Practical Highway Design Solutions (2013)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

35 1. Dorothy, P.W. and S. Thieken, NCHRP Synthesis 422: Trade-Off Considerations in Highway Geometric Design, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington D.C., 2011. 2. American Association of State Highway and Trans- portation Officials (AASHTO), A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design, AASHTO, Washington, D.C., May 2004. 3. Executive Order 13274—Purpose and Need Workgroup Baseline Report, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 2005. 4. American Association of State Highway and Trans- portation Officials (AASHTO), A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, AASHTO, Washing- ton, D.C., 2011. 5. American Association of State Highway and Transpor- tation Officials (AASHTO), Roadside Design Guide, AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2005. 6. Mitigation Strategies for Design Exceptions, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., July 2007 [Online]. Available: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/geometric/ pubs/mitigationstrategies/index.htm. 7. Mason, J. M. and K. M. Mahoney, NCHRP Synthesis 316: Design Exception Practices, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003. 8. American Association of State Highway and Transporta- tion Officials (AASHTO), A Policy on Design Standards— Interstate System, 5th ed., AASHTO, Washington, D.C., Jan. 2005. 9. Application of Design Standards, Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards and Bridges, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. [Online]. Available: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/design/0625sup.cfm. 10. “Context Sensitive Solutions,” Federal Highway Admin- istration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washing- ton, D.C. [Online]. Available: http://contextsensitive solutions.org/? 11. Lane, L. B., NCHRP Synthesis 373: Multi-Disciplinary Teams in Context-Sensitive Solutions, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington D.C., 2007. 12. Neuman, T. R., et al., NCHRP Report 480: A Guide to Best Practices for Achieving Context-Sensitive Solu- tions, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2002. 13. Geometric Design Criteria and Processes for Non- Freeway RRR Projects, Technical Advisory, T 5040.21, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., Oct. 17, 1988 [Online]. Available: http://www.fhwa. dot.gov/design/t504028.cfm. 14. McGee, H.W., NCHRP Synthesis 417 Geometric Design Practices for Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabili- tation, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2011. 15. “Value Engineering,” Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C. [Online]. Available: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ve/. 16. “Value Engineering, Laws, Regulations, and Policy,” Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C. [Online]. Available: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ve/vepolicy.cfm. 17. Wilson, D. C., NCHRP Synthesis 352: Value Engineering Applications in Transportation, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005. 18. Flexibility in Highway Design, Report FHWA-PD-97, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 1997. 19. Jones, J., “Practical Design,” Public Roads, Vol. 73, No. 4, Jan./Feb. 2010. 20. MoDOT Engineering Policy Guide, Missouri Department of Transportation, Jefferson City, n.d. [Online]. Available: http://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Main_Page. 21. Practical Design Implementation, Missouri Department of Transportation, Jefferson City, n.d. 22. American Association of State Highway and Transpor- tation Officials (AASHTO), Highway Safety Manual, Volumes 1, 2, and 3, AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2010 [Online]. Available: www.highwaysafetymanual.org. 23. Practical Solutions for Highway Design, Idaho Depart- ment of Transportation, Boise, n.d. 24. Stamatiadis, N., A. Kirk, D. Hartman, and J. Pigman, Practical Solution Concepts for Planning and Design- ing Roadways in Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Frankfurt, Oct. 2008. 25. Stamatiadis, N. and D. Hartman, “Context Sensitive Solutions vs. Practical Solutions: What Are the Differ- ences?” presented at the 90th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 23–27, 2011. 26. Practical Improvements, Kansas Department of Trans- portation, Topeka, 2009. 27. Max, K. and D. Sicking, NCHRP Report 492: Roadside Safety Analysis Program (RSAP)—Engineer’s Manual, Transportation Research Board of the National Acad- emies, Washington, D.C., 2003. 28. Practical Design Guidebook, Oregon Department of Transportation, Salem, Mar. 2010. 29. Practical Design Guide, Planning and Designing Practi- cal Transportation Solutions for Utah, Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City, Feb. 1, 2011. RefeRences