Winter 2006 Volume 12 Issue 1
Passive optical splitter: A New York-based company has introduced a passive optical splitter. The device allows transmission of video, audio and data signals from one fiber-optic transmitter to multiple receiver units simultaneously by 'splitting' the optical power across multiple fibers. The splitter works with all Pure Digital
Fiberlink and Fiberlink one-way systems and the company claims that it offers a cost-effective solution for point-to-multipoint signal distribution over short distances. The unit is available with two or four outputs. Go to www.itsinternational.com/products/article.cfm?recordID=1347 for more information. You may be required to register to log onto the site.
Automotive safety the next major battleground for carmakers: According to findings from international market research firm ABI Research, a new war among automakers is on the verge of breaking out.
The main focus of this battle will be centered on safety as the key differentiator for vehicle lines. "There are a host of cutting-edge safety systems in varying stages of development that will alter the consumer's perception of what makes for a safe vehicle,” notes ABI Research Senior Automotive Analyst, Robert LaGuerra.
“What is interesting is that automakers disagree about how they define a safe vehicle.” LaGuerra adds that automakers are tackling the issue of safety from varying perspectives. From electronic stability control (ESC), adaptive cruise control and telematics systems to blind-spot detection, lane-departure warning, driver monitoring and pedestrian-based safety systems, all will be used in some combination to make for a safer vehicle.
Automakers such as Honda and Mercedes are among the first to introduce systems promoting pedestrian safety, while GM may be the first automaker to introduce both ESC and reactionary safety systems such as
OnStar as standard equipment across all its North American models.
ABI Research claims its series of automotive safety studies is the most comprehensive offer available.
Each of the studies: "Vehicle Safety Systems," "Automotive Radar/Lidar Systems," "Driver Monitoring Systems," "Automotive-Based Pedestrian Safety Systems" and "Automotive Electronics Systems" covers the industry from a unique perspective and is designed to give all industry players a deep understanding of the critical issues and market trends.
ABI Research cautions that there are still issues to be overcome, including high systems costs, the ability for on-board safety systems to communicate, decisions about how much control should be taken away from the driver in an emergency, plus software and processor limitations in assessing an emergency situation on a real-time basis. ABI Research suggests that further systems integration will not only enhance the level of safety but also help reduce overall system costs.
Freedom to roam: Every country within the European Union (EU) brings with it its own unique culture and domestic vehicle manufacturers. But while the dream of true mutual understanding is still far from being realized, it is entirely possible that very soon all cars will be able to communicate using one language; this is the aim of research being carried out in the field of vehicle-to-vehicle communication. The Car-2-Car Communication Consortium (C2C-CC), a non-profit collaboration between Audi, BMW, DaimlerChrysler, Fiat, Ren-
(Continued on page 3)
Published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers
1099 14th Sreet NW, Suite 300 West, Washington, DC 20005-3438
Telephone 202-289-0222, FAX 202-289-7722
- David E. Woosley, P.E., Editor

I hope you have or have had a good holiday season, depending on when this newsletter is delivered to you. I want to remind you about an important new membership change for 2006. You will get to choose one membership in a council of your choice when you pay your 2006 dues. ITE is going to charge all members $7 to join a council. This will result in a decrease in your membership costs, as you are already paying
$20 to be a member of the Traffic Engineering Council (TENC). I am guessing that this change will dramatically increase our membership from 1894 members in 2005 to over 5000 members in 2006. The TENC Board is looking at ways to improve membership benefits and services because of this increase.
The TENC works hard to provide you benefits for your membership. I described some committee activities in the last three newsletters. I will highlight six additional committees in this newsletter: Awards,
SCORP, Secretary, Policy, Public Agency and Review Technical Reports.
The Awards Committee submits the TENC candidates each year before the ITE Annual Meeting. The committee selects the Best Traffic Engineering Technical Paper presented at the Annual Meeting, the Best
Technical Product produced by the TENC each year and the Best TIP article published in the newsletter each year. If you have any questions about the Awards Committee, please contact Karen Kahl
( kkahl@rkkengineers.com
) or Richard Ryan ( rfryan72@aol.com
).
The Standing Committee on Recommended Practices (SCORP) is represented by one member of the
TENC. SCORP reviews ITE recommended practices and recommends whether ITE should continue, update, or discontinue each recommended practice. SCORP makes an annual report to the ITE board on the status of ITE recommended practices. If you have any questions about ITE recommended practices, please contact Beverly Kuhn at b-kuhn@tamu.edu
.
The secretary for the TENC takes and records minutes for each meeting and publishes the minutes.
