To position power poles a safe distance from the road to minimise the likelihood of being accidentally hit by vehicles.

Similar documents
Policy Statement. Objective. Context. References and Supporting Documentation

Geometric Design Tables

Figure 1: Graphical definitions of superelevation in terms for a two lane roadway.

October 2004 REVISIONS (2) SUPERELEVATION DEVELOPMENT 11.3(2)

3-13 UFC - GENERAL PROVISIONS AND GEOMETRIC DESIGN FOR ROADS, STREETS, WALKS, AND OPEN

Road Safety Audit training course. Motorways - safety issues of the motorway design

H8 Signs, Supports and Poles

Alberta Infrastructure HIGHWAY GEOMETRIC DESIGN GUIDE AUGUST 1999

PLACEMENT OF SIGNS RECOMMENDED PRACTICES SUB-SECTION

DISTRIBUTION: Electronic Recipients List TRANSMITTAL LETTER NO. (13-01) MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. MANUAL: Road Design English Manual

Review of Guidelines for Cycleway Safety Fencing

Post impact trajectory of vehicles at rural intersections

SPEED CONTROL AT ROUNDABOUTS USE OF MAXIMUM ENTRY PATH RADII

(HIGHWAY GEOMETRIC DESIGN -1)

Geometric designs for Safe Highways. Dr. Manoj M. Asst. Professor Department of Civil Engineering IIT Delhi

A Safe System-based approach to selection of clear zones, safety barriers and other roadside treatments

Chapter Twenty-eight SIGHT DISTANCE BUREAU OF LOCAL ROADS AND STREETS MANUAL

Road Side Design: When is a Barrier Required?

H3 Roadside Design Process

Guide to Road Design Part 3: Geometric Design Session I 18 October 2016

Chapter III Geometric design of Highways. Tewodros N.

INDEX. Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads INDEX

Safety Barriers (including Erratum No. 1, dated June 2013, and Amendment No. 1, dated February 2014)

H3 Roadside Design Process

Clear Zone Conflicts in AASHTO Publications

Developed by: The American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) 15 Riverside Parkway, Suite 100 Fredericksburg, VA

Cross Section Elements

INTERSECTIONS AT GRADE INTERSECTIONS

NOT TO SCALE PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DETAILS CURB DETAILS DATE: MARCH 2013 FILE NAME: CURB.DWG

DESIGN BULLETIN #66/2010

SIGN PLACEMENT-ELEVATION VIEW: FREEWAY (FORESLOPE) ROADSIDE SIGN LOCATIONS & SUPPORT SPACING MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (MIN.

Auckland Transport Code of Practice 2013

RAILWAY LEVEL CROSSING CHECKLIST Road Safety Review of Railway Crossings

CHECKLIST 6: EXISTING ROADS: ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

Alberta Highway 881. Corridor Management Plan. Session Forum 1 - Highways. Tri-Party Transportation Conference Moving Alberta Into the Future

CHECKLIST 2: PRELIMINARY DESIGN STAGE AUDIT

700 Multi-Modal Considerations

MUTCD Part 6G: Type of Temporary Traffic Control Zone Activities

PERFORMANCE ACTIVITY 405 LIMB MANAGEMENT

10.0 CURB EXTENSIONS GUIDELINE

Section 4 Basic Geometric Design Elements

SECTION 12 ROAD MARKINGS AND DELINEATION

City of Roseville Section 13 Design Standards. _Bikeways January 2016 SECTION 13 BIKEWAYS

Safety Barrier System Acceptance Conditions SMART Steel Crash Cushion

Memorandum. Exhibit 60 SSDP To: Jenny Bailey, Senior Planner. From: Bill Schultheiss, P.E. (WA. P.E. #46108) Date: June 20, 2017

Driveway Design Criteria

Designing with the Railroad

1.3.4 CHARACTERISTICS OF CLASSIFICATIONS

GEOMETRIC DESIGN STANDARDS FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION STREETS TABLE 1A CG-6 CURB AND GUTTER SECTION

ROUNDABOUTS/TRAFFIC CIRCLES

Design Criteria. Design Criteria

References General Definitions

Roadway Design Manual

AN INTRODUCTION TO ROADSIDE HAZARD MANAGEMENT

Roadway Design Manual

Guidelines for Integrating Safety and Cost-Effectiveness into Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation Projects

