DOCSLIB.ORG

COMPLIANCE and SURROGATE SAFETY MEASURES for UNCONTROLLED CROSSWALK CROSSINGS in OREGON Draft Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
COMPLIANCE and SURROGATE SAFETY MEASURES for UNCONTROLLED CROSSWALK CROSSINGS in OREGON Draft Final Report COMPLIANCE AND SURROGATE SAFETY MEASURES FOR UNCONTROLLED CROSSWALK CROSSINGS IN OREGON Final Report PROJECT SPR 806 COMPLIANCE AND SURROGATE SAFETY MEASURES FOR UNCONTROLLED CROSSWALK CROSSINGS IN OREGON Draft Final Report SPR 806 by Miguel Figliozzi, Professor Avinash Unnikrishnan, Associate Professor Sirisha Kothuri, Research Associate Portland State University 1930 SW 4th Avenue, Portland OR 97201 for Oregon Department of Transportation Research Section 555 13th Street NE, Suite 1 Salem OR 97301 and Federal Highway Administration 400 Seventh Street, SW Washington, DC 20590-0003 September 2018 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA-OR-RD-19-02 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Compliance and Surrogate Safety Measures for Uncontrolled September 2018 Crosswalk Crossings in Oregon 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Miguel Figliozzi, Avinash Unnikrishnan, Sirisha Kothuri, Álvaro Report No. Caviedes, David R. Soto Padín 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Oregon Department of Transportation Research Section 11. Contract or Grant No. 555 13th Street NE, Suite 1 Salem, OR 97301 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Oregon Dept. of Transportation Covered Research Section and Federal Highway Admin. Final Report 555 13th Street NE, Suite 1 400 Seventh Street, SW 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Salem, OR 97301 Washington, DC 20590-0003 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract This research aims to find readily observable and measurable field measures and geometric data to evaluate relative crosswalk safety performance. A literature review was conducted and crash data analysis was undertaken to determine the significant predictors for pedestrian crashes at unsignalized marked crosswalks. These factors were used to select nine sites for data collection. Video and radar equipment were used to collect pedestrian and traffic information at each of the sites. Both qualitative and quantitative analyses conducted at each site provided important insights into driver and pedestrian behavior. Ultimately, normalized entering volume (NEV) and no-stop percentage (NSP) are recommended as macro-level surrogate metrics that could be used to analyze pedestrian safety at unsignalized marked crosswalks. They are strongly associated with pedestrian-vehicle conflicts and are based on readily observable and measurable field measures and geometric data. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Pedestrian safety, unsignalized marked crosswalk, Copies available from NTIS, and online at macro surrogate measures, field data collection www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP_RES/ 19. Security Classification 20. Security Classification 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 165 Technical Report Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized Printed on recycled paper i ii SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS When You Multiply When You Multiply Symbol To Find Symbol Symbol To Find Symbol Know By Know By LENGTH LENGTH in inches 25.4 millimeters mm mm millimeters 0.039 inches in ft feet 0.305 meters m m meters 3.28 feet ft yd yards 0.914 meters m m meters 1.09 yards yd mi miles 1.61 kilometers km km kilometers 0.621 miles mi AREA AREA millimeters millimeters in2 square inches 645.2 mm2 mm2 0.0016 square inches in2 squared squared 2 2 2 2 ft square feet 0.093 meters squared m m meters squared 10.764 square feet ft 2 2 2 2 yd square yards 0.836 meters squared m m meters squared 1.196 square yards yd ac acres 0.405 hectares ha ha hectares 2.47 acres ac iii 2 kilometers 2 2 kilometers 2 mi square miles 2.59 km km 0.386 square miles mi squared squared VOLUME VOLUME fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters ml ml milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz gal gallons 3.785 liters L L liters 0.264 gallons gal ft3 cubic feet 0.028 meters cubed m3 m3 meters cubed 35.315 cubic feet ft3 yd3 cubic yards 0.765 meters cubed m3 m3 meters cubed 1.308 cubic yards yd3 NOTE: Volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3. MASS MASS oz ounces 28.35 grams g g grams 0.035 ounces oz lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg kg kilograms 2.205 pounds lb short tons (2000 T 0.907 megagrams Mg Mg megagrams 