DOCSLIB.ORG

Traffic Calming

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Local Transport Note 1/07 March 2007 Traffc Calming Local Transport Note 01/07 Traffic Calming Department for Transport Department for Regional Development (Northern Ireland) Scottish Executive Welsh Assembly Government London: TSO Traffic Calming 1 Published by TSO (The Stationery Office) and available from: Online www.tsoshop.co.uk Mail, Telephone, Fax & E-mail TSO PO Box 29, Norwich NR3 1GN Telephone orders/General enquiries: 0870 6005522 Fax orders: 0870 6005533 E-mail: [email protected] Textphone: 0870 240 3701 TSO Shops 123 Kingsway, London WC2B 6PQ 020 7242 6393 Fax 020 7242 6394 16 Arthur Street, Belfast BT1 4GD 028 9023 8451 Fax 028 9023 5401 71 Lothian Road, Edinburgh EH3 9AZ 0870 606 5566 Fax 0870 606 5588 TSO@Blackwell and other Accredited Agents © Crown copyright 2007, except where otherwise stated Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for non-commercial research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The copyright source of the material must be acknowledged and the title of the publication specified. For any other use of this material, apply for a Click-Use Licence at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/index.htm, or by writing to the Licensing Division, Office of Public Sector Information, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ, fax 01603 723000, e-mail [email protected] First published 2007 ISBN 978 011 552795 1 Printed in the United Kingdom for TSO N5407880 c15 03/07 Printed in Great Britain on paper containing at least 75% recycled fibre. 2 Traffic Calming Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................7 1.1 Background .........................................................................................................................7 1.2 Early traffic calming ...........................................................................................................10 1.3 Modern traffic calming .......................................................................................................10 2 General considerations ............................................................................12 2.1 Traffic calming legislation ..................................................................................................12 2.2 Traffic calming as part of the local road safety strategy and local transport plan .............13 2.3 Use of traffic calming for security purposes (e.g. anti-terrorism)....................................... 14 2.4 Consultation .......................................................................................................................14 2.5 Routes for buses ...............................................................................................................15 2.6 Routes for emergency service vehicles .............................................................................18 2.7 Vulnerable road users........................................................................................................19 2.8 Road lighting ......................................................................................................................26 2.9 Monitoring of a scheme .....................................................................................................27 2.10 Public attitudes to schemes ...............................................................................................28 2.11 Impact of traffic calming schemes on street activity ..........................................................30 2.12 Environmental impact of traffic calming schemes..............................................................30 3 Traffic-calmed areas .................................................................................31 3.1 Shared road space ............................................................................................................31 3.2 Roads with 20 mph speed limits ........................................................................................34 3.3 Roads with 30 mph speed limits ........................................................................................38 3.4 Roads with 40 mph speed limits ........................................................................................39 Traffic Calming 3 3.5 Roads with speed limits greater than 40 mph ....................................................................40 3.6 Town centres .....................................................................................................................40 3.7 Historic areas .....................................................................................................................41 3.8 Villages and rural areas ....................................................................................................42 4 Road humps ...............................................................................................47 4.1 Background .......................................................................................................................47 4.2 Types of road hump ...........................................................................................................48 4.3 Cost and maintenance .......................................................................................................57 4.4 Effectiveness .....................................................................................................................57 4.5 Environmental impact ........................................................................................................61 5 Rumble devices and overrun areas .........................................................67 5.1 Types of rumble devices ....................................................................................................67 5.2 Cost and maintenance .......................................................................................................69 5.3 Effectiveness .....................................................................................................................69 5.4 Environmental impact ........................................................................................................70 5.5 Overrun areas....................................................................................................................71 6 Narrowings and chicanes .........................................................................73 6.1 Background .......................................................................................................................73 6.2 Signing ...............................................................................................................................74 6.3 Narrowings .......................................................................................................................74 6.4 Chicanes............................................................................................................................76 6.5 Cost and maintenance .......................................................................................................78 6.6 Effectiveness .....................................................................................................................79 6.7 Environmental impact ........................................................................................................81 4 Traffic Calming 7 Gateways and entry treatments ...............................................................83 7.1 Background .......................................................................................................................83 7. 2 Gateways to villages ..........................................................................................................83 7.3 Entry treatments ................................................................................................................84 7.4 Effectiveness .....................................................................................................................85 7.5 Environmental impact ........................................................................................................85 8 Roundabouts .............................................................................................86 8.1 Background .......................................................................................................................86 8.2 Types of roundabouts ........................................................................................................86 8.3 Costs and maintenance .....................................................................................................87 8.4 Effectiveness .....................................................................................................................87 8.5 Environmental impact ........................................................................................................88 9 Vehicle activated devices .........................................................................90 9.1 Vehicle activated signs ......................................................................................................90 9.2 Speed cameras .................................................................................................................90
Recommended publications
  • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual on Uniform Traffic

    Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual on Uniform Traffic

    MManualanual onon UUniformniform TTrafficraffic CControlontrol DDevicesevices forfor StreetsStreets andand HighwaysHighways U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration for Streets and Highways Control Devices Manual on Uniform Traffic Dotted line indicates edge of binder spine. MM UU TT CC DD U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration MManualanual onon UUniformniform TTrafficraffic CControlontrol DDevicesevices forfor StreetsStreets andand HighwaysHighways U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration 2003 Edition Page i The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is approved by the Federal Highway Administrator as the National Standard in accordance with Title 23 U.S. Code, Sections 109(d), 114(a), 217, 315, and 402(a), 23 CFR 655, and 49 CFR 1.48(b)(8), 1.48(b)(33), and 1.48(c)(2). Addresses for Publications Referenced in the MUTCD American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249 Washington, DC 20001 www.transportation.org American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA) 8201 Corporate Drive, Suite 1125 Landover, MD 20785-2230 www.arema.org Federal Highway Administration Report Center Facsimile number: 301.577.1421 [email protected] Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) 120 Wall Street, Floor 17 New York, NY 10005 www.iesna.org Institute of Makers of Explosives 1120 19th Street, NW, Suite 310 Washington, DC 20036-3605 www.ime.org Institute of Transportation Engineers
  • TED C. SCHROEDER December 2018 Department of Agricultural Economics Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506 Telephone: (785) 532-4488 E-Mail: Tcs@Ksu.Edu

    TED C. SCHROEDER December 2018 Department of Agricultural Economics Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506 Telephone: (785) 532-4488 E-Mail: [email protected]

    TED C. SCHROEDER December 2018 Department of Agricultural Economics Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506 Telephone: (785) 532-4488 E-Mail: [email protected] EXPERIENCE University Distinguished Professor of Agricultural Economics Kansas State University, May 2004 - present Professor of Agricultural Economics Kansas State University, July 1996 - May 2004 Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics Kansas State University, July 1991 - June 1996 Assistant Professor of Agricultural Economics Kansas State University, September 1986 - June 1991 EDUCATION Ph.D. Agricultural Economics, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 1986 B.S. Agricultural Economics, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska, 1982 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Agricultural and Applied Economics Association Western Agricultural Economics Association Southern Agricultural Economics Association Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association Agricultural Economics Society NCR-134 Committee on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Risk Management HONORS AND AWARDS Leadership Associate Editor, Journal of Commodity Markets, 2018-present. Faculty Leadership Team, Beef Cattle Institute, Kansas State University, 2016-2017 CME Group Agricultural Market Advisory Council, 2013-present Founding Director, Center for Risk Management Education and Research, 2012-present Professorial Performance Award, Kansas State University, 2008 President, Western Agricultural Economics Association, 2004 Editor, Review of Agricultural Economics, 1993-1996 Associate Editor,
  • Application for Speed Bump Installation

    Application for Speed Bump Installation

    Oakland Department of Transportation APPLICATION FOR SPEED BUMP INSTALLATION ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SPEED BUMPS Advantages: • The overall speed of traffic is reduced near speed bumps. • Speed bumps create an impression that discourages speeding and “cut through” trafficking. • Speed bumps are self-enforcing. Disadvantages: • The response time for emergency vehicles may be increased by speed bumps. • Some residents may object to the visual impact of speed bumps—the signs and the markings that accompany them. • There will be an increase in vehicle emissions and noise near speed bumps. • Inconvenient access as a result of speed bumps may be imposed on some parts of the neighborhood. • Speed bumps may displace traffic to neighboring streets. • Although speeds will be reduced immediately next to them, drivers tend to speed up after passing or traveling between speed bumps. REQUESTER INFORMATION A. Location Please provide the name of the street block to be considered. Indicate the boundaries of the block by identifying the intersecting street on each end. A separate application is required for another block. Street Name: _____________________________________________ From: _____________________________________ To: _________________________________ B. Contact Information Each application must contain a contact person who will receive all correspondence from the City and be responsible for gathering evidence of support when requested. Name: ________________________________ Email Address: ____________________________ Address: _________________________________________________ Zip Code: ______________ Daytime Phone #: _______________________ Additional Phone #: _________________________ C. Concerns Please tell us about the specific concerns you have for this segment of the street. _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ NOTE THAT AFTER RECEIVING A QUALIFYING PETITION THE CITY WILL CONDUCT AN INSPECTION TO DETERMINE IF SPEED BUMPS ARE FEASIBLE.
  • Stop That Cow Free