Chapter 5 Shared-Use Paths

Traffic Control Inspection Checklist Segment:

Road Markings. Lecture Notes in Transportation Systems Engineering. Prof. Tom V. Mathew

South Carolina Department of Transportation. Engineering Directive

SECTION 3 STREET DESIGN

Gordon Proctor Director Policy on Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel on ODOT Owned or Maintained Facilities

FOR HISTORICAL REFERENCE ONLY

Appendix 5B Accessway standards and guidelines Appendix 5B Accessway standards and guidelines

11 CHECKLISTS Master Checklists All Stages CHECKLIST 1 FEASIBILITY STAGE AUDIT

Road Safety Facilities Implemented in Japan

Supplementary Appendix to ARTC Track & Civil Code of Practice. Establishing Minimum Protective Measures at Level Crossings ETF-16-01

2017 Temporary traffic control guidelines for pedestrians. v.2

Shared Use Path Design

1 This technical note considers the issues associated with the use of tidal flow bus lanes on key public transport corridors in Cambridge.

ENGINEERING STANDARD FOR GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF ROADS AND STREETS ORIGINAL EDITION MAR. 1996

7 DESIGN CRITER RIA 7.1 Design Space Requirements

TGSI Tactile Ground Surface Indicators

FORM A PASCO COUNTY ACCESS CONNECTION PERMIT APPLICATION

Geometric design deals with the dimensioning of the elements of highways, such

LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES

STAKING TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEMS

CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION

November 2012: The following Traffic and Safety Notes were revised:

SECTION 14: LANDSCAPING AND BEAUTIFICATION

DESIGN CODE. Enterprise West Harlow London Road North Design Code 21

SMART STEEL CRASH CUSHION

Progress Report on the Design and Planning of an Infrastructure Improvement Project for the Sunnyside TIF District (Phase II)

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN

Accommodating Pedestrians in the Work Zone

200 Horizontal and Vertical Design. Table of Contents

SECTION 1A NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE GEOMETRIC DESIGN

Using Computer Modelling to Identify Road Safety Risks Vecovski, P. 1, Mak, J. 1, Brisbane, G. 1

Copy of my report. Why am I giving this talk. Overview. State highway network

TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES

RURAL HIGHWAY SHOULDERS THAT ACCOMMODATE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN USE (TxDOT Project ) June 7, Presented by: Karen Dixon, Ph.D., P.E.

Access Management Standards

2004 Traffic and Safety Notes. Cross Reference between the Old Note Number and the New Note Number

Roadway Horizontal Alignment Design

Figure 3B-1. Examples of Two-Lane, Two-Way Marking Applications

Off-road Trails. Guidance

Route 47 (North Main Street) Reconstruction

Roadside Safety Proven Countermeasures. Emmett McDevitt Transportation Safety Engineer Federal Highway Administration

SECTION 12 ROAD MARKINGS AND DELINEATION

Rhebogue Neighbourhood Greenway. Road Safety Audit Stage 2

Transcription:

Policy Statement Subject Placement of Rigid Distribution Poles Along Roads With Speed Limits Exceeding 70KM/H Approved by Robert Rogerson Signature & Date Distribution Standards and Policy Manager Authorised by Mark Wilshusen Manager Signature & Date Standards, Policy & Data Quality Issue Date 14 August 2006 Issue Initial Objective To position power poles a safe distance from the road to minimise the likelihood of being accidentally hit by vehicles. Context During traffic accidents, it is not uncommon for vehicles to leave the carriageway and collide with solid structures, such as poles. By positioning poles a safe distance from the road, this hazard can be reduced. References and Supporting Documentation http://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/internet/standards/rtems/roadside/services/guiderelocprotserv.asp - Main Roads website - Guide to the Relocation or Protection of Services. http://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/internet/standards/rtems/roadside/barriers.asp - Main Roads website - Guide to the Design of Road Safety Barriers. http://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/nr/rdonlyres/0b774c88-78a5-44f6-850b- F012E9A1F265/0/utility.pdf - Main Roads website - Utility Providers Code of Practice. AS/NZS 3845:1999, Road safety barrier. Section 17 of the Rural Road Design, published by Austroads. Section 14 of the Urban Road Design, published by Austroads. Main Roads - WA roads with permanent traffic counters. Main Roads - Metropolitan roads with permanent traffic counters. Main Roads - South West roads with permanent traffic counters. Policy Statement Rigid power poles should not be installed within the Clear Zone. Policy Details For roads other than freeways or controlled access highways, the Main Roads requirements are defined in its Guide to the Relocation or Protection of Services, Section 4.3 as follows. Policy Statement 1