1.102 short tons (2000 lb) T lb) TEMPERATURE (exact) TEMPERATURE (exact) (F- 1.8C+3 °F Fahrenheit Celsius °C °C Celsius Fahrenheit °F 32)/1.8 2 *SI is the symbol for the International System of Measurement iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to thank the members of the ODOT Research Section for their sage advice and assistance in the preparation of this report. The authors also acknowledge the contributions of research assistants Alvaro Caviedes, Robert Burdalski, Santiago Espinosa, and David Soto. DISCLAIMER This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Oregon Department of Transportation and the United States Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The State of Oregon and the United States Government assume no liability of its contents or use thereof. The contents of this report reflect the view of the authors who are solely responsible for the facts and accuracy of the material presented. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Oregon Department of Transportation or the United States Department of Transportation. The State of Oregon and the United States Government do not endorse products of manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the object of this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. v vi TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................... 1 1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................................ 1 1.3 FOCUS AND DATA COLLECTION CONSTRAINTS ............................................... 1 1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION .......................................................................................... 2 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................ 3 2.1 FACTORS INFLUENCING PEDESTRIAN-VEHICLE CRASHES ............................ 3 2.1.1 Pedestrian Behavior and Demographic Factors ................................................................................... 3 2.1.2 Land Use Types ...................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.3 Traffic Characteristics ........................................................................................................................... 6 2.1.4 Road Characteristics ............................................................................................................................. 9 2.1.5 Safety Treatments ................................................................................................................................. 11 2.2 SURROGATE MEASURES ........................................................................................ 13 2.2.1 Time to Collision (TTC) Group............................................................................................................ 14 2.2.2 Post-Encroachment Time (PET) Group ............................................................................................... 15 2.2.3 Deceleration Group ............................................................................................................................. 16 2.2.4 Mixed Surrogates ................................................................................................................................. 17 2.2.5 Pros and Cons of Surrogate Safety Measures ..................................................................................... 19 2.4 TRAFFIC CONFLICT STUDIES ................................................................................ 21 2.4.1 Traffic Conflicts and Crash Severity .................................................................................................... 21 2.4.2 Swedish Traffic Conflict Technique ..................................................................................................... 22 2.4.3 Traffic Conflicts and Crash Rates ........................................................................................................ 24 2.5 PEDESTRIAN SAFETY INDICES ............................................................................. 26 2.5.1 Point System Approach ........................................................................................................................ 26 2.5.2 Regression Approach ........................................................................................................................... 27 2.6 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................ 32 3.0 CRASH AND EXPOSURE ANALYSIS ....................................................................... 33 3.1 PEDESTRIAN-VEHICLE CRASHES AT CONTROLLED AND UNCONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS .................................................................................................................... 33 3.1.1 General Trends ...................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Factors Influencing Safety at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings
    NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM REPORT FACTORS INFLUENCING SAFETY AT HIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSINGS NAS-NAE OCT 24 1968 LIBf^ARY HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES-NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD 1968 Officen DAVID H. STEVENS, Chairman OSCAR T. MARZKE, First Vice Chairman D. GRANT MICKLE, Second Vice Chairman W. N. CAREY, JR., Executive Director Executive Committee ' LOWELL K. BRIDWELL, Federal Highway Administrator, V. S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) A. E. JOHNSON, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway Officials (ex officio) GEORGE C. SPONSLER, Executive Secretary, Division of Engineering, National Research Council (ex officio) , J. B. McMORRAN, Commissioner, New York Department of Transportation (ex officio. Past Chairman 1966) EDWARD G. WETZEL, Associate Consultant, Edwards and Kelcey (ex officio, Past Chairman 1967) DONALD S. BERRY, Chairman, Department of Civil Engineering, Northwestern University J. DOUGLAS CARROLL, JR., Executive Director, Tri-State Transportation Commission, New York City * WILLIAM L. GARRISON, Director, Center for Urban Studies, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago SIDNEY GOLDIN, Vice President of Marketing, Asiatic Petroleum Corp. WILLIAM J. HEDLEY, Consultant ^ GEORGE E. HOLBROOK, Vice President, E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company 1 EUGENE M. JOHNSON, Chief Engineer, Mississippi State Highway Department PYKE JOHNSON, Retired THOMAS F. JONES, JR., President, University of South Carolina •• LOUIS C. LUNDSTROM, Director, Automotive Safety Engineering, General Motors Technical Center OSCAR T. MARZKE, Vice President, Fundamental Research, U. S. Steel Corporation * D. GRANT MICKLE, Vice President, Automotive Safety Foundation LEE LA VERNE MORGAN, Executive Vice President, Caterpillar Tractor Company T. E. SHELBURNE, Slate Highway Research Engineer, Virginia Highway Research Council CHARLES E.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Violations at Gated Highway-Railroad Grade Crossings
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Re No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 1 i TX 987-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS AT GATED HIGHWAY-RAILROAD October 1997 GRADE CROSSINGS 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Kay Fitzpatrick, Paul J. Carlson, Jonathan A. Bean, and Richard T. Research Report 2987-1 Bartoskewitz 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Study No. 7-2987 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Research: Research and Technology Transfer Office September 1995 - August 1997 P.O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Research performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation. Research Study Title: Evaluation of Automated Highway-Railroad Grade Crossing Enforcement System 16 . Abstract Senate Bill 1512, which was passed into law by the 74th State Legislature in 1995, required the Texas Department of Transportation to install and operate automated highway-railroad grade crossing enforcement systems as a demonstration project. Three sites with gate arms, relatively high traffic and train volumes, and a minimum number of accidents, were selected for the demonstration study. Additionally, a violation study was conducted at 16 additional gated crossings. The purpose of the violation study was to identifY roadway geometric and operational characteristics that influence violations at gated highway-railroad grade crossings. The demonstration project resulted in no statistical differences between the violations during the before period compared to the after period.
    [Show full text]
  • View / Open TM Database Composite.Pdf
