrans emphasize efforts to develop Oasis-type partnerships, particularly focusing on the Intestate Oasis Program, as the primary form of rest area public/private partnerships developed at off-line locations. • In addition to Interstate Oasis partnerships, it is recommended that Caltrans investigate the potential of developing public/private partnerships on land owned by Caltrans at the Sidewinder Road interchange on Interstate 8 and at the State Route 76 interchange on 1 Task 5 Report: Strategic Recommendations| Dornbusch Associates Interstate 15. These locations offer Caltrans the opportunity to develop alternative types of public/private partnership arrangements, including lease based partnership arrangements.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Commercialization of Rest Areas in California
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1326 Commercialization of Rest Areas in California EDWARD N. KRESS AND DAVID M. DORNBUSCH The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is study­ The cost of building a new rest area that serves both di­ ing the feasibility of establishing private commercial services in rections of freeway travel to Caltrans' standards is about $5 rest areas. A lease was signed in late 1990 for the first traveler million plus the expense of land, which varies considerably services rest area (TSRA), which provides such commercial ser­ from site to site. A standard full-size rest area, located ad­ vices. Under the agreement, a private partnership will build, op­ erate, and maintain the rest area for 35 years, after which all jacent to the freeway and accessible from an existing inter­ improvements will become the state's property. Cal trans will con­ change, provides parking spaces for 240 vehicles and modern tribute the land and $500,000 in exchange for an operatiug rest comfort stations, fully supported by utilities and site ameni­ area and revenues from the commercial operations, estimated to ties. be at least $9 million over the life of the agreement. TSRAs are In addition, annual maintenance costs are between $75,000 still in an experimental stage, and two main obstacles impede and $125,000, not including the hidden costs of insurance further developments: federal law prohibiting commercial serv­ ices on Interstates and opposition from local business operators (California self-insures) and security (provided by the Cali­ who fear additional competition. However, during development fornia Highway Patrol and local Jaw enforcement agencies).
    [Show full text]
  • Safety Rest Areas and the American Travel Experience
    Balancing Past and Present Safety Rest Areas and the American Travel Experience Joanna Dowling, MSHP National Safety Rest Area Conference 2008 I have been researching rest area history and architecture for the past three years now, and one of the things that I have learned in that time, is that if you are going to study bathroom history you have to have a sense of humor about it, so I am going to attempt to make this discussion as lively as possible. My primary focus has been looking at the developmental history of the rest area program, beginning with the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 through the 1970s. And also looking at the architectural forms that were built in these sites; this is based on a background in historic preservation and architectural history. I presented at two conferences in Albuquerque last month, The Society for Commercial Archeology and Preserving the Historic Road, and people were very interested in this topic, which I hope will be encouraging to all of you. Today, I want to talk about the more functional aspect of this story. In keeping with the theme of the conference “More with Less,” the premise of my talk is “balancing past and present.” because I think that there are many mutually beneficial solutions to be found in the combined awareness of history and function. 1 Designed to be both functional and aesthetically pleasing, the rest areas at most locations will include lighted rest-room facilities, a few picnic tables and benches, parking, on-and-off ramps, a water fountain, litter barrels, a telephone booth and a travel information shelf.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapters 2I-2N
