DOCSLIB.ORG

HRP.Synffiesi*S 241"'

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
HRP.Synffiesi*S 241 LOA HRP.Synffiesi*s 241"' U U rJationa1IResea-iounc-i1 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMIUEE 1997 Officers Chair DAVID N. WORMLEY, Dean of Engineering, Pennsylvania State University Vice Chair SHARON D. BANKS, General Manager, Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Oaklan4 California Executive Director ROBERT E. SKINNER, JR., Transportation Research Board, National Research Council Members BRIAN J. L. BERRY, Lloyd Viel Berkner Regental Professor, Bruton Center for Development Studies, University of Texas at Dallas LILLIAN C. BORRONE, Director, Port Commerce Department, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Past Chair, 1995) DAVID G. BURWELL, President, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy E DEAN CARI..SON, Secretary, Kansas Department of Transportation JAMES N. DENN, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Transportation JOHN W. FISHER, Director, ATLS Engineering Research Center, Lehigh University DENNIS J. FITZGERALD, Executive Director, Capital District Transportation Authority DAVID R GOODE, Chairman, President, and CEO, Norfolk Southern Corporation DELON HAMPTON, Chairman & CEO, Delon Hampton & Associates LESTER A. libEL, Hamilton Professor; University of Virginits, Department of Civil Engineering JAMES L. LAMIvflE, Director, Parsons Brincker!wff, inc. BRADLEY L MALLORY, Secretary of Transportation, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ROBERT E. MAR11NEZ. Secretary of Transportation, Commonwealth of Virginia JEFFREY J. McCAIG, President and CEO. Trimac Corporation MARSHALLW. MOORE, Director, North Dakota Department of Transportation CRAIG E PHILIP, President, Ingram Barge Company ANDREA RINIKER, Deputy Executive Director, Port of Seattle JOHN M. SAMUELS, Vice President-Operating Assets, Consolidated Rail Corporation WAYNE SHACKIEFORD, Commissioner, Georgia Department of Tro.nsportation LESLIE STERMAN, Executive Director of East-West Gateway Coordinating Council JOSEPH M. SUSSMAN, JR East Professor and Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, MIT (Past Chair, 1994) JAMES W. VAN LOBEN SELS, Director, California Department of Transportation (Past Chair. 1996) MARTEN WAdiS, Director, University of California Transportation Center, Berkeley, California DAVID L. WINSTEAD, Secretary, Maryland Department of Transportation MIKE ACOTF, President, National Asphalt Pavement Association (as officio) ROY A. ALLEN, Vice President, Research and Test Department, Association of American Railroads (ex officio) JOE N. BALLARD, Chief of Engineers and Commander, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ex officio) ANDREW H. CARD, JR., President & CEO, American Automobile Manufacturers Association (ex officio) KELLEY S. COYNER, Acting Administrator, Research & Special Programs Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) MORTIMER L DOWNEY, Chairman and President, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (ex officio) THOMAS M. DOWNS, Chairman & President, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (ex officio) FRANCIS B. FRANCOIS, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (ex officio) DAVID GARDINER, Assistant Administrator. Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ex officio) JANE F. GARVEY, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) JOHN E GRAYKOWSKI. Acting Administrator. Maritime Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) GLORIA J. JEFF. Acting Adininist rotor; Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) T.R. LAKSHMANAN, Director, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S.Department of Transportation (ex officio) GREGORI LEBEDEV, Acting President and CEO, American Trucking Associations, Inc. (ex officio) GORDON J. LINTON, Federal Transit Administrator, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) RICARDO MARTINEZ. Administrator. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (ex officio) WILLIAM W. MTLLAR, President, American Public Transit Association (ex officio) JOLENE M. MOUTORIS, Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Transportation Research Board Executive Committee Subcommittee for Nt1IRP DAVID N. WORMLEY, Pennsylvania State University (Chair) ROBERT E. SKINNER, JR., Transportation Research Board FRANCIS B. FRANCOIS, American Association of State Highway and RODNEY E. SLATER, Federal Highway Administration Transportation Officials JAMES W. VAN LOBEN SELS, California Department of Transportation LESTER A. libEL, University of Virginia Field of Special Projects Project Committee SP 20-5 Program Staff JON P. UNDERWOOD, Texas Department of Transportation (Chair) ROBERT J. REILLY, Director, Cooperative Research Programs KENNETH C. AFFERTON. New Jersey Department of Transportation (Retired) CRAWFORD F. JENCKS, Manager, NCHRP GERALD L ELLER, Federal Highway Administration (Retired) DAVID B. BEAL. Senior Program Officer JOHN J. HENRY, Pennsylvania Transportation institute LLOYD R. CROWTHER, Senior Program Officer GLORIA L JEFF, Federal Highway Administration B. RAY DERR, Senior Program Officer C. IANMACGILLIVRAY. Iowa Department of Transportation AMIR N. HANNA, Senior Program Officer GENE E. OFSTEAD, Minnesota Department of Transportation EDWARD T. HARPJGAN, Senior Program Officer EARL