Thinking Beyond the Pavement - Maryland State Highway ...

Eighteen other sessions explored key issues facing transportation designers, such as: barriers to context-sensitive design, how tointegrate community values, funding, safety, flexible approaches to achieving goals, public involvement, liability, project development,"smart growth,” and related topics.CASE STUDY: A Small Town Main Street: East Main Street Reconstruction Project (Rt. 32), Westminster, MDEnvisioned as a typical40-foot section with two12-foot traffic lanes andtwo 8-foot parking lanes,the first design proposalwould have narrowedexisting sidewalks andrequired the removal of 42mature trees. Citizenopposition led to a completeredesign and a stakeholder taskforce to work with the design team. The cross section wasreduced to 36 feet, allowing for ample sidewalks, retention ofmost trees, and an overall ambiance in harmony with thehistoric character of Westminster.Liability Sessions“The new statute (23 USC 109, as statedon page 6) gives broader authority fordesign issues than has ever beenpresented to engineers before, takinginto consideration environmental,scenic, aesthetic, historic, communityand preservation impacts. You couldgo back to your local jurisdictions andask for someone to adapt the federalcode to the state system.”– Pamila Brown, formerly Deputy Counsel to the Maryland StateHighway AdministrationIMPORTANT POINTS:■■■The broad stakeholder involvement in the project wascritically important.The redesign of the project involved breaking down manybarriers to a flexible design approach, including institutionalones. Where traditionally the designers handed off the projectto the construction engineer, here the designers workedwith the construction engineer to be sure the consensus goalsand objectives of the project were met. The result was moreteamwork throughout the construction phase.Utility relocation work done in advance of roadwayconstruction, performed under a separate contract fromthe highway work, was not well coordinated in terms ofcommunications with affected property owners and reroutingof traffic. Once the task force brought utility decision-makersinto the task force discussions, project coordination andcommunication improved.The design team made decisions tree-by-tree to determine whichshould be saved and how much parking could be provided.SeaTac“We have to get the focus off SOVs (singleoccupancy vehicles), and become more conscientiousabout incorporating other modes of transportation.”– Don Monaghan, Assistant Director,Public Works, City of SeaTacEast Main Street“The Task Force didn't vote. We worked to buildconsensus, which was far more important than votingand having some people feel that they had lost.”– Tom Beyard, City Director of Public Works,Westminster, MDEast Main Street“We established goals and developed design conceptswith the task force from building face to building facerather than from curb to curb. We considered lanewidths in light of the whole road as it passes throughthe town. If we went from 10-foot lanes to 11-foot,would the impact on pedestrians, on trees, on theentire context be worth that extra foot? Everyonedeveloped an understanding of the implications,and we were able to reason together.”– Dan Uebersax, Landscape Architect,Maryland State Highway AdministrationFunctional Classification Session“Functional Class and design speed don't have anautomatic relationship. Functional classificationsshould be established with an eye to future planneddevelopment. There is a need for new classificationsfor scenic and historic country roads, with increasedfederal funding eligibility.”– Neil Pedersen, Director, Planning,Maryland State Highway Administration