    2009 Edition Page 299 CHAPTER 2I. GENERAL SERVICE SIGNS Section 2I.01 Sizes of General Service Signs Standard: 01 Except as provided in Section 2A.11, the sizes of General Service signs that have a standardized design shall be as shown in Table 2I-1. Support: 02 Section 2A.11 contains information regarding the applicability of the various columns in Table 2I-1. Option: 03 Signs larger than those shown in Table 2I-1 may be used (see Section 2A.11). Table 2I-1. General Service Sign and Plaque Sizes (Sheet 1 of 2) Conventional Freeway or Sign or Plaque Sign Designation Section Road Expressway Rest Area XX Miles D5-1 2I.05 66 x 36* 96 x 54* 120 x 60* (F) Rest Area Next Right D5-1a 2I.05 78 x 36* 114 x 48* (E) Rest Area (with arrow) D5-2 2I.05 66 x 36* 96 x 54* 78 x 78* (F) Rest Area Gore D5-2a 2I.05 42 x 48* 66 x 72* (E) Rest Area (with horizontal arrow) D5-5 2I.05 42 x 48* — Next Rest Area XX Miles D5-6 2I.05 60 x 48* 90 x 72* 114 x 102* (F) Rest Area Tourist Info Center XX Miles D5-7 2I.08 90 x 72* 132 x 96* (E) 120 x 102* (F) Rest Area Tourist Info Center (with arrow) D5-8 2I.08 84 x 72* 120 x 96* (E) 144 x 102* (F) Rest Area Tourist Info Center Next Right D5-11 2I.08 90 x 72* 132 x 96* (E) Interstate Oasis D5-12 2I.04 — 156 x 78 Interstate Oasis (plaque) D5-12P 2I.04 — 114 x 48 Brake Check Area XX Miles D5-13 2I.06 84 x 48 126 x 72 Brake Check Area (with arrow) D5-14 2I.06 78 x 60 96 x 72 Chain-Up Area XX Miles D5-15 2I.07 66 x 48 96 x 72 Chain-Up Area (with arrow) D5-16 2I.07 72 x 54 96 x 66 Telephone D9-1 2I.02 24 x 24 30 x 30 Hospital
    [Show full text]
  • Interstate 75 Rest Areas Project Development and Environment Study
    Interstate 75 Rest Areas Project Development and Environment Study From the Charlotte/Lee County Line to SR 681 in Sarasota County Charlotte and Sarasota Counties, Florida FPID: 436602-1-22-01 March, 2017 FDOT Evaluates New I-75 Rest Areas Rest Area Design Concept The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), District One, is conducting a Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study to identify sites for the placement of one northbound and one southbound rest area facility along Interstate 75. The study limits extend from the Charlotte/Lee County line north to the interchange of SR 681 and I-75 in Sarasota County. The FDOT is evaluating two sites in Public Hearing Scheduled Charlotte County located south of the Airport Road overpass FDOT invites you to a public hearing regarding the to replace the recently closed rest area at the North Jones identification of sites for two new rest areas along Interstate 75 in Loop interchange. Each of the build alternatives shown on Southwest Florida. Your participation and feedback about this the map below will require additional right-of-way adjacent to project are important. FDOT anticipates final site selection in mid- I-75. FDOT does not anticipate residential or business 2017. The hearing will begin with an informal open house at 5 relocations for the build alternatives. As part of this study, p.m., and the formal hearing will begin at 6 p.m. The study team FDOT will consider a “no-build” alternative, which would not will be available throughout the evening to discuss the project include a new rest area in this segment of I-75.
    [Show full text]
  • Cta Snapshot of National Driver Rest Area/Service Facility Support During Covid-19 Pandemic
    CTA SNAPSHOT OF NATIONAL DRIVER REST AREA/SERVICE FACILITY SUPPORT DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC (AS OF APRIL 7, 2020) The Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) and the provincial associations are working hard with provincial governments and the Government of Canada to keep rest stops open, clean, with washrooms accessible and food provided for truck drivers during the COVID-19 crisis. CTA and its provincial association members appreciate this support. Private companies are also stepping up – CTA is a working with Restaurants Canada to find workarounds to drive-thru access policies so truck drivers can receive food service. So far, McDonalds, A&W, Tim Hortons and Swiss Chalet have stepped up. However, despite the gracious efforts by these great corporate citizens, CTA is continuously receiving reports of very poor treatment of drivers at shipper/receiver facilities like inadequate or non-existent social distance policies; lack of bathroom access; or no access to food and even a place to rest, just to name a few examples. Support in the form of public messaging and moral persuasion may be required by all levels of government to remind such companies that their behaviour towards drivers should reflect a more “McDonalds” and “A&W” approach. Regarding public rest area facilities for trucks, it was clear that prior to COVID-19 we had a shortage of locations; however, the situation has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 crisis. CTA appreciates all the efforts of the federal and provincial governments on this issue; however, based on reports from members across the country, we collectively have more work to do.