C. SHIRLEY, Co,,sulting E,,gineer RONALD D. McCREADY, Senior Program Officer J. RICHARD YOUNG, JR., Mississippi Department of Transportation. KENNETH S. OPIELA, Senior Program Officer RICHARD A. McCOMB, Federal Highway Administration (Liaison) EILEEN P. DELANEY, Editor ROBERT. E. SPICHER, Transportation Research Board (Liaison) .TRB Stafffor NCHRP Project 20-5 STEPFIEN R. GODWIN, Director for Studies and Information Services SALLY D. 11FF, Senior Program Officer STEPHEN F. MAHER, Senior Program Officer LINDAS. MASON, Editor National Cooperative Highway Research Program Synthesis of Highway Practice'241 Truck Operating Characteristics PAUL S. FANCHER, Jr. and THOMAS D. GILLESPIE, Ph.D. University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute Topic Panel INNETh L. HEALD, Western Highway Institute GARRICK HU, Mack Truck Company, ELAINE KING, Transportation Research Board HUGH W. McGEE, Bellomo-McGee, Inc. MAR.K MORRISON, V&consin Department of Transportation JOHN R. PEARSON, Transportation Association of Canada WILLIAM A. PROSSER, Federal Highway Administration JUSTIN TRUE, Federal Highway Administration Transportation Research Board National Research Council Research Sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in Cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1997 Subject Areas Pavement Design Management, and Performance; Highway Operations, Capacity, and Traffic NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP SYNTHESIS 241 Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective Project 20-5 FY 1990 (Topic 22-12) approach to the solution of many problems facing highway ad- ISSN 0547-5570 ministrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local ISBN 0-309-6020-6 Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 97-67 305 interest and can best be studied by highway departments indi- © 1997 Transportation Research Board vidually or in cooperation with their state universities and oth- ers. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to Price $19.00 highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway re- NOTICE search program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from par- The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Coop- ticipating member states of the Association and it receives the erative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Re- full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Admini- search Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Re- search Council. Such approval reflects the Governing Board's judgment that stration, United States Department of Transportation. the program concerned is of national importance and appropriate with re-- The Transportation Research Board of the National Research spect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. Council was requested by the Association to administer the re- The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project search program because of the Board's rec6gnized objectivity and to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is and with due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been ac- committee structure from which authorities on any highway cepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, communication and cooperation with federal, state, and local the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or governmental agencies,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Analysis of Traffic Capacity on Mountainous Two Lane Highway Adding Climbing Lane
    MATEC Web of Conferences 81, 04009 (2016) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/20168104009 ICTTE 2016 Analysis of Traffic Capacity on Mountainous Two Lane Highway Adding Climbing Lane Yunwei Meng1,2 , Hailing Li2, Hejun Chai2 and ZonglingYan 2 1The Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering, Ministry of Education, Tongji University, 201804,Shanghai, China 2China Merchants Chongqing Communications Technology Research & Design Institute Co., LTD, 400067,Chongqing, China Abstract. During the construction of mountainous double lane highway, climbing lane plays a certain role for enhancing the traffic capacity. In order to explore traffic capacity improvement effect for different conditions of climbing lane, 20 representative models are chosen, which contain various combinations of alignment and traffic parameters. The changes of traffic capacity, average speed, delays, and saturation in models are obtained before and after the use of a climbing lane by means of numerical simulation. The results show that the use of a climbing lane could improve traffic capacity, average speed, while reducing delays and saturation. The improvement effect is different according to different combinations of alignment and traffic parameters. The research could provide a reference for mountainous climbing lane construction intend. 1 Introduction found that it is possible to generate traffic bottlenecks in the lane separation and convergence position. It can Because of the limitation of geology, topography and effectively ease traffic congestion by extending the length engineering investment, two-way two lane highway is of the transition section [4]. Setting up a reasonable common form in mountainous area of China. Two lane climbing lane, it can slow down the occurrence of traffic highways in mountain area is the main artery, assuming congestion [5].
