Impacts of Rural Development on Iowa’s Secondary Road Systems, TR-548, September 2010

Today, many of Iowa’s counties are experiencing an increase in rural development. Two specific types of development were focused on for this research: rural residential subdivisions and livestock production operations. Rural residential developments are primarily year round single-family homes, though some are vacation homes. Livestock production in Iowa includes hog, beef, and poultry facilities. These two types of rural development, while obviously very different in nature and incompatible with each other, share one important characteristic: They each generate substantial amounts of new traffic for Iowa’s extensive secondary road system. This research brings together economic, spatial, and legal analysis methods to address the impacts of rural development on the secondary road system and provide county engineers, county supervisors, and state legislators with guidance in addressing the challenges associated with this development.

Guidleines for Removal of Traffic Control Devices in Rural Areas, October 2005

It is commonly regarded that the overuse of traffic control devices desensitizes drivers and leads to disrespect, especially for low-volume secondary roads with limited enforcement. The maintenance of traffic signs is also a tort liability concern, exacerbated by unnecessary signs. The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Traffic Control Devices Handbook provide guidance for the implementation of STOP signs based on expected compliance with right-of-way rules, provision of through traffic flow, context (proximity to other controlled intersections), speed, sight distance, and crash history. The approach(es) to stop is left to engineering judgment and is usually dependent on traffic volume or functional class/continuity of system. Although presently being considered by the National Committee on Traffic Control Devices, traffic volume itself is not given as a criterion for implementation in the MUTCD. STOP signs have been installed at many locations for various reasons which no longer (or perhaps never) met engineering needs. If in fact the presence of STOP signs does not increase safety, removal should be considered. To date, however, no guidance exists for the removal of STOP signs at two-way stop-controlled intersections. The scope of this research is ultra-low-volume (< 150 daily entering vehicles) unpaved intersections in rural agricultural areas of Iowa, where each of the 99 counties may have as many as 300 or more STOP sign pairs. Overall safety performance is examined as a function of a county excessive use factor, developed specifically for this study and based on various volume ranges and terrain as a proxy for sight distance. Four conclusions are supported: (1) there is no statistical difference in the safety performance of ultra-low-volume stop-controlled and uncontrolled intersections for all drivers or for younger and older drivers (although interestingly, older drivers are underrepresented at both types of intersections); (2) compliance with stop control (as indicated by crash performance) does not appear to be affected by the use or excessive use of STOP signs, even when adjusted for volume and a sight distance proxy; (3) crash performance does not appear to be improved by the liberal use of stop control; (4) safety performance of uncontrolled intersections appears to decline relative to stop-controlled intersections above about 150 daily entering vehicles. Subject to adequate sight distance, traffic professionals may wish to consider removal of control below this threshold. The report concludes with a section on methods and legal considerations for safe removal of stop control.

Construction and Maintenance Practices to Minimize the Potential Liability of Counties for Roads in Rural Subdivisions, HR-221, 1981

In an earlier research project, HR-204, the magnitude and nature of highway related tort claims against counties in Iowa were investigated. However, virtually all of the claims identified in that research resulted from incidents that occurred in areas with predominantly agricultural land use. With recent increases in the rural non-farm population, many traditionally urban problems are also appearing in built-up areas under county jurisdiction. This trend is expected to continue so that counties must anticipate a change in the nature of the tort claims they will encounter. Problems that heretofore have been unique to cities may become commonplace in areas for which counties are responsible. The research reported here has been directed toward an investigation of those problems in rural subdivisions that lead to claims growing out of the provision of highway services by counties. Lacking a sufficient database among counties for the types of tort claims of interest in this research, a survey was sent to 259 cities in Iowa in order to identify highway related problems leading to those claims. The survey covered claims during a five year period from 1975 to 1980. Over one-third of the claims reported were based on alleged street defects. Another 34 percent of the claims contained allegations of damages due to backup of sanitary sewers or defects in sidewalks. By expanding the sample from the 164 cities that responded to the survey, it was estimated that a total of $49,000,000 in claims had been submitted to all 259 cities. Over 34% of this amount resulted from alleged defects in the use of traffic signs, signals, and markings. Another 42% arose from claims of defects in streets and sidewalks. Payments in settlement of claims were about 13.4% of the amount asked for those claims closed during the period covered by the survey. About $9,000,000 in claims was pending on June 30, 1980 according to the information furnished. Officials from 23 cities were interviewed to provide information on measures to overcome the problems leading to tort claims. On the basis of this information, actions have been proposed that can be undertaken by counties to reduce the potential for highway-related claims resulting from their responsibilities in rural subdivisions and unincorporated communities. Suggested actions include the eight recommendations contained in the final report for the previous research under HR-204. In addition, six recommendations resulted from this research, as follows: 1. Counties should adopt county subdivision ordinances. 2. A reasonable policy concerning sidewalks should be adopted. 3. Counties should establish and implement a system for setting road maintenance priorities. 4. Counties should establish and implement a procedure for controlling construction or maintenance activities within the highway right of way. 5. Counties should establish and implement a system to record complaints that are received relating to highway maintenance and to assure timely correction of defective conditions leading to such complaints. 6. Counties should establish and implement a procedure to ensure timely advice of highway defects for which notice is not otherwise received.

