| Contextual Infrastructure Planning and Design |
| Context Sensitive Design: A Rural Success Story |
| By James W. Langston, Dallas, Texas 1-214-819-5962, langstonj@pbworld.com
and Tina L. Walker, Texas Department of Transportation |
| Context-sensitive highway
design might simply be defined as "doing the right thing."
The application of this approach and achievement of a successful result
are the focus of this article. |
|
The American Society of Civil Engineers sponsored a context sensitive
design workshop in Reston, Virginia, in June 1999 where Tom Warne,
executive director of Utah Department of Transportation, outlined
five goals that can be met when such design is applied to a highway:
- Save time, effort and money in preliminary design.
- Reduce the time from concept to finished
construction.
- Avoid conflicts throughout the design and
construction processes.
- Enhance satisfaction for all those involved.
- Create good will among the community by
providing it with a more acceptable project.
Building on Mr. Warne's principles, we can achieve these goals by
applying some of the following practices:
- Give proper consideration to both the natural
and man-made environments.
- Build a project that meets the mobility needs
of the area.
- Give proper consideration to community input
early in the process.
- Be creative in the design to benefit the
project.
- Obtain the tools needed to perform the work.
Context sensitive design is not a required documentation process like
that mandated in the U.S. by the National Environmental Policy Act.
Rather, it is a voluntary means of working with different groups and
organizations to achieve a better overall project for the affected
region-that which will bear the greatest impacts from the project,
both good and bad.
Background of
the IH 69 Project
Since 1998, work has been underway in the Lufkin/Nacogdoches, Texas,
area to relieve traffic congestion on U.S. 59 that is due to growth
and development. The project's scope was developed with the knowledge
that the previously completed Corridor 20 Study had determined that
a continuation of IH 69 from Indiana to the valley in South Texas
was feasible and that U.S. 59 was probably in the path of IH 69. The
study concluded that an interstate-level upgrade of U.S. 59 was a
cost-effective way to improve mobility on this North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA) trade route, and the Texas Department of Transportation
(TxDOT) decided that if U.S. 59 was improved, the improvements would
be to interstate standards. Congress subsequently approved IH 69 while
we were developing the U.S. 59 Corridor Master Plan, so this project
officially became a leg of the future IH 69. Once IH 69 is completed
(in approximately 10+ years) some segments will be shared by IH 69
and U.S. 59.
The U.S. 59 Corridor Master Plan strategy was developed to address
the following issues:
- What long-term solution for mobility needs in Angelina and Nacogdoches
Counties would be compatible with a future interstate designation
- What improvements to the existing facility were needed to enhance
mobility until the long-term solution is constructed.
In addition to addressing current and long-term mobility needs and
reconstructing U.S. 59 to interstate standards, the Lufkin District
of TxDOT wanted to meet its own goals:
- Foster an enhanced working relationship with the local communities
of and around Lufkin and Nacogdoches.
- Give these local communities a project that
they would accept and have pride in, and that would be consistent
with their plans for the future of the area.
- Save time and money by developing a good schematic design early
to avoid potential conflicts later.
TxDOT hoped to achieve all of these goals by applying the principles
of context sensitive design. PB was retained as the prime consultant
on the U.S. 59 Corridor Master Plan Study, which included corridor
analysis and selection, transportation modeling, environmental documentation
and detailed schematic design for both the long-term improvement (IH
69) and immediate improvements being made to handle traffic.
Success: A Bold Statement
A very detailed schematic design phase and environmental assessment
of IH 69 are nearing completion, following a very successful corridor
analysis and selection phase. Even though IH 69 has not been built
yet, the project is considered a success story by TxDOT, the local
affected communities of Lufkin and Nacogdoches, and PB. Why? This
project has completely met three of Tom Warne's five goals listed
above, and partially met the other two, which relate to construction.
It has also been featured in Engineering News-Record and Public Works
magazines for being the test for
and introducing LiDAR surveying to TxDOT, as described below, and
it has received local and national quality recognition awards.
The construction-related issues cannot be addressed until IH 69 is
built. To reduce some of the construction-related conflicts, however,
a significant amount of effort has been made to locate the constraints
and conflicts, and a very detailed schematic design should help the
project move through final design and construction with few problems.
Let's see how this project measures up to each of the five goals.
Goal 1: Save Time, Effort and Money
in Preliminary Design
In his presentation, Tom Warne made it clear that projects developed
with the appropriate regard for their context (physical surroundings
and community) do not need to cost more than other projects. If the
proper community/stakeholder input is not received up front and proper
consideration is not given to aesthetic design, then the project will
likely cost even more in the long run through false starts, reworking
designs and project delays.
The U.S. 59 Master Plan team started working to obtain the community/stakeholder
input immediately after the initial notice to proceed was received.
A strong public outreach began with organization of an Advisory Committee
comprised of city and county officials and a Technical Committee of
city planners and engineers, TxDOT headquarters representatives and
the design team of consultants and district staff.
A partnering session held within the first eight weeks for the Technical
Committee established relationships among members and fostered discussions,
with each party sharing ideas. Immediately following, a team-building
meeting was held with the Advisory Committee to obtain ideas from
its members, get them actively involved in the project and apprise
them of the outcome of the partnering session. These early meetings
proved to be a valuable foundation for a relationship that helped
to get the Master Plan through some turmoil that arose later on.
The general public was also brought into the project early on through:
- Workshop-type meetings
- Civic group meetings
- Project advertising in the form of newsletters
and press releases
- Public information booths at community events, such as county
fairs.