The minutes are published on the ITE Web site for the TENC in the meetings section. The section includes minutes for executive board meetings from 2001 to present. The secretary is Troy Peoples
( tpeople@stantec.com
).
Our policy liaison sits on the ITE Policy and Legislative Committee and represents the interests of the
TENC. The Policy and Legislative Committee recommends changes to the policies of ITE and helps the ITE board recommend ways to educate Congress about matters of highway safety and operations for all modes of transportation. If you have any questions about ITE policies, please contact Russell Brownlee
( rbrownlee@ibigroup.com
).
Our public agency liaison represents TENC on the Public Agency Council. This position helps the Public Agency Council on issues of interest to traffic engineers. The Public Agency Council was formed to help traffic engineers manage their departments more efficiently. If you have any questions about the Public
Agency Council, please contact John Davis ( jadavis@hntb.com
).
The Review of Technical Reports Committee is responsible for quality control on technical reports developed by the TENC. The committee reviews the reports and makes the final recommendation to ITE to approve the technical reports. The committee tries to find experts in the field of the research to do the reviews. If you would like to help, please contact Jeff Paniati ( Jeff.Paniati@fhwa.dot.gov
).
If you reread the last four newsletters, including this issue, you will see that all the committee activities benefit and service your membership. ( http://www.ite.org/councils/TENC/newsletters.asp
)
If you are interested, please get involved in your profession. The TENC has many needs for your expertise and you will get more out of your ITE membership. Contact the committee chairs with your questions or interest in volunteering.
If you have any ideas on how to improve member services, please e-mail me
( martin.bretherton@gwinnettcounty.com
). Hope to see you in Washington, DC for the TRB Meeting.
2 • traffic engineering council UPDATE • Winter 2006

(
Tips and Trends
Continued from page 1) ault and Volkswagen, was established to work out a standardized language. Among others Opel, Honda,
NEC and Philips will join by the end of 2005. Compatibility is a major goal because leaders realize that being able to have cars from different manufacturers communicate with each other will bring major benefits to the customers.
A first step by 2008 is to work out the communication standard (effectively, the “grammar”); then by
2010 the next step is to allocate the required license-free frequency band (the “medium”). However, one of the main challenges facing the engineers involved is to consolidate the results obtained from the many different Car-2-Car (C2C) projects and initiatives funded by the EU itself or national governmental bodies. To date, the research in Europe has concentrated on C2C, as it is perceived to have two major advantages over
Car2Infrastructure (C2I) communication for market introduction in Europe, it does not require external infrastructure and will be available on minor roads.
A very promising safety application, which supports that view, is WILLWARN (Wireless Local Danger
Warning). This focuses on warning the driver before he or she reaches a potentially dangerous point on the road. Obviously, alerts can be generated by some form of infrastructure positioned at danger points such as work zones; however, the main objective is to build an onboard communication system which detects a hazard as a result of the driver's actions or by using sensor technology to immediately generate a standardized message. This message is distributed either directly to other vehicles in the vicinity or via multi-hop routing to those farther away. For example, the range of hazards causing severe accidents can be classified into obstacles beyond a bend (such as a collision or the end of a traffic jam); reduced grip (because of mud or ice on a rural road); or reduced visibility (due to fog or heavy rain).
At present, a lot of effort is going into achieving the full functionality of WILLWARN based only on
GPS, without a digital map or navigation system. This is to address the low market penetration of navigation systems in Europe, as well as non-standardized mapping. The required technique, known as GPS chain matching, uses the vehicle's current and most recent stored positions to determine whether a hazard is on the road ahead, on a parallel or crossing street, or even in a different direction entirely.
In July a meeting took place between WILLWARN and NOW (Network On Wheels), a national communications project funded by the German Ministry for Education and Research. It resulted in a corporate taskforce that will pull together the hardware and routing specifications of both projects. The key aspect here is to solve the routing problems for rural roads, which typically experience low traffic densities, as well as for overcrowded highways. This results in some very different communication requirements. In a sparse network, messages have to be stored and forwarded to every vehicle in the vicinity to keep the information alive and within a certain area; bandwidth is sufficient, as there is a small amount of communication going on. A congested highway with three lanes in each direction can have as many as 600 communication partners within a 500m section. Without some form of regulation, this will lead to a breakdown in communication.
One possible solution is to adjust the power of any transmission to make it flexible and able to adjust to the number of vehicles in the locality. By reducing the communication radius the number of vehicles within reach is also reduced.
A highly scalable application that works perfectly well without infrastructure and even given low penetration rates is SOTIS (Self-Organizing Traffic Information System). Being developed in the predecessor of
NOW called FleetNET; it concentrates on informing the driver about the traffic situation on the road ahead.