Where practical: Services should be placed on the alignment given in Appendix B of the Utility Providers Code of Practice. Above-ground services should be placed outside the Clear Zone, as detailed in the Guide to the Design of Road Safety Barriers, so as not to pose a hazard to motorists. The Guide to the Design of Road Safety Barriers, Section 2, states that a Clear Zone should be determined in accordance with Austroads Urban Roads Design Guide to the Geometric Design of Major Urban Roads, and Rural Road Design Guide to the Geometric Design of Rural Roads. The Clear Zone is defined in AS/NZS 3845 1999, Section 1.4.9, as - "the horizontal width of space available for the safe use of an errant vehicle which consists of the verge area and is measured from the nearside edge of the left-hand traffic lane. In the case of a divided road, it is also measured from the offside edge of the right-hand traffic lane to the edge of the pavement for opposing traffic. NOTE: This area may consist of a shoulder, a recoverable slope, a non-recoverable slope and a runout area, but all parts can be traversed. The desirable width is dependent on traffic volumes, speeds and the geometry of the road. Figure 1: Clear Zone layout The width of the Clear Zone may be limited by the presence of physical objects that limit or prevent errant vehicles from leaving the carriageway (e.g. a barrier rail or trees). The process for defining the width of the Clear Zone involves the following three steps: 1. Determining the Clear Zone width for straight roads without steep embankments. 2. Adjusting the width of the Clear Zone to accommodate curves. 3. Adjusting the width of the Clear Zone to accommodate steep embankments. Policy Statement 2

1. Determining the Clear Zone width for straight roads with flat embankments Figure 2: Clear Zone widths on straight roads with flat embankments (Published by Austroads) The Clear Zone width for straight roads without steep embankments can be determined from Figure 2, above. To use the diagram we need to identify two parameters: the design speed and the one-way Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT). For most rural roads and roads managed by local governments, AADT values are below 1000. For major highways, they generally exceed 5000. The accurate AADT values can be obtained by contacting Main Roads Customer Services section, by sending an email to the following address: RoadInfo@mainroads.wa.gov.au Main Roads measures AADT by using both permanent and temporary count sites. The email requesting AADT information must include a permanent count site reference number (shown on the Main Roads maps) or alternatively must clearly describe the section of the road for which information is required. It is necessary to obtain or estimate the AADT value and to calculate the corresponding Clear Zone width for the future. This is because the installed poles will remain in place for a long period of time. As a minimum, in accordance with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidance, we should estimate AADT values and Clear Zone widths for five years time. The future AADT values should be estimated by using a linear extrapolation method, demonstrated in Example 1. Example 1 Main Roads provided the following AADT values: last year - 750 vehicles per day, this year - 800 vehicles per day. What will be the value of AADT in five years time? The AADT growth rate is equal to: (800 750) / 750 = 0.0667, i.e. ~6%. In five years time, the AADT value will increase by (1+ 0.06) 5 =1.06 5 = 1.338 times. The future AADT will equal: 800 x 1.338 = 1070 vehicles per day. Therefore, the AADT value to be used for calculating the Clear Zone width should be 1100. Policy Statement 3

After deciding on the AADT value, the width of the Clear Zone can be determined from Figure 2 by taking the following steps: Draw a vertical projection from speed value on the horizontal axis, up as far as the speed curve for the appropriate AADT value. Then draw a horizontal projection from that point on the speed curve towards the vertical axis and identify value of the Clear Zone width. Example 2 For a speed limit of 95km/h, and an AADT of 3000 vehicles per day, the value of Clear Zone width is 7.5m. Adjusting the width of the Clear Zone to accommodate curves Vehicles travelling along curves have a greater likelihood of leaving the carriageway and will travel a greater distance into the Clear Zone than when travelling along a straight line. Therefore, when power poles are located along the outside curve of a road, it is necessary to apply an adjustment factor to the Clear Zone width, calculated from Figure 2. Its value will depend on the curve radius and on vehicle speed, and can be determined from Figure 3. Figure 3: Adjustment factors for Clear Zones on curves (published by Austroads) The radius of a road curve can be estimated from aerial photos, available from NMS or from DFIS. For vehicle speed, use the speed limit applicable to the road. Example 3 On a curve with a radius of 500 metres and speed limit of 95km/h, the adjustment factor is 1.3. Therefore, if this curve is located on a road with an AADT of 3000 vehicles per day, as in Example 2, the width of the Clear Zone (CZ) should be multiplied by 1.3, as follows: CZ = 7.5 x 1.3 = 9.75 metres. Policy Statement 4

