20181598_Att. 23 - Guidance on the Safe Implement_20160222

Attachment 23
Guidance on the Safe Implementation of Unconventional
Arterial Designs
Draft Final Report
Prepared for the:
Southeastern Transportation Center
Dr. Stephen H. Richards, Center Director
University of Tennessee at Knoxville
FY 00-01 Seed Grant Program
Written by:
Cipriana D. Thompson, Research Assistant
Joseph E. Hummer, Associate Professor
North Carolina State University
Department of Civil Engineering
Raleigh, NC 27695-7908
September 17th, 2001

ABSTRACT
Unconventional arterial designs like median u-turns, superstreets, jughandles,
continuous flow intersections, and bowties have the potential to significantly reduce
delay compared to conventional arterial designs of similar size. One of the reasons
designers cite for not using the unconventional designs, however, is concern that drivers
will not understand how to negotiate their way through the intersections, particularly
when they are new. The purpose of this project was to explore this concern and highlight
ways in which it could be alleviated. States where the unconventional designs are
already in place were contacted regarding their signing plans and public information
procedures. Many of the signing plans are a good starting, if not ending, point for
engineers interested in implementing these designs. Public information is another
important aspect of implementing the unconventional designs. Information regarding the
designs can be distributed to the driving public in a variety of ways, including, but not
limited to, pamphlets, flyers and newspaper articles. The results of this effort indicate
that the five unconventional arterial designs can be implemented safely through the use of
signing plans and efficient public information campaigns.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors acknowledge the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) far assistance with this research. Specifically, Mike Reese, Gary Roberts, and
John Davenport provided valuable information.
The authors gratefully acknowledge assistance of the Departments of
Transportation in Michigan and New Jersey, the Maryland State Highway Association,
and others. In particular, we thank Timothy Szwedo, Angela Smith, Bob Lariviere, and
Francisco Mier.
The authors also acknowledge the Southeastern Transportation Center (STC) for
supporting this research, and North Carolina State University for providing matching
support for this research.
The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the STC, the NCDOT, the Michigan DOT,
the New Jersey DOT, or North Carolina State University.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
1. INTRODUCTION
2. DESIGNS
Descriptions and Signing Plans
Median U-Turn
Superstreet
Jughandle
Continuous Flow Intersection
Bowtie
Movement Evaluation
Cost Data
3. PUBLIC INFORMATION AND EDUCATION
Driver Understanding
Public Education
Texas Vital Signs Campaign
Public Information in North Carolina
4. ENFORCEMENT
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6. REFERENCES
APPENDICES
A. Signing Plans and Pictures
B. MUTCD Standard and Cost Data for Signing Plans
C. Detailed Expectancy Checklists
D. Public Information Brochures
E. Texas Vital Signs Campaign Sign
F. NCDOT Public Information Brochures
Page
i
ii
iv
vii
3
3
3
4
4
5
6
7
10
12
12
12
13
14
15
16
:
19
40
43
56
60
62

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1. Median U-Turn
Figure 2-2. Superstreet
Figure 2-3. Jughandle
Figure 2-4. Continuous Flow Intersection
Figure 2-5. Bowtie
Figure 3-1. Know Your Vital Signs Logo
Figure A-1.1 Michigan DOT Median U-Turn
Figure A-2.1 Superstreet Intersection in Kent County, MD
Figure A-2.2 Superstreet Intersection
Figure A-2.3 Past the Intersection
Figure A-2.4 Past the Intersection
Figure A-2.5 Past the Intersection
Figure A-2.6 Major Street Approach
Figure A-2.7 Minor Street Approach
Figure A-2.8 Sign on Minor Street Approach
Figure A-3.1 Jughandle Signing Plan 1
Figure A-3.2 Jughandle Signing Plan 2
Figure A-3.3 Jughandle Signing Plan 3
Figure A-3.4 Jughandle Signing Plan 4
Figure A-4.1 MD 210 & MD 228, Prince Georges County, MD
Figure A-4.2 MD 210 Southbound — Approaching Intersection
Figure A-4.3 MD 210 Southbound — Approaching Intersection
Page
3
4
5
6
7
13
21
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
28
29
30
31
33
33
34

LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd)
Figure A-4.4 MD 210 Southbound — At Intersection
Figure A-4.5 MD 210 Northbound — Approaching Intersection
Figure A-4.6 MD 228 Westbound — View of Intersection
Figure A-4.7 MD 228 Westbound — View of Intersection
Figure A-4.8 MD 228 Westbound
Figure A-4.9 MD 228 Westbound
Figure A-4.10 MD 228 Westbound
Figure A-5.1 Bowtie Signing Plan
Figure G 1 Blank Expectancy Checklist
Figure G2 Median U-Turn Checklist
Figure C-3 Superstreet Checklist
Figure C-4 Jughandle Checklist
Figure C-5 Continuous Flow Intersection Checklist
Figure C-6 Bowtie Checklist
Figure D-1 Protective/Permissive Signal Brochure
Figure D-2 Left-Turn Traffic Signals Brochure
Figure D-3 Left-Turn Phasing Warrants Brochure
Figure E-1 Texas Vital Signs Campaign Sign
Figure F-1 NCDOT News Release
Figure F-2 Community Meeting Flyer
Figure F-3 Project/Construction Information Flyer
Figure F-4 Community Meeting Door Hanger
Page
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
39
44
46
48
50
52
54
57
58
59
61
63
64
65
66

LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd)
Figure F-5 Road Widening Information Flyer
Page
67
Figure F-6 Resident and Business Information Flyer 68
Figure F-7 Construction Information Flyer 69

LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 2-1. Unnatural Vehicle Movement Matrix
Table 2-2. Pedestrian Movement Matrix
Table B-1. MUTCD Standard and Cost Data 41

L INTRODUCTION
Many signalized intersections in the U.S. suffer from congestion and long queues and
delays. Congestion on urban and suburban arterials is an ever-present traffic problem.
The issue of congestion is so broad that no one solution will fiX the problem. Therefore,
it is important to mold congestion solutions to fit specific problem areas. From traffic-
actuated signals to multiple left-turn lanes to parallel one-way streets, transportation
engineers have tried many traditional approaches to relieving this problem. Although
these approaches are sometimes successful, there is a need to explore additional options.
Unconventional alternatives may provide a new way of tackling these issues.
Engineers should consider alternatives that focus on treating left-turns to and from
arterials, as they are the cause of many operational problems. These "unconventional"
alternatives focus on reducing delay to through vehicles, reducing conflict points at
intersections, and separating the conflict points that remain (1). The unconventional
alternatives that are being considered for the purpose of this project are median u-turns
(left turns to and from the arterial required to use directional median crossovers),
superstreets (all left turns and the cross-street through movements must use directional
median crossovers), bowties (a form of inedian u-turn using roundabouts instead of
median crossovers), continuous flow intersections (ramp to the left of the arterial
upstream of the main intersection to handle traffic turning left from the arterial), and
jughandles (ramps diverge from the right side of the arterial to accommodate all turns
from the arterial) (2). These designs have potential far widespread implementation in the
short term. Unfortunately, these alternatives, in providing a different and sometimes new
approach to attacking congestion, may cause more driver confusion than conventional
arterials.
With the implementation of new and unfamiliar arterial designs, there is always the
concern about driver understanding. The new designs may reduce the congestion at
intersections, but only if the drivers effectively navigate them. Therefore, the question
arises: How should agencies communicate to the driver the correct and safe way to
utilize a new arterial design?
When dealing with new traffic designs, driver expectancy is an extremely important
factor. According to FHWA's Driver Expectancy in Highway Design and Tra�c
Operations (3), "expectancy relates to a driver's readiness to respond to situations,
events, and information in predictable and successful ways." Traffic operations, traffic
control devices, and geometrics that are unfamiliar to or "unexpected" by drivers, violate
this concept. When driver expectancy is violated, the driver may respond in a confused,
frustrated, slow, or even dangerous manner. Therefore, it is important that the road user
not only expects what is ahead, but understands how to make his way safely. When
introducing a new traffic pattern, drivers need to be aware, ahead of time, of what is
expected of them.
1

Transportation engineers and officials, enforcement officers, and the driving public all
have a vested interest in these issues. All of these parties will need to be involved in the
process of implementing the five designs for them to be successful.
This project will recommend to designers how to safely implement unconventional
designs. This project report will discuss which signs are effective for particular designs
(including cost data), what public relations activities are most effective in informing
drivers of unusual new intersections, and what types of enforcement are needed.
2

2. DESIGNS
The unconventional arterial designs that are the focus of this project all basically share
the same operational mode: they reroute left-turn movements.
Probably the most recognized "new" type of arterial design is the roundabout. The
roundabout design operates without the use of signals. It is a circular roadway that has a
continuous circulating traffic flow; drivers enter where there is an appropriate gap.
Entering traffic yields to the traffic in the roundabout. Although not one of the designs
being studied, the roundabout is now relatively popular. As it was a"new" design that
caused drivers to adapt to a new operation, some information regarding roundabouts may
be referenced. Roundabout implementation will be a good analogy for unconventional
design implementation.
The roundabout has effectively eased its way into mainstream traffic operations. As most
drivers have become comfortable with navigating this design, there is hope that the five
unconventional designs of interest here should, in time and if widely implemented, be
easily recognized as well.
2.1. Descriptions and Signing Plans
2.1.1. Median U-Turn
The median u-turn, shown in Figure 2-1, requires left-turning vehicles to and from the
arterial to use directional median crossovers. Left turns are prohibited at the main
intersections. Vehicles wishing to turn left from the main arterial to the minor arterial or
collector must continue through the intersection, make a u-turn at the crossover and then
make a right turn back at the intersection. Vehicles wishing to turn left onto the arterial
must first turn right, make a u-turn at the crossover and then proceed through the
intersection. The most prominent user of inedian u-turns in the United States, the
Michigan Department of Transportation (DOT) has over 1,000 miles in service (1).
Figure 2-1. Median U-turn
The typical signing plan used by the Michigan DOT consists of a series of regulatory and
guide signs (Appendix A). As shown in a table in Appendix B, all of the regulatory signs
used in this plan are in the Manual on Uniform TNaffic Control Devices (MUTCD) (5).