    Stop That Cow Free

    FREE STOP THAT COW PDF Mairi Mackinnon,Fred Blunt | 32 pages | 17 May 2010 | Usborne Publishing Ltd | 9781409507093 | English | London, United Kingdom “Stop that cow!” at Usborne Children’s Books To the untrained eye, the boxing portion of a boxing class or fence-work run might look like the horse is just going back Stop That Cow forth, keeping the cow at one end of the pen. One of the most important parts of boxing is stopping with the cow—and I mean coming to a complete stop—before making another move. Because he stopped well, my horse is loaded on his hocks, ready to push off. He can turn to the left or right with an easy pivot. I facilitate this ready position by keeping my upper body perpendicular to the ground with my feet under me. Regardless, my horse is stopped and maintaining his position. It prevents Stop That Cow stops and leaning Stop That Cow, as well as anticipation of turns. It also allows my horse to anticipate the turn. A good stop requires Stop That Cow and drive from behind so the horse can use Stop That Cow properly, stay balanced and straight, and stop on his hind end. I have contact with the Stop That Cow so that if my horse starts to turn before he finishes his stop, I can correct him. It also helps remind him about staying straight and keeping his shoulders elevated. Then we can go back to working the cow. Brad Barkemeyer, Scottsdale, Arizona, grew up on a ranch in Montana, which gave him an appreciation for versatile horses.
  • Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada Project Team

    Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada Project Team

    Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada Project Team Project Leads: Nancy Smith Lea, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Dr. Ray Tomalty, School of Urban Planning, McGill University Researchers: Jiya Benni, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Dr. Marvin Macaraig, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Julia Malmo-Laycock, School of Urban Planning, McGill University Report Design: Jiya Benni, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Cover Photo: Tour de l’ile, Go Bike Montreal Festival, Montreal by Maxime Juneau/APMJ Project Partner: Please cite as: Benni, J., Macaraig, M., Malmo-Laycock, J., Smith Lea, N. & Tomalty, R. (2019). Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada. Toronto: Clean Air Partnership. CONTENTS List of Figures 4 List of Tables 7 Executive Summary 8 1. Introduction 12 2. Costs of Bicycle Infrastructure Measures 13 Introduction 14 On-street facilities 16 Intersection & crossing treatments 26 Traffic calming treatments 32 Off-street facilities 39 Accessory & support features 43 3. Costs of Cycling Programs 51 Introduction 52 Training programs 54 Repair & maintenance 58 Events 60 Supports & programs 63 Conclusion 71 References 72 Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada 3 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Bollard protected cycle track on Bloor Street, Toronto, ON ..................................................... 16 Figure 2: Adjustable concrete barrier protected cycle track on Sherbrook St, Winnipeg, ON ............ 17 Figure 3: Concrete median protected cycle track on Pandora Ave in Victoria, BC ............................ 18 Figure 4: Pandora Avenue Protected Bicycle Lane Facility Map ............................................................ 19 Figure 5: Floating Bus Stop on Pandora Avenue ........................................................................................ 19 Figure 6: Raised pedestrian crossings on Pandora Avenue .....................................................................
  • Cattle Grids and Grazing Project Questions and Answers

    Cattle Grids and Grazing Project Questions and Answers

    Litcham Common Cattle Grids and Grazing Project Questions and Answers Litcham Common Management Committee 22nd June 2011 Why is Litcham Common important? Litcham Common is predominantly a heathland site. Heathlands are open areas with few trees, often dominated by heathers and gorse. These plants thrive on nutrient-poor soils where most plants would not be able to survive. Early man cleared the woodland from Litcham Common and the rest of Norfolk around 4000 years ago. Subsequent grazing and other management kept the areas as open heathland with unique assemblages of plants and animals. In relatively recent times there has been a dramatic loss of heathlands worldwide as the land has been used for agriculture, forestry and building development. In Britain over 70% has been lost since 1830. Litcham Common is a small remaining fragment of what was previously 500 acres of heathland in the parish, and now amounts to just over 60 acres in total. Despite suffering considerable scrub encroachment over the past 60 years, the site still retains a wealth of important wildlife species. Because of its high nature conservation value, Litcham Common is designated as a Local Nature Reserve and also a County Wildlife Site. Why does Litcham Common need managing? Natural succession means that without management to control invasive species such as birch and bracken, heathland will revert to woodland. If this happens many rare plant and animal species would face further population declines. A photograph taken by the RAF in 1946 shows the common with virtually no trees, and demonstrates the dramatic increase in tree cover which has taken place since World War Two.
  • Reducing Wild Dog Impacts on Livestock Production Industries 4.09