2. Adjusting the width of the Clear Zone to accommodate embankments. Embankments can have cut or fill slopes, as shown in Figure 4. Figure 4: Pole setback for cut/fill slope embankments. Fill slope embankments Fill slopes occur when a road is built higher than the adjacent land. They are divided into three categories: a) Recoverable slopes, with gradients of up to 1:6 (that is, one length of vertical distance to six lengths of horizontal distance). It is assumed that on these slopes errant vehicles would be able to slow down or manoeuvre to avoid poles, as they would on a flat surface. b) Partially recoverable slopes, with values between 1:5.5 and 1:3.5. Errant vehicles may not be able to reduce speed when travelling down these slopes. c) Non-recoverable slopes, steeper than 1:3.5. It is likely an errant vehicle would run uncontrolled down these slopes. a) Recoverable fill slopes CZ = the Clear Zone width determined from Figure 2 and adjusted for road curvature based on Figure 3. Figure 5: Recoverable fill slopes. Policy Statement 5

B For fill slope embankments with a ratio of 1:6 or less, as shown in Figure 5, the Clear Zone width is calculated as for flat embankments. b) Partially recoverable fill slopes ECZ - is the effective Clear Zone width, i.e. the Clear Zone width calculated for flat embankments adjusted for embankment slope. W 1 - - W 2 - is the width from edge of thoroughfare lane to hinge point. is the embankment width. is the width from toe of embankment (minimum 3m). Figure 6: Partially recoverable fill slopes When a fill slope is classified as partially recoverable, half of the embankment width should be included in the Clear Zone width calculation. The calculations vary, depending on the width of the embankment. The formulas are given in Table 2. Clear Zone calculations for non-recoverable fill slopes are demonstrated in Examples 4 and 5. Example 4 If CZ = 7.5m, W 1 = 1m and B = 16m (wide embankment). CZ W1 <, as CZ W 1 = 6.5 and 8 2 2 = W 2 = CZ W 1 B / 2, W2 = 7.5 1 8 = 1.5m, W 2 is less than 3m so must be increased ECZ = W 1 + 2 (CZ W 1 ), W 2 = 3m ECZ = 1 + 2 x (7.5 1) = 14m Example 5 If CZ = 7.5 m, W 1 = 1m and B = 4m (narrow embankment). CZ W1 >, as CZ W 1 = 6.5 and 2 2 2 = W 2 = CZ W 1 / 2, W B 2 = 7.5 1 2 = 4.5m, (W 2 > 3m) Policy Statement 6

ECZ = W 1 + / 2 + W B 2, ECZ = 1 + 2 + 4.5 = 7.5 m Policy Statement 7

Table 2: Effective Clear Zone formulas for partially recoverable fill slopes (values in metres) Slope type Formula description Formulas Partially recoverable fill slope Testing of embankment width Calculated distance from toe of embankment to edge of ECZ (W 2 ) Testing of W 2 for the minimum value of 3 metres Effective Clear Zone (ECZ) width Clear Zone distance (CZ) minus shoulder width (W 1 ) smaller than half of the embankment width ( ) CZ W < 1 2 Clear Zone distance (CZ) minus shoulder width (W 1 ) greater than half of the embankment width ( ) CZ W > N/A W 2 = CZ W 1 1 2 2 N/A W 2 < 3 W 2 > 3 ECZ = W1 + 2 (CZ - W 1 ) W B ECZ = W 1 + + 3 2 W B ECZ = W 1 + 2 + W2 Policy Statement 1