This typical method of signing median u-turns has been in place for many years. This
signing plan has been and remains, according to several Michigan DOT traffic engineers,
an effective one.
21.2. Superstreet
The superstreet design, shown in Figure 2-2, is an alternative that eliminates through and
left-turn movements from the minor street. These movements are rerouted to the
directional crossover on the major street. The superstreet alternative was originated by
Richard Kramer, a traffic engineer in Alabama. There are few full implementations of
the superstreet alternative (1).
Figure 2-2. Superstreet
The research team was able to locate an implemented superstreet design in Kent County,
Maryland (Appendix A). A site visit provided information on the signs and marking.
The superstreet, at the intersection of US 301 and Galena Road, is unsignalized and
follows the operational procedure described previously. The majority of the signs used at
this particular intersection are MUTCD standard or assemblies of MUTCD standard
signs. Appendix B displays pictures of some of the signs, including the more innovative
ones.
After observation of this intersection, the signing plan seem d to be an effective one.
There did not appear to be any driver confusion, which coul have been indicated by late
lane changes, erratic braking, or decreased vehicle speed on approach. However, the
addition of a diagrammatic sign on the minor street approach to convey to the driver how
to complete the through or left turn movement would be helpful. This signing plan
seemed effective for this section of US 301, where the traffic was light to moderate. This
same signing plan also would seem appropriate in a suburban area. However, if the
superstreet design were located in a busier area, signalization may be necessary. If there
is a higher volume on the major street, entry from the minor street may become difficult.
2.1.3. Jughandle
The jughandle design, shown in Figure 2-3, uses ramps diverging from the right side of
the arterial to accommodate all turns from the arterial (2). This design eliminates all
turns from the main arterial at the intersection. Approaching the intersection, the vehicles
wishing to make right or left turns use the ramp on the right side. Those turning left will
0

take the ramp, make the left onto the cross street and then proceed through the
intersection. Those turning right will simply take the ramp and continue right.
The New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) has used and continues to use
jughandles on hundreds of miles of heavy-volume arterials (2).
Figure 2-3. Jughandle
The NJ DOT provided typical signing and marking plans for a variety of jughandle
designs (Appendix A). There is a combination of regulatory and guide signs. Again, not
all of the signs are MUTCD standard (Appendix B). Several NJDOT traffic engineers
believe that their typical signing plans have been and continue to be effective. A site visit
to several intersections in New Jersey provided the research team with the opportunity to
drive a variety of jughandle designs. Based on the experience of a first-time jughandle
driver, the method of signing proved adequate and effective.
2.1.4. Continuous Flow Intersection
The continuous flow intersection design (CFI), shown in Figure 2-4, uses a ramp to the
left of the main arterial and a ramp to the right of the minor arterial or collector. Left-
turning vehicles from the main street take the left side ramp to the minor street prior to
reaching the intersection. Right-turning vehicles from the minor street take the right side
ramp to the major street prior to entering the intersection.
This design, patented by Francisco Mier (U.S. Patent Number 5049000), was first used in
the U.S. in Long Island, New York and has since been used several times in Mexico (2).

Figure 2-4. Continuous Flow Intersection
Although most of these designs have been implemented in Mexico, the research team
visited a partial CFI in Prince Georges County, Maryland (Appendix A). The
"continuous flow" left side ramp was located on the minar street. Located at the T-
intersection of MD 210 and MD 228, there are many signs directing drivers. The signing
plan used at this particular intersection incorporates many MUTCD standard signs. This
signing plan also uses several overhead signs. Although more than adequately
communicating directions to the driver, the overhead signs could likely be replaced with
roadside signs at other intersections.
Although this signing plan is for a partial intersection, it would be effective for a full CFI
as well. Whether the continuous flow portions were on the minor or major arterial, the
same signing method could be used.
2.1.5. Bowtie
The bowtie, shown in Figure 2-5, is a design that accommodates all left turns on the cross
street. The bowtie uses roundabouts on the cross street to accommodate left turns instead
of directional crossovers across a wide median (1). Again, with left turns prohibited, the
vehicles wishing to turn left will make a right turn at the intersection, enter the
roundabout on the minor street, and then come back through the intersection.
�

�
'��` �4roeriat
Figure 2-5. Bowtie
The bowtie is the only design mentioned that has not already been implemented at some
location. Because there is no current implementation for this design, the research team
developed a signing plan. As shown in Appendix A, the signing plan essentially
combines the signing plans of the roundabout (obtained from the North Carolina
Department of Transportation), jughandle, and median u-turn with a few innovative
additions. As the signing plans for those designs appear to be effective, the bowtie
designs signing plan should be equally adequate.
2.2. Movement Evaluation
The basic issue in developing signing plans for these designs is to communicate ways in
which they differ from conventional intersections from the driver's point of view. To
explore these differences, the project team developed a matrix (Table 2-1) illustrating the
number of "unnatural and altered movements" required to navigate each design. An
unnatural movement is a movement that requires a different course of action than a
typical intersection, i.e., to make a left turn, a driver must turn right and then go straight.
An altered movement is a movement that essentially requires the same course of action,
but at a different location, i.e., a right turn is still permissible, but occurs before or after
the intersection.
The matrix includes four conventional intersection types, the five unconventional designs
of interest, and the roundabout. There are sixteen movements considered, including u-
turns. The matrix shows that the roundabout contains the largest number of unnatural
and altered movements. The five designs of interest fall in between the conventional
intersections and the roundabout, with the jughandle containing the fewest number of
unnatural movements.
A second matrix (Table 2-2) illustrates the pedestrian movements required to safely cross
these designs. This is evaluated by taking into account the number of roadways crossed,
the number of crossings of free-flowing roadways, and the status of the right-turn
movement (free-flowing or controlled). The designs are then ranked according to lowest
7

Table 2-1. Unnatural Vehicle Movement Matrix
unnatural movement (2 pts) -- a movement that requires a different course of action; i.e. to make a left turn, driver must turn right and then go straight
altered movement (1 pt) -- a movement that essentially requires the same course of action, but at a different location; i.e. a right turn is still permissable,
but occurs before or after the intersection
"natural" movement (0 pts)
1-- No median and free right turn
2-- Median and no free right turn
3-- No median and no free right turn
4-- Median and free right turn
�
Movement Number Code
12 11 10 9
«�l�►�
*♦----21/22---------
1 � � 19/20
14�; 23/24
17/18
♦------�''1�
1 2 3
Major Street �
�
Minor Street
:

Table 2-2. Pedestrian Movement Matrix
Conventional Intersection (1
Conventional Intersection (2
Conventional Intersection (3
Conventional Intersection (4
Median U-Turn*
S u perstreet*
CFI*
Jughandle*
Bowtie
Roundabout*
Conventional I ntersections
0
17/'
1
2
1
2
2
2
3
3
1
2
reaestrian movements
Number of Number of Right-turn movement
�ways Crossed Free-Flowing Crossings Free-flowing(1), Controlled
I 9/20 21 /22 23/24 17/18 19/20 21 /22 23/24 17/18 19/20 21 /22 23/;
1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 2 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0
2 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
2 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0
1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
Movements 17/18 and 21/22 are crossing the major street.
Movements 19/20 and 23/24 are crossing the minor street
*Assuming medians
1-- No median and free right turn
2-- Median and no free right turn
3-- No median and no free right turn
4-- Median and free right turn
8
6
4
10
6
12
22
16
4
20
5
3
1
6
3
7
10
8
1
9

score. One of the conventional intersections (no median and no free right turn) and the
bowtie design, followed by another conventional intersection (median and no free right
turn) and the median u-turn design proved to be the most "pedestrian friendly." The
roundabout and continuous flow intersection proved to be the most difficult for
pedestrians to navigate.
The roundabout ranks last or close to last in both matrices. There has been an increase in
the number of roundabouts being constructed in North Carolina and other states and
drivers and pedestrians have gotten used to the designs very quickly. The more exposure
drivers have to the unconventional designs, as with the roundabout, the more likely they
are to become familiar with it.
2.3. Cost Data
The NCDOT's Traffic Engineering and Safety Systems Branch provided the research
team with cost estimates on some of the signs used with these designs. A table in
Appendix B displays this cost information. For each of the five unconventional designs
(including two types of jughandles), a matrix in Appendix B includes the signs, quantity
used in each design, MUTCD standard information (sign number, section, type),
dimensions, and costs (including sign cost, mounting cost, installation cost and a 15%
mobilization fee).
From least expensive to most expensive, the designs of interest ranked as follows:
median u-turn ($7800), bowtie ($12,000), jughandle ($13,000), superstreet ($105,000),
and continuous flow intersection ($205,000). The reason for the large difference between
the first three designs and the latter two is the use of overhead signs. The superstreet has
two overhead signs, one on each of the minor street approaches. The continuous flow
intersection signing plan has three overhead signs, all on the southbound approach.
Cost reduction is possible with the superstreet and continuous flow designs. The two
overhead signs used in the superstreet intersection convey to the drivers that they must
stop ahead and can only turn right at the intersection. Because of the location of the signs
and the other signs surrounding them, it appears that the overhead signs are the clearest
way to communicate to the drivers what they are to do. However, because the minor
approach (at this particular intersection) is one lane in each direction, the message on the
overhead sign can be communicated with a roadside sign. We recommend, at this early
stage in the development of the superstreet design, ground-mounted guide signs on the
minor street if there is just one lane and overhead signs if there are multiple lanes. If the
signs were ground-mounted, the total cost of the signing plan would be $12,000.
In the continuous flow intersection design, the use of the three overhead signs does not
seem to be absolutely necessary. The overhead signs are guide signs used to indicate
which lanes the driver needs to be in to go to a particular destination. The same message
could be communicated as clearly without the use of overhead masts, particularly since
the left turn is only an altered movement and the through and right turn are unchanged.
The destination signs could be mounted on the roadside with directional arrows or words
10

to communicate the same message as the overhead signs. If the signs were mounted in
the ground, the total cost of the signing plan would be reduced to $23,000.
Pavement markings, although not the focus of discussion in this report, may be necessary
in some of the unconventional design plans. The pavement markings (lines) are priced
per linear foot. The average cost in North Carolina is approximately $0.35 per linear foot
for 4-inch lines and $75 for symbols (i.e. arrows). The addition of pavement markings to
any of the plans could result in an increase in cost of several thousand dollars.
Three of the five unconventional designs (median u-turn, superstreet, and continuous
flow) also may require additional signals at the crossover locations depending upon
traffic volumes and other variables. Extra signals are approximately $60,000 each plus
the cost of interconnection.
11