    Reducing Wild Dog Impacts on Livestock Production Industries 4.09

    BULLETIN 4.09 Sustainable Harvests 2017 RESEARCH FINDINGS in the School of VETERINARY & LIFE Adult male wild dog moving past a remote SCIENCES sensing camera. TRISH FLEMING1, TRACEY KREPLINS1, CATHERINE BAUDAINS1, MALCOLM KENNEDY2, PETER ADAMS2 & BILL BATEMAN3 Reducing wild dog impacts on livestock production industries ild dogs are a huge problem for shooting and baiting. ‘Doggers’ and dog- WAustralian livestock producers, proof fencing were also considered effective costing farmers an estimated $50 million management options. 89% of respondents annually in livestock losses and for their believe that more action needs to be taken control. Here we describe outcomes of a to manage wild canids, but identify time recent project that has examined aspects and financial constraints as well as a lack of wild dog control in WA. of coordinated community action and incentives as major hurdles to participation. Who controls wild canids? Importantly, landscape-scale control Almost all (96%) the 195 landholders requires coordination and a feedback of who responded to our nation-wide online information to engage participants. ABOVE: Wild dogs, less than one year old, sniffing survey indicated that they had experienced where a dried meat bait once was. negative impacts from wild dogs and/or Can we protect working dogs? conservation estate for feral pig control, foxes. The majority (83%) of respondents 57% of our survey respondents had confirming their bait-aversion responses up had livestock (cattle 63% of responses; working dog(s), and 28% had lost 1–6 to a year from the initial training session. sheep 57%; goats 18%; pigs 4%) and (2.1±1.4) working dogs to baits.
  • Temporary Speed Hump Impact Evaluation

    Temporary Speed Hump Impact Evaluation

    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1-1-2002 Temporary speed hump impact evaluation Daniel James Smith Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Recommended Citation Smith, Daniel James, "Temporary speed hump impact evaluation" (2002). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 21323. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/21323 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Temporary speed hump impact evaluation by Daniel James Smith A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Civil Engineering (Transportation Engineering) Program of Study Committee: Dr. Keith Knapp, Co-major Professor Dr. Shauna Hallmark, Co-major Professor Dr. Gary Thomas Dr. William Meeker Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2002 11 Graduate College Iowa State University This is to certify that the master's thesis of Daniel James Smith has met the thesis requirements oflowa State University Signatures have been redacted for privacy lll TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .....................................................................................................................
  • Special Study

    Special Study

    Special study The beef supply chain in the United States Status, development and perspectives Braunschweig, October 2006 Diploma thesis Daniel Brüggemann Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank the many people who generously provided information, further contacts and aid in compiling this study. These include Kerry Smith and Justin Ransom, USDA Agriculture Marketing Service; John Lawrence, Iowa State University; Ted Schroeder and Rodney Jones, Kansas State University; Damona Doye and Clem Ward, Oklahoma State University; and Claus Deblitz, German Federal Agricultural Research Centre. Furthermore I want to thank the German Academic Exchange Service for financial support via scholarship. Appreciation is also extended to the persons and families who provided me with warm hospitality and a feel for the American lifestyle. Contents I Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Situation 1 1.2 Objectives 2 1.3 Approach and implementation 2 2 Overview about the U.S. beef supply chain 5 2.1 The U.S. beef industry in a world-wide context 5 2.2 Structure of the supply chain 7 2.3 The cattle inventory 9 2.4 Important issues and challenges 13 3 Production on farm-level 17 3.1 Introduction 17 3.2 Cow-calf operation 18 3.2.1 Introduction 18 3.2.2 Regional distribution 18 3.2.3 Structure 21 3.2.4 Production systems 22 3.2.5 Profitability 25 3.2.6 Conclusions 31 3.3 Stocker cattle operations 32 3.3.1 Introduction 32 3.3.2 Regional distribution 32 3.3.3 Production systems 34 3.3.4 Profitability 37 3.3.5 Conclusions 41 3.4 Finishing operations 42 3.4.1 Introduction
  • Policy on Children at Play Signs