    [Show full text]
  • US 64 from West of NC 281 at Lake Toxaway to Indian Creek Transylvania County WBS No
    US 64 From West of NC 281 at Lake Toxaway to Indian Creek Transylvania County WBS No. 34428.2.2 T.I.P. No. R-2409C EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Administrative Action Categorical Exclusion. 2. CONTACTS The following individuals may be contacted for additional information concerning this Proposal: Mr. John F. Sullivan, III, P.E. Mr. Edward A. Green, P.E., Division Engineer Division Administrator Highway Division 14 Office Federal Highway Administration North Carolina Department of Transportation 310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410 253 Webster Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 Sylva, NC 28779 Telephone: (919) 856-4346 Telephone: (828) 586-2141 3. OTHER GOVERNMENTAL ACTIONS REQUIRED The proposed action will require permits pursuant to Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended. A 401 Water Quality Certification from the Water Quality Section of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), Division of Water Quality will be needed for fill activity in adjacent wetlands and surface waters. A Section 404 permit issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers will be required to discharge and place fill materials into wetlands. 4. PROPOSED ACTION The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and FHWA propose transportation improvements to US 64 from 0.3 mile west of NC 281 at Lake Toxaway to Indian Creek, Transylvania County. The proposed project is included in the NCDOT 2012-2020 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as project number R-2409C. The project consists of upgrading this 1.5-mile, two-lane roadway to improve geometric design conditions and add a climbing lane.
    [Show full text]
  • DN-GEO-03031 June 2017 TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE IRELAND (TII) PUBLICATIONS
    Rural Road Link Design DN-GEO-03031 June 2017 TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE IRELAND (TII) PUBLICATIONS About TII Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) is responsible for managing and improving the country’s national road and light rail networks. About TII Publications TII maintains an online suite of technical publications, which is managed through the TII Publications website. The contents of TII Publications is clearly split into ‘Standards’ and ‘Technical’ documentation. All documentation for implementation on TII schemes is collectively referred to as TII Publications (Standards), and all other documentation within the system is collectively referred to as TII Publications (Technical). Document Attributes Each document within TII Publications has a range of attributes associated with it, which allows for efficient access and retrieval of the document from the website. These attributes are also contained on the inside cover of each current document, for reference. TII Publication Title Rural Road Link Design TII Publication Number DN-GEO-03031 Activity Design (DN) Document Set Standards Stream Geometry (GEO) Publication Date June 2017 Document 03031 Historical NRA TD 9 Number Reference TII Publications Website This document is part of the TII publications system all of which is available free of charge at http://www.tiipublications.ie. For more information on the TII Publications system or to access further TII Publications documentation, please refer to the TII Publications website. TII Authorisation and Contact Details This document
    [Show full text]
  • The Undisputed Market Leader in Design-Build
    THE UNDISPUTED MARKET LEADER IN DESIGN-BUILD PROJECTS PROJECT LOCATION OWNER DESIGN-BUILD TEAM or CONTRACTOR Glenn Highway Improvements Anchorage, AK Alaska DOT Kiewit Infrastructure West Co. SR202L South Mountain Freeway Project Phoenix, AZ Arizona DOT Connect 202 Partners, LLC Loop 202 Widening Phoenix, AZ Arizona DOT Kiewit + Sundt + URS I-10 INA Road GMP 2 Tucson, AZ Arizona DOT Sundt/Kiewit JV Metro Orange Line Extension Chatsworth, CA LACMA Brutoco Engineering + Mc Lean & Schultz + Wildan Engineering I-15 & I-235 Devore Interchange Devore, CA CALTRANS Atkinson Contractors, LP BART Warm Springs Extension Fremont, CA CALTRANS Warm Spring Constructors CA High Speed Rail-1 DB Fresno, CA California High Speed Rail Authority Tutor Perini/Zachry/Parsons, A Joint Venture SR-99 Realignment-CMGC