A guide to understanding the variation in premiums in rural health insurance marketplaces (RUPRI Center for Rural Health Policy Analysis rural policy brief)

This brief discusses several important factors that should be considered when comparing health insurance plans in the health insurance marketplaces across geographic areas.

Guidelines for Removal of Traffic Control Devices in Rural Areas, TR-527, 2005

It is commonly regarded that the overuse of traffic control devices desensitizes drivers and leads to disrespect, especially for low-volume secondary roads with limited enforcement. The maintenance of traffic signs is also a tort liability concern, exacerbated by unnecessary signs. The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Traffic Control Devices Handbook provide guidance for the implementation of STOP signs based on expected compliance with right-of-way rules, provision of through traffic flow, context (proximity to other controlled intersections), speed, sight distance, and crash history. The approach(es) to stop is left to engineering judgment and is usually dependent on traffic volume or functional class/continuity of system. Although presently being considered by the National Committee on Traffic Control Devices, traffic volume itself is not given as a criterion for implementation in the MUTCD. STOP signs have been installed at many locations for various reasons which no longer (or perhaps never) met engineering needs. If in fact the presence of STOP signs does not increase safety, removal should be considered. To date, however, no guidance exists for the removal of STOP signs at two-way stop-controlled intersections. The scope of this research is ultra-low-volume (< 150 daily entering vehicles) unpaved intersections in rural agricultural areas of Iowa, where each of the 99 counties may have as many as 300 or more STOP sign pairs. Overall safety performance is examined as a function of a county excessive use factor, developed specifically for this study and based on various volume ranges and terrain as a proxy for sight distance. Four conclusions are supported: (1) there is no statistical difference in the safety performance of ultra-low-volume stop-controlled and uncontrolled intersections for all drivers or for younger and older drivers (although interestingly, older drivers are underrepresented at both types of intersections); (2) compliance with stop control (as indicated by crash performance) does not appear to be affected by the use or excessive use of STOP signs, even when adjusted for volume and a sight distance proxy; (3) crash performance does not appear to be improved by the liberal use of stop control; (4) safety performance of uncontrolled intersections appears to decline relative to stop-controlled intersections above about 150 daily entering vehicles. Subject to adequate sight distance, traffic professionals may wish to consider removal of control below this threshold. The report concludes with a section on methods and legal considerations for safe removal of stop control.

Traffic Management Strategies for Merge Area in Rural Interstate Work Zones, CTRE 97-12, 1999

The Iowa Department of Transportation, like many other state transportation agencies, is experiencing growing congestion and traffic delays in work zones on rural interstate highways. The congestion results in unproductive and wasteful delays for both motorists and commercial vehicles. It also results in hazardous conditions where vehicle stopped in queues on rural interstate highways are being approached by vehicles upstream at very high speeds. The delays also result in driver frustration, making some drivers willing to take unsafe risks in an effort to bypass delays. To reduce the safety hazards and unproductive delays of congested rural interstate work zones, the Iowa Department of Transportation would like to improve its traffic management strategies at these locations. Applying better management practices requires knowledge of the traffic flow properties and driver behavior in and around work zones, and knowledge of possible management strategies. The project reported here and in a companion report documents research which seeks to better understand traffic flow behavior at rural interstate highway work zones and to estimate the traffic carrying capacity of work zone lane closures. In addition, this document also reports on technology available to better manage traffic in and around work zones.