3. PUBLIC INFORMATION AND EDUCATION
3.1. Driver Understanding
One of the most important factors in driver understanding relates to driver expectancy. A
new sign or intersection operation may not be necessarily hard to understand when
looking at a plan view, but by nature of its appearance, the driver can be surprised ar
even confused.
To provide signs for an intersection, it is important to know what would make a signing
plan effective or ineffective based on driver expectancy. According to the FHWA's
Driver Expectancy in Highway Design and Traffic Operations, the basic driving task
consists of three performance levels — control, guidance, and navigation. Each level
involves different acts and information sources. Control refers to the driver's interaction
with the vehicle itsel£ The driver receives information based on the response of the
vehicle to his/her actions. Guidance has to do with the driver's maintenance of a safe
speed and path. The driver receives information from the highway (geometry, hazards,
etc.), traffic (speed, gaps, etc.), and traffic control devices (signs and marking).
Navigation deals with the activities involved in planning and executing a trip from arigin
to destination. Information here comes from maps, signs, and verbal directions.
There are two types of driver expectancies: a priori and ad hoc (3). A priori expectancies
are long term and are based on past experience or learned actions. Ad hoc expectancies
are more short term and are based on site-specific practices and situations encountered
while driving. So, it is necessary, when implementing new designs, to initially tackle the
ad hoc expectancy requirement and eventually progress to a priori expectancy. As these
designs become more widely used, drivers will understand their operation and know what
to expect when they approach them.
In the FHWA's Driver Expectancy document, a useful "Detailed Expectancy Checklist"
is provided (Appendix C). The checklist reviews a variety of items including land use,
road type and surface, sight distances, traffic patterns, signals, markings, signs, and
missing information. The research team completed a checklist for each of the five
designs, based on drives through four of the five designs. The completed checklists,
shown in Appendix C, emphasized the unusual traffic patterns and any signs that were
surprising or confusing to the driver. The use of this Expectancy Checklist proved
helpful when evaluating the signing plans of the various designs.
3.2. Public Education
With regards to public information, for those states, such as Michigan and New Jersey,
that began implementing one or more of these alternatives many years ago, no one can
clearly recall what information was initially given to drivers, if any.
There is a variety of ways to educate the public on new traffic patterns and operations. A
few of the main ways are informational pamphlets/brochures, press releases and driver
12

educational classes or programs. Informational pamphlets/brochures allow drivers to
have something tangible to refer to at their leisure. Several brochures are shown in
Appendix D(7). Press releases get the media involved and therefore increase the reach
of the information. Educational programs provide hands-on instruction to particular
groups of the driving population, such as elderly or young (new) drivers. The
dissemination of pertinent information to drivers can be facilitated through the use of
already accessible resources, including driver's license offices, driving schools, motor
vehicle organizations (i.e. AAA), trucking associations, and state welcome centers.
3.21. Texas Vital Signs Campaign
An example of a successful public trafiic control device information campaign is the
"Vital Signs" campaign conducted by the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT)
and the Texas Transportation Institute. The two organizations partnered to put together
educational programs and a driver information campaign. In terms of educational
programs, the partnership focused on revising descriptions in the Texas D�ivers
Handbook, revising the educational curriculum for driver education and driver safety
courses to emphasize selected traffic control devices, and developing driver outreach
materials (8).
With regards to the driver information campaign, the partnership produced
brochures/posters, a public service announcement, a press conference, an instructional
video on traffic control devices, and a slide presentation on traffic control devices. As
the team did not have funding for advertising, the initial messages of the campaign were
communicated to the extent that that media would carry them free of charge, through
televised public service announcements and print media (8). The campaign was driven
by their "Know Your Vital Signs" theme, as Figure 3-1 shows.
Figure 3-L Know Your Vital Signs Logo
The team produced a brochure encouraging drivers to learn, understand, and follow the
traffic signs. These brochures were disseminated to an enormous amount of drivers
through driver education teachers, student councils, safety program participants, TxDOT
public information officers, traveler centers, driver license renewal stations, and civic
groups. The brochure and poster (Appendix E), focused on colors and shapes. A second
brochure was produced focusing on traffic light configurations, pavement markings, and
seven categories of signs.
13

A public service announcement was produced for television. The announcement
encouraged the audience to be familiar with the traffic signs. A press conference was
used to "launch" the whole campaign. The news media was provided with the first
campaign brochure/poster, the public service announcement, and a summary of the
research report (8). Overall, this campaign proved to be successful. According to the
report, the campaign was well received by the participating agencies and the general
public. The campaign received significant coverage in both the popular media and
technical publications. The media's involvement helped to reach many drivers. The
clever marketing plan aided in the success.
3.3. Public Information in North Carolina
The North Carolina Department of Transportation's Construction Unit has a public
information program called IMPACT (Information Management, Public Affairs,
Construction and Traffic Control). The goals of this program are to promote safety in the
work zone, inform the public of impacts from construction and provide excellent
customer service. This program, ar programs like it, could feasibly be the best way to
reach the public regarding the five unconventional designs discussed in this report.
The NCDOT's Construction Unit, in conjunction with the Traffic Control Section, the
Highway Divisions and the Public Information Office, develops and distributes a wide
range of brochures, fliers, press releases, etc. Appendix F displays a few of these
examples. The straightforward explanations and diagrams seem to be an effective
communication tool.
In addition to this effort, the newspapers typically will contain articles about new traffic
patterns, designs or construction. Speaking with traffic columnists at the News &
Observer and The Charlotte Observer, traffic issues are highlighted based on their
perceived importance to the driving public. The press releases that NCDOT distributes
also bring attention to a variety of new traffic patterns and issues. An estimated 95% of
press releases issued by the NCDOT result in stories in a newspaper. As visible as a new
arterial is, the chance of a story based on a press release about such a design is excellent.
The columnists also address traffic issues based on reader requests.
14

4. ENFORCEMENT
With respect to enforcement at these unconventional intersections, several traffic
engineers from Michigan, New Jersey and North Carolina agree that it is relatively non-
existent in the sense of "formal" enforcement. The intersections are, to all intents and
purposes, self-enforcing. A driver attempting to make prohibited left turns through one
of these intersections will likely encounter the wrath (i.e. honking of horns) of other
drivers because he or she will undoubtedly begin to cause a queue for the through
movement.
Although the enforcement may theoretically come from other drivers, this is not
necessarily a foolproof tactic. For example, in the 1970's there was a jughandle
implemented on US 70 in eastern North Carolina. One of the reasons it failed was, with a
low volume of traffic, the drivers found it easier to just continue making the left turn at
the intersection. Other vehicles were not a strong enough incentive to keep the drivers
from making that turn. Therefore, it is wise for a formal enforcement presence to be on
site far at least the first few days after the designs go into operation. Enforcement during
the AM and PM peak hours would likely be adequate. An increased presence of police
officers in the area could help discourage any illegal traffic movements at the
intersection.

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Congestion is an ever-present traffic problem on urban and suburban arterials. The
conventional solutions to congestion only work so well. Unconventional alternatives
provide more ways of addressing the congestion problem. The unconventional
alternatives discussed in this report focused on treating left-turns to and from arterials, as
they are the cause of many operational problems.
The unconventional alternatives that were considered far this project, because of their
potential for widespread implementation in the short term, were the median u-turn,
superstreet, jughandle, continuous flow intersection, and bowtie. Because these are
different and sometimes new arterial designs, driver confusion is a concern. This report
discussed signing plans, enforcement, and public information useful far the
implementation of the five designs of interest.
The unnatural vehicle movement matrix illustrated the unnatural and altered movements
required to navigate the unconventional designs. In comparison with the number of
changed movements needed for the roundabout, the iive designs allowed more natural
movements. Most of the designs, although requiring some unnatural movements, are
signed in a manner that can help the drivers successfully navigate them.
The pedestrian movement matrix illustrated how well the unconventional designs, as well
as conventional intersections, accommodate pedestrians. The designs were evaluated by
the number of roadways crossed, the number of free-flow crossings, and whether the
right-turn movement is free-flowing or controlled. The bowtie and one conventional
intersection (with no median and no free right turn) ranked best, followed by the median
u-turn and another conventional intersection (with median and no free right turn). The
continuous flow intersection ranked last, proving the most difficult for a pedestrian to
safely cross.
As shown throughout the report, it is not necessary for traffic engineers to start from the
beginning when it comes to signing these designs. The signing systems in use by various
states thus far appear effective. Most of the previously mentioned plans would be
suitable for use by states wishing to implement these unconventional arterial designs.
The signing recommendation for the median u-turn and jughandle designs would be what
the states of Michigan and New Jersey, respectively, already have in place. The
recommended signing plan for the superstreet is similar to the plan that is in use at the US
301 and Galena Road intersection in Kent County, MD. An addition of a diagrammatic
sign on the minor street approach could help drivers better understand how they need to
navigate the upcoming intersection. Also, the use of the overhead signs on the minor
street approaches (indicating that only right turns are allowed at the intersection) may not
be needed. For the continuous flow intersection, the plan used at the MD 210 and MD
228 intersection is recommended with the change of the overhead signs to roadside signs.
The bowtie design signing plan illustrated in Appendix B is recommended. Without
overhead signs, all plans are in the range of $4000 to $23,000.
16

An effective public information campaign will enhance a good signing plan. We
recommend, upon opening an unconventional design new to an area, that the highway
agency use informational brochures such as the ones put out by the NCDOT Impact
Team. The brochures should contain basic information about the design and the
procedures needed to navigate the design. These brochures should be distributed to
driver's license offices, trucking associations, state welcome centers, and driver service
organizations (i.e. AAA). Press releases should be used and should result in stories in the
local newspaper that could also help inform drivers. Additional enforcement may also be
needed upon opening an unconventional design.
17

6.REFERENCES
1. Hummer, J.E. "Unconventional Left-Turn Alternatives for Urban and Suburban
Arterials—Part One." ITE Journal, September 1998, pp. 26-29.
2. Hummer, J.E. "Unconventional Left-Turn Alternatives for Urban and Suburban
Arterials—Part Two." ITE Journal on the Web, November 1998, pp. 101-106.
3. Alexander, G.J. and H. Lunenfeld. Driver Expectancy in Highway Design and
Traffic Operations, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 1986.
4. Michigan Department of Transportation. Directional Crossovers: Michigan's
Preferred Left Turn Strategy. Michigan DOT, December 1995.
5. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices. Washington, D.C.: FHWA, 1988.
6. Picha, D.L., H.G. Hawkins, Jr., K.N. Womack, et al. Driver Understanding of
Alternative Traffic Signs. In Ti^ansportation Research Record 1605, TRB,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 8-16.
7. Pline, J.L. NCHRP Report 225: Left-Turn TNeatments at Intersections. TRB,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1996.
8. Hawkins, Jr., H.G., S.M. Lancaster, B.R. Fette, et al. Helping Drivers Understand
Traffic Control Devices: Implementing Research Results. Presented at 77tn
Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
I:

APPENDIX A
SIGNING PLANS AND PICTURES
19

A.1. MEDIAN U-TURN
20

uu �
� � f=:I!
.�
�
j �y � 3 ��14L � 0
��
� �
i � :�
Ii"U� I '
TL�ef L� �I
� ��cic :i v��in� :�r �:: - i � 1��cv:���af
I�� � �f�� .�
' ��
�
Figure A.1.1 Michigan DOT Median U-Turn Signing Plan (Michigan DOT)
21

A.2. SUPERSTREET
22

�'`;k`��' ��� ti
.r ;F.��r� ,�� '` � ���� _.
,"?� �y�. .�s - .�,��; r'
��# * .,�'•���;�'� ..�..' �.i. �i�,
�. � �����
_ ���. . _ . ��
___ �� _ � .
_� _ .
. F -,� _��� -__- . - .��,=.y�-t.�;
�� �
.�
_ --, -�
. � �. � �_
� . _ ���. . �. ` . �
`� +� ,� � _ _�_� . ' -
_t _ � . _ - �= � _ . -
Figure A.2.1. Superstreet Intersection in Kent County, MD
(Photos by Cipriana D. Thompson)
�.. ��� —�ti�
�Y�'u ' . _ . : - z
. � _ �� z �y`L
���'� .
— �_ Y _
��� �
_ � '�h`5�
' ' ���- �3:
. . �'�+-
' . ' __ �4�
.}�. ' ' _
_ . 'ytk _
-- . •.— .. . ,
Figure A.2.2. Superstreet Intersection
23

