DOCSLIB.ORG

TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT of Transportation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT of Transportation Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 2 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 3 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 4 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Two Recurring Work Zone Design Challenges: • ADA/Pedestrian Accommodation • Bicyclist presence within Work Area Revealed thru Annual Work Zone Reviews & ODOT Region feedback October 2015 5 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Enough “Tools in the TCP Toolbox” The RIGHT Tools • Safe & Effective • Practical Project applications • Cost effective Implementation and Training • Design Manuals, Drawings, Specifications Distribute Information to Customers Consistency & Enforcement October 2015 6 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 7 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 8 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 9 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) • “All altered portions of existing facilities located in the public right-of-way shall comply with these requirements to the maximum extent feasible.” ODOT’s focus on Pedestrian & ADA Needs • New Devices, Materials, Technologies • Increased ODOT TCP Design Manual guidance • Added details from PROWAG • Device selection and usage criteria October 2015 10 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Pedestrian Channelizing Device (PCD) • Pilot Project in 2012 – SUCCESS! BEFORE… AFTER! October 2015 11 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Pedestrian Channelizing Device (PCD) • Multiple products available on ODOT QPL October 2015 12 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Pedestrian Channelizing Device (PCD) • Multiple products available on ODOT QPL October 2015 13 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Pedestrian Channelizing Device (PCD) • Multiple applications for various activities October 2015 14 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Standard Drawing TM844 available October 2015 15 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation TCP DESIGN MANUAL – 11th Edition (April, 2015) Enhanced Design guidance • Pedestrian-Specific Traffic Control Plans October 2015 16 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation TCP DESIGN MANUAL – 11th Edition (April, 2015) Enhanced Design guidance • Pedestrian-Specific Traffic Control Plans October 2015 17 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation TCP DESIGN MANUAL – 11th Edition (April, 2015) Enhanced Design guidance • Pedestrian Channelization Devices (PCD) usage and placement matrix October 2015 18 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation TCP DESIGN MANUAL – 11th Edition (April, 2015) Enhanced Design guidance • Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) details October 2015 19 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Pedestrian Accessibility Products & Devices • Portable, Adjustable Sidewalk Ramps Replaces non-compliant ramps More portable and adjustable than AC or PCC ramps October 2015 20 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Pedestrian Accessibility Products & Devices • Automated Pedestrian Information Stations Programmable audible messages Describes alternate routes, conditions, hazards October 2015 21 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 22 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 23 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 24 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation WORK AREA October 2015 25 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 26 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 27 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation OPTION 1: Provide Separate Facilities, or Alternate Routes October 2015 28 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 29 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation October 2015 30 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation OPTION 2: Warn of Bicyclist presence, Mitigate, Enhance • “Bicycles ON ROADWAY” sign • Enhanced pavement markings • Decrease Channelizing Device spacing October 2015 31 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation OPTION 2: Warn of Bicyclist presence, Mitigate, Enhance • Shared facilities “Shared Roadway” October 2015 32 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Separate Bicycle Facilities • During short-duration work zones • Bicycle-specific pathway delineation October 2015 33 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation Separate Bicycle Facilities • Delineation within Lane Closure October 2015 34 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation New “Bicycle Channelizing Devices” (BCD) • For Long-term, stationary work areas October 2015 35 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation New Bicycle-specific Signing and Markings • Designate and sign bicycle-specific facilities CURRENT EXAMPLES… ADDITIONAL WORK ZONE USES… Including Project-specific designs… October 2015 36 of 38 Oregon Department TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS UNIT Of Transportation ODOT Traffic Control Plans Design Manual • www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/TRAFFIC-ROADWAY/pages/tcp_manual.aspx National Work Zone Safety Information Clearinghouse • Work Zone Safety Grants • www.workzonesafety.org/fhwa_wz_grant/atssa American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) • “Pedestrian Safety & Accessibility in Work Zones” • www.workzonesafety.org/fhwa_wz_grant/atssa/atssa_pedestrian_work_zones ODOT Transportation Safety Division • “Accommodating Pedestrians in Work Zones” • www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TS/docs/workzone/accomodatingpedestrians.pdf ODOT Bicycle & Pedestrian Program • Sheila Lyons – Program Manager • Rodger Gutierrez – Facilities Specialist, Salem Gary Obery – ODOT Alternate Mode Traffic Engineer October 2015 37 of 38 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 9 Intersections
    2005 Intersections CHAPTER 9 INTERSECTIONS 9.0 INTRODUCTION Intersections are intended to operate with vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles proceeding in many directions, often at the same time. At such locations, traffic movements on two or more facilities are required to occupy a common area. It is this unique characteristic of intersections, the repeated occurrence of conflicts, that is the basis for most intersection design standards, criteria, and proper operating procedures. An intersection is defined as the general area where two or more highways join or cross, including the roadway and roadside facilities for traffic movements within it. Each highway radiating from an intersection and forming part of it is an intersection leg. The common intersection of two highways crossing each other has four legs. It is not recommended that an intersection have more than four legs. An intersection is an important part of a highway system because, to a great extent, the efficiency, safety, speed, cost of operation, and capacity depend on its design. Each intersection involves through or cross-traffic movements on one or more of the highways concerned and may involve turning movements between these highways. These movements may be handled by various means, such as signals, signing, and channelization, depending on the type of intersection. 9.1 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND OBJECTIVES The main objective of intersection design is to reduce the potential conflicts between motor vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, and facilities while facilitating the convenience, ease, and comfort of the people traversing the intersection. The design should be fitted closely to the natural transitional paths and operating characteristics of the users.
    [Show full text]
  • 17346 1 Special Marking Areas
    4" 4" 4" 4" 4" 4" 8' 8' 8' 8' 8' 8' 4" 34 s.f. 22 s.f. 23 s.f. 24 s.f. 20 s.f. 26 s.f. 13 s.f. 20 s.f. 20 s.f. 23 s.f. 22 s.f. 20 s.f. 4" 4" 4" 4" 4" 4" 3'-4" 3'-4" ' ' 5 R2 ' R1 7 5 ' " ' 4" ' 5 6 3 10' 3 - ' R1 6" " 7 ' 6 " 3 - ' ' 9 1 ' 9 8 - ' ' 3 4" ' " ' 5 " 2 4 2 5 6 ' 1 3 - 5 ' " R2 . 4 9 6 - ' ' " ' 1' 1 7 4 8 3 " 5 . R - ' 1' 1' 3 3'-4" 3'-8" 5 2 2 8" R R1=3'3.375" R1=2' 11" ' R2=2'3.563" 3' 1' 5 . R2=1' 11" 6 6'-4" 1 Preferential Lane Through Turn Symbol R1=3'3.375" U Turn Lane-Use Lane-Use R2=2'3.563" Lane-Use Arrow Arrow 11 s.f. Arrow 12 s.f. 17 s.f. Turn and Through 27 s.f. Lane-Use Right Turn Arrow To Be Reversed. Arrow DIMENSIONS ARE WITHIN 1" ± 30" 29 s.f. Wrong-Way 4" PAVEMENT ARROW AND MESSAGE DETAILS NOTE: When arrow and pavement message are used together, the arrow Arrow shall be located down stream of the pavement message and shall be n separated from the pavement message by a distance of 25' (Base of the g 24 s.f. d . arrow to the base of the message). Stop message shall be placed 25' 1 0 from back of stop line.
