Utilities and Roadside Safety (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 32-42
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 32... ...
5Initiatives C Paul Scott and Don L
|
From page 33... ...
4. Specific countermeasures best suited to reducing accidents in the most cost-effective manner are recommended for implementation.
|
From page 34... ...
3. Delineation: PennDOT proposes placing reflective tape around poles where undergrounding or relocation is not a feasible option.
|
From page 35... ...
Initiatives 25 Location I objects include utility objects located within the control zone in the following areas: • Outside of horizontal curves where advisory signed speeds for the curve are 15 mph or more below the posted speed limit of that section of highway; • Within the turn radius area of public grade intersections; • Where a barrier, embankment, rock outcropping, ditch, or other roadside feature is likely to direct a vehicle into a utility object; and • Closer than 5 ft horizontally beyond the edge of the usable shoulder. About 20% of the utility objects in Washington State are Location I objects.
|
From page 36... ...
26 Utilities and Roadside Safety where M = number of miles of utility-owned aboveground facilities located within highway right-of-way (multiply by 5,280 to convert to feet of facilities) , N = utility's average line span length (ft)
|
From page 37... ...
The number of poles to be moved is estimated based on the number of existing poles that need to be mitigated over a 30-year period. The more crash-susceptible areas are to be treated first.
|
From page 38... ...
stood that the intent was to identify high crash areas. If the cause of the crashes could be eliminated independently of any utility relocation, this would be the thrust.
|
From page 39... ...
Initiatives 29 LUS's general approach is as follows: Step 1. Continue to monitor collisions with utility structures to determine which of the preceding categories they best fit.
|
From page 40... ...
30 Utilities and Roadside Safety On January 27, 1993, FHWA upgraded the HBS and FHWA (Massachusetts) designs from experimental to operational.
|
From page 41... ...
MASSACHUSETTS The Massachusetts Electric Cooperative and the New England Telephone Company installed 19 new utility poles near Boston. These poles were prefabricated and contained the safety hardware when delivered to the site.
|
From page 42... ...
The field experience with steel-reinforced safety poles has been overwhelmingly positive. William Quirk of Massachusetts Electric, who was intimately involved in the Massachusetts work where at least five impacts have been recorded, has stated emphatically, "The breakaway poles have saved us money." MARYLAND FHWA and the Maryland State Highway Administration initiated a pilot study in 1999 to delineate utility poles and other man-made fixed objects within the highway rightof-way.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.