DOCSLIB.ORG

IMPROVER Appendix C

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
IMPROVER Appendix C IMPROVER Subproject 4, Appendix C, Data collection and analysis at a national level TREN-04-ST-S07.37022 IMPROVER Impact Assessment of Road Safety Measures for Vehicles and Road Equipment Appendix C Subproject 4 Harmonisation of road signs and road marking on the TERN from a safety point of view INTERNAL DELIVERABLE REPORT WP 4.1b Data Collection and Analysis at a National Level VTT Technical Research Center, Finland with the following partners: • BASt Federal Highway Research Institute, Germany • IS-V Ingenieurbüro Siegener, Germany • KTI Institute for Transport Sciences Ltd., Hungary • LCPC Laboratoire Central des Ponts et Chaussées, France • TIS Consultores em Transportes Inovacao e Sistemas, Portugal • TRL Transport Research Laboratory Limited, United Kingdom IMPROVER Subproject 4, Appendix C, Data collection and analysis at a national level TREN-04-ST-S07.37022 INTERNAL DELIVERABLE REPORT TRL Limited IMPROVER: Tasks 4.1.2 and 4.1.3: Data Collection and Analysis at a National Level Version: 2 by T. Horberry and J. Mitchell, TRL (With assistance from G. Coe, J. Rutter, A. Rogers and S. Thompson) Contract No.: TREN-04-ST-S07.37022 Approvals Project Manager Dr T. Horberry Quality Dr A. Stevens Reviewed This report has been produced by TRL Limited, under/as part of a Contract placed by DG-TREN through BASt. Any views expressed are not necessarily those of DG-TREN or BASt. TRL is committed to optimising energy efficiency, reducing waste and promoting recycling and re-use. In support of these environmental goals, this report has been printed on recycled paper, comprising 100% post-consumer waste, manufactured using a TCF (totally chlorine free) process. 2 IMPROVER Subproject 4, Appendix C, Data collection and analysis at a national level TREN-04-ST-S07.37022 CIRCULATION LIST Initially copies have been sent to the other IMPROVER (WP 4) partners: 1. BASt (contract holder with DG TREN) 2. VTT (overall coordinator of WP 4) 3. IS-V 4. KTI 5. LCPC 6. TIS 7. TRL 3 IMPROVER Subproject 4, Appendix C, Data collection and analysis at a national level TREN-04-ST-S07.37022 Executive Summary This Work Package developed, collected data and analysed four questionnaires concerning different aspects of traffic signing and road markings. The questionnaires focused on the following areas: standard traffic signs, direction signs, road markings and institutional scenarios of traffic signs. The aim of the four questionnaires was to uncover essential points of signing from the 25 EU countries. Data were collected for 19 of the 25 EU countries. Following data collection, the four questionnaires for each country were coded and initially analysed by one of the partners (TRL), then given to the other partners for additional comment. The results are presented in a structured way with tables and diagrams used where possible to show the signs and markings used in the different countries for comparable situations. Overall the results of the Work Package showed that there are many areas where traffic signs and markings vary between different EU countries. These include: the use of road studs, and widths of road marking lines, some aspects of Standard traffic signs (for example, when they were last revised), the colours, positions and designs of directional signs leading to different types of junctions and institutional policies and procedures with respect to traffic signs (for example, the penalties imposed for inappropriate implementation of signs). However, the official representatives from most countries pointed out that the costs and potential safety disbenefits of traffic sign harmonisation might be very high. As such, extreme care should be taken in proposing wholesale harmonisation in many traffic signs, or policies concerning traffic signs. Based on the results presented here, and the review of literature being undertaken in parallel, members of the project team will identify key areas where harmonisation might be desirable, and will then quantify the costs associated with such possible changes. 4 IMPROVER Subproject 4, Appendix C, Data collection and analysis at a national level TREN-04-ST-S07.37022 Contents Executive Summary.................................................................. 4 1. Method.................................................................................. 6 1.1. Questionnaires................................................................ 6 1.2. Procedure ....................................................................... 6 2. Results.................................................................................. 7 2.1. Standard traffic signs ...................................................... 7 2.2. Direction signs .............................................................. 83 2.3. Road markings............................................................ 