Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
where development is most intensive; and it is precisely in such areas that highway
construction entails the most severe community disruption, the most intensive
public controversy, and the highest dollar cost. Thus the highways with the greatest
congestion relief potential are also the least feasible to construct.
”
However, where added capacity is provided, its lasting effect on congestion
relief (especially in metropolitan areas exceeding 2 million people) can only be
realized by combining it with strategies that reduce the need to travel by car
while
maintaining acceptable levels of mobility and accessibility. These strategies will be
discussed in the next six chapters.
—
References
1. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. (2002) The positive impacts of transportation investment,
NCHRP Project 8
-
36, Task 22, Final Report, Working paper 4
—
compilation of working
papers. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC
2. Prepared by: Cambridge Systematics, Inc., Resource Systems Group, Inc. (2008) NCHRP
20
24A Task 63: Effective management practices for congestion management: Final
Report. Requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO)
3. Schrank D, Lomax T, Eisele B (2011) TTI
-
s 2011 urban mobility report. Powered by INRIX
traffic data. s.l. Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System, College
Station
4. American Highway Users Alliance and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. (2004) Unclogging
America
'
2004
5. Nevers B, Steyn H, Mereszczak Y, Clark Z, Rouphail N, Hummer J, Schroeder B, Bugg Z,
Bonneson J, Rhodes D (2011) NCHRP report 707: guidelines on the use of auxiliary through
lanes at signalized intersections. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC
6. Brewer MA (2012) NCHRP synthesis 432: recent roadway geometric design research for
improved safety and operations
—
a synthesis of highway practice. Transportation Research
Board, Washington, DC
7. Hughes W, Jagannathan R, Sengupta D, Hummer J (2010) Alternative Intersections/
Interchanges:
'
s arteries
—
effective relief for highway bottlenecks, 1999
−
Informational Report
(AIR), Report No. FHWA-HRT-09-060, FHWA,
Washington, DC
8. Dorothy PW, Maleck TL, Nolf SE (1997) Operational aspects of Michigan design for divided
highways. Transportation research Record 1579
1997 geometric design and its effects on
−
26
9. Koepke FJ, Levinson HS (1993) Case studies in access management. Transportation Research
Board, Washington, DC
10. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (2001) A policy of
geometric design for highways and streets. s.n. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC
11. Rodegerdts L, Bansen J, Tiesler C, Knudsen J, Myers E, Johnson M, Moule M, Persaud B,
Lyon C, Hallmark S, Isebrands H, Crown RB, Guichet B, O
operations, pp 18
-
'
Brien A (2010) NCHRP report
roundabouts: an informational guide, 2nd edn. Transportation Research Board,
Washington, DC
12. Bared JG, Edara P, Jagannathan R (2005) Transportation research record 1912: design and
operation performance of the double crossing intersection and diverging diamond interchange.
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC
13. Outwater M et al (2014) Effect of smart growth policies on travel demand. Strategic highway
research program (SHRP2). Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC
672
—