Fresno, CA CALTRANS MSE Retaining Systems, Inc. Fresno Braided Ramps Fresno, CA CALTRANS R & L Brosamer, Inc. SR-58 Kramer Junction CMGC Hinkley, CA CALTRANS Kiewit Infrastructure West Co. Inglewood Stadium Inglewood, CA TURNER HUNT LA NFL JOINT VENTURE Kiewit Infrastructure West Co. I-405 Sepulveda Pass Design Build Los Angelos, CA CALTRANS Kiewit Infrastructure West Company SDRBDT Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project San Diego, CA SAN DIEGO Assoc. of Govts. (SANDAG) Mid-Coast Transit Constructors Smugglers Gulch Wash Tunnel San Diego, CA USACE Kiewit + Simon Wong Engineering + HNTB COSMIX Colorado Springs, CO CDOT SEMA Construction + CH2M Hill T-REX Denver, CO CDOT + RTD Kiewit + Parsons Transportation Group RTD West Corridor (Fastracks)* Golden, CO RTD Herzog + Stacey Witbeck JV + David Evans & Assoc. I-25 Trinidad Phase B Trinidad, CO CDOT Slaton Brothers, Inc. Rehab of Frederick Douglas Bridge Washington, DC DC Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Iii Roads and Streets Chapter Contents
    CHAPTER III ROADS AND STREETS TOC-III-3 of 3 CHAPTER III ROADS AND STREETS CHAPTER CONTENTS Page No.I...........................................................................................................GENERAL 1 A. Introduction............................................................................................................1 B. Definitions .............................................................................................................1 C. Authorization, Permits ...........................................................................................3 D. Abbreviations.........................................................................................................4 II. DESIGN CRITERIA .......................................................................................................4 A. Pre-Design Meeting ...............................................................................................4 B. Preliminary Considerations....................................................................................4 1. Factors to be Considered in Trafficway Design ........................................4 2. Survey Requirements.................................................................................5 3. Right-of-Way Requirements......................................................................6 4. General Development Plan ........................................................................7 5. Preliminary Studies....................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • BMP Chapter 3: Bicycle Network Recommendations
    Chapter 3 Bellingham Bicycle Master Plan | Chapter 3: Bicycle Network Recommendations Chapter 3: Bicycle Network Recommendations Chapter 3 presents the recommended network of on-street bicycle facilities that will help Bellingham meet the goals of this Plan. It describes the methodology used to develop the proposed network and suggests facility types for each street segment in the network. This chapter also provides a prioritized list of recommendations to facilitate strategic and timely implementation of the Plan. Network Opportunities and Constraints The City of Bellingham street system presents both opportunities and constraints for developing an on- street, city-wide bicycle network that safely connects all major destinations for bicyclists of all skill levels. In areas of the City that have a traditional street grid pattern, such as Downtown, Fairhaven, and neighborhoods west of Interstate 5 (I-5), there are strong opportunities on local and arterial streets to develop a system of well-connected bicycle facilities. In newer sections of the City, particularly to the east and north of I-5, there are more dead-end streets and larger blocks, making it harder to develop an extensive network of bicycle facilities in these areas. Many of these areas with limited connectivity were built under the current land use and local, State, and federal environmental regulations, which are much more restrictive than in the past and can make street and trail construction - and associated environmental impact mitigation - very expensive. One of the most significant challenges for creating a connected bicycle network is I-5. There are currently eleven arterial streets that cross I-5 over a nine-mile stretch and many of these are intimidating to novice and intermediate bicyclists.