    • • • • TRANSPORTATION-MARKINGS • DATABASE • COMPOSITE CATEGORIES • CLASSIFICATION & INDEX • • • -­ • III III • 1 TRANSPORTATION-MARKINGS: A STUDY IN CO.MMUNICATION MONOGRAPH SERIES Alternate Series Title: An Inter-modal Study of Safety Aids Transportatiol1-Markings Database Alternate T-M Titles: Transport [ation] Mark [ing]s / Transport Marks / Waymarks T-MFoundations, 4th edition, 2005 (Part A, Volume I, First Studies in T-M) (3rd edition, 1999; 2nd edition, 1991) Composite Categories A First Study in T-M: The US, 2nd edition, 1993 (Part B, Vol I) Classification & Index International Marine Aids to Navigation, 2nd edition, 1988 (parts C & D, Vol I) [Unified First Edition ofParts A-D, University Press ofAmerica, 1981] International Traffic Control Devices, 2nd edition, 2004 (Part E, Volume II, Further Studies in T-M) (lst edition, 1984) Part Iv Volume III, Additional Studies, International Railway Signals, 1991 (Part F, Vol II) International Aero Navigation Aids, 1994 (Part G, Vol II) Transportation-Markil1gs: A Study il1 T-M General Classification with Index, 2nd edition, 2004 (Part H, Vol II) (1st edition, 1994) Commllnication Monograph Series Transportation-Markings Database: Marine Aids to Navigation, 1st edition, 1997 (I'art Ii, Volume III, Additional Studies in T-M) TCDs, 1st edition, 1998 (Part Iii, Vol III) Railway Signals. 1st edition, 2000 (part Iiii, Vol III) Aero Nav Aids, 1st edition, 2001 (Part Iiv, Vol III) Composite Categories Classification & Index, 1st edition, 2006 (part Iv, Vol III) (2nd edition ofDatabase, Parts Ii-v,
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Fe's Steel Radial Roof Cabooses
    SFRH&MS 2010 CONVENTION, DENVER Santa Fe’s Steel Radial Roof Cabooses Jim Price photo 1948 John McCall collection Santa Fe 2-6-2 1120 San Angelo – Sterling City mixed 2 SFRH&MS 2010 CONVENTION, DENVER Santa Fe’s Steel Radial Roof Cabooses Period covered 1927 to 1976 Timeline vs. Details By John B. Moore, Jr. Albuquerque 3 Contributors • Frank Ellington • John McCall • Stephen Priest • Craig Ordner • Gordon Locke • John Signor • Charlie Slater • Steve Rippeteau • Steve Sandifer • Eddie Corbin • Greg Silva • John Hitzeman • Keith Jordan • Paul Brown • Jay Miller • Andy Sperandeo • Bill Childers • Ron Welch • J. P. Hereford, Jr. • Richard Biermann • Stan Kistler • Gordon Bassett • Mark Wilkouski • Joe McMillan • Frank Angstead • 4 SFRH&MS 2010 CONVENTION, DENVER overview • Detail changes over time – Improvements – Changing needs – Safety • Presentation is divided into eras – 1930s ACF built cabooses – 1940s ATSFbuilt cabooses – 1950s Radios – 1960s Changes – 1970s final years of the 4 digit numbers 5 SFRH&MS 2010 CONVENTION, DENVER Radial roof cabooses 1500-1649 AC&F 1927 150 cars 1650-1749 AC&F 1928 100 cars 1750-1874 AC&F 1929 125 cars 1875-1978 AC&F 1930 104 cars 1979-2000 AC&F 1931 22 cars TOTAL 501 cars 2001-2008 ATSF 1942 8 cars 2009-2100 ATSF 1943 92 cars 2101-2200 ATSF 1944 100 cars TOTAL 200 cars Peaked roof cabooses 2201-2300 ATSF 1949 100 cars (Duryea underframe) 500-599 ATSF 1949 100 cars TOTAL 200 cars 6 Roof walk (Running Board) configurations – built with wood W - built with steel S Note some wood running boards replaced with
    [Show full text]
  • Missouri Pacific V. Limmer
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 06-0023 444444444444 MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY D/B/A UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. PATRICIA LIMMER, BILLYE JOYCE SMITH, AND BOBBY JEAN NOTHNAGEL, RESPONDENTS 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 Argued November 13, 2007 JUSTICE HECHT delivered the opinion of the Court, in which CHIEF JUSTICE JEFFERSON, JUSTICE WAINWRIGHT, JUSTICE MEDINA, JUSTICE GREEN, JUSTICE JOHNSON, and JUSTICE WILLETT joined. JUSTICE O’NEILL and JUSTICE GUZMAN did not participate in the decision. In this wrongful death action arising out of a truck-train collision, the plaintiffs claim that crossbucks — the familiar black-and-white, X-shaped signs that read “RAILROAD CROSSING”1 — provided inadequate warning for the railroad crossing and that the railroad was negligent in failing to remove a gravel pile and vegetation that restricted drivers’ view of approaching trains. The railroad contends that federal law preempts these claims. When railroad crossing improvements are 1 U.S. DEP’T OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, at Table 2A-4 (2003) (Use of Sign Shapes), available at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2003r1r2/ mutcd2003r1r2complet.pdf [hereinafter MANUAL]. federally funded, federal regulations specify what warning devices must be used,2 and the United States Supreme Court has held that section 20106 of the Federal Railroad Safety Act of 19703 expressly preempts state tort law actions challenging the adequacy of those devices.4 The trial court concluded that federal regulations do not apply in this case, and the court of appeals affirmed.5 We disagree and accordingly reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and render judgment that the plaintiffs take nothing.