126 2.4. Institutional scenarios ................................................. 196 3. Conclusions ...................................................................... 244 5 IMPROVER Subproject 4, Appendix C, Data collection and analysis at a national level TREN-04-ST-S07.37022 1. Method 1.1. Questionnaires Four questionnaires (standard traffic signs, direction signs, road markings and institutional scenarios) were developed by the project partners. These are shown in the Appendix. 1.2. Procedure The partners identified the appropriate official representatives from each of the 25 States. The questionnaires were either given to these representatives to complete, or the partners completed as much of the material as possible from other sources then the draft answers were confirmed by the States. Following data collection, the four questionnaires for each country that gave a response were coded by TRL. Thereafter, data analysis was undertaken by TRL. This analysis was then given to the other partners for extra analyses and comment. Finally, TRL added this additional information from the other partners and produced the report. Figure 1 shows the data collection and analysis process. Data collected from the 25 EU states and given to TRL TRL coded all the data and undertook the initial analysis. Initial analysis given to the other partners for additional comment TRL added obtained information from the other partners Report produced for WP 4.1.2 and 4.1.3. Figure 1: Data collection and analysis process for tasks 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 6 IMPROVER Subproject 4, Appendix C, Data collection and analysis at a national level TREN-04-ST-S07.37022 2. Results Results are presented for each of the four questionnaires separately. Within each questionnaire, the questions asked and the answers obtained are shown. 2.1. Standard traffic signs For this questionnaire, responses were obtained from 17 of the 25 countries that were contacted. In the case of no response having been received the column in the table has been left blank. 2.1.1. Is the sign shown part of your official traffic sign collection (symbol/character need not be identical, but similar)? Table 1 shows the responses of each country to each of the traffic signs listed in the left-hand column. Listed in each category below are some of the significant results which have been highlighted. o Danger warning signs (category A) – Sign A7c , only 6 of 17 responding countries (35%) listed this sign as part of their official traffic sign collection. Of the countries that responded, only six used this sign, these included Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Spain. The responses for Sign A8 , recorded that only 10 of 17 countries (59%) utilised this sign. Those countries that do not use this sign include; Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland and the Netherlands. o Priority signs (category B) – both signs B3 and B4 recorded utilisation of 15 of 17 countries (88%) and in both cases it was the UK and Ireland that do not use these particular signs. o Prohibitory or restrictive signs (category C) – sign C4b recorded just 6 of 17 countries (35%) utilising this particular sign. Only Belgium, Cyprus, Greece, Hungary, Portugal and Sweden use this sign as part of their traffic sign collection. o Mandatory signs (category D) – sign D10a recorded just 5 of 17 countries (29%) utilising this sign, that is just five of the countries that responded (including Estonia, France, Greece, Hungary & Latvia). o Special regulation signs (category E) - both signs E11a and b recorded low usage with 5 of 17 (29%) and 4 of 17 (24%) countries respectively utilising these signs. o Indication signs (category G) – signs G18 ,G19 and G22a-c recorded low usage with just 5 of 17 (29%) countries using G18 and only 6 of 17 countries (35%) using G19 and G22a-c. 7 IMPROVER Subproject 4, Appendix C, Data collection and analysis at a national level TREN-04-ST-S07.37022 o Additional panels (category H) – of this group of signs, sign H9 recorded the lowest usage with 11 of 17 countries (65%) using this sign. Of the countries that did not use this sign the reason for this could be due to climatic factors for some countries, but there were others that did not use this particular sign despite suffering the relevant climatic conditions. o The total utilisation of signs was reviewed for each country. This identified an interesting finding; the average utilisation for the 17 countries was 82%, yet Ireland recorded a percentage utilisation of just 42%. Therefore the Irish were only utilising half of the signs from the Vienna Convention in their traffic sign collection when compared to the other countries that responded to the questionnaire. The results
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transport and Map Symbols Range: 1F680–1F6FF