    [Show full text]
  • ROADWAY DESIGN GUIDELINES English Revised
    TDOT - ROADWAY DESIGN GUIDELINES English Revised: 10/27/15 SECTION II - PRELIMINARY PLANS CHAPTER 1 - DESIGN GUIDELINES 2-100.00 PROJECT FOLDER (See 1-100.00) 2-105.00 ROADWAY DESIGN CHECKLIST - PRELIMINARY PLANS (See 1-105.00) 2-110.00 PROJECT ACTIVITY STATUS SHEET (See 1-110.00) 2-112.00 SIZE OF FULL-SIZE PLAN AND CROSS-SECTION SHEETS (See 3-102.00 and 4-112.00) 2-115.00 IDENTIFICATION OF SUPERVISORS, DESIGNERS, AND CHECKERS ON TITLE SHEET (See 3-105.00) 2-115.01 SPECIAL NOTES 2-115.05 EQUATION BLOCKS ON TITLE SHEET (See 4-115.20) 2-115.10 EXCLUSIONS ON TITLE SHEET (See 4-115.25) 2-115.15 TRAFFIC BLOCK ON TITLE SHEET 2-115.20 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS 2-115.25 SPECIAL LOG MILE NOTE 2-120.00 TRAFFIC DATA FOR DESIGN 2-125.00 VERTICAL CLEARANCES FOR NON-INTERSTATE BRIDGES 2-127.00 SUBMITTAL OF PLANS FOR STRUCTURAL GRADE APPROVAL 2-130.00 SUPERELEVATION RATES AND RUN-OFF 2-132.00 INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE 2-135.00 THE CLEAR ZONE ROADSIDE CONCEPT 2-135.05 CLEAR ZONES ON CURVED ALIGNMENTS 2-136.00 LANDSCAPING 2-140.00 MEDIAN OPENING SPACING 2-145.00 EXCAVATION AND UNDERCUTTING (See 4-203.00) 2-145.05 EARTHWORK BALANCES (See 2-145.10, 3-315.05 and 3-315.15) 2-145.07 SUBMISSION OF GRADING QUANTITIES SHEETS (See 3-315.20 and 4- 203.50) 2-145.10 SHRINKAGE AND SWELL FACTORS (See 2-145.05, 3-315.10, and 4- 203.05) 2-150.00 TRUCK CLIMBING LANES 2-150.01 LOCATION GUIDELINES 2-150.02 CAPACITY ANALYSIS 2-i TDOT - ROADWAY DESIGN GUIDELINES English Revised: 10/27/15 2-150.03 CRITICAL LENGTH OF GRADE 2-150.04 DESIGN GUIDELINES 2-150.05 DOWNGRADES 2-150.06
    [Show full text]
  • Roads: Geometric Design and Layout Planning
    Chapter 7 Roads: Geometric design and layout planning 7 GUIDELINES FOR HUMAN SETTLEMENT PLANNING AND DESIGN TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE . 1 INTRODUCTION. 1 Reference to planning . 1 Classification of the road and street system. 2 Measures of effectiveness (MOE) . 3 Traffic calming . 4 BASIC DESIGN PARAMETERS. 4 The design vehicle. 4 The design driver . 5 The road surface . 5 THE ELEMENTS OF DESIGN . 6 Design speed. 6 Ceiling speed . 6 Design hour . 6 SIGHT DISTANCE . 8 Stopping sight distance (SSD) . 8 Barrier sight distance (BSD) . 8 Decision sight distance (DSD) . 10 Passing sight distance (PSD) . 10 Intersection sight distance (ISD) . 10 HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT . 13 Tangents . 14 Curvature and superelevation . 14 Superelevation runoff. 14 VERTICAL ALIGNMENT . 15 Curvature . 15 Gradients. 17 Climbing lanes . 18 CROSS-SECTION DESIGN . 19 i Roads: Geometric design and layout planning Chapter 7 GUIDELINES FOR HUMAN SETTLEMENT PLANNING AND DESIGN Lanes . 19 Shoulders . 21 Medians and outer separators . 22 Verges . 22 Sidewalks . 22 Slopes . 24 INTERSECTIONS . 24 Introduction . 24 Location of intersections. 25 The types of intersection control . .26 The form of intersections . 28 Intersection components . 29 Mini-roundabouts . 32 BIBLIOGRAPHY . 35 ii Chapter 7 Roads: Geometric design and layout planning GUIDELINES FOR HUMAN SETTLEMENT PLANNING AND DESIGN LIST OF TABLES Table 7.1 Comparison between classification systems . .3 Table 7.2 Dimensions of design vehicles (m) (after Wolhuter and Skutil 1990) . .4 Table 7.3 Minimum turning radii . .5 Table 7.4 Brake force coefficients . .6 Table 7.5 Recommended design and ceiling speed . .7 Table 7.6 Stopping sight distance on level roads . .8 Table 7.7 Barrier sight distance .