    [Show full text]
  • The Term Level Crossing (Also Called a Railroad Crossing, Road Through
    CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE SURVEY 2.1 History of Railway & Level Crossing Development Rail services in Sri Lanka were commenced by Britishers in 1864 with the inauguration of the first train to Ambepussa. Thereafter Railway tracks were extended to Kandy and to the central hills mainly to transport tea and other agricultural products for export to the Port of Colombo, on which the country’s economy depended on. From the commencement of the Railways, it was managed by the Government as a service oriented organization. With the expansion of the road network the need for Level Crossings became prominent. The road network was constructed parallel with the rail line and bus halts were located very close to the railway station. In order to facilitate links the level crossings were needed to be constructed in short intervals. According to the current sources, Sri Lanka Railways has a route network of 1449 km. Total track length inclusive of double lines and crossing loops at stations is 1670 km. It has a ruling gradient of 1:44. Rails used are 80 lbs/yd, on flat country, 88 lbs/yd on the entire mainline from Colombo to Badulla. These two sections are now converted to 90A in stages to accommodate higher axle loads and speeds. Around 650 km of track length is with welded rails and altogether 530 km are laid with concrete sleepers. Average life of a rail is 30 years and that of a wooden sleeper is 04 years and that of a concrete sleeper is 35 years. Cost of a 20 m long rail is Rs.
    [Show full text]
  • Combined CCI Copy.Cwk
    T-M TRANSPORTATION-MARKINGS DATABASE: COMPOSITE CATEGORIES CLASSIFICATION & INDEX Brian Clearman Mount Angel Abbey 2012 Saint Benedict, Oregon TRANSPORTATION-MARKINGS DATABASE: COMPOSITE CATEGORIES CLASSIFICATION & INDEX TRANSPORTATION-MARKINGS: A STUDY IN COMMUNICATION MONOGRAPH SERIES Alternate Series Title: An Inter-modal Study of Safety Aids Alternate T-M Titles: Transport [ation] Mark [ings]/Transport Marks/Waymarks/ Transportation Control Devices T-M Foundations, 5the edition, 2008 (Part A, Volume I, First Studies in T-M (2nd ed., 1991; 3rd ed., 1999, 4th ed., 2005) A First Study in T-M: The US, 2nd ed., 1992 (Part B, Vol. I) International Marine Aids to Navigation, 3rd edition, 2010 (Parts C & D, Vol. I) (2nd ed., 1988) [Unified lst Edition of Parts A-D, 1981, University of America Press] International Traffic Control Devices, 2nd ed., 2004 (Part E, Vol. II, Further Studies in T-M) (lst ed., 1984) International Railway Signals, 1991 (Part F, Vol. II). International Aero Navigation Aids, 1994 (Part G, Vol. II). T-M General Classification, 3rd edition, 2010 (Part II, Vol. II) (2nd ed., 2003; 3rd ed., 1995). Transportation-Markings Database: Marine, 2nd ed., 2007 (Part Ii, Vol. III, Additional Studies in T-M), (1st ed., 1997) TCD, 2nd. ed., 2008 (Part Iii, Vol. III), (lst ed., 1998) Railway, 2nd ed., 2009 (Part Iiii), (lst ed., 2000) Aero, 2nd ed., 2009 (Part Iiv) (lst ed., 2001) Composite Categories Classification & Index, 2nd ed., 2012 (Part Iv, Vol. III) (lst ed., 2006) Transportation-Markings: A Historical Survey, 1750-2000, 2002 (Part J, Vol. IV, Final Studies in T-M) Transportation-Markings: An Integrative Systems Perspective: Communication, Information, Semiotics, 2011 (Part K, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Startup V. Pacific Electric Railway Company
