National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Chapter 4 - Conclusions and Suggested Research
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Safe and Aesthetic Design of Urban Roadside Treatments. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14171.
×
Page 52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Safe and Aesthetic Design of Urban Roadside Treatments. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14171.
×
Page 53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Safe and Aesthetic Design of Urban Roadside Treatments. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14171.
×
Page 54
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Safe and Aesthetic Design of Urban Roadside Treatments. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14171.
×
Page 55

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.

52 1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Offi- cials. Roadside Design Guide. Washington, DC (2002). 2. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Traffic Safety Facts 2005: A Compilation of Motor Vehicle Crash Data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the General Estimates System. DOT HS 810 631. U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (2006). 3. Neuman, T. R., Pfefer, R., Slack, K. L., Raub, R., Lucke, R., and Wark, R. NCHRP Report 500: Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan—Volume 1: A Guide for Addressing Aggressive-Driving Collisions. Transportation Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2003). 4. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. National Transportation Sta- tistics 2005. U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (2005). 5. Bryer, T. E. “Safety Management.” The Traffic Safety Toolbox: A Primer on Traffic Safety. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC (1993) pp. 11–23. 6. Zeigler, A. J. Guide to Management of Roadside Trees. Users Manual. FHWA-IP-86-17. Michigan DOT, FHWA, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (1986). 7. Turner, D. S. and Mansfield, E. R. “Urban Trees and Roadside Safety.” ASCE Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 16, No. 1 (1990) pp. 90–103. 8. Chowdhury, M. A., Warren, D. L., Bissell, H., and Taori, S. “Are the Criteria for Setting Advisory Speeds on Curves Still Relevant?” ITE Journal (February 1998) pp. 32–45. 9. Kubilins, M. A. “Designing Functional Streets That Contribute to Our Quality of Life.” Transportation Research E-Circular E-C019: Urban Street Symposium Conference Proceedings. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council (December 2000). http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/circulars/ec019/ec019.pdf. 10. Fitzpatrick, K., Carlson, P., Brewer, M., and Wooldridge, M. D. “Design Speed, Operating Speed, and Posted Speed Limit Prac- tices.” Transportation Research Board 82nd Annual Meeting Com- pendium of Papers (CD-ROM). Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2003). 11. Fitzpatrick, K., Shamburger, B., and Fambro, D. “Design Speed, Operating Speed, and Posted Speed Survey.” Transportation Re- search Record 1523. Transportation Research Board, National Re- search Council, Washington, DC (1996) pp. 55–60. 12. Tarris, J. P., Mason, Jr., J. M., and Antonucci, N. “Geometric Design of Low-Speed Urban Streets.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1701. Transporta- tion Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (2000) pp. 95–103. 13. Al-Madani, H. and Al-Jahani, A. R. “Assessment of Drivers’ Com- prehension of Traffic Signs Based on Their Traffic, Personal, and Social Characteristics.” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 5, No. 1 (2002) pp. 63–76. 14. Recarte, M. A. and Nunes, L. “Mental Load and Loss of Control Over Speed in Real Driving. Towards a Theory of Attentional Speed Control.” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 5, No. 2 (2002) pp. 111–122. 15. Herrstedt, L., Kjemtrup, K., Borges, P., and Anderson, P. An Im- proved Traffic Environment, a Catalogue of Ideas. Report 106. Road Data Laboratory, Road Standards Division, Road Directorate, Denmark Ministry of Transport (1993). 16. Brewer, J., German, J., Krammes, R., Movassaghi, K., Okamoto, J., Otto, S., Ruff, W., Sillan, S., Stamatiadis, N., and Walters, R. Geo- metric Design Practices for European Roads. FHWA-PL-01-026. FHWA, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (2001). 17. Lynch, K. The Image of the City. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1960). 18. Sivak, M. “Recent Psychological Literature on Driving Behaviour: What, Where, and by Whom?” Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 46, No. 3 (1997) pp. 303–310. 19. Groeger, J. A. and Rotherngatter, J. A. “Traffic Psychology and Be- havior.” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Be- haviour, Vol. 1, No. 1 (1998) pp. 1–9. 20. Transit New Zealand. Guidelines for Highway Landscaping. SP/M/020. Version 2. (PDF). (2006). www.transit.govt.nz/technical/ view_manual.jsp?content_type=manual&=edit&primary_key= 31&action=edit#about. 21. City of Las Vegas. “Streets: A Users’ Manual—Your Guide to the Las Vegas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program.” Las Vegas, NV (2001). 22. Land Transport Safety Authority. Guidelines for Urban-Rural Speed Thresholds: RTS 15. Wellington, NZ (2002). 23. Ewing, R. Traffic Calming: State of the Practice. Institute of Trans- portation Engineers, Washington, DC (1999). 24. FHWA. Synthesis of Shoulder Rumble Strip Practices and Policies (2000). http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fourthlevel/exec_summary.htm. Accessed May 17, 2004. 25. Neuman, T. R., Pfefer, R., Slack, K. L., Hardy, K. K., Council, F., McGee, H., Prothe, L., and Eccles, K. NCHRP Report 500: Guid- ance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan—Volume 6: Guide for Addressing Run-Off-Road Collisions. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2003). References