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1270 Auxiliary Lanes
    Chapter 1270 Auxiliary Lanes 1270.01 General Exhibit 1270-3 Speed Reduction Warrant Example 1270.02 Climbing Lanes Exhibit 1270-4 Auxiliary Climbing Lane 1270.03 Passing Lanes Exhibit 1270-5 Passing Lane Example 1270.04 Slow-Moving Vehicle Turnouts Exhibit 1270-6 5 Length of Passing Lanes 1270.05 Shoulder Driving for Slow Vehicles Exhibit 1270-7 Passing Lane Configurations 1270.06 Emergency Escape Ramps Exhibit 1270-8 Buffer Between Opposing Passing Lanes 1270.07 Documentation Exhibit 1270-9 Auxiliary Passing Lane 1270.08 References Exhibit 1270-10 Emergency Escape Ramp Example Exhibit 1270-11 Emergency Escape Ramp Length Exhibit 1270-1 Climbing Lane Example Exhibit 1270-12 Rolling Resistance (R) Exhibit 1270-2 Speed Reduction Warrant: Performance for Exhibit 1270-13 Typical Emergency Escape Ramp Trucks 1270.01 General Auxiliary lanes are used to comply with capacity demand; maintain lane balance; accommodate speed change, weaving, and maneuvering for entering and exiting traffic; and encourage carpools, vanpools, and the use of transit. For signing and delineation of auxiliary lanes, see the Standard Plans, the Traffic Manual, and the MUTCD. Contact the region Traffic Engineer for guidance. Although slow-moving vehicle turnouts and shoulder driving for slow vehicles are not auxiliary lanes, they are covered in this chapter because they perform a similar function. For additional information, see the following: Chapter 1103 Design controls, including speed Chapter 1230 Geometric cross section components Chapter 1310 Turn lanes Chapter 1310 Speed change lanes at intersections Chapter 1360 Collector-distributor roads Chapter 1360 Weaving lanes Chapter 1410 High-occupancy vehicle lanes 1270.02 Climbing Lanes 1270.02(1) General Climbing lanes (see Exhibit 1270-1) are normally associated with truck traffic, but they may also be considered in recreational or other areas that are subject to slow-moving traffic.
