Welcome to ROSA P | Benefits of public roadside safety rest areas in Texas : technical report. - 21905 | US Transportation Collection
Stacks Logo
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.
 
 
Help
Clear All Simple Search
Advanced Search
Benefits of public roadside safety rest areas in Texas : technical report.
  • Published Date:
    2011-05-01
  • Language:
    English
Filetype[PDF-3.14 MB]


Details:
  • Corporate Creators:
  • Publication/ Report Number:
    FHWA/TX-11/0-6267-2
  • Resource Type:
  • Geographical Coverage:
  • NTL Classification:
    NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION ; NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Design ;
  • Format:
  • Abstract:
    The objective of this investigation was to develop a benefit-cost analysis methodology for safety rest areas in

    Texas and to demonstrate its application in select corridors throughout the state. In addition, this project

    considered novel safety rest area development approaches that could reduce the public cost burden borne by

    individual public agencies. Based upon the available supporting data for Texas, a benefit-cost ratio

    relationship was developed that included safety, comfort and convenience, and excess travel and diversion

    benefits accrued by highway users; direct monetary benefits accrued by highway or other public agencies;

    economic development/tourism and specific business enterprise benefits accrued by external entities and

    direct monetary cost accrued by highway or other public agencies. The resulting method utilizes timely and

    relevant data and national/aggregate unit values, whose sources are carefully documented to ensure

    defensibility and repeatability of the benefit-cost ratios estimated for Texas. A noted shortcoming of the

    applied method is that it is heavily assumption-based—minor changes to any of the assumed values will

    influence the resultant benefit-cost ratios, although it is unclear to what extent these ratios would change. A

    second shortcoming not unique to this methodology relates to the quality and accessibility of supporting data,

    which challenged and in some instances prevented estimation of individual benefit and cost components. A

    high level of variability in individual benefit and cost component estimates—both within and between the

    three demonstration corridors—suggests limitations to the transferability of these results.

  • Supporting Files:
    No Additional Files
No Related Documents.
You May Also Like:
Submit Feedback >