    University of California, Hastings College of the Law UC Hastings Scholarship Repository Opinions The onorH able Roger J. Traynor Collection 4-28-1947 Startup v. Pacific lecE tric Railway Company Roger J. Traynor Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.uchastings.edu/traynor_opinions Recommended Citation Roger J. Traynor, Startup v. Pacific leE ctric Railway Company 29 Cal.2d 866 (1947). Available at: http://repository.uchastings.edu/traynor_opinions/234 This Opinion is brought to you for free and open access by the The onorH able Roger J. Traynor Collection at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Opinions by an authorized administrator of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 866 STABTOP tI. PACIFIC ELECTRIC By. Co. [29 C.2d (L. A.. No. 19876. In Bank. Apr. 28, 1947.] SADIE STARTUP et aI., Appellants, v. PACIFIC ELECTRIC RAILWAY COMPANY (a Corporation), Respondent. Pl Bailroad&-lDjuries from Operation-Warnings and Sipala.­ All interurban railroad company which bas undertaken to WarD travelers of its trains by the nse of a wigwag must use reasonable eare in the construction and maintenance of the signal system lest the appearance of 811.fety created by the. presence of the device constitute a trap for persons relying on it for protection. [2] 1d. -lDjuries from Operation - Instructions - Signals and Warnings.-In an action against an interurban railroad com­ pany for injuries sustained by automobile guests in a grade crossing collision.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record-Senate.· February 2
    1428 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE.· FEBRUARY 2, By Mr. MERCER: Petition of post-office clerks of Omaha, PETITIONS .AND MEMORI..A.LS, Nebr., for the passage of House bill No. 4351-to the Committee Mr. PROCTOR presented a petition of sundry citizens of the on the Post-Office and Post-Roads. United States, praying for the establishment of a proper tribunal By Mr. MIERS of lndiana: Papers to accompany House bill wherein may be adjudicated their claims for property destroyed granting a pension to Samuel F. Fowler-to the Committee on or confiscated by Spanish soldiers during the late war in Cuba; Invalid Pensions. which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. MOON: Affidavits of N. E. Moore and N. W. McDaniel, Mr. LODGE presented a petition of 17 citizens of Medford, to accompany House bill No. 7404, for the relief of the Methodist Mass., praying for the repeal of the stamp tax upon medicines, Episcopal Church (McDaniel's Chapel), Shellmound, Tenn.-to perfumeries, and cosmetics; which was referred to the Committee the Committee on Claims. on Finance. By l\Ir. OTJEN: Petition of W. F. Kaiser and other druggists He also presented sundry petitions of railway mail clerks of Wo­ of Milwaukee, Wis., for the repeal of the stamp tax on medicines­ burn, Pittsfield, and Milford, all in the State of Massachusetts. to the Committee on Ways and Means. praying for the enactment of legislation to provide for the classi­ By Mr. RAY of New York: Petition of M. A. Newton and fication of clerks in first and second class post-offices; which were others, of North Pitcher, Chenango County, N.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation-Markings Database: Railway Signals, Signs, Marks & Markers
    T-M TRANSPORTATION-MARKINGS DATABASE: RAILWAY SIGNALS, SIGNS, MARKS & MARKERS 2nd Edition Brian Clearman MOllnt Angel Abbey 2009 TRANSPORTATION-MARKINGS DATABASE: RAILWAY SIGNALS, SIGNS, MARKS, MARKERS TRANSPORTATION-MARKINGS DATABASE: RAILWAY SIGNALS, SIGNS, MARKS, MARKERS Part Iiii, Second Edition Volume III, Additional Studies Transportation-Markings: A Study in Communication Monograph Series Brian Clearman Mount Angel Abbey 2009 TRANSPORTATION-MARKINGS A STUDY IN COMMUNICATION MONOGRAPH SERIES Alternate Series Title: An Inter-modal Study ofSafety Aids Alternate T-M Titles: Transport ration] Mark [ing]s/Transport Marks/Waymarks T-MFoundations, 5th edition, 2008 (Part A, Volume I, First Studies in T-M) (2nd ed, 1991; 3rd ed, 1999, 4th ed, 2005) A First Study in T-M' The US, 2nd ed, 1993 (part B, Vol I) International Marine Aids to Navigation, 2nd ed, 1988 (Parts C & D, Vol I) [Unified 1st Edition ofParts A-D, 1981, University Press ofAmerica] International Traffic Control Devices, 2nd ed, 2004 (part E, Vol II, Further Studies in T-M) (lst ed, 1984) International Railway Signals, 1991 (part F, Vol II) International Aero Navigation, 1994 (part G, Vol II) T-M General Classification, 2nd ed, 2003 (Part H, Vol II) (lst ed, 1995, [3rd ed, Projected]) Transportation-Markings Database: Marine, 2nd ed, 2007 (part Ii, Vol III, Additional Studies in T-M) (1 st ed, 1997) TCD, 2nd ed, 2008 (Part Iii, Vol III) (lst ed, 1998) Railway, 2nd ed, 2009 (part Iiii, Vol III) (lst ed, 2000) Aero, 1st ed, 2001 (part Iiv) (2nd ed, Projected) Composite Categories