�
l�; �
�,�-,�.-, �
�- .,�x�r� . .a-c`
�l Y.
•1 Y� ` ~�+.
��'�+ _
ifi' .
+� . ti • , � r
� �. � ' �
� ��
Figure A.2.3. Past the Intersection
: � - _ y �--� _ -
Figure A.2.4. Past the Intersection
24

���: r�- � - —
, r, : � �:�+"'� r � y�.
.��� {*. •n �
ti_._ �'.
Figure A.2.5. Past the Intersection
. .�. �. �-- •
. � ^`7���=
��,� .
-1 �,r�,:.. {'�.
a;� '
. ���. . {�� ���_�
� _�����-� -
.,, .. :�. -
-�,:..� .
�•� 7 �.•:;��r�i�� . .
.I r1E k-.�.
����' � .. . �
'ti +�!�'�,F �' '� '��''s L ' f '
�`� _#_ -��� � �����'�'��r���. ;i r�����i���
� 4 ���
l �.'. ' � '- 'i. �.. �i�
� �����
� � � ��� � �'� - �
- .��' � � �
- � _ ':�
Figure A.2.6. Major Street Approach
�

,
�
r� � + � � , _ �
'�,�r� ���`�i��,�. +�_
�� .;�- :ti.. � � _
',4 ar�r'S.;f� . . il .�
'1'r��`F ,.',4�'"r,�i�' `��. , � ' � , �'J�,li'.
� I� � �
; '•:� ,''• -•4��,'�.��'� ii : . �a � ,. . ' . . '� {
"� �-:�� . s� !�: �''��'�-
k
I ��- �-�':��'�� ����� � i:��
' �rt
"_�' ' - �� . — _ . - � _E'r. - - y T.A�
� � � � --
�� . _ - -T- _ - } — — — -.. ..
� � - -- '"'"��� -, . �"`
� — � .- �r . --.`�
� ' _ .
- - . ,��.
�. ------- - -- � - � ��: .'.-. .. .--
r .r
i�
Figure A.2.7. Minor Street Approach
Figure A.2.8. Sign on Minor Street Approach
26

A.3. JUGHANDLE
27

JU�HANbLE �CCa�`!]hlCi
(not to statle} ----
+ .�
� ALI� T�1R�lS � � {1 A[VD LEFi
� FrsOM � � TURN
RIGHT I,..�h1� � � .
� KEEP � O�E wa�
3 � � � ��
�llF2E�1� f�]�[-lT "
0
c� � �
�r �„-.
hi�l1CHE� AYE
� �i A,�D L.E�T
7U�2�1 � .
� � .
5 �
�
f�1E'�i�CFi�A� AV�
8 �3�.L L.4N�
x��� RIGHT
t� �' �1LL LAN�
� GtL� LAl��
� � h?�fL1�r�� �.V�
�
�! �iLL �AN�
a �
1�.�F. Iiepartmrnt o£ Transportati�rl
I7i�i�icn af Irai'�'ic �';��ar,ee::��;
� Traf�ic �ureau ,
hpril 1 �y, 1 g71 �
Figure A.3.1. Jughandle Signing Plan 1(New Jersey DOT)
:

t�e w
x
(not to- ���10)
St _
�--- F i � �. a'h�l f
I
�r�L'�ol� �
iW4'4�' St
� H�pewesl�
Feee�:cld
� }k�t T� Ch�S/�
I � ALL T��,�fS
- � . 4 FR�M
3 � RIGiiT �AIY�
. .
4
� f�l2w S#
Hagewe[r
s � �reenCld
�cFFa ���Fir
N.J. 17�rz:•...e�M c* a�m:�„ro�a�a�:�
�'s�3�CYS OS' a:Art�C �1��%:l'�Y�":�
�I`l'R�t�C �i]�EQU,
J�pi'11, � i:, � q7�
Figure A.3.2. Jughandle Signing Plan 2(New Jersey DOT)
29

JllGHI�NdLE �l�NlldCa
. (aot t�o scna.9} --
� r
i ■
�
• �
�
N�w $1 �
I
F{op�weli
�1 A{vD L�FT
. ? - T IJR�# �
l�L.� Ti�R; i�
" 3 FRf]M
���IT L�a�l�
- Ner� St
� � Hapewelf
�w�P R�GHT
�
C7•5�. ��'!4_^.=�CIM C`� ��Zµ=�C,^ku�{C':l
IJi�`181�1'] ol =ra��1� Ln��'i�erJ17�
�'rntfio T�us`e�n
�pr''-11�, 1��]
Figure A.3.3. Jughandle Signing Plan 3(New Jersey DOT)
30

J�GNk�7Lr SI �NIa��•
' � - . �II4t i�0 SC8k�4� -
� �
� � 'F
�
Figure A.3.4. Jughandle Signing Plan 4(New Jersey DOT)
� U T U:� N J�
U 7U#i�!
� F���w1
Ri�l-�f L►��
a
:�.J. r�,�a�-�::t or �_=.�:�s~a=:aYic-�
F?�'r�sion c� T::,���v Y��,irao~:rg
Tx�f�ia Bureau �
Ap�•f.I � 1�, 1 9'��
31

A.4. CONTINUOUS FLOW INTERSECTION
32

Figure A.4.L MD 210 & MD 228, Prince Georges County, MD
(Photos by Cipriana D. Thompson)
, i �: � �'f -
� �� '� �� � �
�
.. � � �� _.
Figure A.4.2. MD 210 Southbound — Approaching Intersection
33

�� � 't' ....
Figure A.4.3. MD 210 Southbound — Approaching Intersection
;,_. .. � ��,
zze r ����,��,
.'._`.;:. , �- ' . , - r .. r -� . �
. . .�.,: :. �; 'sdr
Figure A.4.4. MD 210 Southbound -- At Intersection
34

} � r��i���l�`l� �I •
S, :, "r V4' �k�;�; � ' II•'
r
V 'S r� .
.h� "� . - ��.. � I 9 � �I!
� '��,� _ ��, ���� ��:�+��� `��, � ,-� � �� ��,� .
� , � �� w.
- ,:,_...._ x�.� �
.,
m� �t �,., �
F� �
, �FF'�" ._. . �
� � �.
xf' �
'.'r" .:
a��� � �.v�. ��' . ' � � � --...._.
� r i � � �''+�; �
.. - ���. , ���~t � �{ .
�.. ' - . . � - . -
,. „ � ,
y u �F,�
:.�p, J :.��� r ����) .
Figure A.4.5. MD 210 Northbound — Approaching Intersection
Figure A.4.6. MD 228 Westbound -- View of Intersection
�

Figure A.4.7. MD 228 Westbound -- View of Intersection
��O
��
�
� �
� } t=
'�t�I1 . � ��� � �
..,.w.,.. . i -AiL 1}�y A ' � �P'adJe! � f � (�,•j� rl'�'. -.
� ..'
�
r t.
� � �
� �.
Figure A.4.8. MD 228 Westbound
36

Figure A.4.9. MD 228 Westbound
Figure A.4.10. MD 228 Westbound
37

A.S. BOWTIE
:

0
YIELD
0
Main St.
1 st St. �
O8 ALL TURNS
FROM
RIGHT LANE
�9 lst STREET
KEEP RIGHT
10
N
North 1 St St.
South lst St�
Main St.
NB 1 St St.
SB lst St.
4
ONE WAY
�� Main St.
5 West
East �
0
�o �
�
�
1�
O O O O
� � � � �
�-- o
� O
� O
EB Main S
11
orth 1 St St. /�
12 South 1St St. ,�
Main St.
Figure A.5.1 Bowtie Signing Plan (by Research Team) 39

APPENDIX B
MUTCD STANDARD AND COST DATA FOR SIGNING PLAN

Table B.1 MUTCD Standard and Cost Data
Cost
Design Sign Quantity Standard? Si n No. Section Type Dimensions in Si n Mount Install Total*
Median U-turn
No Left Turn (Symbol) (2) Yes R3-2 2B.17 Reg 24x24 $60 $100 $100 $598
Left Lane Must Turn Left (4) Yes R3-7 2B.19 Reg 30x30 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
Do Not Enter (4) Yes R5-1 2B.29 Reg 30x30 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
One Way (4) Yes R6-1L 2B.32 Reg 36x12 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
Diagrammatic Sign (4) Yes 2E.19 Guide 72x48 $300 $250 $100 $2,990
$7,728
Superstreet
STOP (2) Yes R1-1 2B.04 Reg 30x30 $100 $100 $100 $690
YIELD (2) Yes R1-2 2B.08 Reg 36x36x36 $100 $100 $100 $690
Left Lane Must Turn Left (4) Yes R3-7 2B.19 Reg 30x30 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
Do Not Enter (2) Yes R5-1 2B.29 Reg 30x30 $100 $100 $100 $690
One Way (4) Yes R6-1R 2B.32 Reg 36x12 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
Right Turn Only (2) No n/a n/a n/a 24x30 $100 $100 $100 $690
Stop Ahead (2) Yes W3-1 2C.15 Warning 36x36 $100 $100 $100 $690
U-Turn (w/ diag. Arrow) (2) No n/a n/a n/a 24x30 $100 $100 $100 $690
US Route Marker (4) Yes M1-4 2D.10/11 Guide 30x24 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
To Marker (2) Yes M4-5 2D.21 Guide 24x12 $80 $100 $100 $644
Advance Turn Arrow (4) Yes M5-1R 2D.25 Guide 21x15 $60 $100 $100 $1,196
Exit Direction Sign (2) Yes E6-2a 2E.11 Guide $300 $250 $100 $1,495
Ri ht Onl at 301 & Sto Ahead" 2 No n/a n/a n/a $300 $40,000 $92,690
*Does not include flashing beacon $104 305
�
Jughandle 1
(Reverse) All Turns From Right Lane (2) No n/a n/a n/a 60x36 $180 $80 $100 $828
U And Left Turn 1(4) No n/a n/a n/a 60x24 $120 $190 $100 $1,886
No Turns (6) Yes R3-3 2B.17 Reg 24x24 $80 $90 $100 $1,863
Keep Right (4) Yes R4-7A 2B.28 Reg 24x30 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
One Way (4) Yes R6-1L 2B.32 Reg 36x12 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
Do Not Enter (2) Yes R5-1 2B.29 Reg 30x30 $100 $100 $100 $690
U And Left Turn 2(2) No n/a n/a n/a 60x24 $120 $190 $100 $943
Destination Sign/Keep Right (2) No n/a n/a n/a Variable $120 $190 $100 $943
Destination Sign (2) Yes D1-2 2D-34 Guide Variable $120 $190 $100 $943
Destination Si n 4 Yes D1-1 2D-34 Guide Variable $120 $190 $100 $1,886
$12,742