53 26. FHWA. “Boosting Roadway Safety with Rumble Strips.” Focus: Accelerating Infrastructure Innovations (May 2002). www.tfhrc. gov/focus/may02/rumble.htm. Accessed May 29, 2004. 27. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Offi- cials. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. Washington, DC (1999). 28. Moeur, R. C. “Analysis of Gap Patterns in Longitudinal Rumble Strips to Accommodate Bicycle Travel.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1705. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (2000) pp. 93–98. 29. Mak, K. K., Bligh, R. P., and Ross, Jr., H. E. “Clear Zone Require- ments for Suburban Highways.” Transportation Research Record 1500. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1995) pp. 119–126. 30. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Offi- cials. Highway Safety Design and Operations Guide. Washington, DC (1997). 31. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design. Washington, DC (2004). 32. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Guidelines for Design of Very Low-Volume Local Roads (ADT ≤ 400). Washington, DC (2001). 33. Zegeer, C. V. and Parker Jr., M. R. “Effect of Traffic and Roadway Features on Utility Pole Accidents.” Transportation Research Record 970. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1984) pp. 65–76. 34. Benekohal, R. B. and Lee, M. H. “Comparison of Safety Effects of Roadside versus Road Improvements on Two-Lane Rural High- ways.” Transportation Research Record 1303. Transportation Re- search Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1991) pp. 92–102. 35. Zegeer, C. V. and Cynecki, M. J. “Determination of Cost-Effective Roadway Treatments for Utility Pole Accidents.” Transportation Research Record 970. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1984) pp. 52–64. 36. Ross, Jr., H. E., Sicking, D. L., Zimmer, R. A., and Michie, J. D. NCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Per- formance Evaluation of Highway Features. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1993). 37. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Offi- cials. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 4th ed. Washington, DC (2004). 38. Dunlap, D. F., Grote, P., Fram, D. M., and Mashinter, W. Investi- gation of the Dynamic Impact Characteristics of Roadside Struc- tures. UM-HSRI-PF-72-5. Highway Safety Research Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI (1972). 39. Olson, R. M., Weaver, G. D., Ross, Jr., H. E., and Post, E. R. NCHRP Report 149: Effect of Curb Geometry and Location on Ve- hicle Behavior. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1974). 40. Ross, H. E., and Post, E. R. Dynamic Behavior of an Automobile Traversing Selected Curbs and Medians. Research Report 140-6. Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX (1975). 41. Holloway, J. C., Sickling, D. L., and Rossen, B. T. Performance Evaluation of NDOR Mountable Curbs. TRP-03-37-94. Midwest Roadside Safety Facility, University of Nebraska-Lincoln (1994). 42. Wezeker, J. and Nkunga, A. Vehicle Trajectories Resulting from Traversing FDOT Street Curbs. B-C352. Florida Department of Transportation (January 2003). 43. Plaxico, C. A., Ray, M. H., Weir, J. A., Orengo, F., Tiso, P., McGee, H., Council, F., and Eccles, K. NCHRP Report 537: Rec- ommended Guidelines for Curb and Curb-Barrier Installations. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (2005). 44. Downs, H. G., Jr. and Wallace, D. W. NCHRP Report 254: Shoul- der Geometrics and Use Guidelines. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1982). 45. Belmont, D. M. “Effect of Shoulder Width on Accidents on Two- Lane Tangents.” Highway Research Board Bulletin 91. Highway Research Board, National Research Council (1954) pp. 29–32. 46. Belmont, D. M. “Accidents versus Width of Paved Shoulders on California Two-Lane Tangents—1951 and 1952.” Highway Re- search Board Bulletin 120. Highway Research Board, National Research Council (1956) pp. 1–16. 47. Hauer, E. “Shoulder Width, Shoulder Paving and Safety.” http://roadsafetyresearch.com (2000). Accessed May 17, 2004. 48. Zimmer, R. A. and Ivey, D. L. Pavement Edges and Vehicle Stability: A Basis for Maintenance Guidelines. Texas Transportation Insti- tute, College Station, TX (1982). 49. Olson, P. L., Zimmer, R. A., and Pezoldt, V. Pavement Edge Drop. Final Report. UMTRI-86-33. University of Michigan Transporta- tion Research Institute, Ann Arbor, MI (1986). 50. Zegeer, C. V., Deen, R. C., and Mayes, J. G. “Effect of Lane and Shoulder Widths on Accident Reduction on Rural, Two-Lane Roads.” Transportation Research Record 806. Transportation Re- search Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1981) pp. 33–43. 51. Maryland Department of Transportation. When Main Street is a State Highway: Blending Function, Beauty and Identity—A Hand- book for Communities and Designers. MD (2003). 52. Harwood, D. W. NCHRP Report 282: Multilane Design Alterna- tives for Improving Suburban Highways. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1986). 53. Sullivan, E. C. Safety of Median Trees with Narrow Clearances on Urban Conventional Highways. Applied Research and Development Facility, Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo, CA (2004). 54. Viner, J. G. “Risk of Rollover in Ran-Off-Road Crashes.” Trans- portation Research Record 1500. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1995) pp. 112–118. 55. Iowa Highway Research Board. Iowa Traffic Control Devices and Pavement Markings: A Manual for Cities and Counties. Center for Transportation Research and Education, Iowa State University, Ames, IA (2005). 56. North Carolina Department of Transportation. Traditional Neigh- borhood Development (TND) Guidelines. Raleigh, NC (August 2000). 57. City of Seattle. Street Tree Planting Procedures. www.ci.seattle. wa.us/transportation/treeplanting.htm. Accessed 2007. 58. City of Simi Valley. City of Simi Valley Landscape Design Guide- lines. Simi Valley, CA (January 2002). 59. City of Montgomery. Montgomery Street Tree Master Plan. Montgomery, AL. www.montgomeryal.gov/media/1473969/ street%20tree%20master%20plan%20document%20-%20final. pdf. Accessed 2007. 60. FHWA. Trees in Hazardous Locations. NCHRP 17-18(3). http:// safety.transportation.org/htmlguides/trees/. Accessed May 7, 2007. 61. Traffic Authority of New South Wales. Guidelines for Tree Plant- ing and Maintenance on Urban Roads. New South Wales, Australia (May 1987). 62. Georgia Department of Transportation. Online Policy and Proce- dure System. www.dot.state.ga.us/doingbusiness/PoliciesManuals/ Pages/topps.aspx. Accessed May 7, 2007.

