Trade-Off Considerations in Highway Geometric Design (2011)

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.

64 BIBLIOGRAPHY Access Management Manual, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2003. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), Fourth Edition, Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, Pennsylvania, 2008. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transporta- tion Officials, Washington, D.C., 2004. Axelrod, A., Risk: The Decision Matrix, Sterling Publishing Co., Inc., New York, N.Y., 2009. Building a True Community, Public Rights-of-Way Access Advisory Committee, U.S. Access Board, Washington, D.C., 2001 Center for Transportation and the Environment at North Carolina University, Results of Joint AASHTO/FHWA Context Sensitive Solutions Strategic Planning Process, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., Mar. 2007. Collings, J.C., “Applying Context Sensitive Design to the Innovative Development of Major Highway Projects,” presented at the Transportation Association of Canada Annual Conference, 2004. “Community Context Audit,” Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Harrisburg, Oct., 2005 [Online]. Avail- able: http://contextsensitivesolutions.org/content/read- ing/penndot_comm_audit/ Context Sensitive Design: The Road Best Traveled, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 2005. Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, D.C., 1998. Dewar, J., B. Crowe, and E. Raynault, “Recent Use of Road Safety Audits (RSAs) in Highway Safety Improvement Programs and Strategic Highway Safety Plans,” pre- sented at the 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 11–15, 2009. Donnell, E.T. and J.M. Mason, Jr., “Context-Sensitive Design for Highways and Streets,” In Handbook of Transporta- tion and Policy Administration, JF. Plant, Ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., 2007, pp. 305–330. FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 2006. Fitzpatrick, K., et al., NCHRP Report 504: Design Speed, Operating Speed and Posted Speed Practices, Transpor- tation Research Board of the National Academies, Wash- ington, D.C., 2003. From Risk to Profit: Benchmarking and Claims Studies, Vic- tor O. Schinnerer & Company, Chevy Chase, Md., 2006. Geometric Design Standards for Highways Other Than Freeways, American Association of State Highway Offi- cials (AASHO), Washington, D.C., 1969. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 3rd ed., American Association of State Highway and Transporta- tion Officials (AASHTO), Washington, D.C., 1999. Hauer, E., Safety in Geometric Design Standards, University of Toronto, ON, Canada, Dec. 1999. Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010. Integration of Context Sensitive Solution in the Transporta- tion Planning Process, U.S. Department of Transporta- tion, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Planning, January 2007. NCHRP Report 348: Access Management Guidelines for Activity Centers, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1992. NCHRP 414: HOV Systems Manual, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washing- ton, D.C., 1998. NCHRP Report 420: Impact of Access Management Tech- niques, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1999. Older Driver Highway Design Handbook: Recommenda- tions and Guidelines, Report FHWA-RD-99-045, Fed- eral Highway Administration, McLean, VA, December 1998. Oldham, S. and V. Birch, “CSS Training Experiences: Main- streaming Context Sensitive Solutions in the Workforce,” presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transporta- tion Research Board, Jan. 21–25, 2007. Olszak, L., R. Goldbach, and J. Long, “Do Context Sensitive Solutions Really Work?” presented at the 87th Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 13–17, 2008. Pietrucha, M., T. Pieples, and P. Garvey, “An Evaluation of the Pennsylvania Road Safety Audit Pilot Program,” pre- sented at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1999. Stitt, S., K. Ames, and J. Webber, “Context Sensitive Solu- tions Strategic Plan for the Illinois Department of Trans-

65 portation,” presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 21–25, 2007. “Thinking Beyond the Pavement,” AASHTO Quarterly, Vol. 77, No. 3, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 1998, pp. 27–34. “Thinking Beyond the Pavement,” University of Maryland Conference Center, May 1998. Traffic Safety Toolbox: A Primer on Traffic Safety, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, 1999. Transportation Research Circular 456: Driveway and Inter- section Spacing, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1996. Venner, M., J. D’Ignazio, and W. Messenger, “Integrating CSS into DOT Management, Planning and Design,” pre- sented at 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 21–25, 2007. Wallace, C.E., NCHRP Report 525: A Guide to Emergency Response Planning at State Transportation Agencies, Vol. 16, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010. Wang, J. and N. Garrick, Historical Review of the Treatment of Context in Highway Design, presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board Annual Conference, Jan. 22–26, 2006.