B c) Non-recoverable fill slopes ECZ - is the effective Clear Zone width, that is, CZ width calculated for flat embankments adjusted for embankment slope W 1 - - is width from edge of thoroughfare lane to hinge point is embankment width W 2 - is calculated distance from toe of embankment to edge of ECZ (minimum 3 metres) Figure 7: Non-recoverable fill slopes. When a fill slope is classified as non-recoverable, the embankment width ( ) B is excluded from the Clear Zone calculation. The calculations vary, depending on the width of the road shoulder, W1. The formulas are given in Table 3. Table 3: Effective Clear Zone formulas for non-recoverable fill slopes Slope types Nonrecoverabl e fill slopes Formula description Calculated distance from toe of embankment to edge of ECZ (W 2 ) Testing of W 2 for the minimum value of 3 metres Effective Clear Zone (ECZ) width in metres Formulas W 2 = CZ W 1 W 2 < 3.0 W 2 > 3.0 ECZ = W 1 + B + 3 ECZ = W 1 + B +W2 Clear Zone calculations for non-recoverable fill slopes are demonstrated in Examples 6 and 7. Example 6 If CZ = 7.5m, W 1 = 1m (narrow road shoulder) and B = 4m. W 2 = CZ W 1, W 2 = 7.5 1 = 6.5m, (W 2 > 3m) ECZ = W 1 + B + W2, ECZ = 1 + 4 + 6.5 = 11.5m Example 7 If CZ = 7.5m, W 1 = 5m (wide road shoulder) and B = 4m. Policy Statement 1

W 2 = CZ W 1, W 2 = 7.5 5 = 2.5 m W 2 is less than 3m so must be increased ECZ = W 1 + B + W2, ECZ = 5 + 4 + 3 = 12m W 2 = 3m Cut slope embankments Cut slopes are created when a road is built by cutting into the ground. They are divided into two categories: a) Traversable cut slopes Cut slopes flatter than 1:2 or with a height of less than 1.2 metres (regardless of slope) are classified as traversable. For these slopes the Clear Zone width should be calculated as for a flat embankment. No adjustment is required. CZ - is the Clear Zone width determined from Figure 1 and adjusted for road curvature based on Figure 2. Figure 8: Traversable cut slopes b) Partially traversable cut slopes Cut slopes both steeper than 1:2 and higher than 1.2 metres are classified as partially traversable. ECZ - W 1 - is the effective Clear Zone width, i.e. CZ width calculated for flat embankments adjusted for embankment slope is width from edge of thoroughfare lane to hinge point Figure 9: Partially traversable cut slopes Policy Statement 2

For road sections with partially traversable cut slopes, the Clear Zone width should be calculated by using the formula given in Table 4. Table 4: Effective Clear Zone formula for partially traversable cut slopes Slope type Formula description Formulas Partially traversable cut slopes ECZ - Effective Clear Zone width S - is the embankment slope (Y/X) W 1 - is shoulder width ECZ = 1.2 x S 1 + W1 The Clear Zone calculation for partially traversable cut slopes is demonstrated in Example 8. Example 8 If CZ = 7.5m, W 1 = 1m, S = 1:1.5 and height = 2m ECZ = 1.2 x S 1 + W1, ECZ = 1.2 x (1/(1/1.5)) + 1.8 = 2.8m In the example above, the ECZ distance of 2.8 metres is located on a side of the slope. A pole may be installed at this location. However, it is preferable to place it on the flat surface at the top of the slope. Please note that for partially traversable slopes, the minimum width of the Clear Zone decreases as the steepness of the slope increases. For a vertical slope when S = 1:0, and ECZ = W 1. Part sentence missing here? Doesn t seem to make sense Safety Barriers and Non-transversable obstructions The Clear Zone widths calculated above do not apply when a pole is protected by a safety barrier. A safety barrier is designed to deform under impact. Therefore, it is important not to position poles within the barrier deflection area. In addition, it is necessary to allow sufficient room to perform pole maintenance, steeling and replacement. For these reasons when W-Barriers are used, poles should not be positioned any closer than one metre to the barrier face (see Figure 10). Other barriers, such as wire rope, deflect significantly more (i.e. 1.5-2.5 metres) and power poles must be installed outside the deflection distance. Policy Statement 3

Figure 10: Location of pole behind guard fence Where there is a non-traversable permanent obstruction in front of a proposed pole position, a rigid pole may be placed behind the obstruction, as close as installation and access requirements allow (see Figure 11). This applies when the obstruction is considered to be a bigger risk than the pole. Figure 11: Non-traversable permanent obstruction in front of pole Policy Statement 4