54 63. Oregon Department of Transportation and Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. Main Street . . . When a Highway Runs through It: A Handbook for Oregon Communities. (1999). 64. Neuman, T. R., Pfefer, R., Slack, K. L., Hardy, K. K., Lacy, K., and Zeeger, C. NCHRP Report 500: Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Highway Safety Plan—Volume 3: A Guide for Addressing Collisions with Trees in Hazardous Locations. Transportation Re- search Board, National Research Council, Washington DC (2003). 65. Iowa State University. Vegetation Control for Safety. A Guide for Street and Highway Maintenance Personnel. FHWA-RT-90-003. Office of Highway Safety, FHWA, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (1992). 66. Zeigler, A. J. Guide to Management of Roadside Trees. Users Manual. FHWA-IP-86-17. Michigan DOT, FHWA, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (1986). 67. FHWA. Roadside Improvements for Local Roads and Streets. U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (October 1986). 68. Lee, J. and Mannering, F. Analysis of Roadside Accident Frequency and Severity and Roadside Safety Management. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA (December 1999). 69. Kloeden, C. N., McLean, A. J., Baldock, M. R. J., and Cockington, A. J. T. Severe and Fatal Car Crashes Due to Roadside Hazards: A Report to the Motor Accident Commission. NHMRC Road Acci- dent Research Unit, University of Adelaide, Australia (1999). 70. Naderi, J. R. “Landscape Design in Clear Zone: Effect of Land- scape Variables on Pedestrian Health and Driver Safety.” Trans- portation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1851. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2003) pp. 119–130. 71. Delaney, A., Langford, J., Corben, B., Newstead, S., and Jacques, N. Roadside Environment Safety (Report to RACV). Monash Univer- sity Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia (2003). 72. Bratton, N. J. and Wolf, K. L. “Trees and Roadside Safety in U.S. Urban Settings.” Transportation Research Board 84th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers (CD-ROM). Transportation Re- search Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2005). 73. Haworth, N. and Bowland, L. Serious Injury Single Vehicle Crashes. Report No. 175. Monash University Accident Research Centre, Victoria, Australia (2000). 74. European Transport Safety Council. Forgiving Roadsides. European Transport Safety Council, Brussels. www.etsc.be/documents/bri_ road5.pdf. Accessed June 15, 2005. 75. Transportation Research Board Committee on Utilities. State of the Art Report 9: Utilities and Roadside Safety. Transportation Re- search Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2004). 76. Mak, K. K. and Mason, R. L. Accident Analysis—Breakaway and Non-Breakaway Poles Including Sign and Light Standards along Highways. DOT-HS-805-605. FHWA, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (August 1980). 77. Lacy, K., Srinivasan, R., Zegeer, C., Pfefer, R., Neuman, T. R., Slack, K. L., and Hardy, K. K. NCHRP Report 500: Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan— Volume 8: A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Utility Poles. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2004). 78. Transportation Research Board Committee on Utilities. State of the Art Report 9: Utilities and Roadside Safety. Transportation Re- search Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2004). 