    Transport and Map Symbols Range: 1F680–1F6FF This file contains an excerpt from the character code tables and list of character names for The Unicode Standard, Version 14.0 This file may be changed at any time without notice to reflect errata or other updates to the Unicode Standard. See https://www.unicode.org/errata/ for an up-to-date list of errata. See https://www.unicode.org/charts/ for access to a complete list of the latest character code charts. See https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-14.0/ for charts showing only the characters added in Unicode 14.0. See https://www.unicode.org/Public/14.0.0/charts/ for a complete archived file of character code charts for Unicode 14.0. Disclaimer These charts are provided as the online reference to the character contents of the Unicode Standard, Version 14.0 but do not provide all the information needed to fully support individual scripts using the Unicode Standard. For a complete understanding of the use of the characters contained in this file, please consult the appropriate sections of The Unicode Standard, Version 14.0, online at https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode14.0.0/, as well as Unicode Standard Annexes #9, #11, #14, #15, #24, #29, #31, #34, #38, #41, #42, #44, #45, and #50, the other Unicode Technical Reports and Standards, and the Unicode Character Database, which are available online. See https://www.unicode.org/ucd/ and https://www.unicode.org/reports/ A thorough understanding of the information contained in these additional sources is required for a successful implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • View Spec Sheet
    IQ1500 Variable Speed Limit Sign White Violator Strobes Variation The IQ Series of Radar Speed Signs offers solutions forraising drivers’ attentions and improving road safety. The bright 15” characters can be seen from up to 750’ away, and help increase driver speed awareness on the roadways where crashes can be so dangerous. SafetyCalm data collection software allows you to gather data of traffic patterns and program the sign to help keep roads safer. Key Features: Part #: M75-15VSL-U0W1 • Modular design for quick, easy installation and service • Full Matrix, amber LEDs with 15” high digits. “SLOW DOWN” or “TOO FAST” messages activate to provide speed sensitive violator warning without being distracting. Why TraffiCalm™? • All iQ Series signs include SafetyCalm Software, a Full Featured Configuration, Scheduling and Data Software Suite. ISO 9001:2015 Certified • USA based facility • Emoticon Display options to grab driver’s attention • Engineered with intelligent power features. Power-Miser mode activates All signs 100% MUTCD • automatically to preserve functionality even with low power input. compliant • Solar or 110V AC ready (power packages sold separately) Vandal resistant • • K-band (24.15GHz) radar, range 450 feet. designs • Unlimited tech support and customer service from our USA facility for the life Broadest range of • of the sign sizes and options in the industry • Fast delivery- typically ships within 2 weeks of order • Made in America. Certificate of Compliance available upon request Industry leading • turnaround from • 3 year limited warranty order to delivery Unlimited tech sup- Package Includes: • port and customer Variable speed limit sign, mounting bracket, SafetyCalm™ Configuration and service from our USA Traffic Data Collection Software, installation and user manual.
    [Show full text]
  • The Eib Climate Survey 2019-2020
    THE EIB CLIMATE SURVEY 2019-2020 HOW CITIZENS ARE CONFRONTING THE CLIMATE CRISIS AND WHAT ACTIONS THEY EXPECT FROM POLICYMAKERS AND BUSINESSES THE EIB CLIMATE SURVEY 20 SURVEY THE EIB CLIMATE 1 9-2020 THE EIB CLIMATE SURVEY 2019-2020 3 THE EIB CLIMATE SURVEY 2019-2020 HOW CITIZENS ARE CONFRONTING THE CLIMATE CRISIS AND WHAT ACTIONS THEY EXPECT FROM POLICYMAKERS AND BUSINESSES The EIB Climate Survey 2019-2020 How citizens are confronting the climate crisis and what actions they expect from policymakers and businesses © European Investment Bank, 2020. 98 -100, boulevard Konrad Adenauer – L-2950 Luxembourg 3 +352 4379-1 U [email protected] www.eib.org twitter.com/eib facebook.com/europeaninvestmentbank youtube.com/eibtheeubank All rights reserved. All questions on rights and licensing should be addressed to [email protected] Photo credits: Shutterstock/Alexandros Michailidis. All rights reserved. Authorisation to reproduce or use these photos must be requested directly from the copyright holder. For further information on the EIB’s activities, please consult our website, www.eib.org. You can also contact [email protected]. Get our e-newsletter at www.eib.org/sign-up Published by the European Investment Bank. Printed on Circle offset 95, FSC Recycled. The EIB uses paper certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Because it’s made by people who like trees. FSC promotes environmentally sound, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world’s forests. We all know reading is good for you. It’s good for the planet, too – as long as you read on the right paper.