It is now being discussed within C2C-CC as a promising traffic efficiency and mobility application. Compared to the flexible transmission power solution, the SOTIS system uses a different algorithm to adapt to the number of vehicles in the vicinity: if the number of vehicles within reach is growing, then the time gap between the recurrent sent messages containing the traffic information will also be enlarged. The amount of bandwidth consumed therefore remains almost constant.
Centralized traffic information systems like radio broadcasting or traffic message channel (TMC) are not very detailed, because of limited bandwidth, and the intervals between updates are quite large—on average, information is 20 to 50 minutes old before it reaches the driver. Therefore, SOTIS uses a decentralized
(Continued on page 4)
3 • traffic engineering council UPDATE • Winter 2006

(
Tips and Trends
Continued from page 3) approach, resulting in a new quality of service. Every equipped vehicle analyzes the traffic situation individually by collecting messages sent out by other vehicles in the vicinity. The messages sent include the speed and direction of the originator and a database that reflects the results of the traffic analysis. This leads to a more detailed view, which is transmitted to the vehicles heading in the opposite direction. In every “hop,” only the latest information about each cell on each street is retained. Cars farther away can therefore be notified with an acceptable delay.
Imagine hearing via a traffic news service about a traffic jam on the highway ahead. You decide to drive off the highway and onto a diversion. What you cannot know is that the jam is already breaking up but the diversion is becoming congested. This was not mentioned on the traffic news because the detour is along rural roads and the information pertaining to the highway was, simply, old. SOTIS would have offered more detailed information about the local traffic situation and an intelligent navigation system connected to it would advise you to stay on the highway.
The trivial aspect of communication needing at least two partners brings C2C to a very crucial point: to have a significant benefit, an application-dependent system penetration rate is needed. This varies from 2 percent for some mobility applications like SOTIS up to 100 percent for the reliable safety of all vehicles. In order to increase the penetration rate the OEMs must work out a strategy for market introduction, which helps the driver to appreciate the systems, even if there are not enough equipped vehicles around. One possibility is to add some kind of entertainment or comfort application, which will work from the outset on the architecture of the C2C system. Typically, this would involve a Car2Home or Car2PersonalEquipment functionality, connecting the car with the environment in a sense of ubiquitous networking. Here, governments could also contribute by putting in place appropriate laws.
Adapted from article published in
, September/October 2005 (Telematics Systems).
ITS Australia makes a powerful case: ITS Australia, which hosted a 2-day Smart Demo 2005 conference at the end of September in Adelaide, used the event and the widespread domestic media coverage it attracted to drive home a powerful message about the need for ITS technologies to delegates and the general public.
Terrorism attacks claim about 2,000 lives each year, ITS Australia’s executive director Brent Stafford told the conference. More than 300 delegates attended the event from eight countries including high-level delegates from the United States, the European Commission and Japan. “Globally, road accidents claim about 1.2 million lives annually—that’s approximately 3,300 each day—with another 22–34 million injuries recorded,” Stafford pointed out.
“Significant improvements have been made on a global scale in national and international security measures and that is totally appropriate in the environment in which we live today,” Stafford said, adding that there has been huge collaboration across all levels of government, as well as investment in new systems and technologies, to increase national security. We have become too complacent about the number of people being killed or seriously maimed through road accidents, which account for about one percent of all deaths in the world,” Stafford said. He pointed out that Australia seems to accept that each day five people
(Continued on page 5)
We’re searching for a chair to lead the technical committee responsible for updating the recommended practice on
. If you are interested, please contact Beverly
T. Kuhn, Ph.D., P.E., Division Head/Research Engineer, System Management Division-Transportation Operations Group, Texas Transportation Institute, e-mail: B-Kuhn@TTIMAIL.TAMU.EDU
.
4 • traffic engineering council UPDATE • Winter 2006

(
Tips and Trends
Continued from page 4) will be killed and another 60 seriously injured in road accidents.
“People should have a fundamental right not to have to die just because they are on our roads.
New ‘intelligent vehicle’ technologies available today offer improvements in security, while also contributing positively to better safety on our roads. We always encourage security and all forms of health initiatives to help reduce deaths. However there are now real opportunities to reduce the enormous social impact of death and injury caused through road accidents.”
Sign Fonts: If you're looking for a way to graphically represent a proposed sign, without getting into the full design process (GuideSign), here's a link to a shareware site with the full range of highway sign fonts: www.triskele.com/fonts/index.html
.