    [Show full text]
  • Intersection Geometric Design
    Intersection Geometric Design Course No: C04-033 Credit: 4 PDH Gregory J. Taylor, P.E. Continuing Education and Development, Inc. 22 Stonewall Court Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677 P: (877) 322-5800 [email protected] Intersection Geometric Design INTRODUCTION This course summarizes and highlights the geometric design process for modern roadway intersections. The contents of this document are intended to serve as guidance and not as an absolute standard or rule. When you complete this course, you should be familiar with the general guidelines for at-grade intersection design. The course objective is to give engineers and designers an in-depth look at the principles to be considered when selecting and designing intersections. Subjects include: 1. General design considerations – function, objectives, capacity 2. Alignment and profile 3. Sight distance – sight triangles, skew 4. Turning roadways – channelization, islands, superelevation 5. Auxiliary lanes 6. Median openings – control radii, lengths, skew 7. Left turns and U-turns 8. Roundabouts 9. Miscellaneous considerations – pedestrians, traffic control, frontage roads 10. Railroad crossings – alignments, sight distance For this course, Chapter 9 of A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (also known as the “Green Book”) published by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) will be used primarily for fundamental geometric design principles. This text is considered to be the primary guidance for U.S. roadway geometric design. Copyright 2015 Gregory J. Taylor, P.E. Page 2 of 56 Intersection Geometric Design This document is intended to explain some principles of good roadway design and show the potential trade-offs that the designer may have to face in a variety of situations, including cost of construction, maintenance requirements, compatibility with adjacent land uses, operational and safety impacts, environmental sensitivity, and compatibility with infrastructure needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 540 HOV and Transit
    Chapter 540 HOV and Transit 540.1 General Chapter540.2 540 References HOV and Transit 540.3 Design Considerations 540.4 Transit Facilities 540.01 General540.5 Commuter Rail 540.04 Transit Facilities 540.02 References540.6 HOVs and Taxis 540.05 Commuter Rail 540.03 Design Considerations 540.06 HOVs and Taxis 540.1 General 540.01 GeneralThis chapter provides guidance and information for designing high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) andThis transit chapterfacilities. providesHOV guidance and transit andfacilities informationinclude fortransit designingcenters, high-occupancybus stops and pullouts, vehicle turnarou(HOV)nds, andpark transitand facilities.ride lots, HOV HOVlanes, and andtransit commuter facilitiesrail includefacilities. transitThe objectives centers, busfor thestops HOVand andpullouts,transit turnarounds,facilities are: park and ride lots, HOV lanes, and commuter rail facilities. The• Improve objectivesthe capability for the HOVof the andterminal transitto facilitiesmove more are:people by increasing the number of • peopleImproveper vehicle.the capability of the terminal to move more people by increasing the • Providenumbertravel of peopletime savings per vehicle.and a more reliable trip time to HOV lane users. •• ProvideProvidetravel traveloptions time forsavingsHOVs andand aindividuals more reliablewithout tripadversely time to HOVaffecting lanethe users.general- • purposeProvidelanes. travel options for HOVs and individuals without adversely affecting the • Providegeneral-integrated purposeconnections lanes. for riders between
    [Show full text]
  • Design Manual 1310 Intersections
    Chapter 1310 Intersections 1310.01 General Exhibit 1310-12 Left-Turn Storage with Trucks (ft) 1310.02 Design Considerations Exhibit 1310-13 Median Channelization: Widening 1310.03 Design Elements Exhibit 1310-14 Median Channelization: Median Width 11 ft 1310.04 Intersection Sight Distance or More 1310.05 Signing and Delineation Exhibit 1310-15 Median Channelization: Median Width 23 ft to 26 ft 1310.06 Procedures Exhibit 1310-16 Median Channelization: Median Width of 1310.07 Documentation More Than 26 ft 1310.08 References Exhibit 1310-17 Median Channelization: Minimum Protected Storage Exhibit 1310-1 Lane Alignment Taper Rate Exhibit 1310-18 Median Channelization: Two-Way Left-Turn Exhibit 1310-2 Ramp Terminal Intersection Details Lane Exhibit 1310-3 Median at Two-Way Ramp Terminal Exhibit 1310-19 Right-Turn Lane Guidelines Exhibit 1310-4 Intersection