    [Show full text]
  • Classification of Inter-Urban Highway Drivers' Resting Behavior for Advanced Driver-Assistance System Technologies Using Vehic
    sustainability Article Classification of Inter-Urban Highway Drivers’ Resting Behavior for Advanced Driver-Assistance System Technologies using Vehicle Trajectory Data from Car Navigation Systems Jaeheon Choi 1 , Kyuil Lee 1, Hyunmyung Kim 1, Sunghi An 2 and Daisik Nam 2,* 1 Department of Transportation Engineering, Myong Ji University, Gyeonggi-do 17058, Korea; [email protected] (J.C.); [email protected] (K.L.); [email protected] (H.K.) 2 Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 1 June 2020; Accepted: 21 July 2020; Published: 23 July 2020 Abstract: Fatigue-related crashes, which are mainly caused by drowsy or distracted driving, account for a significant portion of fatal accidents on highways. Smart vehicle technologies can address this issue of road safety to improve the sustainability of transportation systems. Advanced driver-assistance system (ADAS) can aid drowsy drivers by recommending and guiding them to rest locations. Past research shows a significant correlation between driving distance and driver fatigue, which has been actively studied in the analysis of resting behavior. Previous research efforts have mainly relied on survey methods at specific locations, such as rest areas or toll booths. However, such traditional methods, like field surveys, are expensive and often produce biased results, based on sample location and time. This research develops methods to better estimate travel resting behavior by utilizing a large-scale dataset obtained from car navigation systems, which contain 591,103 vehicle trajectories collected over a period of four months in 2014. We propose an algorithm to statistically categorize drivers according to driving distances and their number of rests.
    [Show full text]
  • Level of Service for Michigan Rest Areas and Welcome Centers Considering Safety and Economic Factors Final Report ORBP Reference Number: OR10‐045
    Evaluating the Appropriate Level of Service for Michigan Rest Areas and Welcome Centers Considering Safety and Economic Factors Final Report ORBP Reference Number: OR10‐045 Prepared For: Michigan Department of Transportation Office of Research and Best Practices 425 West Ottawa Lansing, MI 48933 Prepared By: Wayne State University Transportation Research Group 5050 Anthony Wayne Drive Detroit, MI 48202 Authors: Timothy J. Gates, Ph.D., P.E . Peter T. Savolainen, Ph. D., P.E . Tapan K. Datta, Ph.D., P.E . Ryan G. Todd, and Stephanie Boileau April 30, 2012 Evaluating the Appropriate Level of Service for Michigan Rest Areas and Welcome Centers Considering Safety and Economic Factors MDOT ORBP Project Number: OR10-045 FINAL REPORT By Timothy J. Gates, Ph.D., P.E., Peter T. Savolainen, Ph.D., P.E., Tapan K. Datta, Ph.D., P.E., Ryan G. Todd, and Stephanie Boileau Wayne State University - Transportation Research Group April 30, 2012 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. MDOT Project Manager RC-1570 N/A Lynn Lynwood 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Evaluating the Appropriate Level of Service for Michigan Rest April 30, 2012 Areas and Welcome Centers Considering Safety and Economic 6. Performing Organization Code Factors N/A 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Org. Report No. Timothy J. Gates, Peter T. Savolainen, Tapan K. Datta, Ryan G. N/A Todd, and Stephanie Boileau 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Wayne State University-Transportation Research Group N/A Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering 11. Contract No. 5050 Anthony Wayne Drive, Room #0504 2010-0298 Detroit, MI 48202 11(a).
