My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 07/15/2014
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Public Works Committee
>
2010 - 2019
>
2014
>
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 07/15/2014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2025 10:39:37 AM
Creation date
7/16/2014 9:10:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Public Works Committee
Document Date
07/15/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
HIGH-LEVEL TREATMENTS <br />High-level treatments are high cost and are generally implemented on <br />high -volume and high-speed roadways. They are much more difficult <br />to implement unless they are justified based on traffic and pedestrian <br />volume. <br />Possible high-level treatments are outlined in Table 5 on page 27, and <br />examples of selected treatment options are shown below. For additional <br />information on Treatment Options, please see the.sources listed below. <br />PEDESTRIAN HYBRID <br />,V.,,,SVONI,Vis14,42409? <br />4,11414€44V'ar: <br />,..,4„.,.„.1,41p,st, • 458£(*S'kVkat%V.Vp.2kf'',Pct.'" <br />'XVIentatftg;'&3044ht 41*. ' <br />.,14,044 efORRick ittimiP*4F,A*1***4.-- <br />41.*Air ftreiptl <br />UNDERPASS <br />OVERPASS <br />Evaluate LOS for Treatment Options <br />Step 4 should be repeated after deciding on a treatment <br />option. Determine the level of service (LOS) of the <br />crossing condition with the potential treatment op- <br />tions following the procedure as outlined in the 2010 <br />Highway Capacity Manual. An acceptable service level <br />should be determined by the agency. <br />It acceptable service levels cannot be met: <br />• Do nothing (consider leaving the crossing un- <br />marked and unsigned), <br />• Consider pedestrian routing to another location, <br />and/or <br />• Consider appropriate high-level treatments. <br />Sources: <br />"Minnesota's Best Practices for Pedestrian/BIcycle Safety," MnDOT Office of Traffic, Safety and <br />Technology, September 2013, <br />"Best Practices Synthesis and Guidance In At -Grade Trail -Crossing Treatments," Minnesota <br />Department of Transportation, St.Paul, MN, September 2013. <br />NCHRP Report 562: Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Transportation Research <br />Board of the National Academies, Washington D.C., 2006. <br />Assessment of Driver Yield Rams Pre- end Post-RRFB Installation, Bend, Oregon. Oregon Department <br />of Transportation, Washington D.C., 2011, <br />Bolton & Menk, Inc. <br />Transportation Research Board, HCM 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, Washington D.C.: National <br />Academy of Sciences, 2010. <br />Before -and -After Study of the Effectiveness of Rectangular Rapid -Flashing Beacons Used with School <br />Sign In Garland, Texas. Texas "Ransportation Institute, College Station, TX, April 2012. <br />26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.