transportation operations group enforcement-friendly work zones gerald ullman michael fontaine...
TRANSCRIPT
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
ENFORCEMENT-FRIENDLY WORK
ZONESGerald Ullman
Michael FontaineSteven Schrock
Making Work Zones Work Better Workshop
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
The Problem….
• Enforcement areas often eliminated
• Legislation hampers enforcement efforts
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
What Can Be Done?
• Better DOT/enforcement coordination during planning/design/construction
• Better use of technology?
• Better enforcement-friendly designs
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
When Does Coordination Begin?
During planning review
30%
No coordination
35%
Once project starts10%
Pre-construction
meeting25%
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Innovative Arrangements
• NJ State Police Construction Unit– OSHA-certified officers– Traffic control plan training
• South Dakota DOTCOP – Officers hired as DOT employees– Special DOT vehicles – Authority limited to work zones
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Innovative Arrangements
• Operation Hardhat– Florida Highway
Patrol Officers– Construction
vehicles provide better vantage point
– Extensive publicity, advance warning to motorists
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Technology
• Providing “real-time” information– Portable CMS– Permanent CMS– Active warnings
• Use of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE) Technology
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Active Warnings (Tennessee)• “Workers present” stipulation in
double-fine laws
• Problems– consistency– driver
understanding
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Automated Speed Enforcement• High DOT/contractor/enforcement
interest
• Requires legislative changes to transportation code
• Significant public/political opposition to ASE systems in the U.S.
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Modified ASE?
• Use in a real-time, remote mode
• Move enforcement activity outside of work zone
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Technically Feasible?
• 85-88% of vehicles correctly identified 0.5 to 1.5 miles downstream
• Wireless transmission of up to two images per minute
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Is It Practical?
• Legal/political challenges– Continuous vehicle tracking– Visual verification of a violation – “Speed trap” perceptions
• Financial challenges (ASE $50,000+)
• Deployment/maintenance challenges
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
“Enforceable” Work Zone Designs• Limit allowable work zone lengths• Enforcement pull-out areas
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Enforcement Pull-Out Areas
• How long?• How far apart?• How best to incorporate?
Work Area
Pull Out
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Pull-Out Area Length
• AASHTO HOV Design Guide• Typical driver deceleration/
acceleration values • Observed driver behavior after
receiving a citation• Conclusion:
– Pull out areas should be ¼ mile long on high-speed facilities
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Pull Out Area Spacing
• Direct MOEs and costs difficult to assess
• General hypothesis:– Not too closely spaced
(constructability)
– Not too widely spaced (enforceability)
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Building a Consensus
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Pull Out Area Spacing (Miles)
Perc
eiv
ed
Con
str
ucta
bilit
y
an
d E
nfo
rceab
ilit
y
(1=
Hig
h,
7=
Low
)
Contractors Law Enforcement
Transportation Operations GroupTransportation
Institute
Texas
Other Considerations
• Enforcement buy-in • Appropriate sight distances• Advance signing• Look for ways to incorporate
into standard construction phasing