Safety Impacts of Pavement Edge Drop-offs, 2006

A vehicle may leave its travel lane for a number of reasons, such as driver error, poor surface conditions, or avoidance of a collision with another vehicle in the travel lane. When a vehicle leaves the travel lane, pavement edge drop-off poses a potential safety hazard because significant vertical differences between surfaces can affect vehicle stability and reduce a driver’s ability to handle the vehicle. Numerous controlled studies have tested driver response to encountering drop-offs under various conditions, including different speeds, vehicle types, drop-off height and shape, and tire scrubbing versus non-scrubbing conditions. The studies evaluated the drivers’ ability to return to and recover within their own travel lane after leaving the roadway and encountering a drop-off. Many of these studies, however, have used professional drivers as test subjects, so results may not always apply to the population of average drivers. Furthermore, test subjects are always briefed on what generally is to be expected and how to respond; thus, the sense of surprise that a truly naïve driver may experience upon realizing that one or two of his or her tires have just dropped off the edge of the pavement, is very likely diminished. Additionally, the studies were carried out under controlled conditions. The actual impact of pavement edge drop-off on drivers’ ability to recover safely once they leave the roadway, however, is not well understood under actual driving conditions. Additionally, little information is available that quantifies the number or severity of crashes that occur where pavement edge drop-off may have been a contributing factor. Without sufficient information about the frequency of edge drop-off-related crashes, agencies are not fully able to measure the economic benefits of investment decisions, evaluate the effectiveness of different treatments to mitigate edge drop-off, or focus maintenance resources. To address these issues, this report details research to quantify the contribution of pavement edge drop-off to crash frequency and severity. Additionally, the study evaluated federal and state guidance in sampling and addressing pavement edge drop-off and quantified the extent of pavement edge drop-off in two states. This study focused on rural two-lane paved roadways with unpaved shoulders, since they are often high speed facilities (55+ mph), have varying levels of maintenance, and are likely to be characterized by adverse roadway conditions such as narrow lanes or no shoulders.

Total Cost of Transportation Analysis of Road and Highway Issues, HR-388, 2002

In the administration, planning, design, and maintenance of road systems, transportation professionals often need to choose between alternatives, justify decisions, evaluate tradeoffs, determine how much to spend, set priorities, assess how well the network meets traveler needs, and communicate the basis for their actions to others. A variety of technical guidelines, tools, and methods have been developed to help with these activities. Such work aids include design criteria guidelines, design exception analysis methods, needs studies, revenue allocation schemes, regional planning guides, designation of minimum standards, sufficiency ratings, management systems, point based systems to determine eligibility for paving, functional classification, and bridge ratings. While such tools play valuable roles, they also manifest a number of deficiencies and are poorly integrated. Design guides tell what solutions MAY be used, they aren't oriented towards helping find which one SHOULD be used. Design exception methods help justify deviation from design guide requirements but omit consideration of important factors. Resource distribution is too often based on dividing up what's available rather than helping determine how much should be spent. Point systems serve well as procedural tools but are employed primarily to justify decisions that have already been made. In addition, the tools aren't very scalable: a system level method of analysis seldom works at the project level and vice versa. In conjunction with the issues cited above, the operation and financing of the road and highway system is often the subject of criticisms that raise fundamental questions: What is the best way to determine how much money should be spent on a city or a county's road network? Is the size and quality of the rural road system appropriate? Is too much or too little money spent on road work? What parts of the system should be upgraded and in what sequence? Do truckers receive a hidden subsidy from other motorists? Do transportation professions evaluate road situations from too narrow of a perspective? In considering the issues and questions the author concluded that it would be of value if one could identify and develop a new method that would overcome the shortcomings of existing methods, be scalable, be capable of being understood by the general public, and utilize a broad viewpoint. After trying out a number of concepts, it appeared that a good approach would be to view the road network as a sub-component of a much larger system that also includes vehicles, people, goods-in-transit, and all the ancillary items needed to make the system function. Highway investment decisions could then be made on the basis of how they affect the total cost of operating the total system. A concept, named the "Total Cost of Transportation" method, was then developed and tested. The concept rests on four key principles: 1) that roads are but one sub-system of a much larger 'Road Based Transportation System', 2) that the size and activity level of the overall system are determined by market forces, 3) that the sum of everything expended, consumed, given up, or permanently reserved in building the system and generating the activity that results from the market forces represents the total cost of transportation, and 4) that the economic purpose of making road improvements is to minimize that total cost. To test the practical value of the theory, a special database and spreadsheet model of Iowa's county road network was developed. This involved creating a physical model to represent the size, characteristics, activity levels, and the rates at which the activities take place, developing a companion economic cost model, then using the two in tandem to explore a variety of issues. Ultimately, the theory and model proved capable of being used in full system, partial system, single segment, project, and general design guide levels of analysis. The method appeared to be capable of remedying many of the existing work method defects and to answer society's transportation questions from a new perspective.

Iowa In Motion: State Transportation Plan, 1997

What is Iowa in Motion? The Iowa Department of Transportation is continuing the journey to develop Iowa’s future transportation system. This ongoing planning process, known as Iowa in Motion, was developed in response to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and Iowa’s changing transportation needs. The completion of Parts I, II and III of Iowa in Motion has led to development of this State Transportation Plan. Part IV includes activities, both current and future, to support the plan. This State Transportation Plan represents the thoughts and concerns of thousands of Iowans. Individuals, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), regional planning affiliations (RPAs), associations and organizations have become involved and have made recommendations concerning which direction should be followed regarding transportation investments. This plan represents their extensive input into the Iowa in Motion process and consensus building as we moved towards adoption of this State Transportation Plan. The adopted plan serves as a guide for development of transportation policies, goals, objectives, initiatives and investment decisions through the year 2020.

Transportation Policy Strategies for Iowa to Advance the Quality of Life, 2004

Building on the policy directions advanced in the publication "Policy Strategies for Iowa in Making Major Road Investments", this report defines each policy issue and discusses how transportation can play a role in addressing it. Perspectives from several focus group meetings conducted in nine communities in Iowa are discussed. The report also examines available data pertaining to the issues. Finally, the report presents several specific recommendations dealing with issues on economic development, safety, choice of transportation modes, and financing transportation in the future. The recommendations are directed at proving the Iowa Transportation Commission with the best possible insights to be used in making investment decisions that will impact the quality of life in Iowa in future years.

Part I. Iowa Railroad Investment Plan, 2009

The 2009 Iowa Railroad System Plan details the state’s role in providing and preserving adequate, safe and efficient rail transportation services to Iowans. The plan is intended to serve as a guide for decision makers and provides a basis for future Iowa DOT policy, funding priorities and programming decisions that affect rail transportation service in Iowa. The primary purpose of the 2009 Iowa Railroad System Plan is to guide the Iowa DOT in pursuing actions that maintain and improve railroad transportation in Iowa. The plan is a component of the Iowa Statewide Transportation Plan known as “Iowa in Motion.” This plan considers railroads from an intermodal perspective. Many commodities that move by rail also move by other modes (principally trucks) during part of their journey from origin to destination. The same is true of persons who use rail passenger service to make trips and who must also rely on other modes to access rail service. Therefore, railroads are part of larger intermodal freight and passenger transportation systems.

Comprehensive Statewide Transportation Model: Multimodal Investment Analysis Methodology Phase II, CTRE Project 02-126, 2001

The purposes of this report (Phase II of the project) are to specify in mathematical form the individual modules of the conceptual model developed in Phase I, to identify and evaluate sources of data for the model set, and to develop the transport networks necessary to support the models.