Table B.1 MUTCD Standard and Cost Data cont.
Cost
Design Si n Standard? Si n No. Section T e Dimensions in Si n Mount Install Total"
Jughandle 2
Destination Sign (6) Yes D1-1 2D-34 Guide Variable $120 $190 $100 $2,829
All Turns (2) No n/a n/a n/a 72x18 $110 $190 $100 $920
All Turns From Ri ht Lane 2) No n/a n/a n/a 60x36 $180 $80 $100 $828
$4,577
CFI
No Right Turn (Symbol) (2) Yes R3-1 2B.17 Reg 24x24 $80 $90 $100 $621
No Left Turn (Symbol) (2) Yes R3-2 2B.17 Reg 24x24 $60 $100 $100 $598
Left Lane Must Turn Left (2) Yes R3-7 2B.17 Reg 30x30 $100 $100 $100 $690
One Way (2) Yes R6-1 L 2B.32 Reg 36x12 $100 $100 $100 $690
Lane Ends Merge Left (2) Yes W9-2 2C.28 Warning 36x36 $100 $100 $100 $690
Lane Ends Merge Right (2) Yes W9-2 2C.28 Warning 36x36 $100 $100 $100 $690
Lane Reduction (4) Yes W4-2 2C.28 Warning 36x36 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
No Turns (2) Yes R3-3 2B.17 Reg 24x24 $80 $90 $100 $621
Curve (2) Yes W1-2R 2C.6 Warning 30x30 $100 $100 $100 $690
Destination Sign (2) Yes D1-1 2D-34 Guide Variable $120 $190 $100 $943
Traffic From Right Does Not Stop (2) No n/a n/a n/a 30x30 $100 $100 $100 $690
Cardinal Direction Marker (10) Yes M3-1 - M3-4 2D.15 Guide 24x12 $80 $100 $100 $3,220
Directional Arrow (10) Yes M6-1 - M6-3 2D.26 Guide 21x15 $60 $100 $100 $2,990
Chevron (4) Yes W1-8 2C.10 Warning 18x24 $80 $100 $100 $1,288
Dia rammatic Si ns for Split 4 Yes 2E.20 Guide $1,200 $40,000 $189,520
$205,321
Bowtie
No Left Turn (Symbol) (4) Yes R3-2 2B.17 Reg 24x24 $60 $100 $100 $1,196
YIELD (4) Yes R1-2 2B.08 Reg 36x36x36 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
All Turns From Right Lane (2) No n/a n/a n/a 60x36 $180 $80 $100 $828
Destination Sign (2) Yes D1-2 2D-34 Guide Variable $120 $190 $100 $943
Destination Sign (6) Yes D1-1 2D-34 Guide Variable $120 $190 $100 $2,829
Yield Ahead (Symbol) (2) Yes W3-2a 2C.25 Warning 36x36 $100 $100 $100 $690
Circular Intersection (2) Yes W2-6 2C.34 Warning 36x36 $100 $100 $100 $690
Diagrammatic Sign (2) Yes 2E.19 Guide 72x48 $300 $250 $100 $1,495
One Way (4) Yes R6-1R 2B.32 Reg 36x12 $100 $100 $100 $1,380
Destination Sign/Keep Right 2 No n/a n/a n/a Variable $120 $190 $100 $943
$12,374
*Total includes 15% mobilization cost and quantity of signs

APPENDIX C
DETAILED EXPECTANCY CHECKLISTS
43

DETAILsD EXP�C��N�Y CHEC�LI$T + " . �
RB+r i ew�r•: E1a �e =
Lpc�ation:
1. Ug�[.r�am Land Usc: T� }lavfi Car�r�ges C?ccurred7
lihere: �hat:
?. U�strean Road Typ[�= I��Ye Changes Dccurr(�d?
pfltere ; Whd t. �
3. kJps:.r•ca.�n Rnad SurF�ce; Have �:hang�s Occuered'�
4lhere : k'Iti� {.;
�. Upstrean �.ross-See#.inn= Na+re Chang�s (1C�=urred�x
Whrere: l;yat;
5. TerraTn; Dn T�rr�ai�r Features ar hEannia�f� F1�Cnents Pr•ovida Fa1S� Cues'�
k'hcr•c: --- -- -- kfhat: _ _ �
a, 6ea�:ctry: !]0�5 Gea�netr•y or• Cenn�trl� �e�cansistenr.ics Surprase d3•iuers'�
},'l7er� ; What:
7. Si�ht DiStincp�= Dfles Paor St�ht. Dist�tice Cause �]rsu�rs ta h:iss
Unexpectcd Fcxi.ures';
},�her� ; k�ha t ;
8. 'r�iath�r; Are Ter�por�ry N�athrr Fed4ures InValwed7
4�here: What �
'7. Lightinq; aoes Lighitin� {Incl�ding N���l�rt�l Lightj ContrihuCe ta
�xpectar�cy Yi al at.� ons?
k'i7e re = h!h a t=
]0. Traffic= Da Any lJnusua� Trdff�� �'at;.erns ar• hlixts Exist (Incl�dir�g
Pcdestri ar�sj'
�#her�; �Ihat:
- �� -�-•-- --•- , — I
��
Figure C.1 Blank Expectancy Checklist (Alexander and Lunenfeld)

��
�
rl
11. Sign�is= Arc A��,57�n�Zs, Signa] �onf�¢urat�oFls, ar��foe S�gnal R�tt�r�s
�.onfusing Or Unu�a��'��=� - . �- • -
1�heE�n: ^ _ 4lha�=
1�. ��iarl:ings: �.re ArKy Fiari:in�� �1}elin��tion� Can�using pe Un�xpected7 �
k'Mtiere; Nflat;
33. 'darning � I�e9ulatary �ig�7s; Ar�e Ar�y ��arninq an�jor Regulatory Signs
5�r�rising, ��r��usint�, Oh�p�ete andlnr Nonstandard2
'r�here : �h at :
Z4. Nawigatinn� Are Any G�tide 5igns, dir�s:L1onal Signs, Andlar Rok�te Marktrr�s
Sur�risingi C4fl�u5ir�9, �bsa��te t�ndlor NonsCs��d�rd7
wharp � y��y��r
15_ ;�lissillg lnfaim�atioal- Is An3r �f���E�d l�forsn�ti�r� Missing?
�l�tiere : Nh�a�;
1G. �Lliers` ls ihere Ai�vChing els� AhuU� i.�i� Sitr� o�- �o��tion Sl�rpristng or
Confusing?
lihere ; 41hat:
Figure C1 Blank Expectancy Checklist cont.
�

DETAILED EXPECTANCY CHECKLIST
Reviewer: Hummer Date: 7/17/O1
Location: Median U-Turn — Michi an
1. Upstream Land Use: Retail Have Changes Occurred?_No
Where: What:
2. Upstream Road Type: Arterial Have Changes Occurred?_No
Where: What:
3. Upstream Road Surface: OK Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What: �
4. Upstream Cross-Section: 4-6 lane, 50'-60' median Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What:
5. Terrain: Do Terrain Features or Manmade Elements Provide False Cues? No
Where: What:
6. Geometry: Does Geometry or Geometric Inconsistencies Surprise Drivers? No
Where: What:
7. Sight Distances: Does Poor Sight Distance Cause Drivers to Miss
Unexpected Features? No
Where: What:
8. Weather: Are Temporary Weather Features Involved? No
Where: What:
9. Lighting: Does Lighting (Including Natural Light) Contribute to
Expectancy Violations? No
Where: What:
10. Traffic: Do Any Unusual Traffic Patterns or Mixes Exist (Including
Pedestrians)? Yes
Where: At crossovers and between crossover and main intersection
What: Rerouting left turns to crossovers, weaving
11. Signals: Are Any Signals, Signal Configurations, and/or Signal Patterns Confusing
or Unusual? No, simpler
Where: What:
12. Markings: Are Any Markings (Delineation) Confusing or Unexpected? No
Where: What:
Figure C.2 Median U-Turn Checklist 46

13. Warning & Regulatory Signs: Are Any Warning and/or Regulatory Signs
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? Yes, surprising
Where: At intersection What: No left turn
14. Navigation: Are Any Guide Signs, Directional Signs, and/or Route Markers
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? Yes, Nonstandard
Where: On a roach What: Diagrammatic si�n
15. Missing Information: Is Any Needed Information Missing? No
Where:
What:
16. Others: Is There Anything else About the Site or Location Surprising or
Confusing? No
Where: What:
Figure C.2 Median U-Turn Checklist 47

DETAILED EXPECTANCY CHECKLIST
Reviewer: Thom son Date: 7/16/O1
Location: Superstreet — US 301 & Galena Rd., Kent Count. , MD
1. Upstream Land Use: Commercial (o�en� Have Changes Occurred?_No
Where: What:
2. Upstream Road Type: Divided Hi h�waX Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What:
3. Upstream Road Surface: OK Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What: �
4. Upstream Cross-Section: 41ane, 50'-60' median Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What:
5. Terrain: Do Terrain Features or Manmade Elements Provide False Cues? No
Where: What:
6. Geometry: Does Geometry or Geometric Inconsistencies Surprise Drivers? No
Where: What:
7. Sight Distances: Does Poor Sight Distance Cause Drivers to Miss
Unexpected Features? No
Where: What:
8. Weather: Are Temporary Weather Features Involved? No
Where: What:
9. Lighting: Does Lighting (Including Natural Light) Contribute to
Expectancy Violations? No
Where: What:
10. Traffic: Do Any Unusual Traffic Patterns or Mixes Exist (Including
Pedestrians)? Yes
Where:At intersection What:No throu�h or left turn movements
allowed from Minor Street
11. Signals: Are Any Signals, Signal Configurations, and/or Signal Patterns Confusing
or Unusual? No
Where: � What:
12. Markings: Are Any Markings (Delineation) Confusing or Unexpected? No
Where: What:
Figure C.3 Superstreet Checklist 48

13. Warning & Regulatory Signs: Are Any Warning and/or Regulatory Signs
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? Yes, surprising
Where: At intersection What: No left turn
14. Navigation: Are Any Guide Signs, Directional Signs, and/or Route Markers
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? Yes, Nonstandard
Where: On minor street approach What: Right turn only, Ri ng t onl�
301
15. Missing Information: Is Any Needed Information Missing? Yes
Where:_On minor street approach What: Dia,�rammatic si n�displaving
how to com�lete throu�h or left movement
16. Others: Is There Anything else About the Site or Location Surprising or
Confusing? No
Where: What:
Figure C.3 Superstreet Checklist 49