I've used these in PowerPoint and other drawing programs to get a feel of how the sign would look, and then pass it on to the designers and fabricators. Again, these aren't a replacement for
GuideSign or the sheeting cutter programs, but they are quick and simple to use.
Submitted by Peter J. Yauch, P.E., Director of Public Works/Transportation, Pinellas County Department of Public Works, 440 Court Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756, 727-464-3364.
Traffic Signal Timing and Phasing Policy: For those of you who have always wanted to establish a definitive policy for traffic signal timing and phasing, access the following Web site and download the 20page policy developed by the Metropolitan Government of Nashville (Tennessee, USA) and Davidson
County Department of Public Works, Engineering Division: ftp://ftp.nashville.gov/web/pw/ pw_timing_phasing.pdf
Items addressed in the policy, as adopted on October 1, 2004, include vehicle clearance intervals, pedestrian control features and minimum vehicle green times and left-turn signal phasing and split-phase timing operation guidelines. Also included are several figures and tables that delineate or summarize the intended policies and guidelines.
Submitted by Bob Weithofer, P.E., Transportation Manager, Robert.Weithofer@nashville.gov
. Bob says to contact him with any comments or suggestions as “We are always looking for feedback and ways to improve what we are doing.”
Loop Calculations: Also from a recent exchange of listserv messages was a request for methods to check the adequacy and efficiency of various detector loop configurations. I developed a quick and dirty spreadsheet to help me with such determinations. It can be downloaded from ITE at www.ite.org/ councils/TENC/LOOP.xls
. Please note that the materials included are not endorsed by ITE but are being provided solely as a source of information.
Enter your variables in the columns without formulas or as a replacement for blue numbers. View the results in the right column. The formulas were taken from the Reno A&E Web site. Go to www.renoae.com
, then click on “Support” in the left column, then click on “Loops” and finally on “App.
Notes.” Go through the four links listed for all you can possibly want to know about detector loops and their installation.
Contact regarding the spreadsheet. For questions about detector sensors and the application notes, contact Reno A&E at support@renoae.com
.
Pedestrian Safer: This question was recently posed on the TENC listserv by David J. Weaver of the City and County of Denver, CO, USA: Is a pedestrian safer crossing a busy arterial at a signalized mid-block location as opposed to at a signalized intersection? The fact that there are less conflicting movements would indicate that they likely would be safer at the mid-block location, but I'm interested in hard data.
This edited reply from one of my infrequent tip suppliers: Not hard data, only this first-person anecdote. I faced this question when laying out the alignment for a new trail and needed to cross a two-
(Continued on page 6)
5 • traffic engineering council UPDATE • Winter 2006

(
Tips and Trends
Continued from page 5) lane undivided street. I could have put the crossing at a frenetic signalized intersection with a four-lane undivided street, where the two-lane street had turn lanes that the trail would have to cross. Lots of turning movements, and drivers' attention while turning would be focused elsewhere than on trail users, such as looking for oncoming motorized traffic.
Instead I moved it a few hundred feet away to a mid-block location in a calm section of the two-lane street, where I could put a wide spot in the road to accommodate a raised median pedestrian refuge in the center. There, trail users must cross only one (11') lane of traffic at a time and can safely wait in the generously-sized pedestrian refuge for a comfortable gap before continuing on to cross the opposing lane. Drivers' attention will be focused ahead, where the pedestrians are. Street lighting, median gore pavement markings, enhanced crosswalk markings and possibly in-pavement warning lights (IPWL) will help target value. The crossing is simple for all users, compared to the complexity of the signalized intersection. The mid-block location is far enough away to not interfere with queues for the signalized intersection. Being only a two-lane crossing with pedestrian refuge, I don't expect to need a signal there, except maybe a pedestrian pushbutton to activate the IPWL. Now, as to whether any of this would work at 6,000', I can't say.
Submitted by Ken Sides, City of Clearwater, FL, USA. Contact him at 727-562-4792 or ksides@clearwater-fl.com
.
School Safety: School safety is a continuing interest to our profession. Three new references are shown below.
The risk of a death or injury on the trip to school varies by mode of transportation, with the highest death and injury rates for children in passenger vehicles. For more information see TR News 237, pg 22–24,
March-April 2005.
The North Carolina DOT has developed a Web site to help design how a school handles the traffic based on site parameters. It is the responsibility of the local school officials to contain all school generated traffic on campus and maintain a safe and efficient student loading operation. The intent of the calculator is to provide a conservative estimate of the traffic generated, on an average school day, based on the maximum buildout of the school student population. Calculations reflect the minimum number of vehicles expected and does not take into consideration high traffic demand days and/or special events. To provide maximum safety for pedestrians and motorists during peak demands, the school is expected to have an alternative traffic flow plan that will prevent school related vehicles from presenting a hazard along nearby public streets.