Balance Example Exhibit 1310-20 Right-Turn Pocket and Right-Turn Taper Exhibit 1310-5 Diamond Interchange with Advance Storage Exhibit 1310-21 Right-Turn Lane Exhibit 1310-6 Initial Ranges for Right-Turn Corner (Simple Exhibit 1310-22 Acceleration Lane Curve-Taper) Exhibit 1310-23 Traffic Island Designs Exhibit 1310-7 Left-Turn Storage Guidelines: Two-Lane, Exhibit 1310-24 Traffic Island Designs: Compound Curve Unsignalized Exhibit 1310-25 Traffic Island Designs Exhibit 1310-8 Left-Turn Storage Guidelines: Four-Lane, Exhibit 1310-26 U-Turn Spacing Unsignalized Exhibit 1310-27 U-Turn Roadway Exhibit 1310-9 Left-Turn Storage Length: Two-Lane, Unsignalized (40mph) Exhibit 1310-28 U-Turn Median Openings Exhibit 1310-10 Left-Turn Storage Length: Two-Lane, Exhibit 1310-29 Sight Distance at Intersections Unsignalized (50 mph) Exhibit 1310-30 Sight Distance at Intersections Exhibit 1310-11 Left-Turn Storage Length: Two-Lane, Unsignalized (60 mph) 1310.01 General Intersections are a critical part of Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) highway design because of increased conflict potential.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Islands Should Be a Minimum of 75 Square Feet
    LLP 10/8/2019 7:14:58 AM P:\StandD raw \D ESIG N STAN D AR D S\Standards D raw ings Library\Standard R oadw ay D raw ings - C U R R EN T\In Progress\170.00 D esign - Traffic C ontrol IP\170.01 Pavem ents M arkings IP\TM 3-20190628.dgn NOT TO SCALE 716-02.04, PLASTICPAVEMENTMARKING (CHANNELIZATION STRIPING),S.Y. TO BEPAIDFORUNDERITEMNO. CHANNELIZATION MARKINGS 12" DIAGONALTRANSVERSE 716-02.04, PLASTICPAVEMENTMARKING (CHANNELIZATION STRIPING),S.Y. TO BEPAIDFORUNDERITEMNO. AREA EQUALTOORLESS THAN400SQUAREFEET CHANNELIZATION MARKINGS 12" DIAGONALCHEVRON REQUIRED (MEASUREDFACEOFCURBTOOUTSIDEBOUNDARYLINE). WHEN DISTANCE"A"ISLESSTHAN6',NODIAGONALMARKINGWILLBE AREA GREATERTHAN400SQUAREFEET 8" SINGLESOLIDWHITELINEBOUNDARY 716-02.04, PLASTICPAVEMENTMARKING 24" SINGLESOLIDWHITELINEBOUNDARY 716-02.07, PLASTICPAVEMENTMARKING (CHANNELIZATION STRIPING),S.Y. TO BEPAIDFORUNDERITEMNO. TO BEPAIDFORUNDERITEMNO. TRAFFIC ISLANDS (24 INCHBARRIERLINE),L.F. 8" SINGLESOLIDWHITELINEBOUNDARY 716-02.04, PLASTICPAVEMENTMARKING (SAME FORDEPRESSEDISLAND) (CHANNELIZATION STRIPING),S.Y. TO BEPAIDFORUNDERITEMNO. 10' MARKED ISLAND MARKED ISLAND 10' RAISED ISLAND ( S E MINIMUM 2' E N O TRAFFIC T E T R E A F ) F 45 I C TRAFFIC 45 45 T R A F F I C "A" <6' "A" =6' 716-04.04, PLASTICPAVEMENTMARKING TO BEPAIDFORUNDERITEMNO. (TRANSVERSE SHOULDER),L.F. 716-02.04, PLASTICPAVEMENTMARKING CHANNELIZATION MARKINGS 12" DIAGONALTRANSVERSE (CHANNELIZATION STRIPING),S.Y. WILL BEREQUIRED(MEASUREDOUTSIDEOFBOUNDARYLINES). TO BEPAIDFORUNDERITEMNO. EDGE OFPAVEDSHOULDER CHANNELIZATION MARKINGS 12" DIAGONALTRANSVERSE FOR MEDIANWIDTHLESSTHAN6'NODIAGONALMARKING TRANSVERSE SHOULDERMARKING 45 AND OBSTRUCTIONAPPROACH MARKED MEDIANISLAND T R A F C B F L OFMAINTRAVELWAY L RUNSPARALLELTO TRAFFIC I C S SEE TABLE 45 S DOUBLE SOLIDYELLOWLINE (LINE) PAYITEMUSEDONTHEPROJECT. (LINE) PAYITEMUSEDONTHEPROJECT. APPROPRIATE PAVEMENTMARKING 12" APPROPRIATE PAVEMENTMARKING DOUBLE SOLIDYELLOWLINE TO BEPAIDFORUNDERTHE TO BEPAIDFORUNDERTHE S TRAFFIC SINGLE SOLIDWHITELINE SEE NOTEG.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Manual 1320 Roundabouts
    Chapter 1320 Roundabouts 1320.01 General Exhibit 1320-1 Suggested Initial Design Ranges 1320.02 Roundabout Types Exhibit 1320-2 Radii-Speed Relationship on Approach Legs and R Value Relationships 1320.03 Capacity Analysis Exhibit 1320-3 Intersection Sight Distance 1320.04 Geometric Design 1320.05 Pedestrians 1320.06 Bicycles 1320.07 Signing 1320.08 Pavement Marking 1320.09 Illumination 1320.10 Road Approach, Parking, and Transit Facilities 1320.11 Geometric Design Peer Review 1320.12 Documentation and Approvals 1320.13 References 1320.01 General Modern roundabouts are near-circular intersections at grade. They are an effective intersection type with fewer conflict points and lower speeds, and they provide for easier decision making than other intersection types. They also require less maintenance than traffic signals. Well-designed roundabouts have been found to reduce crashes (especially fatal and severe injury collisions), traffic delays, fuel consumption, and air pollution. They also have a traffic-calming effect by reducing vehicle speeds using geometric design rather than relying solely on traffic control devices. Roundabout Roundabout design is an iterative process. A well-designed roundabout achieves a balance of safety and efficiency. Good design is a process of creating the smooth