DETAILED EXPECTANCY CHECKLIST
Reviewer: Thom son Date: 7/16/O1
Location: Ju�handle — New Jersey
1. Upstream Land Use: Commercial Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What: �
2. Upstream Road Type: Arterial Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What:
3. Upstream Road Surface: OK Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What: �
4. Upstream Cross-Section: 61ane, Jersev Barrier median Have Changes Occurred?_No
Where: What:
5. Terrain: Do Terrain Features or Manmade Elements Provide False Cues? No
Where: What:
6. Geometry: Does Geometry or Geometric Inconsistencies Surprise Drivers? No
Where: What:
7. Sight Distances: Does Poor Sight Distance Cause Drivers to Miss
Unexpected Features? No
Where: What:
8. Weather: Are Temporary Weather Features Involved? No
Where: What:
9. Lighting: Does Lighting (Including Natural Light) Contribute to
Expectancy Violations? No
Where: What:
10. Traffic: Do Any Unusual Traffic Patterns or Mixes Exist (Including
Pedestrians)? Yes
Where:At intersection What:No throu�h or left turn movements
allowed from Minor Street
11. Signals: Are Any Signals, Signal Configurations, and/or Signal Patterns Confusing
or Unusual? No
Where: � What:
12. Markings: Are Any Markings (Delineation) Confusing or Unexpected? No
Where: What:
Figure C.4 Jughandle Checklist 50

13. Warning & Regulatory Signs: Are Any Warning and/or Regulatory Signs
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? Yes, surprising
Where: At intersection What: No left turn
14. Navigation: Are Any Guide Signs, Directional Signs, and/or Route Markers
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? Yes, Nonstandard
Where: On minor street approach What: Right turn only, Ri ng t onl�
301
15. Missing Information: Is Any Needed Information Missing? Yes
Where:_On minor street approach What: Dia,�rammatic si n�displaving
how to com�lete throu�h or left movement
16. Others: Is There Anything else About the Site or Location Surprising or
Confusing? No
Where: What:
Figure C.4 Jughandle Checklist 51

DETAILED EXPECTANCY CHECKLIST
Reviewer: Thom son Date: 7/16/O1
Location: Continuous Flow Intersection — MD 210 & MD 228, Prince Geor�es Co., MD
1. Upstream Land Use: Residential Have Changes Occurred?_Yes
Where: Downstream What: Commercial
2. Upstream Road Type: Divided Hi h�waX Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What:
3. Upstream Road Surface: OK Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What: �
4. Upstream Cross-Section: 41ane, 40'-50' median Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What:
5. Terrain: Do Terrain Features or Manmade Elements Provide False Cues? No
Where: What:
6. Geometry: Does Geometry or Geometric Inconsistencies Surprise Drivers? No
Where: What:
7. Sight Distances: Does Poor Sight Distance Cause Drivers to Miss
Unexpected Features? No
Where: What:
8. Weather: Are Temporary Weather Features Involved? No
Where: What:
9. Lighting: Does Lighting (Including Natural Light) Contribute to
Expectancy Violations? No
Where: What:
10. Traffic: Do Any Unusual Traffic Patterns or Mixes Exist (Including
Pedestrians)? Yes
Where:Prior to intersection WhatMinor street — the wav the
movements split
11. Signals: Are Any Signals, Signal Configurations, and/or Signal Patterns Confusing
or Unusual? No
Where: � What:
12. Markings: Are Any Markings (Delineation) Confusing or Unexpected? No
Where: What:
Figure C.5 Continuous Flow Intersection Checklist 52

13. Warning & Regulatory Signs: Are Any Warning and/or Regulatory Signs
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? Yes, nonstandard
Where: At intersection What: Traffic From Right Does Not Sto�
14. Navigation: Are Any Guide Signs, Directional Signs, and/or Route Markers
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? No
Where:
What:
15. Missing Information: Is Any Needed Information Missing? No
Where:
What:
16. Others: Is There Anything else About the Site or Location Surprising or
Confusing? No
Where: What:
Figure C.5 Continuous Flow Intersection Checklist 53

DETAILED EXPECTANCY CHECKLIST
Reviewer: Thom son Date: 7/16/O1
Location: Bowtie Based on Si nin Plan
1. Upstream Land Use: Commercial Have Changes Occurred?_No
Where: What:
2. Upstream Road Type: Undivided Hi�hwaX Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What:
3. Upstream Road Surface: OK Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What: �
4. Upstream Cross-Section: 41ane Have Changes Occurred? No
Where: What:
5. Terrain: Do Terrain Features or Manmade Elements Provide False Cues? No
Where: What:
6. Geometry: Does Geometry or Geometric Inconsistencies Surprise Drivers? No
Where: What:
7. Sight Distances: Does Poor Sight Distance Cause Drivers to Miss
Unexpected Features? No
Where: What:
8. Weather: Are Temporary Weather Features Involved? No
Where: What:
9. Lighting: Does Lighting (Including Natural Light) Contribute to
Expectancy Violations? No
Where: What:
10. Traffic: Do Any Unusual Traffic Patterns or Mixes Exist (Including
Pedestrians)? Yes
Where:At intersection What:No left turns, must use
roundabout to on minor street to make left turns
11. Signals: Are Any Signals, Signal Configurations, and/or Signal Patterns Confusing
or Unusual? No
Where: � What:
12. Markings: Are Any Markings (Delineation) Confusing or Unexpected? No
Where: What:
Figure C.6 Bowtie Checklist 54

13. Warning & Regulatory Signs: Are Any Warning and/or Regulatory Signs
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? Yes, nonstandard
Where: Prior to intersection What: All Turns from Right Lane, Left
Turns Keep Straight
14. Navigation: Are Any Guide Signs, Directional Signs, and/or Route Markers
Surprising, Confusing, Obsolete and/or Nonstandard? Yes
Where: A�proachin� the Intersection What: Diagrammatic Si�n
15. Missing Information: Is Any Needed Information Missing?
Where:
What:
16. Others: Is There Anything else About the Site or Location Surprising or
Confusing? No
Where:
What:
Figure C.6 Bowtie Checklist 55

APPENDIX D
PUBLIC INFORMATION BROCHURES
56

City o# San Buena�entura, California
3RD STREET
WESTBOUND AT JACK54N STREET
EASTBQUND AT WASHING70N STREET
'The aew "promctrd/perm'rasive" aignal operstios to be instalted at the inurscetions oi ]rd Stmt with 1acicson
and west=ingtaa Sueecs wi11 coesist u( ��aia six sup �phase] sigaa� �equence For us�Pf'ic ie t3�e lcfr lane of 3rti
Streat (westbaund te so�ethiw�ad at lackson apd esstboeaad po narrhbound at Wastain�on) as indiCated �eiow.
Alth�gh the signsl operation will be thc �atne ea at 6th at�d lecksao and 5th oed Weshinatan, the �itawable
tratffic moveaxnts ste son�swhet different beeavse of ths ditfecence ie the tane coafigurations. Nate the
a�ddlnonal sign thas wili be uaed at ehex laacivr�s.
r •
. i�` ,
►./t� . �
.�
��
,<� .. .
I.att lane sign�l dl��lay wlth signs.
Signal �peratlon Ssquenee
Cireea h�lf. Oocominq aaPfic now lus s
Red ughG A11 er�ffic in thla laee must swp. �a lig�t irat�[e ia chis lane may
Croaa atreet n�affic ia proceetii.ng, coutiaua to gv susi�ht ecrns� the ine�r.
section. However, aa indicaud by the
sige, uaftic in tt►6s ls� �ust now yield to
oncomi�g naffic before tumiag ioR.
�
Qs�n tirm�w rvith greea baI�. FrAP[ie 3a dse
left laae may eit�et nu�a !eft a canriuue
� su�aighe acros+ the inursectioa. The gmn
arrow indicaoes that tbe le$ mrn is
"prouxted." that is, botb t�a vncomia�
� traPfic �ad e:os� s�set unffcc uo atopped.
2
Yel�ow brl1. Prepue to stop. Thc ligh� is
ahaut m chaags m red. Cmss acreet
trs�fic is �,batt ro �tart groteedie�.
5
- Yellnw uiow wich grcrc ball. 'The yellaw
srxow ind'xea�rs �h�e the "penucted" leit tum
_'�s �cr�caatus,g, an� asuet�ag u�ifhc'u %eu� � R�d Eight. Al! uaffic ia thi� Z�ne a�f�uat
to teesive a grocn liglu. Trafflc in the left
I�ae may eanpaue ta go strefq�t across the stop. Crosa saeec tta�CCic is praceeding.
istsrseedoa, but kft-tumen musc naw
preparc to yield [o oncaau.ng trafftc.
� �
Figure D1 Protective/Permissive Signal Brochure (Pline)
57