    [Show full text]
  • 2B-1 Application of Regulatory Signs Regulatory
    6. REGULATORY SIGNS 2B-1 Application of Regulatory Signs Regulatory signs inform highway users of traffic laws or regulations and indicate the applicability of legal requirements that would not oth- erwise be apparent. These signs shall be erected wherever needed to fulfill this purpose, but unnecessary mandates should be avoided. The laws of many States specify that certain regulations are enforceable only when made known by official signs. Some regulatory signs are related to operational controls but do not impose any obligations or prohibitions. For example, signs giving ad- vance notice of or marking the end of a restricted zone are included in the regulatory group. Regulatory signs normally shall be erected at those locations where regulations apply. The sign message shall clearly indicate the require- ments imposed by the regulation and shall be easily visible and legible to the vehicle operator. 2B-2 Classification of Regulatory Signs Regulatory signs are classified in the following groups: 1. Right-of-way series: (a) STOP sign (sec. 2B-4 to 6) (b) YIELD sign (sec. 2B-7 to 9) 2. Speed series (sec. 2B-10 to 14) 3. Movement series: (a) Turning (see. 2B-15 to 19) (b) Alignment (sec. 2B-20 to 25) (c) Exclusion (see. 2B-26 to 28) (d) One Way (sec. 2B-29 to 30) 4. Parking series (see. 2B-31 to 34) 5. Pedestrian series (see. 2B-35 to 36) 6. Miscellaneous series (sec. 2B-37 to 44) 2B-3 Design of Regulatory Signs Regulatory signs are rectangular, with the longer dimension vertical, and have black legend on a white background, except for those signs whose standards specify otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • The City of Edinburgh Council Edinburgh LRT Masterplan Feasibility Study Final Report
    The City of Edinburgh Council Edinburgh LRT Masterplan Feasibility Study Final Report The City of Edinburgh Council Edinburgh LRT Masterplan Feasibility Study Final Report January 2003 Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd Admiral House, Rose Wharf, 78 East Street, Leeds LS9 8EE Tel +44 (0)113 242 8498 Fax +44 (0)113 242 8573 REP/FI Job number 68772 The City of Edinburgh Council Edinburgh LRT Masterplan Feasibility Study Final Report CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. INTRODUCTION 9 1.1 Scope of the Report 9 1.2 Study Background and Objectives 9 1.3 Transport Trends 10 1.4 Planning Context 10 1.5 The Integrated Transport Initiative 11 1.6 Study Approach 13 1.7 Light Rapid Transit Systems 13 2. PHASE 1 APPRAISAL 18 2.1 Introduction 18 2.2 Corridor Review 18 2.3 Development Proposals 21 2.4 The City of Edinburgh Conceptual Network 22 2.5 Priorities for Testing 23 2.6 North Edinburgh Loop 24 2.7 South Suburban Line 26 2.8 Appraisal of Long List of Corridor Schemes 29 2.9 Phase 1 Findings 47 3. APPROACH TO PHASE 2 50 3.1 Introduction 50 3.2 Technical Issues and Costs 50 3.3 Rolling Stock 54 3.4 Tram Services, Run Times and Operating Costs 55 3.5 Environmental Impact 55 3.6 Demand Forecasting 56 3.7 Appraisal 61 4. NORTH EDINBURGH LOOP 63 4.1 Alignment and Engineering Issues 63 4.2 Demand and Revenue 65 4.3 Environmental Issues 66 4.4 Integration 67 4.5 Tram Operations and Car Requirements 67 4.6 Costs 68 4.7 Appraisal 69 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Drivers Manual: Ch. 7
    CHAPTER 7 | Safe Vehicle Operation CHAPTER SEVEN | SAFE VEHICLE OPERATION Even the most experienced drivers can be distracted while driving. A defensive driver looks out for the actions of other drivers and anticipates potential problems. LANE MARKINGS Lane markings separate traffic and alert drivers when it is permissible to pass other vehicles. Yellow Lane Markings Yellow lane markings separate multiple lanes of traffic going in opposite directions. You may cross a broken yellow line to pass another vehicle when it is safe, but you should not cross a solid yellow line except to turn. Two-lane road with a solid yellow line Two-lane road with a broken Four-lane road with a solid yellow line yellow line White Lane Markings White lane markings separate multiple lanes of traffic going in the same direction. Most roads with more than two lanes have broken white lines to separate the lanes. You may cross a broken white line when it is safe to change lanes, but you should not cross a solid white line. Three lanes of traffic with broken white lines CHANGING LANES AND PASSING OTHER VEHICLES Change only one lane at a time. When changing lanes to prepare for a turn, you must signal your intention to do so at least 200 feet prior to changing lanes or turning. Your signal distance must be at least 300 feet before the turn if you are operating a vehicle in a speed zone of at least 50 miles per hour. Do not weave in and out of lanes, which will greatly increase your risk of an accident.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic and Road Sign Recognition
    Traffic and Road Sign Recognition Hasan Fleyeh This thesis is submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of Napier University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2008 Abstract This thesis presents a system to recognise and classify road and traffic signs for the purpose of developing an inventory of them which could assist the highway engineers’ tasks of updating and maintaining them. It uses images taken by a camera from a moving vehicle. The system is based on three major stages: colour segmentation, recognition, and classification. Four colour segmentation algorithms are developed and tested. They are a shadow and highlight invariant, a dynamic threshold, a modification of de la Escalera’s algorithm and a Fuzzy colour segmentation algorithm. All algorithms are tested using hundreds of images and the shadow-highlight invariant algorithm is eventually chosen as the best performer. This is because it is immune to shadows and highlights. It is also robust as it was tested in different lighting conditions, weather conditions, and times of the day. Approximately 97% successful segmentation rate was achieved using this algorithm. Recognition of traffic signs is carried out using a fuzzy shape recogniser. Based on four shape measures - the rectangularity, triangularity, ellipticity, and octagonality, fuzzy rules were developed to determine the shape of the sign. Among these shape measures octangonality has been introduced in this research. The final decision of the recogniser is based on the combination of both the colour and shape of the sign. The recogniser was tested in a variety of testing conditions giving an overall performance of approximately 88%.