    [Show full text]
  • ()I§Ne'yland: an AESTHETIC of POSTMODERN CONSUMER CULTURE, HYPERREALITY and SEMIOTIC CONTENT in the VISUAL ARTS
    ()i§ne'Yland: AN AESTHETIC OF POSTMODERN CONSUMER CULTURE, HYPERREALITY AND SEMIOTIC CONTENT IN THE VISUAL ARTS by Christel Wolfaardt submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Magister Artium (Fine Arts) in the Faculty of Arts University of Pretoria August 1996 © University of Pretoria FOREWORD ii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS iii INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER ONE: Disneyland as model 7 for the manifestation of a Postmodern consumer culture mentality in the visual arts 1.1. Characteristics of a Postmodern consumer 7 culture in Disneyland 1. 1. 1. Global intimations of a mass aesthetic in 7 Disneyland 1.1.2. Watch out! Here comes the Information 14 Revolution in Disneyland: 'caveat emptor' 1.1.3. Nostalgia, myth, and spectacle in 22 Disneyland 1.2. The influence of Postmodern consumer 27 culture mentality on the visual arts 1.2.1. Disney and a popular aesthetic 27 1.2.2. Disneyland's aesthetic of animation 30 1.2.3. Infotainment Art: the importance of being 32 entertaining and informative CHAPTER TWO: Disneyland as model for 42 the creation of a state of hyperreality: 'simulacra' and 'simulation' in the visual arts 2.1. Hyperreality: 'simulacra' and 'simulation' in 42 Disneyland 2.1.1. Disneyland and the problem of 'more' 42 reality 2. 1.2. Simulation and body politics 50 2.2. The influence of a state of hyperreality: 54 'simulacra' and 'simulation' in the visual arts 2.2.1. Hyperreality and the 'art of illusion' 54 2.2.2. Hyperrealify and deconstruction in the 57 visual arts CHAPTER THREE: Disneyland as model for 60 the visualisation of semiotic content in the visual arts 3.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Report to Congr'ess 11 I I I I I I I I Railroad-Highway Safety Part I: a Comprehensive Statement of The· Problem
    PB 206 792 REPORT TO CONGR'ESS 11 I I I I I I I I RAILROAD-HIGHWAY SAFETY PART I: A COMPREHENSIVE STATEMENT OF THE· PROBLEM I ; I \'" :I h. _.__ - U.s. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION -by NAnONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATlON SERVICE .. 22151 PREPARED BY THE STAFF OF THE FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION TECHNIC.t.L REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE . R.part No. 2. Ga....l'ftl'llM'lt A"•••ion No• 3. Rec:i pi..,'"s CatGloa No. - : _Titl. and 5_ Report Oat. RU1roCtd-E:gl!<;:ay Safety November 1971 ?art A Canprehensive S"tatement Of The 6. O,ganizatian Code A.rho,t.) 8. O,gani&eation Repon No. ?repared by the Staffs of the Federal Rail- Road Administration & Federal. Hiqhwav Ad1'ni.1!. Performing Organization N.,.. ond Adell.... 10. Work Unit No. - 11. Contract or G.o",t No. 13. T-,pe of Reoport one: Ca..,.recI SponsDring Agency N..._ .,d Ackh.... ?ederaI Administration and Report to Congress ?ederal Highway Administration ... Sponao4"ino ADeney Cod. i. Suppl..-n'ary No.... ,& l'hii report"presents Part I of the combined study effort of the ?ederal Administration and Federal Highway Admi.nistration • mdw-as submitted to the Congress in October 1971 in response :0 the Railroad Safety Act of 1970. I f:)identifies the extent and lature of the safety problem associated with railroad - highway Lntersections nationwide and to pedestrians along d.ghts-of-way • particularly within and near, urban areas. A cost- )enefit analysis is employed to present the problem in order of nagnitude.l II of the report will be submitted in July_.
    [Show full text]