79. Land Transport Safety Authority. Urban Roadside Barriers and Alternative Treatments RTS11. Wellington, New Zealand, 1995 (republished in 2001). 80. Haworth, N., Vulcan, P., Bowland, L., and Pronk, N. Fatal Single Vehicle Crashes Study: Summary Report. Report No. 122. Monash University Accident Research Centre, Victoria, Australia (1997). 81. Dixon, K., Wu, C., Geary, G., Wang, J., and Coley, M. Analysis of Fatal Crashes at Utility Pole Locations in Georgia for 1997 and 1998. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA (2000). 82. Marquis, B. Utility Pole Crash Modeling. Maine Department of Transportation, Augusta, ME (2001). 83. McLean, A. J., Offler, W. J., and Sandow, B. L. Adelaide In-Depth Accident Study: 1975–1979: Part 7: Road and Traffic Factors. Road Accident Research Unit, University of Adelaide, Australia (1981). 84. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Offi- cials. Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires, and Traffic Signals, 4th ed. Washington, DC (2002). 85. Lewin, I., Box, P. and Stark, R. Roadway Lighting: An Investigation and Evaluation of Three Different Light Sources—Final Report 522. Arizona Department of Transportation, FHWA, U.S. DOT (May 2003). 86. Nilsson, G. and Wenäll, J. “Fixed Roadside Objects Cause 100 Fatalities Each Year.” Nordic Road and Transport Research, No. 1, Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (1998) pp. 13–15. 87. Ray, M. H., Weir, J., and Hopp, J. NCHRP Report 490: In-Service Performance of Traffic Barriers. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2003). 88. Stephens, L. B. “Guardrail Warrants for Low-Volume Roads.” Transportation Research Circular 416: Issues Surrounding Highway and Roadside Safety Management. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (October 1993) pp. 74–84. 89. Wolford, D. and Sicking, D. L. “Guardrail Need: Embankments and Culverts.” Transportation Research Record 1599. Transporta- tion Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1997) pp. 48–56. 90. California Department of Transportation. California Highway Barrier Aesthetics. (June 2002). 91. Glad, R. W., Albin, R. B., McIntosh, D. M., and Olson, D. K. Median Treatment Study on Washington State Highways. WA-RD 516.1. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA (2002). 92. Zein, S. R. and Montufar, J. Roadway Safety Benchmarks Over Time. Report TP 14328 E. Transport Canada, Ottawa, ON (2003). 93. Vermont Agency of Transportation. Guardrail Study. (2002). 94. Office of Highway Safety. Improving Highway Safety at Bridges on Local Roads and Streets. FHWA, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (1998). 95. Turner, S. M., Shafer, C. S., and Stewart, W. P. Bicycle Suitability Criteria for State Roadways in Texas. Report No. TX-97/3988-S. Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, TX (1997). 96. Harkey, D. L., Reinfurt, D. W., Knuiman, M., Steward, J. R., and Sorton, A. Development of the Bicycle Compatibility Index: A Level of Service Concept. FHWA-RD-98-072. FHWA, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (1998). 97. Litman, T., Blair, R., Demopoulos, B., Eddy, N., Fritzel, A., Laidlaw, D., Maddox, H., and Forster, K. Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning: A Guide to Best Practices. Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria, BC (2005). 98. Sutts, J. C. and Hunter, W. W. Injuries to Pedestrians and Bicyclists: An Analysis Based on Hospital Emergency Department Data. FHWA-RD-99-078. Federal Highway Administration, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC (1999).

