1 / 69

The Georgia Initiative

The Georgia Initiative. GDOT/GUCC Clear Roadside Program. Clear Roadside. Tom Jackson Vice President. Purpose of Presentation . To Heighten the awareness of the importance of proper pole (and other utility structures) placements on or adjacent to public right-of-way. What more can be Done?.

fionn
Download Presentation

The Georgia Initiative

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Georgia Initiative GDOT/GUCC Clear Roadside Program

  2. Clear Roadside • Tom Jackson • Vice President

  3. Purpose of Presentation • To Heighten the awareness of the importance of proper pole (and other utility structures) placements on or adjacent to public right-of-way.

  4. What more can be Done? • Over 40 fatal crashes in 1997 • Where did these happen? • Why did these happen?

  5. Fatal crash review • Examine the crashes closer • Determine actual pole location • Estimate influencing factors • Can these factors be changed?

  6. 43 Fatal Crashes in 1997 • Sequence of events from: • GDOT Database information • Police report • Field Inspection • Pictures

  7. Utility Pole Fatal Crashes

  8. Majority involve: Alcohol/Drugs Lack of SeatBelt Use Male Drivers 35-45 mph Roads Metropolitan Areas Typical Utility Pole Crash

  9. Curbed 88% met 1.5’ dist. 25% met CRC Non-curbed 33% met AASHTO Curbed 83% met 1.5’ dist. 42% met CRC Non-curbed 52% met AASHTO Pole LocationsComparisons 1997 DATA 1998 DATA

  10. Crossover

  11. Curbed-38% CO 50% met CRC Non-curbed-56% CO 59% met AASHTO Curbed - 33% CO 50% met CRC Non-curbed- 36% CO 78% met AASHTO Pole LocationsComparisons 1997 DATA 1998 DATA

  12. Georgia Experience • Curbed Roadways recognized • Effect over time (30 years) • Apparent benefits already realized • …More Work to be Done!!

  13. GUCC Clear Roadside Committee (CRC) • CRC Policy: • guidelines for curbed roadways • 30 year relocation & mitigation plan

  14. Curbed Roadways • 12 ft desirable • 6 ft minimum at 35 mph or less • 8 ft minimum for >35 and <45 mph

  15. Relocation Plan • Crash history • 3 year timeframe • 3 mile stretches of road • State & US Routes

  16. Move certain number of poles each year Developed variance policy for joint-use situations Give and Take Utilities GDOT

  17. Georgia Power Program • Committed to relocate 179 poles per year. Total includes poles relocated on DOT projects that did not meet clear roadside. • Continuation of program started in 1979

  18. Georgia Power Agreed to • Goal is to have all poles meet clear roadside in 30 years. • Relocate poles hit by a vehicle when possible. DOT to provide accident information.

  19. DOT Agreed • Not require relocation of poles when only adding facilities or reconducting only. • Allow for replacement of poles in same location for maintenance.

  20. 20 Sections with Most Utility Pole Crashes - 1995 to 1997 data 1 2

  21. 20

  22. Crash history • Reduction in observed crashes • More extensive before-after study needed

  23. Crash Rates • Crash/AADT • Observed Reduction in crash rate

  24. 20

  25. Stewart Avenue/Metropolitan Parkway

  26. What can we do? • Design jobs to meet clear roadside design • Review accidents to see if we can avoid future occurrences • Be aware of poles placed in apex of curves

  27. Review Jobs to Ensure • Replacement of existing poles meet clear roadside where possible. • Accidents involving fatalities are investigated to determine if pole can be relocated.

  28. New Program Georgia DOT

  29. Clear Roadside Committee Mission Statement A committee formed to develop a comprehensive clear roadside safety program that will improve the safe and efficient use of highway rights of way for the traveling public in the State of Georgia.  Once developed, the committee will communicate the benefits of the program to all utilities statewide and strive for participation by all utilities that occupy highway rights of way.

  30. What Are We Attempting to Achieve • Guidelines for pole placement on rural and urban shoulders • Reducing facilities and injuries by joint efforts between Utilities and GDOT • Bring attention to site specific safety considerations

  31. What do the Feds think? • FHA Program Guide: Utility Relocation and Accommodation on Federal-Aid Highway Projects, Sixth Edition, Section 645.209(k): • The highway agency shall initiate corrective measures. • The intent for each State to work with pole owners. • Systematically remove, relocate, or mitigate hazardously located utility poles.

  32. Why is it Needed. • Over 3 million utility poles statewide • On average of 50 deaths and approx. 3400 injuries each year

  33. Pole Accident Rates 1995 - 2003

  34. Why is it Needed. • Over 3 million utility poles statewide • On average of 50 deaths and approx. 3400 injuries each year • Georgia ranks 13th in Pole Fatality Accidents

  35. Accidents • Information will be sent to the pole owner for their review

  36. Permitting (New Facilities) • All new facilities (in rural areas) will follow the Roadside Design Guide, current edition, published by AASHTO as a guide in determining current clear roadside requirements. • Curb Section - Where there are curbed sections the utilities are to be located as far as practical behind the back of curb. The following is the minimum lateral clearances based on the respective posted speed limits: • Minimum Lateral ClearancePosted Speed Limit (mph) • 12’ 45 • 8’ 35 to 40 • 6’ 0 to 30 • The lateral clearance is measured from the back of curb to the face of pole. However, in all of the above cases, the facility shall not encroach upon current ADA sidewalk clearances.

  37. Proactive Efforts • The DOT would assist in funding for the relocations of poles • $5,000,000 of safety funds • 50% assistance

  38. Accidents involving pole fatalities will be sent to the pole owner • for his review. If the pole was the determining factor, the poles in • the area in question will be addressed immediately. • Major rehab projects where 33% of poles are being replaced or added • the pole owner will be required to relocate all the poles in the permit • request to current clear roadside requirements. • Where accident data for a pole line shows an average of 1 accident • per mile per year for the last 3 years (with none being a fatality), and • where the pole location doesn’t meet clear roadside requirements; • the pole owner will be required to relocate that section of line or use • approved mitigation methods. • All new facilities will be required to meet current clear roadside • requirements shown in the DOT Accommodation Manual. • Proactive effort by the participating utilities to address high accident • location in their service area. The DOT would assist in funding • relocations of poles based on accident when safety funds are available.

  39. Current Schedule • First Project - CSSTP-0007-00(072) has currently been identified • GDOT working on Guidelines and Agreements • Utilities working on cost estimates (starting October) • Project set for January 2005

  40. Future Planning • Try to always set back during maintenance activities • Look at the type and number of poles utilized • Location, Location, Location

More Related