Go to the Web site and click on “schools” and then click on “calculator.” The Web site is www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruction/traffic/congestion/CM/msta/default.htm
Utah DOT has a supplement of the MUTCD, Part 7 called “Traffic Control for School Zones.” The standard has a section on applications, engineering studies required, private schools, charter schools, colleges and universities, school crossing control, school routes and other sections. You can view this document at http://www.udot.utah.gov/index.php?m+c&tid=578
.
Speed Cameras: The U.K. government recently funded a study on speed cameras. The study looked at crash reports from 29 highway construction zones between November 2001 to July 2003. The study compared the construction zone crashes with crashes from control sites without construction.
The study results found that speed cameras increased injury crashes by 55 percent in construction zones and by 31 percent in areas without construction. Police patrols reduced injury crashes by 27 percent in construction zones and 10 percent on roads without construction.
(Continued on page 7)
6 • traffic engineering council UPDATE • Winter 2006

Your membership in the Traffic Engineering Council will enable you to stay in synch with the latest advancements and evolving issues of concern to your area expertise. Equally important, your membership also enables you to play a leadership role in the types of advancements made, and the identification and resolution of ITE issues of concern at both the local and national levels. The geographical diversity among
ITE members provides a unique forum for the exchange of individual peer experiences and the evaluation of best practices.
As a member of the Traffic Engineering Council, in addition to receiving the newsletter addressing current technical and non-technical issues, you are able to stay-up-to-date by proactively participating in:
Internet discussion groups, where matters of mutual concern are addressed (Contact Zachary Pleasant
(zpleasant@ite.org) to join the council list serv); Working committees that focus on council related topics
(See the listing of council projects at http://www.ite.org/councils/projects/default.asp
for more information); and scheduled council meetings at the ITE Technical Conference and Exhibit, the Annual Meeting and Exhibit and during TRB Week.
TRB Week Schedule: http://www.ite.org/meetcon/trb.asp
Technical Conference and Exhibit Schedule: http://www.ite.org/Conference/
(
Tips and Trends
Continued from page 6)
The study was titled “Safety Performance of Traffic Management at Major Motorway Road Works” and was studied by Transport Research Laboratories. The study was published on Jan 1, 2004. You can purchase the paper at www.trl.co.uk/store/report_detail.asp?srid=2746 .
There was also an article published on a Web site dedicated to the politics of driving. The Web site is www.thenewspaper.com/news/06/602.asp
. Apparently, the U.K. study was funded but the results of the study were hidden from the public for a period of time.
Work Zone Rule: FHWA has published an Implementation Guide to help work-zone practitioners implement the recently updated rule on Work Zone Safety and Mobility (23 CFR 630 Subpart J). The guide titled
“Implementing the Rule on Work Zone Safety and Mobility” can be viewed and downloaded from www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/resources/final_rule.htm
.
The guide provides a general overview of the rule; differences between the updated and former rule; and guidance to help implement the rule.
The guide will also be available by the end of 2005 in hard copy and on CD-ROM. Contact Tracy
Scriba, FHWA Work Zone Team Technical Program Manager, tracy.sciber@fhwa.dot.gov
.
7 • traffic engineering council UPDATE • Winter 2006

Dear Editor,
In response to a recent TENC listserv question regarding a corridor analysis project involving roundabouts and the use of SimTraffic, the following was submitted: We have done a cursory look at
SimTraffic's ability to model roundabouts, and I offer these observations for your consideration. These tests are unofficial and have not been supported by any funded research effort; dissenting views and/or experiences are welcome.
We tested single-lane capacity by loading up a subject approach beyond capacity and then measured the outflow against a range of circulatory flows. For single-lane roundabouts, SimTraffic appears to produce higher estimates of capacity at low circulating flows (<600 veh/hr) than either the FHWA urban compact or FHWA single-lane model (at zero circulating flow, SimTraffic produces an entry capacity of
~1600 veh/hr). At moderate to high circulating flows, the model appears to be in the same range as the two FHWA models. We haven't checked SimTraffic against U.S. field data at this time.
Regarding multilane roundabouts, I respectfully disagree that "cars from either lane can make any direction turn." The logic for lane selection is (or should be) the same for roundabouts as for any other intersection: for a two-lane approach with two receiving lanes on the far side, you turn left from the left lane, right from the right lane, and go through from either lane, unless traffic control devices dictate otherwise. The MUTCD is in the process of being updated to better clarify this operation, including providing examples of the use of circulatory and exit striping to guide motorists in this fashion.