In the first public workshop, the design team had not yet set any
potential highway corridors but had prepared a constraint map showing
items such as cemeteries, schools, utilities and wetlands throughout
the two-county area. We also compiled an initial list that identified
and prioritized those items deemed significant to the region and to
each county. This list was displayed at the public workshop for comment
and acceptance while people reviewed the maps.
Our design team worked one-on-one with the citizens to get their comments;
update, correct or add to the constraint map; and review the exhibits.
Some of the constraints were noted as being shown in the wrong locations,
but no new items were offered as constraints and no changes to the
list of priorities were received.
In following meetings, the public was kept aware of developments as
the corridor options were first delineated, then evaluated and narrowed
from a large number to a small group, and finally a preferred option
selected. Citizens provided valuable comments that were weighed as
an element of the selection process. Their comments helped to enforce
the idea that this project needed to be more than a straight-shot
single line connecting two points, and their strong feelings on the
location of the ultimate highway fostered a unique corridor.
The alignment that came out of the corridor study has proven to be
in the same cost-per-mile range as other projects of a similar magnitude.
This benchmark-check verifies that listening to the public and giving
them a project they can accept does not mean excess cost.
Goal 2: Reduce the Time from Concept to Finished
Construction
A very aggressive schedule resulted in significant time savings. The
entire corridor analysis and selection, environmental analysis, and
detailed schematic design process will be completed within approximately
two and a half years from the initial constraint and information gathering
workshop-a very short time frame for 67 km (42 miles) of new location
highway. Right-of-way acquisition should be ready to begin in 2002.
In addition to cutting the design costs by reducing the schedule,
a major time and cost savings resulted from our team testing and applying
a new survey technique, LiDAR. Although LiDAR will not be detailed
in this article, it basically involves a helicopter-mounted laser
used in conjunction with airborne global positioning system (GPS)
satellites for guidance and location to gather data for a digital
terrain model. The area covered was more than 4720 ha (11,800 acres)
and the model was obtained in less than six weeks, including flight
time. This process generated savings of over $1.5 million in survey
costs and nine months of design time.
Using LiDAR also prevented the intrusion of ground surveyors on personal
property and did not require the extensive brush cutting for sight
lines needed by conventional surveying practices. Because of the reduced
survey impacts, this process also aided in reaching the goal of creating
good will and generating a more acceptable project for the community.
Goal 3: Avoid Conflicts Throughout the
Design and Construction Processes
Heavy public involvement throughout the project helped to avoid conflicts
throughout the design phase and, potentially, in the construction
phase. In fact, even with the 67 km (42 miles) of new location highway
with 200 potential impacts to residences, fewer than ten residents
voiced any opposing comments and only three have maintained any strong
feelings of continued opposition.
Furthermore, we gathered utility information on more than 1300 km2
(500 square miles) in two counties for use in corridor selection.
This was a tremendous effort, but with the utility information gathered,
utility relocations could be estimated and major adjustments avoided
when possible.
Goal 4: Enhance Satisfaction
for All Those Involved
The project has run very smoothly as a result of the up-front effort
and context sensitive design practice. Using these approaches, the
design team has reduced the negative impacts to the local area and
generated a positive reaction from the stakeholders. The community
also took great interest in LiDAR and pride in the fact that their
project was theirs was the highway project in Texas to use this new
technique. The tremendous amount of local publicity and project advertising
that resulted from this pilot project also helped to foster acceptance
for the project.
In addition to saving money and time and getting a better product,
the positive public reaction helped the client to reach one of its
goals-foster a better relationship with the communities. Only two
complaints were heard from residents throughout the entire survey
process.
From this low number of opposing comments, the team can deduce that,
for the most part, all of the involved parties have received some
satisfaction.
- The general public has knowledge that the
study was performed fairly and without bias.
- The communities will have a facility that
they can support and help develop.
- The cities will have a facility that will
allow them to support anticipated development through the extension
of utilitiesand infrastructure improvements in due time.
- With the low number of complaints, the Lufkin
TxDOT District and the design team are certainly enjoying some
relative peace and quiet instead of continuous calls from angry
customers.
Goal 5: Create Good Will and a More Acceptable
Project to the Community
When the final alignment was selected, there were more residential
impacts than thought at the outset because the communities expressed
a strong desire to have the corridor closer into the cities of Lufkin
and Nacogdoches. In fact, the selected alignment had seemed initially
to be one of the first that would be rejected in the selection process.
It was curvy and wove around the communities in an "S" shape,
so it looked much longer than the other options. Upon evaluation,
however, the "S" was the best option for several reasons:
- It came out to be only slightly longer than a straight line
option.
- The travel demand model for the two-county area showed that
it would carry much more traffic than many of the other alternative
corridors.
- Input from the Advisory and Technical Committees led to it being
closer (3 km, or 2 miles) from the existing loop highways to the
city limits to allow for expansion of the city utilities that
may be needed to serve anticipated future development.
While more impacts appear to be a big negative, over time the community
acceptance of the project and resulting support have shown that the
correct decisions were made.
Conclusion
This successful project demonstrates the benefits of applying context
sensitive design practices. It meets the five basic goals, follows
the principles, has a positive outcome and measurable success factors.
Our team benefited from being involved in the corridor selection and
development processes and we contributed our expertise in several
issues along the way. For example, with help from PB's PAN members,
we identified LiDAR as a means of greatly impacting this project.
Use of this technology not only saved time and money and earned stakeholder
satisfaction, it earned acclaim and national recognition for both
PB and TxDOT. |
|
Jim Langston is a Project Manager/Engineer currently
located in Dallas, Texas. Has been with PB for 14 years and has worked
on various civil and roadway projects.
[Ed. note: This article was based on a paper presented by Jim Langston
to the Texas Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers' spring
meeting in Austin, Texas on April 7, 2000.] |
|