    [Show full text]
  • International Road Signs Leaflet
    International Road Signs Leaflet Edition 2008 A Comprehensive list of unusual road signs by country © AIT-FIA Information Centre (OTA) Preface This third edition of the International Road Signs leaflet includes three new countries (Kuwait, Latvia and Slovenia) as well as a number of new unusual road signs in several countries. The publication follows a similar approach as the 2005 edition. We have tried to select the most unusual road signs among the ones which do not conform to those prescribed by international agreements, namely the Protocol on Road Signs and Signals (Geneva, 1949) and the Convention on Road Signs and Signals (Vienna, 1968). There is certainly a degree of subjectivity in our selections and we apologise for missing any signs that would have deserved to be inserted in this leaflet. But be sure we will take your remarks into consideration for future updates. We would also like to thank all the national automobile clubs for their invaluable help in the making of this publication. Whether you read it out of curiosity or because you intend to travel abroad, we hope you will enjoy using this leaflet. © AIT-FIA Information Centre (OTA) Table of content Things to know Australia Austria Belgium Brazil Canada China Czech Republic Denmark Finland France Germany Hong Kong Iceland Israel Italy Japan Kuwait Latvia Macedonia (FYROM) Malaysia Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Russia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom USA Tunnel road signs in several countries © AIT-FIA Information Centre (OTA) Things to know According to international agreements: - Danger warning signs are either triangles or diamonds depending on the countries - Restrictive or prohibitory signs are usually circular with red borders.
    [Show full text]
  • Road Traffic Signs and Regulations in the Netherlands Note This Is an Abridged Popular Version Published for Instructional Use
    Road Traffic Signs and Regulations in the Netherlands Note This is an abridged popular version published for instructional use. Due to abridging and modification of the text, no legal status may be derived from this document. The author accepts no liability for the consequences of interpreting the rules. The complete 1990 Traffic Rules and Signs Regulations (RVV 1990) can be viewed at www.ween.nl Road Traffic Signs and Regulations in the Netherlands Summary of Contents Road Trac Act 1994 (WVW 1994) 1 Traffic Conduct 6 1.1 Rules of Conduct 6 Trac Regulations and Road Signs (RVV 1990) 2 Traffic Regulations 9 2.1 Road position 9 2.2 Overtaking 11 2.3 Queues 12 2.4 Approaching road junctions 12 2.5 Giving priority 13 2.5a Level crossings 13 2.6 Cuing across military columns and motorised funeral processions 13 2.7 Turning 14 2.8 Speed limits 15 2.9 Waiting 19 2.10 Parking 19 2.11 Parking bicycles and mopeds 22 2.12 Signals and identification marks 22 2.13 Using lights while driving 24 2.14 Using lights while stationary 27 2.15 Special lights 28 2.16 Motorways and main highways 30 2.17 Roads across recreational areas 31 2.18 Roundabouts 31 2.19 Pedestrians 32 2.20 Emergency vehicles 32 2.21 Stray livestock 32 2.22 Boarding and alighting passengers 33 2.23 Towing 33 2.24 Special manoeuvres 33 2.25 Unnecessary noise 34 2.26 Warning triangles 34 2.26a Seats 35 2.27 Seat belts and child safety systems 36 2.28 Safety helmets 40 2.30 Use of mobile telecommunications equipment 41 2.31 Conveyance of persons in or on trailers and in loading space 42 3 Road
    [Show full text]
  • 2C-1 Application of Warning Signs Warning Signs Are Used When It Is