    [Show full text]
  • Vehicle Climbing Lanes
    HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD Bulletin 104 Vehicle Climbing Lanes National Research Co HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD Officers and Members of the Executive Committee 1955 OFFICERS G. DONALD KENNEDY, Chairman K. B. WOODS, Vice Chairman FRED BUBGGRAF, Director ELMER M. WARD, Assistant Director Executive Committee C. D. CuRTiss, Commissioner^ Bureau of Public Roads A. E. JOHNSON, Executive Secretary, American Association of State Highway Officials LOUIS JORDAN, Executive Secretary, Division of Engineering and Industrial Research, National Research Council R. H. BALDOCK, State Highway Engineer, Oregon State Highway Commission PYKE JOHNSON, Consultant, Automotive Safety Foundation G. DONALD KENNEDY, President, Portland Cement Association O. L. KiPP, Assistant Commissioner and Chief Engineer, Minnesota Department of Highways BURTON W. MARSH, Director, Safety and Traffic Engineering Department, Ameri• can Automobile Association C. H. ScHOLER, Head, Applied Mechanics Department, Kansas State College REX M. WHITTON, Chief Engineer, Missouri State Highway Department K. B. WOODS, Director, Joint Highway Research Project, Purdue University Editorial Staff FRED BURGGRAF ELMER M. WARD WALTER J. MILLER 2101 Constitution Avenue Washington 25, D. C. The opinions and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Highway Resoarch Board. HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD BuUetin 104 Vehicle Ctimbing Lanes PRESENTED AT THE Thirty-Fourth Annual Meeting January 11-14, 1955 1955 Washington, D. C. Department of Design T. E. Shelburne, Chairman Director of Research, Virginia Department of Highways, University of Virginia COMMITTEE ON GEOMETRIC fflGHWAY DESIGN D. W. Loutzenheiser, Chairman Acting Chief, Urban Highway Branch, Bureau of Public Roads R. H. Baldock, State Highway Engineer, Oregon State Highway Commission Warren James Cremean, Urban Projects Engineer, Ohio Department of Highways Ralph L, Fisher, Engineer of Design, New Jersey State Highway Department Fred W.
    [Show full text]
  • From Truck-Only Lanes
    Appendix A. NCHRP Project 03-73 Separation of Vehicles – CMV- Only Lanes Task 7 – Interim Report NCHRP Project 3-73: Separation of Vehicles - CMV-Only Lanes A. NCHRP Project 03-73 Separation of Vehicles – CMV-Only Lanes Task 7 – Interim Report A.1 Introduction This interim report document provides results of the first phase of research on National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 03-73 Separation of Vehicles – Commercial Motor Vehicle-Only Lanes project. It presents a review and discussion of a wide range of issues relevant to planning, designing, and evaluating a variety of concepts from CMV-Only Lanes that should be useful to planners and policy makers in the public and private sector. It also presents an evaluation of available data and its suitability to conduct additional analyses in Phase II of the research plan. A.1.1 Project Overview For a number of years, there has been growing interest in commercial motor vehicle (CMV)- only lanes and several notable proposals for CMV-only lane systems/projects have appeared in the planning and traffic engineering literature. To a large extent, this growth in interest has been related to the growth in truck traffic relative to automobile traffic and the contribution of truck traffic to congestion. Heavy trucks have a greater impact on capacity than their sheer volume would suggest, especially when mixed with automobiles. Separation of autos and trucks may be a beneficial way of building more system capacity in certain circumstances. A number of studies also have suggested that CMV-only lanes that are tolled may present a viable means of financing system capacity improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Bicycle Master Plan Chapter 3
    Chapter 3: Bicycle Network Recommendations Chapter 3 presents the recommended network of on-street bicycle facilities that will help Bellingham meet the goals of this Plan. It describes the methodology used to develop the proposed network and suggests facility types for each street segment in the network. This chapter also provides a prioritized list of recommendations to facilitate strategic and timely implementation of the Plan. Network Opportunities and Constraints The City of Bellingham street system presents both opportunities and constraints for developing an on- street, city-wide bicycle network that safely connects all major destinations for bicyclists of all skill levels. In areas of the City that have a traditional street grid pattern, such as Downtown, Fairhaven, and neighborhoods west of Interstate 5 (I-5), there are strong opportunities on local and arterial streets to develop a system of well-connected bicycle facilities. In newer sections of the City, particularly to the east and north of I-5, there are more dead-end streets and larger blocks, making it harder to develop an extensive network of bicycle facilities in these areas. Many of these areas with limited connectivity were built under the current land use and local, State, and federal environmental regulations, which are much more restrictive than in the past and can make street and trail construction - and associated environmental impact mitigation - very expensive. One of the most significant challenges for creating a connected bicycle network is I-5. There are currently eleven arterial streets that cross I-5 over a nine-mile stretch and many of these are intimidating to novice and intermediate bicyclists.
    [Show full text]