99. Stutts, J. C. and Hunter, W. W. Police-Reporting of Pedestrian and Bicyclists Treated in Hospital Emergency Rooms. University of North Carolina, Highway Safety Research Center, Chapel Hill, NC (1998). 100. Burden, D. and Zykofsky, P. Emergency Response Traffic Calming and Traditional Neighborhood Streets. Local Government Com- mission, Sacramento, CA (December 2000). 101. Polus, A. and Craus. J. “Planning and Geometric Aspects of Shared Streets.” Transportation Research Record 1523. Transporta- tion Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1996) pp. 29–33. 102. Gunnarsson, S. O. “Traffic Planning.” The Traffic Safety Toolbox: A Primer on Traffic Safety. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC (1999) pp. 15–37. 103. Zegeer, C. V. and Seiderman, C. B. “Designing for Pedestrians.” The Traffic Safety Toolbox: A Primer on Traffic Safety. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC (1999) pp. 177–196. 104. Whyte, W. H. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. The Conser- vation Foundation, Washington, DC (1980). 105. Landis, B. W., Vattikuti, V. R., Ottenberg, R. M., LcLeod, D. S., and Guttenplan, M. “Modeling the Roadside Walking Environ- ment: A Pedestrian Level of Service.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1773, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council (2001) pp. 82–88. 106. Corben, B. F. and Duarte, A. Injury Reduction Measures in Areas Hazardous to Pedestrians—Stage 1: Countermeasure Options. Report No. 169. Monash University Accident Research Centre, Victoria, Australia (2000). 107. Cottrell, W. D. UDOT Report No. UT-02.10: Evaluating and Im- proving Pedestrian Safety in Utah. Prepared by the University of Utah for the Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City, UT (2002). 108. Skene, M. “‘Traffic Calming’ on Arterial Roadways?” Paper Pre- sented at the 69th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Transporta- tion Engineers. Las Vegas, Nevada (August 1–4, 1999). 109. Robinson, C. C. “Traffic Calming on Arterials–Con.” Paper Pre- sented at the 69th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Transporta- tion Engineers. Las Vegas, Nevada (August 1–4, 1999). 110. Burden, D. Streets and Sidewalks, People and Cars: The Citizens’ Guide to Traffic Calming. Local Government Commission, Center for Livable Communities, Sacramento, CA (2000). 111. Pates, G. “Improving Small City Highways: New Techniques for Improving Safety and Livability Through Technology Transfer.” Proceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Transportation Planning for Small and Medium-Sized Communities. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA (1999). 112. Wheeler, A. H., Abbott, P. G., Godfrey, N. S., Phillips, S. M., and Stait, R. TRL Report 238: Traffic Calming on Major Roads: The A47 Trunk Road at Thorney, Cambridgeshire. Transport Research Lab- oratory, London, UK (1997). 113. Berger, W. J. and Linauer, M. “Raised Traffic Islands at City Limits—Their Effect on Speed.” Proceedings of ICTCT Work- shop 1998. Lund Institute of Technology, Budapest, Hungary (1999). 114. Crowley, F. and MacDermott, A. Evaluation of Traffic Calming Schemes Constructed on National Roads 1993–1996. Road Safety Engineering, R460. National Roads Authority, Dublin, Ireland (2002). 115. Forbes, G. and Gill, T. “Arterial Speed Calming, Mohawk Road Case Study.” Transportation Research E-Circular E-C019: Urban Street Symposium Conference Proceedings. Transportation Re- search Board, National Research Council (December 2000) pp. I-2/1–I-2/7. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/circulars/ ec019/Ec019_i2.pdf. 116. Ewing, R. “From Highway to My Way.” Journal of Planning, Vol. 67(1), American Planning Association, Chicago, IL (January 2001) pp. 22–26. 117. Florida Department of Transportation. Utility Accommodation Manual. Document No. 710-020-001-d. Tallahassee, FL (1999). 118. Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). (Database). National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) and NHTSA. www-fars. nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx. 119. Ostensen, A. G. “New Focus for Highway Safety.” Public Roads, Vol. 68, No. 5 (2005) pp. 2–7. 120. Iowa State University Technology Transfer Center. Vegetation Control for Safety. A Guide for Street and Highway Maintenance Personnel, FHWA-RT-90-003. Prepared under the Rural Trans- portation Assistance Program Project 70, Office of Highway Safety, FHWA, U.S. DOT, Ames, IA (1990). 121. Walkinginfo.org: Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (website). “Shared Street (Green Street).” www.walkinginfo.org/ engineering/calming-street.cfm. 122. NCSA and NHTSA General Estimates System. (Database). 123. Zeeger, C. V., Stutts, J., Huang, H., Cynecki, M. J., Van Houten, R. V. Alberson, B. Neuman, T. R., Pfefer, R., Slack, K. L., Hardy, K. K. NCHRP Report 500: Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Highway Safety Plan—Volume 10: A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Pedestrians. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington DC (2004). 124. McLean, J. Effects of Sealed Shoulders on Road User Costs. Project Report for Austroads Project No. BS. E. N. 042. Austroads Pub- lication No. AP-R188/01. Sydney, Australia (2001). 55

Next: Appendix A - Urban Control Zone Corridor Study Reports »
Safe and Aesthetic Design of Urban Roadside Treatments Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 612: Safe and Aesthetic Design of Urban Roadside Treatments explores recommended design guidelines for safe and aesthetic roadside treatments in urban areas. The report also examines a toolbox of roadside treatments designed to balance pedestrian, bicyclist, and motorist safety and mobility.

NCHRP Report 612 includes four appendices, three of which are available online. The fourth, Appendix C, is included with the report.

Appendix A includes detailed information about the urban control zone corridor sites.

Appendix B includes the summary statistics for the report's case study sites.

Appendix C includes an urban roadside design toolbox, and

Appendix D provides draft language for the urban chapter in the AASHTO Roadside Design Guide.

Tables 19 and 20 on p. 43 of NCHRP Report 612 include incorrect information. The corrected tables are available online.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!