GUIDEBOOK ON PRESERVING THE FUNCTIONALITY OF STATE HIGHWAYS IN TEXAS by Edwin N. Hard Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute Brian S. Bochner, P. E. Senior Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute and Yingfeng (Eric) Li, Ph.D. Assistant Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute Product 0-6208-P1 Project 0-6208 Project Title: Preserving Functionality/Asset Value of the State Highway System Prepared in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration March 2009 Published: May 2010 http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-6208-P1.pdf TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 DISCLAIMER 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 view or policies of the FHWA or TxDOT. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The research supervisor in charge of this project was Edwin N. Hard. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was conducted in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The research reported herein was performed by the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI). Mr. Blair Haynie, district transportation planning engineer of TxDOT’s Abilene District, served as the research project director and TxDOT’s Transportation Planning and Programming Division, directed by Mr. Jim Randall, was the Office of Primary Responsibility for the project. The authors would like to thank the members of the Project Monitoring Committee for their advisement and guidance: Mr. Robert Appleton, Bryan District, Texas Department of Transportation; Ms. Maria Burke, Design Division, Texas Department of Transportation; Ms. Melisa Montemayor, Laredo District, Texas Department of Transportation; Mr. Kenneth Petr, Amarillo District, Texas Department of Transportation; Ms. Peggy Thurin, Transportation Planning and Programming Division, Texas Department of Transportation; Mr. Henry Wickes, Traffic Division, Texas Department of Transportation; and Mr. Doug Woodall, Texas Turnpike Authority, Texas Department of Transportation; The authors would like to provide special thanks to Duncan Stewart and Sylvia Medina of TxDOT’s Research and Technology Implementation (RTI) Division for their assistance in this project. They would also like to thank the following individuals for providing their time and insights: Ms. Catherine McCreight – Houston District; Ms. Elvia Cardinal – Houston District; Ms. Karen Baker – Conroe Area Office; Mr. Jim Heacock – Houston District; Ms. Francis Willams – Houston District; Mr. Dan Wilds – Montgomery County Engineers Office; and Mr. Amar Mohite – Planning and Development, City of Houston. The following individuals are acknowledged for their research and written contributions in the final report of this research report from which portions of this guidebook are based. Dr. Yi Qi, Department of Transportation Studies, Texas Southern University and Dr. Ivan Damnjanovic, Department of Construction and Engineering Management, Texas A&M University. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... vii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ vii Project Purpose and Background .................................................................................................1 Role and Importance of Highway Functionality ..........................................................................3 Five Components Affecting Highway Functionality ...............................................................4 Functionality Cycle ..................................................................................................................5 Use Performance Measures to Monitor Functionality .............................................................6 Planning to Maintain Functionality .............................................................................................9 MPO and Statewide Efforts .....................................................................................................9 TxDOT and Local Practices and Policies ..............................................................................11 Operations and Functionality .....................................................................................................13 Traffic Control and Management ...........................................................................................13 Signal Coordination and Optimization ..................................................................................14 Facility Design and Enhancement .........................................................................................16 Right of Way, Utilities, and Functionality .................................................................................19 Right-of-Way Acquisition .....................................................................................................19 Right-of-Way Protection ........................................................................................................20 Utility Accommodation .........................................................................................................21 Safety and Functionality ............................................................................................................25 Infrastructure Affects on Functionality ......................................................................................27 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................29 Choices ...................................................................................................................................29 The Right Choice ...................................................................................................................30 References ..................................................................................................................................31 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Operational Functionality Cycle. ..................................................................................... 6 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Practices by Component Affecting Functionality. ............................................................ 5 Table 2. MPO and Statewide Planning Practices, Roles, and Actions to Address Functionality. 10 Table 3. District and Local Planning Practices and Actions to Address Functionality. ............... 12 Table 4. Traffic Control and Management and Actions to Address Functionality. ...................... 14 Table 5. Signal Coordination and Optimization and Actions to Address Functionality. ............. 15 Table 6. Facility Design and Enhancement and Actions to Address Functionality. ..................... 17 Table 7. Right-of-Way Acqusition and Actions to Address Functionality. .................................. 20 Table 8. Right-of-Way Protection and Actions to Address Functionality. ................................... 21 Table 9. Utility Accomodation and Actions to Address Functionality. ........................................ 23 Table 10. Safety and Actions to Address Functionality. .............................................................. 26 Table 11. Pavements, Bridges, and Actions to Address Functionality. ........................................ 28 vii PROJECT PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The purpose of this project was to identify the sources of deterioration of state highway functionality that occur over time and what actions can be taken to preserve, recover, and enhance functionality. Congestion and operational problems slow traffic, resulting in wasted fuel and time. Safety problems endanger goods and people and poor pavement can affect both travel speed and safety. In light of this, it is important that functionality be considered in all stages of a highway’s lifecycle and that it be protected, preserved, and where possible enhanced during the course of planning, growth and development, operations, and maintenance. This report provides guidelines through an extensive list of actions for how TxDOT, MPOs, local jurisdictions, and other transportation stakeholders and agencies can protect, preserve, and enhance the functionality of the state highway system. It represents product P1 of TxDOT research project 0-6208, Preserving Functionality/Asset Value of the State Highway System. Relative to the full 0-6208-1 research report, this document is intended to serve as a reference document. 1 ROLE AND IMPORTANCE OF HIGHWAY FUNCTIONALITY Highway functionality determines how well highway facilities serve Texas and its many highway corridors. With Texas’ population and economy spread far and wide across the state, our state highways are the lifeblood of Texas. Achieving a high level of functionality across the Texas highway system is important to the state’s residents and businesses for many reasons: Mobility and accessibility are major factors in making Texas economically competitive and successful as well as delivering a desirable quality of life. Highway safety is greater when highways function efficiently, and safety is important to the health and welfare of all