Influence of Recreational Areas on the Functional Service of Highways

Development of outdoor recreational facilities in Kentucky has generally been in predominately rural areas. Access to these areas from the primary highway network is often provided by existing low-standard local roads. The recreational travel demand often exceeds the design volumes of these local roads or the volumes that can be accommodated at reasonable levels of service. Such travel demand also constitutes a significant portion of the total demand on the rural primary network, particularly during the peak weekend periods. Many large reservoirs in Kentucky have generated extensive developments of recreational facilities in the surrounding areas. Highways which have been displaced by reservoir developments are usually relocated and built to the same standards as the original facilities. Such practices and policies, which are followed by many city, state, and federal agencies, neglect the certain increase in demand for recreational activity and ignore the impact of recreational areas on the functional services to be provided. The purpose of this study was to investigate the nature of travel demand to outdoor recreational facilities in Kentucky and to develop a model for predicting this demand for use in plannng and design of recreational and other routes and in evaluating the traffic-service impacts of proposed new recreational facilities

Evaluation of Reference Markers

The objective of this research evaluation was to evaluate the reference markers which were installed on sections of interstates and freeways in the Cincinnati-northern Kentucky area, the Lexington-Fayette Urban County area, the Louisville-southern Indiana area, and the Indianapolis area. The evaluation was conducted to determine if the use of reference markers at spacings of 0.1 or 0.2-mile intervals could improve the effectiveness of the emergency response and incident management processes. Also evaluated were color of the markers and the placement location within the right-of-way. Both \u27white on blue and \u27\u27white on green markers were installed on various projects, with some installed on the median barrier wall and some on grass medians or shoulders. Included were condition surveys of the marker installations and opinion surveys of those involved in the incident or emergency management process. Nearly unanimous endorsement of the reference markers was received from interviews and surveys of highway agency personnel and participants in the emergency management process. Recommendations were made for spacing of the markers at 0.2-mile intervals, with exceptions in curved sections to allow for placement of the markers at 0.1-mile intervals. Based on what appears to slightly increased conspicuity of the \u27\u27white on blue marker as compared to the \u27\u27white on green marker, it was recommended that a standardized reference marker be developed with white letters on blue background. Because of reduced exposure to mowing operations and errant vehicles, it was recommended that reference markers be placed on median barrier walls where practical

Evaluation of Kentucky’s Policy on Tourist Information Signs

As a result of recommendations made by the Governor\u27s Task Force on Signage and Tourism, the Transportation Cabinet requested that an evaluation be made of Kentucky\u27s policy on tourist information signs. Among the tasks undertaken were a review of the formula tor Parks, Historic, and Recreation Area signs, a survey of interstates and parkways to determine the extent of the constraints imposed by the limitation of one supplemental sign tor each interchange approach, and an investigation of the potential for application of Tourist Oriented Directional signs (TODS). The opportunity tor increased tourism through improvements in signing and accessibility was evaluated. Kentucky\u27s policies on tourist-related signing were compared to those in other states and to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. In general, it was determined that Kentucky\u27s policy was not unduly restrictive and major revisions were not justified. However, the following actions were taken by representatives of the Transportation and Tourism Cabinets to revise signing requirements and create the potential for increased tourism. A formula used for determining signing eligibility for Parks, Historic or Recreation Areas was modified significantly to permit signing for more tourist attractions. A fifth type of service sign for tourist attractions was approved for usage. A policy for a TODS program was established. In addition, an analysis of data from a survey of supplemental sign usage indicated that 305 of 532 interchanges surveyed were eligible for supplemental signing