    C. WARNING SIGNS 2C-1 Application of Warning Signs Warning signs are used when it is deemed necessary to warn traffic of existing or potentially hazardous conditions on or adjacent to a high- way or street. Warning signs require caution on the part of the vehicle operator and may call for reduction of speed or a maneuver in the interest of his own safety and that of other vehicle operators and pedes- trians. Adequate warnings are of great assistance to the vehicle opera- tor and are valuable in safe-guarding and expediting traffic. The use of warning signs should be kept to a minimum because the unnecessary use of them to warn of conditions which are apparent tends to breed disrespect for all signs. Even on the most modern expressways there may be some conditions to which the driver can be alerted by means of warning signs. These conditions are in varying degrees common to all highways, and existing standards for warning signs are generally applicable to expressways. Typical locations and hazards that may warrant the use of warning signs are: 1. Changes in horizontal alignment 2. Intersections 3. Advance warning of control devices 4. Converging traffic lanes 5. Narrow roadways 6. Changes in highway design 7. Grades 8. Roadway surface conditions 9. Railroad crossings 10. Entrances and crossings 11. Miscellaneous Warning signs specified herein cover most conditions that are likely to be met. Special warning signs for highway construction and mainte- nance operations, school areas, railroad grade crossings and bicycle fa- cilities are dealt with in Parts VI through IX of this Manual.
    [Show full text]
  • Road Signs and Other Devices of Traffic Control in Finland
    Road signs and other devices of traffic control in Finland 1 Danger warning signs Right bend Left bend Several bends, Several bends, Dangerous the first to the right the first to the left descent Steep ascent Road narrows Two-way traffic Swing bridge Ferry, quay or river bank Traffic congestion Uneven road Road works Loose gravel Slippery road Dangerous Pedestrian Children Cyclists Ski track shoulders crossing Elks Reindeer Intersection with Intersection with minor Intersection with equal roads (give road (vehicles coming minor road way to the vehicles from the minor road coming from the right) have to give way) Intersection with Light signals Roundabout Tramway line Level-crossing minor road without gates 2 Danger warning signs Level-crossing Additional sign at Level-crossing Level-crossing Falling rocks with gates approach to with one track with two or more tracks level-crossing Aircrafts flying at Cross-wind Other danger low altitude Signs regulating priority Priority road End of priority Priority over oncoming traffic Priority for Give way (to vehicles Stop and give way oncoming traffic on the road you (to vehicles on the road are approaching) you are approaching) Prohibitory or restrictive signs Closed to all vehicles No entry for power- No entry for truck No entry for vehicle No entry for power- driven vehicles and van combinations driven agricultural vehicle 3 Prohibitory or restrictive signs No entry for No entry for No entry for vehicles No entry for bus No entry for moped motor cycle motor sledge carrying dangerous goods No entry
    [Show full text]
  • Speed Limits in Work Zones Guidelines October 2014 Table of Contents
    Speed Limits in Work Zones Guidelines October 2014 Published by: Office of Traffic, Safety & Technology Office of Construction & Innovative Contracting SPEED LIMITS IN WORK ZONES GUIDELINES OCTOBER 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY CHART ................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 2 THE LAW ............................................................................................... 3 DOCUMENTATION ................................................................................. 4 ADVISORY SPEEDS ............................................................................. 5 WORKERS PRESENT SPEED LIMITS ................................................. 6 24/7 CONSTRUCTION SPEED LIMITS .................................................. 8 HIGHER FINES FOR INPLACE SPEED LIMITS IN WORK ZONES ....... 9 SPEED LIMITS ON DETOURS .............................................................. 10 DYNAMIC SPEED DISPLAY SIGNS ..................................................... 11 EXTRAORDINARY LAW ENFORCEMENT .......................................... 12 APPENDIX: Sample Extraordinary Law Enforcement Request ............................ 15 Sample Workers Present Speed Limit Documentation Form ........... 16 Layouts 1, 2, 2a, 2b, 3 and 4 ................................................................. 17 Dynamic Speed Display Sign Drawing ............................................... 23 The information contained
    [Show full text]