curvature, channelization, and deflection required to achieve consistent speeds, well-marked lane paths, and appropriate sight distance. The decision to install a roundabout is the result of an Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) (see Chapter 1300) approved by the region Traffic Engineer or other designated authority. WSDOT Design Manual M 22-01.20 Page 1320-1 September 2021 Chapter 1320 Roundabouts New roundabouts and changes to existing roundabouts that either add or reduce capacity, or change the geometric configuration require a Peer Review (see Section 1320.11) 1320.02 Roundabout Types There are five basic roundabout types: mini, compact, single-lane, multilane, and teardrop described in the following sections.
    [Show full text]
  • Street Design Guidelines
    FINAL DRAFT Town of Leland Street Design Guidelines Prepared for: Town of Leland November 2017 Town of Leland Street Design Guidelines Table of Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 2 Street Network Plans and Policies ......................................................................... 3 2.1 Relevant Plans and Policies ....................................................................................................3 2.2 Complete Streets ......................................................................................................................4 3 Street Typologies and Characteristics ................................................................. 6 3.1 Types and Roles of Streets .....................................................................................................6 3.2 Flexcode Street Typology ......................................................................................................8 3.3 Conventional Subdivision Street Typology ......................................................................9 4 Street Design Overview ............................................................................................. 11 4.1 Street Design Principles .......................................................................................................11 4.2 Cross-Section Elements ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Highway Design Manual Chapter 24.3 Commuter Transfer Facilities
    HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL Chapter 24 - Mobility Measures Revision 32 May 4, 1998 Chapter 24 MOBILITY MEASURES Contents Page 24.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................. 24-1 24.1.1 Background ................................................ 24-1 24.1.2 HOV Lanes ................................................ 24-2 24.1.3 Commuter Transfer Facilities .................................. 24-2 24.1.4 Additional Treatments ........................................ 24-2 24.2 HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES ON FREEWAYS ................... 24-4 24.2.1 HOV Types ............................................... 24-6 24.2.2 HOV Operation ............................................ 24-18 24.2.3 Design Criteria ............................................ 24-24 24.2.4 Barrier-Separated Reversible-Flow Lanes ....................... 24-28 24.2.5 Barrier-Separated Two-Way Flow Lanes ........................ 24-34 24.2.6 Two-Way Busway Lanes .................................... 24-40 24.2.7 Buffer-Separated Two-Way Concurrent Flow Lanes ............... 24-44 24.2.8 Nonseparated Two-Way Contiguous Flow Lanes ................. 24-51 24.2.9 Contraflow Lanes .......................................... 24-53 24.2.10 Signing and Pavement Markings .............................. 24-57 24.2.11 Provisions for Incident Handling and Maintenance ................ 24-64 24.2.12 Highway Drainage .......................................... 24-65 24.2.13 Lighting .................................................. 24-67 24.2.14 Lane Conversions .........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Longitudinal Channelizing Devices in Work Zones FACT SHEET