    Policy on Children at Play Signs

    MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE Traffic Department SPEED HUMP FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS HUMPS VERSUS BUMPS? A speed hump is a (typically) rounded traffic calming device designed to reduce vehicles speeds on residential streets. They are constructed across the road, and, often installed in a series of several humps to reduce the potential for drivers to gain any significant benefit from speeding once the vehicle has crossed the hump. The height of the device ranges from 3 to 4 inches, and, is typically 13 feet long (as measured along the center of the road) for the humps used here in Anchorage, and is constructed to a very specific curvature over which the vehicles travel. In addition, warning signs are placed at the location of the device to provide information that the hump is located on the road (important to motorists, emergency responders, and street maintenance personnel) and pavement markings on the hump to provide an added visual warning of the device. Humps are used in locations on residential streets with low to moderate volumes (typically no less than 500 vehicles per day – about 50 homes and no greater than 1000 to 1500 vehicles per day), and not major roadways serving as connections between neighborhoods, and are rarely used on bus routes or primary emergency response routes. 1. What is a speed hump, and what is its purpose? A speed hump is a traffic control/calming device constructed with asphalt concrete. It is constructed to a very specific design that uses one of several potential vertical layouts, and used to control speeds – typically effective only when several humps are used on a section of roadway, about 400 to 500 feet apart.
  • Easy Rider® Rubber Speed Bump Product Information Brochure Pictured: Speed Bump

    Easy Rider® Rubber Speed Bump Product Information Brochure Pictured: Speed Bump

    EASY RIDER® RUBBER SPEED BUMP PRODUCT INFORMATION BROCHURE PICTURED: SPEED BUMP Checkers™ is a full-service manufacturer of parking lot safety solutions. We design and manufacture traffic control products that help cars navigate and park safely. Our main goal has been to create solutions that protect motorists and pedestrians from the perils of today’s parking lots. As such, Checkers™ products have been designed and developed with speed reduction, driver and pedestrian safety in mind. All our solutions are manufactured from 100% recycled rubber and plastic. Our speed bumps or parking blocks, for example, are longer lasting, highly visible, and more car-friendly than asphalt or concrete alternatives. Not only are Checkers™ traffic safety solutions environmentally friendly, they can also be installed for either temporary or permanent use. • Rubber speed bumps greatly outlast concrete or • Pliable rubber protects vehicles as well as curbs asphalt competitors • Highly-reflective colored tape ensures the speed • Rubber speed bumps don’t degrade like concrete bump will be visible speed bumps, keeping parking lots • Easy-to-install, either on asphalt or concrete surfaces aesthetically pleasing • Can be used for temporary or • Channeled bottom for cabling and piping permanent applications • High-quality rubber is resistant to weather, salts, • Great for commercial and residential applications and chemicals • End caps available and sold separately • Recycled rubber construction is environmentally friendly 800-438-9336 • CHECKERS-SAFETY.COM PRODUCT INFORMATION Easy Rider® Speed Bump reduces vehicle speeds to 2-5 mph (approximate), making parking lots or light traffic streets safer for pedestrians and motorists. Constructed from 100% recycled tires, Easy Rider® speed bumps are preformed to ensure a smooth, safe ride.
  • Boundary Fencing

    Boundary Fencing

    Contract No. BOUNDARY FENCING QUEENSLAND CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION C265 BOUNDARY FENCING © The AUS-SPEC Joint Venture date: May 2000 Copying strictly prohibited AUS-SPEC-1\QLD-C265 May 2000 MACKAY CITY COUNCIL Contract No. BOUNDARY FENCING Amendment Record for this Specification Part This Specification is Council’s edition of the AUS-SPEC generic specification part and includes Council’s primary amendments. Details are provided below outlining the clauses amended from the Council edition of this AUS-SPEC Specification Part. The clause numbering and context of each clause are preserved. New clauses are added towards the rear of the specification part as special requirements clauses. Project specific additional script is shown in the specification as italic font. The amendment code indicated below is ‘A’ for additional script ‘M’ for modification to script and ‘O’ for omission of script. An additional code ‘P’ is included when the amendment is project specific. Amendment Key Topic addressed in Clause Amendment Author Amendment Sequence No. amendment No. Code Initials Date 1 “HOLD POINT” added C265.03 A Nov 02 2 “the” changed to “tie” C265.15 M Dec 02 (6)Z © The AUS-SPEC Joint Venture date: May 2000 Copying strictly prohibited AUS-SPEC-1\QLD-C265 May 2000 MACKAY CITY COUNCIL Contract No. BOUNDARY FENCING SPECIFICATION C265 - BOUNDARY FENCING CLAUSE CONTENTS PAGE GENERAL .............................................................................................................................1 C265.01 SCOPE..............................................................................................................................................1