    [Show full text]
  • Rest Areas: Mounting Costs and Increased Expectations Create the Perfect Opportunity for Exploring New Public Private Partnerships
    Rest Areas: Mounting Costs and Increased Expectations Create the Perfect Opportunity For Exploring New Public Private Partnerships Prepared by Ken Winter, June 2008 VDOT Research Library 530 Edgemont Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 Ph: (434) 293-1959 Fax: (434) 293-1990 [email protected] KEY SEARCH TERMS: Roadside Rest Areas Truck Stops Public Private Partnerships Financing Privatization Research Synthesis Bibliography No. 17 Research Synthesis Bibliographies (RSBs) are distillations of relevant transportation research on current topics of interest to researchers, engineers, and policy/decision makers. Sources cited are available for loan (or available through Interlibrary Loan) to VDOT employees through the VDOT Research Library. Commercialization Still Not Allowed at Rest Areas, But Federal Stance Softening Efforts to privatize rest areas and welcome centers on Interstate highways have been steadily progressing for 40 years. Today the idea of rest area privatization (or any commercialization beyond vending machines and information booths) continues to be explored by state DOTs, AASHTO, USDOT and FHWA. In addition, support in Congress to reform transportation policies related to rest areas has been increasing. In the 1960s, during development of the interstate highway system, state and federal fuel tax receipts were sufficient to fund the maintenance of existing rest facilities and provide for expansion through new construction, including the maintenance and development of new rest areas. However, with the rapid growth in VMT and limited growth in revenues from gas taxes, funding for the development of public rest areas has become a lower priority (Kress and Dornbusch, 1991, 1). Clearly, the environment and context in which rest areas were initially developed has undergone tremendous change.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Scan for Truck Parking Needs at Rest Areas
    Truck Parking Needs at Rest Areas Environmental Scan Transport Canada Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation Truck Parking Needs at Rest Areas Environmental Scan Jeannette Montufar, Ph.D., P.Eng. Jonathan D. Regehr, P.Eng. Garreth Rempel, EIT Montufar & Associates Transportation Consulting Winnipeg, Manitoba and Benjamin Jablonski Greg Blatz University of Manitoba Transport Information Group Winnipeg, Manitoba March 24, 2009 The findings of this report do not represent the views of any individual, party, or organization that commissioned or contributed information for the analysis. The independent consulting team of Montufar & Associates used the best available information within the time and budget constraints for the study. Readers are responsible for fully understanding any limitations of this study and exercising any caution that may be warranted as a result of the methodologies used when applying the results. This report does not reflect the views or policies of Transport Canada. Neither Transport Canada, nor its employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this report, or process described herein, and assumes no responsibility for anyone's use of the information. Transport Canada is not responsible for errors or omissions in this report and makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of the information. Transport Canada does not endorse products or companies. Reference in this report to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by Transport Canada and shall not be used for advertising or service endorsement purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Signs
    TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic signs control the flow of traffic, warn you of hazards ahead, guide you to your destination, and inform you of roadway services. As indicated below, traffic signs are intentionally color coded to assist the operator. RED - stop GREEN - direction YELLOW - general warning BLACK/WHITE - regulation BLUE - motorist service (e.g., gas, food, hotels) BROWN - recreational, historic, or scenic site ORANGE - construction or maintenance warning STOP AND YIELD SIGNS The STOP sign always means come to a complete halt and applies to each vehicle that comes to the sign. You must stop before any crosswalk or stop line painted on the pavement. Come to a complete stop, yield to pedestrians or other vehicles, and proceed carefully. Simply slowing down is not enough. If a 4-WAY or ALL WAY sign is added to a STOP sign at an intersection, all traffic approaching the intersection must stop. The first vehicle in the intersection of a four-way stop has the right of way. When you see a YIELD sign, slow down and be prepared to stop. Let traffic, pedestrians, or bicycles pass before you enter the intersection or join another roadway. You must come to a complete stop if traffic conditions require it. 56 REGULATORY SIGNS The United States is now using an international system of traffic control signs that feature pictures and symbols rather than words. The red-and-white YIELD and DO NOT ENTER signs prohibit access or movement. WARNING SIGNS Yellow warning signs alert you to hazards or changes in conditions ahead. Changes in road layout, proximity to a school zone, or some special situation are examples of warning signs.
    [Show full text]
  • Traveler Expectations and Future Use of Highway Rest Areas in the Western United States
    Traveler Expectations and Future Use of Highway 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 restaurants, and motels. 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Rest Area User Survey
    REST AREA USER SURVEY By Dan Blomquist Jodi Carson Research Assistant Senior Research Associate Of the Western Transportation Institute Civil Engineering Department Montana State University - Bozeman Prepared for the STATE OF MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Transportation Planning Division Special Studies December 1998 DISCLAIMER The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT). Alternative accessible formats of this document will be provided upon request. Western Transportation Institute Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1.1 Goals and Objectives .................................................................................................. 2 1.1.2 Benefits ....................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Background......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Literature Review................................................................................................................ 3 1.3.1 Travel and Demographic Characteristics...................................................................
    [Show full text]