Difference between revisions of "Roadways: Facility Selection"
(Created page with "{| class="wikitable" |- | colspan="3" | '''Facility Selection''' |- | colspan="3" | '''Primary Guidance''' *The facility type must reflect the corridor function(s) in an appr...") |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| colspan="3" | | | colspan="3" | | ||
− | + | =Primary Guidance= | |
*The facility type must reflect the corridor function(s) in an appropriate design year not to exceed the 20 year forecast. | *The facility type must reflect the corridor function(s) in an appropriate design year not to exceed the 20 year forecast. | ||
*Practitioners are encouraged to start by evaluating less costly solutions such as operational strategies, network solutions or transportation system management techniques before selecting significant facility upgrades that entail major capital expenditures. | *Practitioners are encouraged to start by evaluating less costly solutions such as operational strategies, network solutions or transportation system management techniques before selecting significant facility upgrades that entail major capital expenditures. | ||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| colspan="3" | | | colspan="3" | | ||
− | + | =Discussion= | |
− | Design Year | + | ==Design Year== |
*Major Capital Projects require the use of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Travel Demand Model, or the Maryland Statewide Transportation Model (MSTM) both of which are based on a 20 year time horizon. | *Major Capital Projects require the use of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Travel Demand Model, or the Maryland Statewide Transportation Model (MSTM) both of which are based on a 20 year time horizon. | ||
*System Preservation Projects may necessitate the use of a design year that supports more immediate traffic operation and/or safety needs, not to exceed 20 years. | *System Preservation Projects may necessitate the use of a design year that supports more immediate traffic operation and/or safety needs, not to exceed 20 years. | ||
− | Functional Classification | + | ==Functional Classification== |
The facility must represent the appropriate balance between access and mobility for its intended purpose. The functional classification system developed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) reflects the degree of local access and regional connectivity a roadway provides. The level of access control should reflect the official functional classification as well as the actual role that the roadway serves, which may vary along a roadway corridor. While there may be substantial flexibility in defining the level of access control for new roadways, the options may be substantially more complex or limited on projects that are modifying existing roadways. | The facility must represent the appropriate balance between access and mobility for its intended purpose. The functional classification system developed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) reflects the degree of local access and regional connectivity a roadway provides. The level of access control should reflect the official functional classification as well as the actual role that the roadway serves, which may vary along a roadway corridor. While there may be substantial flexibility in defining the level of access control for new roadways, the options may be substantially more complex or limited on projects that are modifying existing roadways. | ||
− | Roadway Users | + | ==Roadway Users== |
MDOT values the needs of all of its roadway users, including cars, trucks, bicyclists, and pedestrians. All user needs both along a roadway and across it should be considered. | MDOT values the needs of all of its roadway users, including cars, trucks, bicyclists, and pedestrians. All user needs both along a roadway and across it should be considered. | ||
Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
*Bicycle needs should consider locally adopted plans, existing bicycle activity, proximity to bicycle traffic generators, and network connectivity. | *Bicycle needs should consider locally adopted plans, existing bicycle activity, proximity to bicycle traffic generators, and network connectivity. | ||
− | Roadway Capacity and Operations | + | ==Roadway Capacity and Operations== |
Level of Service indicates general traffic capacity needs: | Level of Service indicates general traffic capacity needs: |
Revision as of 15:35, 26 October 2016
Facility Selection | ||
ContentsPrimary Guidance
| ||
DiscussionDesign Year
Functional ClassificationThe facility must represent the appropriate balance between access and mobility for its intended purpose. The functional classification system developed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) reflects the degree of local access and regional connectivity a roadway provides. The level of access control should reflect the official functional classification as well as the actual role that the roadway serves, which may vary along a roadway corridor. While there may be substantial flexibility in defining the level of access control for new roadways, the options may be substantially more complex or limited on projects that are modifying existing roadways. Roadway UsersMDOT values the needs of all of its roadway users, including cars, trucks, bicyclists, and pedestrians. All user needs both along a roadway and across it should be considered.
Roadway Capacity and OperationsLevel of Service indicates general traffic capacity needs:
Adding capacity that creates failing conditions upstream, or downstream, of proposed improvements should be avoided. Other performance measures may be needed to develop solutions that address specific project needs.
|