In SimTraffic, the user can set the number of circulatory lanes (as "# of lanes"). This is an intersection-wide parameter. The default striping that appears when the number of circulatory lanes is set to
“2” is a concentric ring. By default, only vehicles in the outside lane may exit (unmarked lane configuration of TH and TH/RT). The user can, however, set the exit next to each approach to be a two-lane exit.
For example, if the user wants a two-lane exit on the west leg, one sets "two-lane exit" for the eastbound approach. Note that when this is set, it sets an unmarked lane configuration of TH/RT and RT on the circulatory roadway in front of this exit. Graphically this is shown by adding an exit stripe in addition to the concentric circulatory stripe.
Fundamentally, SimTraffic appears to assume that the roundabout operates as a series of Tintersections, with a section of circulatory roadway between legs (visually, this looks very much like an urban compact style with perpendicular entries). Therefore, each downstream exit is considered independent of the upstream entry. However, at most roundabouts, the paths of an entry and immediately following exit cross each other, rather than join and separate. As a result of this assumption, it appears that SimTraffic cannot accurately model the normal lane configuration for a standard double-lane roundabout with double-lane entries and double-lane exits on all approaches.
Due to these findings, we haven't attempted to check the capacities that could be derived by Sim-
Traffic for a double-lane roundabout.
Lee A. Rodegerdts, P.E.
Portland, OR, USA
The second in a series of reports,
, is now available. This report provides a snapshot of traffic congestion in the United States by summarizing recent trends. The report also offers a number of suggested operational solutions for transportation agencies to incorporate to help ease the growth of congestion and increase the reliability of travel times across the nation. The report can be found at www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion_report/index.htm
.
This information was provided by Shelley J. Row, P.E., PTOE, Associate Executive Director for
Technical Programs, Institute of Transportation Engineers.
8 • traffic engineering council UPDATE • Winter 2006

W e
b Se
miin arrs
ITE Web seminars are available to assist you in meeting your professional development needs.The single site registration fee allows you to maximize training opportunities by allowing as many employees as you like to view the Web seminar of your choice at the designated time.
Please visit the ITE Web site at www.ite.org/education/webinars.asp to learn more about ITE’s Web seminars and to find answers to frequently asked questions.
TENC
Name ______________________________________________ Mailing Address is:
K
Home
K
Business
Title ________________________________________________ ITE Member Number ____________________________________________
Employer ____________________________________________ E-mail ________________________________________________________
Street Address ________________________________________ Telephone and Fax ______________________________________________
City/State or Province__________________________________ Postal Code and Country ______________________________________
Web Seminar Offerings Time ITE Members Nonmembers Additional Subtotal
$250 $275
Quiz*
No. $25 each
$ $ Tuesday, February 7
Pedestrian Accessibility: Introduction and Context
Thursday, February 9
Introduction to Systems Engineering
Tuesday, February 21
Managing High Technology Projects
Tuesday, February 28
Transportation Planning: Site Impact Analysis
Thursday, March 2
Signal Timing Fundamentals
Tuesday, March 7
Signal Timing for Congested Conditions**
Tuesday, March 28
Ethics for the Transportation Professional
Thursday, March 30
Innovative Bicycle Treatments
Web Briefing Offerings
Wednesday, February 1
Traffic Calming: What’s Working,What’s Not
Wednesday, February 22
Revised ADA Guidelines
Wednesday, March 22
Transportation Operations & Emergency
Management
2:00–3:30 p.m., ET
12:00–1:30 p.m., ET
12:00–1:30 p.m., ET
12:00–1:30 p.m., ET
2:00–3:30 p.m., ET
2:00–3:30 p.m., ET
12:00–1:30 p.m., ET
2:00–3:30 p.m., ET
Time
12:00–1:30 p.m., ET
2:00–3:30 p.m., ET
12:00–1:30 p.m., ET
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$275
$275
$275
$275
$275
$275
$275
ITE Members Nonmembers
$75 $75
$75
$75
$75
$75
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
* Access to one quiz is included in the registration fee.There is an additional $25 fee for each additional quiz taken at registrant’s site.Web briefings are not eligible for CEU/PDHs, therefore there are no quizzes.
** It is recommended, but not required, that participants take the Signal Timing Fundamentals Web Seminar prior to this course.
Prepayment is required. Make check payable to ITE or provide American Express, MasterCard, or Visa information.
All remittances are due in U.S. dollars.
ITE does not accept the Discover Card.