    Longitudinal Channelizing Devices in Work Zones FACT SHEET Fall 2017 Commonly known as Longitudinal Channelizing Devices (LCD), these units are used to delineate or channelize vehicles and pedestrians. LCDs help address work zone safety by preventing pedestrians and vehicles from entering work areas. Use of LCDs is beneficial at major decision points such as lane closures, exit ramps, driveways, and crossovers. These devices may be used instead of a tapered line of cones, drums, or barricades and also to define a travel path. Typical applications of LCDs include defining travel paths for pedestrians and conforming to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. LCDs were first introduced in the 2003 edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) as Longitudinal Channelizing Barricades. In the 2009 version of the MUTCD, LCDs are described as lightweight, deformable devices that Source: American Traffic Safety can be connected together to delineate or channelize vehicles Services Association or pedestrians. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Roadside Design Guide describes this type of barrier as “longitudinal barriers of segmented, polyethylene plastic shells (with a steel framework for NCHRP [1] Test Level 3), designed for use with a ballast, that have been successfully crash tested using NCHRP 350 requirements.” [2] Ballast may be filled with water or sand. LCDs provide channelization with no gaps, Source: FHWA NCHRP Report 350 prohibiting motorists from driving between individual devices. Examples of longitudinal channelizing devices include the Model 2001/2001M manufactured by the Yodock Wall Company, the RB1-1000 manufactured by Rhino Barriers, and the Triton Barrier TL-2 manufactured by Energy Absorption Systems, Inc.; all of which are water filled barriers meeting NCHRP 350 performance requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Standards Policy Guidelines
    TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS AND POLICY GUIDELINES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF WEATHERFORD, TEXAS TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS AND POLICY GUIDELINES Prepared by Terry Hughes Director of Community Development December, 2003 Revised September, 2007 Community Development Department City of Weatherford, Texas TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 1 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION AND STREET PATTERN DESIGN 1-1 Introduction 1-1 Land Use Relationships 1-1 Functional Classification 1-1 The Basis of Classification 1-1 General Street Classifications 1-2 Weatherford Street Classifications 1-4 Street Pattern Design 1-5 Mandatory Requirements 1-5 Recommended Practices 1-7 2 GEOMETRIC DESIGN 2-1 Introduction 2-1 Design Controls and Criteria 2-1 Design Vehicles 2-1 Design Speed 2-2 Design Volume 2-2 Design Designation 2-2 Roadway Drainage 2-2 Design Elements 2-3 Lane Widths 2-3 Sight Distance 2-3 Horizontal Alignment 2-4 Vertical Alignment 2-5 Summary of Street Design Criteria and Elements 2-10 3 INTERSECTION DESIGN 3-1 Introduction 3-1 Basic Intersection Forms 3-1 Design Objectives 3-1 Design Principles 3-3 Intersection Design Elements 3-3 Turning Movements 3-3 Cross Sectional Features 3-5 Turning Lanes 3-6 Supplementary Design Requirements for Turning Lanes 3-9 Intersecting Profiles 3-10 Intersection Sight Distance 3-11 Channelization 3-18 Driveways 3-19 4 SPECIAL DESIGN CASES 4-1 Stacking Space 4-1 Entrances into Secure Areas 4-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Title Page 5 LEFT-TURN CHANNELIZATION AND MEDIAN OPENINGS
    [Show full text]
  • Part 3 Markings
    Including Errata No. 1 dated June 14, 2001 December 2000 Page TC3-1 PART 3. MARKINGS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 3A. GENERAL . Dec. 2000 Section 3A.01 Functions and Limitations...................................................................3A-1 Section 3A.02 Standardization of Application............................................................3A-1 Section 3A.03 Materials..............................................................................................3A-2 Section 3A.04 Colors ..................................................................................................3A-2 Section 3A.05 Colors of Longitudinal Pavement Markings.......................................3A-3 Section 3A.06 Widths and Patterns of Longitudinal Pavement Markings .................3A-3 CHAPTER 3B. PAVEMENT AND CURB MARKINGS . Dec. 2000 Section 3B.01 Yellow Centerline and Left Edge Line Pavement Markings and Warrants...............................................................................................3B-1 Section 3B.02 No-Passing Zone Pavement Markings and Warrants..........................3B-6 Section 3B.03 Other Yellow Longitudinal Pavement Markings...............................3B-11 Section 3B.04 White Lane Line and Right Edge Line Pavement Markings and Warrants ......................................................................................3B-14 Section 3B.05 Other White Longitudinal Pavement Markings ................................3B-15 Section 3B.06 Edge Line Pavement Markings .........................................................3B-19
    [Show full text]