00394949

Component

http://onlinepubs.trb.org...s/trr/1984/970/970-008.pdf

https://scholar.google.co...ecki&publication_year=1984

The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of alternative utility pole treatments. The study involved a large-scale data-collection and analysis effort to quantify benefits and costs associated with the following countermeasures: (a) placement of utility lines underground, (b) relocation of poles further from the roadway, (c) reducing the number of poles, (d) combinations of pole relocation and reducing pole density, and (e) use of breakaway poles. Expected accident benefits were computed for various countermeasures based on an in-depth analysis of accident and roadway data in four states. Countermeasure costs were obtained from telephone and electric utility companies around the country. Placing the utility lines underground and pole relocation were found to be cost effective for telephone and electric distribution lines for a variety of traffic and roadway conditions. Reducing pole density through multiple pole use was also cost effective in some instances, but increasing pole spacing was generally not cost effective. No countermeasures involving large transmission poles and lines were cost effective within the limits of the analysis. General guidelines were developed for selecting cost-effective countermeasures under various combinations of pole offset, traffic volumes, pole density (spacing), roadside conditions, and type of utility poles and lines.

Publication of this paper sponsored by Committee on Utilities. Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences. Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved

00450230

pp 52-64

1984

Transportation Research Record

0309037522

Print

Figures (2) ; References (14) ; Tables (9)

Alternatives analysis; Breakaway supports; Cost effectiveness; Countermeasures; Density; Relocation (Facilities); Spacing; Traffic crashes; Transducers; Underground structures; Utility poles

Relocation; Treatment

Bridges and other structures; Design; Highways; Planning and Forecasting; Safety and Human Factors; I21: Planning of Transport Infrastructure; I85: Safety Devices used in Transport Infrastructure

TRIS, TRB

Nov 30 1985 12:00AM

• BRIDGE DECK DESIGNS FOR RAILING IMPACTS
• DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF SELF-RESTORING TRAFFIC BARRIERS
• DEVELOPMENT OF PROPOSED HEIGHT STANDARDS AND TOLERANCES FOR LIGHT-POST TRAFFIC BARRIERS
• EFFECT OF TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY FEATURES ON UTILITY POLE ACCIDENTS
• ENCASEMENT OF PIPELINES THROUGH HIGHWAY ROADBEDS: SYNOPSIS OF FINAL REPORT FOR NCHRP PROJECT 20-7, TASK 22
• GUIDELINES FOR PLACEMENT OF LONGITUDINAL BARRIERS ON SLOPES
• IN-SERVICE EVALUATION OF SAFETY APPURTENANCES: PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS (ABRIDGMENT)
• SOIL-FOUNDATION INTERACTION BEHAVIOR OF HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL POSTS