$
Method of Payment: K Check (payable to ITE) K American Express K MasterCard K Visa
Card Number ______________________________ Name on Card __________________________ Expiration Date __________
Signature ________________________________________________________ Date ____________________________________
If you need registration assistance, call Nicola Williams at ITE Headquarters at +1 202-289-0222 ext. 155 or e-mail nwilliams@ite.org.
Complete this form and send with your payment to:
Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1099 14th St., NW, Suite 300 West,Washington, DC 20005-3438 USA
For faster service using a credit card, fax your application to the attention of Nicola Williams at +1 202-289-7722.
If you fax, please do not mail a duplicate.
Registration and payment must be received NO LATER THAN 3 days prior to seminar.
TENC0 106

QTY.
PUBLICATION
Professional Development Module: Traffic Signal Change Intervals: CD-ROM
Professional Development Module: MUTCD 2000 and 2003 Revisions: CD-ROM
Professional Development Module: Engineering Intersections to Reduce Red-Light Running: CD-ROM
Professional Development Module: Managing High Technology Projects in Transportation: CD-ROM
Professional Development Module: Introduction to Systems Engineering: CD-ROM
Professional Development Module: Intervalos de Despeje de Transito: CD-ROM
Professional Development Module: Fundamentals of Road Weather Management: CD-ROM
Professional Development Module: Trip Generation: Fundamentals and Applications: CD-ROM
Professional Development Module: Trip Generation: Advanced Concepts and Application: CD-ROM
Professional Development Module: Ingenieria en Intersecciones para Reducir la Incidencia de
Pasarse la Luz Roja: CD-ROM
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices—2003 Edition
Perfect bound book
Looseleaf
Binder with tabs
Trip Generation, 7th Edition
Trip Generation Handbook, 2nd Edition
Transportation and Land Development
Transportation Planning Handbook, 2nd Edition
Traffic Engineering Handbook, 5th Edition
Access Management Manual
Parking Generation, 3rd Edition
Guidelines for the Activation, Modification, or Removal of Traffic Control Systems
Innovative Bicycle Treatments
Determining Vehicle Signal Change and Clearance Intervals
Toolbox on Intersection Safety and Design
Signal Timing Practices and Procedures: State of the Practice
PUBL. NO.
CD-024
CD-025
COST SUBTOTAL
$75 ($100)
$75 ($100)
$
$
CD-026 $75 ($100) $
CD-029 $75 ($100) $
CD-030 $75 ($100) $
CD-032 $75 ($100) $
CD-033
CD-035
CD-036
$75 ($100)
$75 ($100)
$75 ($100)
$
$
$
CD-037 $75 ($100) $
MUTCD-1A $70 ($70)
MUTCD-2A $70 ($70)
MUTCD-3A
IR-016E
$15 ($15) $
$225 ($275) $
RP-028B $70 ($85)
TB-015 $80 ($100)
$
$
TB-011A $90 ($110)
TB-010A $90 ($110)
LP-658 $80 ($100)
IR-034B $95 ($125)
$
$
$
$
RP-034 $25 ($30)
IR-114 $35 ($45)
IR-073
IR-117
$10 ($15)
$35 ($40)
IR-116 $20 ($25)
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Canadian Orders Only: Add 7% goods and services tax BEFORE shipping/handling.
(GST Registration Number R 130 188 667)
Regular Shipping: U.S. & Canada: Add 12% of the subtotal (minimum US$7);
Outside U.S. & Canada: Add 17% of the subtotal (minimum US$12)
Expedited Shipping (U.S. & Canada): Sent same day via next day air.
Add US$35 to regular shipping/handling charges noted above.
Expedited Shipping (Outside U.S. & Canada): Various shipping methods are available.
E-mail kwallington@ite.org or fax +1 202-289-7722 for a shipping quotation.
$
$
$
$
TOTAL $
NAME
TITLE
ORGANIZATION
STREET ADDRESS
CITY
COUNTRY
STATE OR PROVINCE
TELEPHONE FAX
Prre pa ym en eq uiirre send with order. Prices subject to change without notice. Check Visa MasterCard American Express
POSTAL CODE
ACCOUNT NUMBER
NAME OF CARD HOLDER
SIGNATURE
IIn sttiittu
EXP. DATE
Trra ns orrtta n E giin errs 09 9 1 4tth Sttrre ett,, N W,, S uiitte 30 0 W stt,, W sh gtto n,, D C 2 00 5--3 43 8 U A;; T ell:: + 1 2 02 89 22 2;; w ww
Fax order to ITE: +1 202-289-7722
PDMCD06

1099 14th Street NW, Suite 300W, Washington, DC 20005-3438; Phone +1 202-289-0222; www.ite.org
This handbook presents the fundamental concepts and practices related to freeway and interchange geometric design commensurate with the state-of-the-art. While it is recognized that geometric design procedures for freeways and interchanges may vary among various agencies, this handbook sets forth the techniques and procedures successfully applied on numerous constructed or reconstructed projects. The handbook focuses on geometric and operational characteristics of freeways and interchanges including toll facilities and HOV/managed lanes. This handbook is the first in a series of three geometric design handbooks to be published by ITE. The others will focus on rural and urban geometric design.
ITE’s Freeway and Interchange Geometric Design Handbook is a companion to AASHTO’s
A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 5th Edition (Greenbook).
Order both books and save now.
This fifth edition of AASHTO's “Greenbook” contains the latest design practices in universal use as the standard for highway geometric design and has been updated to reflect the latest research on superelevation and side friction factors as presented in
NCHRP Report 439. New exhibits in Chapter 3 will help designers to quickly and accurately determine the side friction factor used for horizontal curve design, the superelevation rates for various curve radii, and the minimum radii with normal crown for each of the five maximum superelevation rates.
Please call Ken Wallington at +1 202-289-0222 ext. 130 or Sallie Dollins at ext. 149 for special pricing on the purchase of 5 or more copies.
QTY.
TITLE OR ITEM PUBL. NO.
UNIT PRICE
Member (Nonmember)
SUBTOTAL
NEW!
Freeway and Interchange Geometric Design Handbook TB-017 $95 ($125) $
A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 5th Edition LP-323C $120 ($145) $
A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 5th Edition (CD-ROM)
SET: Freeway and Interchange GDH and AASHTO Greenbook (Savings of $30)
SET:
Freeway and Interchange GDH and AASHTO Greenbook CD-ROM
(Savings of $50)
CD-014A
GP-003
GP-004
$192 ($217)
$185 ($240)
$237 ($292) $
CANADIAN ORDERS ONLY: Add 7% goods and services tax BEFORE shipping/handling. (GST Registration Number R 130 188 667)
REGULAR SHIPPING: U.S. and Canada: Add 12% of the subtotal (minimum US$7);
Outside U.S. and Canada: Add 17% of the subtotal (minimum US$12).
EXPEDITED SHIPPING (U.S. and Canada): Sent same day via next day air. ADD US$35 to regular shipping/handling charges noted above.
$
$
$
$
$
EXPEDITED SHIPPING (Outside U.S. and Canada): Various shipping methods are available.
Contact the ITE Publications Department for a shipping quotation.
$
Name
Title
Agency or Firm
Address
City State or Province
Country
Telephone Number Fax Number
Postal Code
Payment: Prepayment is required. Make check payable to ITE or provide credit card information (MasterCard, Visa, or American Express). Purchase orders are accepted; send with order. Prices subject to change without notice.
❍ Purchase Order/Check for $_______________ enclosed.
(Send with order.)
Charge my:
❍
MasterCard
❍
Visa
❍
American Express
Cardholder’s Name
Signature
Card Number
Offer expires January 31, 2006.
Expiration Date
TENC 1205

W. Martin Bretherton Jr., Chair
Gwinnett County, GA
Martin.Bretherton@gwinnettcounty.com
Beverly Thompson Kuhn, Vice-Chair
Texas Transportation Institute b-kuhn@tamu.edu
John Abraham
City of Troy, MI abrahamjk@ci.troy.mi.us
Russell
IBI rbrownlee@ibigroup.com
John A. Davis
Corporation jadavis@hntb.com
Lawrence T. Hagen
University of South Florida hagen@cutr.usf.edu
James T. Harris
City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA jharris@ci.rancho-cucamonga.ca.us
Karen
Rummel, Klepper & Kahl
kkahl@rkkengineers.com
LaMunyon
DePalma llamunyo@schoordepalma.com
Jeffrey F. Paniati
U.S. DOT FHWA
Jeff.Paniati@fhwa.dot.gov
Troy A. Peoples
Planning & Traffic Engineering SE tpeoples@stantec.com
Richard
RF Ryan & Associates rfryan72@aol.com
William M. Sampson
McTrans Center bsampson@ce.ufl.edu
W. Wainwright
U.S. DOT FHWA scott.wainwright@fhwa.dot.gov
E.
City of Lawrence, KS dwoosley@ci.lawrence.ks.us
Peter J. Yauch
Pinellas County, FL pyauch@co.pinellas.fl.us
12 • traffic engineering council UPDATE • Winter 2006