�--
r
m
Clhrr pbitP+lnfvrain�t��.�
�Rv.Btirr� A.�fl�b�o
��
.. - .vs d =an�• r- - �
'i .' U :. i 'rY.: Fyzv��
.�. . -�::�R.x.
. � .��,:.,��
�.��nr 5�P"N SYsmii�
+'. il :i[Tlu� �vaa�r3 ���nils
�..`.�ih] dwtmn;
. s .�� P¢.v�+'S
�. :.,,,,r„�y-��,•�_
. � : �n,. .-=y
� ��i�_wrs:Y:. , ...
s.•.. �- . .. . � � ... �
..- =��xy�u',,; . .:, .
, . „ �. �;,��;�s��,��,•.;��;��; ,�
. .,n,u��:�. � acur:,..,.,:.
� r: � �etw:v.� r..=
ic€r r�rrr,
Ti�ffic �igr#�fs
.. ,� ..i� ......... .
v. rF`+�t�i�i�..a,7.. .i�.
rranl{,�4� Irt::{:5.. .
- .aa�llY �iri.3 � 4
�. f�y��._"_': :
s'in �� #�"4 z: .
.. •Yfhi�4lr.� ...
:f�M��4�4�+-": " .
7"i� T�i�i� r1ii; p�-, �r
y��lifp s.t►�n�y'+�>
.. i4nl l}I Tk Ib! :�it-w. .
.i N��x110 . hW" "
�v. v�r.-.iaY�'�i .
^ . � _i5ti r - •
.��.i �� ��.�i[ v�{`.'���•
FfPMi1IR'���PTlIRj7J CYE
[rt�f hr�r ��pn�l�
�� .
�a�-,-��: �,��r.-S . � �
�.r.a.e�nmr:-a,-+vn+4r� �����
�Yi1� {nl�h�011n i7N�i 9m�+ -1�.�n
.h.�l il 4{�IUy t-�ihU] {Y ly� �� •i�r /
•_:kar.•.._ �h�.+c:.r�.. ,., ,.
�,,.k n. ��: �� � �� �
..� ai����.,n.xi.mu.,��
. .� � n �. w�
. . ��rd � �+'�I •Xr4 Yti d.l�
, . � ri krr }yra� �s''� jrG i
. sv�o�84}�II'f+�iUC�.
�.' ii 1u T1 NIP+ Pb R�Mb
� ..,.I.}Y�n4"L'4Q'oP�IW��W
� ..�.� 57Ni�S�7Yhl birol
• .-„�nia�rr.naiw!Waa�t
. ,t,mi+a�a�thww
• ' ++R 6 M5 {Sk�+P¢ t1�L 7
. � �.T�LSiL :•�`•�d.'Y4M^i.�
�. IJlif svY.rS�rx ik N4/W i1�
t �..1{=E4trChh1lhr�M�M1.�YQ
,��wFf 4FNh L':IGC p hMYF 4U1
� •,•�:nCrx��r�na�m+q
- � � L's w rckCe�y}j � }
Figure D.2 Left-Turn Traffic Signals Brochure (Pline)
w#�r p�,n�� �r�. c�tr u,.o-
Frale[ted74rrnl��l.r LeF{
7�rn SJgRytF 1.. ry.Y fxrr?
� ' _'.-.'_ .. ... k5
�r'�4Y+GCs�'�v�5�• ��iL��:a17
7�{ti7R14;!t:'riS.Y•5�yvu i
+'�A�TK E+�If{i1�W.,�.yF..�y.syo�
��+^�9�+Y�dOl1�•T r^ Y fk
.a..r,�i� �{ s4=��i
1+Sn��O� {L" �T[fI_•Tt+a "
vs+�T..-�"1x+'.r�'r+a•R��"cL I
�d t.��X 1(r N. � �.� .}i'„S'�I'
�r�xi�'rLm' Iv�� N �•.1f W
�.�L[W :r:i Yq�.X¢vp :#�.v+41 �y.i
w+}�fR�R k_w'. kaFSnrw� y' W
•�..M�41�..r. �,.�,y�'
��ix�.y or-„� .,.��..sx ;:�-•; ;F
lcaYa.aaxru�r'.}4s�`.� S^T�.
1 ayfvir �.�1irn,u.+« T�.'
w"J{hi2�.rr.rn� :r. ar.y
r r_. � Y LY� la��-Yq:2�far.�ar N
� i Sv;� Yll Ya'.i 1r.v� ��t�`cy� w �r �
�'ifK!M1 �41avn Uc�irr. �r�.L�3�1
�wv.r q�xa� m.ii i��ss+; a�
t. s....x r.re yo x+�- s+w+�_�a
-w �� r� �..� �� r+a+�n..�
.�..., ie � sr t K+�nr.:
�- r� .c � s-u � ��� x-
'.Js� �ti�� c L4 l v S. Y�¢ �r
•��r-nr�a� Az-m�.r�t
I.�'sf Wi: RY\w� FnY h�turw�: �d
i..,,.��m*wra r.� M+.tw
i '�✓liA 'LLlr- M1*{k�l{���tiirn
� ,-3.eWr.rna-�.at�-.-e,.:,..
, _,... .t.:.i',.� , , . s. � � -
.=x.�'
:

�'�.J'E
.. .Y 'u
_� 't
���;x
a ? E.Y
4 � } �
�y y:i
�' � �
7 * Y �
y � '
"�-y�
�'�a fi
:��=
�
� E j�. �
u� �G"
F �k ; �a
jj f. _.�
H�E��
i�0 �
..: y � � t.
fi � v ? �
9
� � �
��a
�3� a
Y � y �
''k S
�'_a k� �
� � � -
�j�
y ry '
_ :I �. 3
r 3 - '
.k �
c ' 4
r 5 �`
Figure D.3 Left-Turn Phasing Warrants Brochure (Pline)
r.
�
TL
C �
�. F
:s
{ "r
a 5
1 �
.I �
�
ra
8
F
F
�
59

APPENDIX E
TEXAS VITAL SIGNS CAMPAIGN SIGN
.1

e
T�R�F��f� ������ �►�� 11���`�E
T� ���I�E� ��1FETY.
LE�1�� TI��M.
lJ f� � E R���►fV ��H E N�.
F�l��VI1 T'F�E�V1.
�t. � :c�l���y���e. c�r•i�+r�rx� .��u;�rv's•r, ,S�'�ti� ��r�
,� � r . � `�°�[:�7�°'�.��S,.�iA�G?�d �)u�,�vr� .
ti' �' r .r�'�."�!'!fi� �� �",•T'? �.'!5n+a{ ... I
_ � � _.
- . J.
� � ��•� h
�� � � I
�����
} , �I � I � � �

APPENDIX F
NCDOT PUBLIC INFORMATION BROCHURES
62

����
r r ��. a•� i ��
�` .fi.�.
� :`�: :+�'.' ��
,�i �
�'r.�� r�. a �E � �,�: i � [ � . �uc�t. � _�.�
L)�F'?�F�T���fF.�l�I' �)1° `l'I��SF'�F�T_�']��IC��I
\[ic�ri�5._�:i.l'. I�. �,�i i-�� I.���rs7�llr�L7'�:
4' 7' : j \4`.i. \� :�F.I.Y \A 5
� R��:4L�;:L*L: ]n�oitiJi_r�_ 1'F.�� I;- �I:i-:l: '. '[�ll
{'�l�l'.1{-T; [;:�c+� K4,beris. l`� l!f! 7�= -'_' 117 t,r lllwl'Rll�l'Tif}ti� a;. '�,, � I. K'.
eri.r�l: ��ml,eri;t�='tl�.�[.si_ue.vL�.��v C�.Lk'
�:�::L�1' \{7..
�:}��i�:Dl_l _�l.r_��1��°x�
��n��r ��r:c�i�E�:�� I�'i-1•;Rti�r;�T'F ']5 �[}C�'l�kl .�\L} t.�-�_ .! �rt ��
H:�l2���_��"I' {'C}L���rl
C��l,f�:lt:€E—Th74• � C�. �h[+;:f�i7ti.7� t�r ir.m;����r,�iiun i��C�€]C}�1�1 1�.7., I�i{4�,�n�•�� �Ill4`C��.1�4' 4}�
.�4�11[11.11 ��i[ i� iii la.inirll {'�rliRl'.. =�l:t�_ L-.�. ��l ,,[ 1-�}w ji:a: Tk•t7G�l1w�.
�1-lu• ,}�iiki�i�' I�:[14 1}{ l-{?5 ,�t�u[11 :lii,l t,nr 1a11C ln k�i1tiL7 ULfLti�L4�ll i,n [�.5. •3?1 �4'CC4' tilu:tid
4��ii�`.�x. l��l�r�i.�rx� ?(�, {47T hn;��*t [��:iii:;. :lii:l If71' �'Il1tiIR�� 34'ti�� �uui�i�):][�tl uo- l;sx[ [��� I�s3��r
u'4�k:. lJu� [o Lt�ti�[l x��.i�Eirr ;vrn� 4C4'il'� x3�t�il:ii��� ,�ct�ui«� �l�r cI4}4A. �� L�{} � 54::� :�I}�L� Ii}
�,,;,��,ls•s�• ih4 pn,i�cs ,U7ti:t�1 t�r,�k7�t3��1�•.
1=u1� Rlc�[C lnFoi�li�[itm i,iy :Iri; r�7.1t�2_ tt��si.l�[ Iht� I,ri�l�-�• :n:rin;:•I�.L7i4 tiil��iiitf�� ii+.
r:�ks•���•k�;�lk• :�� s<s�[r� 4 't� ��= �7.
� ,�"�\ l: �1 ��l"l� * ^ �
l�.,ru�.hrrLr,rn>Fr,rs_ii,,nqut�>ri��;�z.,�.��:lh�drF��.rinrer_i'.i'r,i,����_� ti4��,i.�t�liii�;:
u�ll fcer ai I-��--1?l}•L'-�F1'l7l',
1=t•� icl�t}:i7�:i:i4•u �J���ai �n:�it,r r4}nitrau�lit}n �+r•.}j.t[4 ac�t,c� �I�t� ki_�l�-. x�s;lllie \C-UC�T L'�}�rsu �it�[i��ii
�1'���'IIY:I�I�'ll �,L�L'��CI'.'C41LI�_IL ti�_���IIti':I�'�515N'.4I.5I7'_i�l.�l.11L.11ti_LI�LI}7��_::ir�::��'.�I'15t'
I'_i{'.\I�:.•il��:"::_'�li'� F.t��i.ty,M1._ �:_I
Figure F.1 NCDOT News Release (NCDOT)
63

�
•
c
� �
� �
� �
� �
� �
� 4
� �
o io
v� 'r;+.
C �O
��
�: L
F.1 �
� �
D
� �
c =
E u
b � -
CJ �
��
��
��
�
�4
- G
•� �
�
� �
a �
Z °J �
�, Y �
�O
� �
a
+�. a.,
� +_.� -
� �
� Q
� g-
L �� .
w d
G ,,�
+� +,
� u
a� �
� '�
� �
��
a c
t� �
c �
.p C
L •�
u E
� �
L =
� �E v�
z
� U •�
� � �
�
C7
�
i:]
�
L
C6
�
co
'�
�
�
�
f--
¢
Q
Figure F.2 Community Meeting Flyer (NCDOT)
�
0
a�
��
za
��
�a
M �
2 �
w
� �
¢�
� �
aF
oa
�
c�3 �
��
o�
��
�
�u
_ �i'"
�:w,::...
���
�,

- - -- --,�,
- .CGt, . _ �_. .
-;�..}. r� �k;•: . _
o-s w+ r
� i �
E � �
�
� r�9} �
L V
Il-� ,� f�`i
� � L1'1
C '� �
1 � �
� � 4
Uti
.� �W
W
� r K
❑ � �
� � �
' � 1
�
= Ct '�
�' a r
� � �'
�
� C '�
�_�
_ �
� } ,�
� � �
� C }
� o z+
w� ti �
v y �
� " •l7 �
� � � 0
��� � �
u
� � Q u
V � � �
� V'I �
G �
�
L� o�
� O V 4
t7
a
n
�
�
u
e,
,�
c
�
V
C�
�
�
�
u
3
��
Q�
t
W
��
.�
v
�
C
D
�
��
3�`' i `
,
: = �: p
yAfik I __3 S
O S —
_ -- � I
A �-� � i
{ �ti � .
- - I—I I
L
D
- � b8
4 �� C
N � �
� — T
� � �
.� Q �
4 � >+
.i � �
� �
o '
� ,�
E °s
� ^� o-n
� � 7�7
, i`S C
� � �
� � i
� ' �
" o p
� � �
�L �
� �
= C �
._ � _ � �
C r
� r� � C c
C
�*,] 4 � � i
' � '7 i�
.- �'c � '-$ � {J �
� E� " � � �
r 4� 7� p
G i (5 l+�` ��`J � '�
i'} � + � — p] >+ �
L i'� R ^ � �
�N C �
� � � � �� � �
r��'— q� j f`? ��` 4
r _ � � � IL C+5 �
� � 4. � i � . .
�
Figure F.3 Project/Construction Information Flyer (NCDOT)
ia
3
�
W
C
.�
E
L
C
.�
c
�n
L"
G
.1:
L
�
_4
'
u
i�
�
Q
u
�
C
m
�
{j
�
�
ca
� �
— C
k �
C] ,s
L L
� �
F--'
_ �
C
n �
L:. _
.'S _
_ �
.- :�
'� 2
L '. ;
I
�

�le�r���� ,�rive
�� i,��
Sr���e �����ce����
� �e�tin� �a ��f��~m
t�� c�r-�m�ni�y.
��7 Q:
G�tti��s�;riu Citz� 1"�licc anri [Itc 1�Tu:tli
� C�LU�ii�3 Dr�aarmtimt nETr,fnsE�o.[:�tio��_
`�,
W�a�: �. .. . .
�. L'?�'�� r� un_�-r- ��1}C [ �11<� {u tliv�usa rh� .� irrTi [ i�
':���:��r tiri4iec`zrplacc�ricn�°:=�.":.:�'�."�<...•:. .. .
1N�er�: .... ..' .`�.._ .". . -.Y�='"_ �. -
5cptc��ilr:r l.b. L�?9F� — � _ - - _ - . �
-- �,i:�. tn �] �,.r.7. ' - . .
.�- - ti V� LP `•_ '
Whe�*�:. _. �
' :w�� x���, s��a� �ud�����:��ti.
���or
���i���
f�nr o�h,rr rc��tsspc,�,:[iv,�
qu��T;or��: call [hr 41c��,nr�tstcn[�
' �Xi,trRmCFSCf3�LL: �fCLti�
' �nll frce rcls•�+hn[sc uui7Yl,4r :x,
1-a .-L}C�T3E�'C�L?
�
' � � � �� �
. ���
- ��
,,� � .�
�
�t ti.Yi� '":}: -�.�SL_r}i �7ir�.-�.�...
� I'.4' 1.'_N.` :1J�J�h:�,'b.'. ffV:��r LC`.' YY_�i_Y: :�: :. r
,1.;�'�.*� '— k-R'� t'.�.L`W �.}.'�"E'!T �' n. _:��:..-� ,
�� v=�cr�_���};,•; T r fi� n� ���,T v, rc_�.x:�t .
?�:i'Y .xi : i 9� �'-:i f7.r�. _rir Nir_•ra1 �x �r i�o= sf 3 rr,:n r_� S' ��4 I
Figure F.4 Community Meeting Doar Hanger (NCDOT)

� ��• � �
}s r�ow fo�r l�r��s rr�
���v�r� � �n�I P�r��Yrr�a�� ���n�i�:
The NoE�tlz Carc�lin� pcpar[men� of Transpor#atinsr f��s 4vide��ecE �1,5, 17 ..,
fo�r lanes di�rided by a rr�e�ian f�am ilic Ede�itan Bypass tn t]re 1��crt�o��
�yp�sw a# U,S, 17 ��sir�es� �c�ut�i c}f E��r�t�rd,
=� �::� :ca.y-
��r�� �an�� �vill I�� ���� �� ����� in ���1�
����L����� �i I ZYl�� ��f �L1.l���l ��I �1�����■
�it�toei�� aee ur��d to [�c�R� C�ot� w��rs and use caution when ent�r€ni trafri�.
���` �
R �
� �
..r,.�r;"""""; _� :,....:�-�-�r- •.-�-��Ya'�
�Z'� � .' � . . .G. h �.�µ.-�.i .4. I"_:.eri.=•i
t }-+ .' . ��!� r• r .. J_�i
,�L-�" �'�� _ �•�.�.�i4:r�::.C� ���?'� i� CI'�!i�• j�1_�a��+� �'�
"• i . --" _ :'�_ • _ - �.j�'+�.'L _Y4r±.
. t ; ... i ..I�'.-�I;_Yi"�-Tf'L.��L.f.1
'����' _!I.,' i - `S.i'''. � �_1'i
. !� �'��'���' � -
:'�� [.. .�!�.,,:,� ...�� :,..: i'6'_�:r� �':;�
- _ � �J_I...i.l.�. � ... �' -._i. _ �:.r+"r - ��1J�,
..�-.--�-.rr� �.r.,,r�._..,.�... ti�_��ti�,:.�r .r,-r-�-s-r3,.:�
�
�
I
rF�'
4i�ORKI�I�IFSW4FFf-Y T7Ja5
' tiw� za,t x
. ���
����! • sr.av ��Far �.vl�i[e ;irivinn lhra�i�� CMe ���:ark �oeir..
�sr,ar.;�r . 1�L'aid'1 �bl'Y1c'l�trutii[: ���ttQn4S.
• C�b�v th� speed limil ai3�3 alla��u fixt-o :irrti� ta�r iraav�l.
� ��r;•.mar���7�arirrat'�sh��r�.i��.�3.7.i�hsjr��drar�,mriiori-L'�eFcs;�erit��riar�r�pr�in�_��ari;kie�o�f���}332��4_::�::"_ - - ..
. , . ,......••-••••,. . .,, . , . . ...._..,.. ----.._.y----•..�.._....., .
� ,�4r�:.s�,��{tt��tc�hmv�7ClfL�iP_�R . I'�aai.. ��t}flhC'�.fC'a91.laC'�'V'IYIISCII[{ifYF}ni�klii�iii115
fCfrrrv�iJ;�[:ff7k'�JOfl.i't71"�r�Cf!f!i�f�?C;74'f1I£r4�.V7k'7Er. � � r.wr'aC7'Pt�hGckij�ormctwr.l7n�r�n
I� ��} r . � - ` -
��1� {i,n'_7 :.-�� iT:S r�'�'�' '�L'e'JY' "F'�'�i � � e'�}ci !'J � �:'f�t� •;:{''. � 4a
Figure F.5 Road Widening Information Flyer (NCDOT)
67

f •�� I" I • � •�.
NCDOT asks your cooperation as
U.S. 3� 1 Widening Continues [n RandoYph County
The Ttarth Carolina Departmen# of Transpartation (NCDOTj is continuing to widen
U.S. 317 to firre Ianes with a center tum lane. Canstruciion began in June 1997 and is
scheduled for [ompleiion in summer 1999.
'The department's top prioriry is safety for mvtoris� and highway workers — both on and
off the highways. That's why beginning in lune, IVCpOT will place concrete barr�er on
eastbound U.S. 311 from Tom Hill Road to Trotter Road. Upon compleiion of eastbound
U.S. 317 work, car�crete barrier wil] be placed an westbpund U.S. 31'! from '[Yo�ter Road io
Tom N[E! Road.
Whi1e the concrete barrier i5 in place, p�ease use the temparary gra�el roadway from
your driveway to access �I.S. 311, which wili be fimi�ed to the Suits Raad intersection.
Work Zone Trps
�� • Please dri�e with cau#ion �n the temporary roadway.
���� • Watch for signs with cvnstruction and roadway access information.
STAYAI.ERi • STAY AL�RT and alfow e�ctra traue[ time when driving through the work
zone.
RecyGing is part of NCDOT construCHpn. NORTH CAROLINA DEpARTMEN'I' OF TRANSPdRTA730N
For mOre Informatlon call the residerrt engineer. fMPACTPUBLlClNFORMA770NPRQGk,4M
75 [opfes aJ this jlyer were reproduced at a cost of 3 rnnfs ¢a[h. £J98
U-2538 -
Figure F.6 Resident and Business Information Flyer (NCDOT)
.:

�
...`` _ _ _ __
_ _iF_+M1 ___ __ -
- _ _ _ __ _ .5.':.1'i" � �_' --- _ .'.1____ __ __ __ ___ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ }-:.".. '�.L-'-_ _ �.4-: .'.':.': v _
'.. -.-._..na:... _ _
'.____ . "i '.. ___ _ _ ' - __ _ _
.... .._' _'__ " .I_..4' - _. • _
"�_� 'r'__ _.____ •___" � - _ __
- : �.__'_ __ {{�4'=Y�s � -_ _ _ . --_ _ ' - .. ..
_ '.l- . `. __ _�;J'J`_�'1�•--- - ______ _ __ .. -,
_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ 3 4 }SY , _
.. ___ � _ ' r�
. . ..... .. � --- - -
_ :....,---. .. ... ..- -- - - --- -
-- -=�� `_ -�i',:� -�--- - _ - h ` '
..'.: . . _ _ _ _ _
.". ' . ": .. ._.=':. .. .-� � _ __ _ _— ' __
'_ �.' y�y�
_ ,4 ,i. ...
. . � _ .. _.. . L�GS �
" �/VL���■ {.iL��Yi� �■F��F ���SRF� J iY1r}i�� _- _ ' __
�iL
� ���� � �*�• �1.► � � i �r�+�r i. I �. ,#�11� ■ 1s�+■ �Ial f L 1 � ��� -
. . � Fl �� F'C �l � r1 �� 5� . . . :--�� r�
. �_�=-= -- -_ = -- _ . � � - __ __ - - - -<:�� - --.
.. --_ i4'_ _ - ' .. ' . . ' __ -.
_ _ - _ _ --_ __ __ _ _---- , ' �l1E5�3�, �CC, � .. __ _i-- - .. .
- ---':;-: -
_-- __ - .-.. -.- --- . --, -_-- .7 p,��o. - 9 �.r7�. . ..
:;� ::.�;.<>::: C�rro�l Middle ���ool Cafet�ria .
_ - �r� the acc�s� ra:�� east of I-�}5 ���w�Ln �he �J.S. 3�� ar�d
___ _. N,C. 2� I Interc}t�ar�g� in f�un�6erton
T7e Narth Caroiina pcp;�re���i7: ofTransport�3tion 4N��pT) will ftiole 3 corrsrr;i�.�ion
in#arm��ipn i����El�lg t0 ciis[�ss t�e i�57�r�v�:m��TS LO ��7€ers�te 95 and inrerc!7aF�.g�s ?c
U_5. 30l, N.C. 21 I and �6.C.. 7�17 f I �ati Lui�berta�,.
NC��7 represei��a�ives will give a snort �Srescnra�"son felfo,�•e� by . c�ucs�ion ai�c� �-_
311SW�r S�ssian_ -
aRtel'e5ied Citi�ens an� r�p:-escn.atiwes frarrt �r�a ���sin�sses :r� cncous�ag�;� tc �;tterd. -
-ti.:::::
For ptitiore inforirs�tian Zb[�u[ vl�e �72eexi=7g c�r k-95 s:r�p� ov�merrs, con:a�t �he r�siCe�t -
engineer in L�imbercoi7 �z (° I 41 7�°-�71 �. . .. _
. :.ti.
a.. .� � � � . . -
— iH� :`�i�FTH C-R��i^i;�. _��-��,:���:-"If L'�'r IShP:C=D�T�.l,4r4. ��� ��i��`_IL r.��.��4'5:.�.T� ��..:�i.�.i�.� .. .
fit ` ry/ _ .
�� �l.'�i�i.:il.� r{ r�ii. .^.�'Yi. i+\}:�4ii.:��4!l'.�1�.�.:... i1�4,� i�itnrr7_iri��.^.. in.�i.,;;c ttie rec.�rr_� enF'r.e:r. �.
_,�11{} �t�->i:< i�!�i�iiK I!�:':: �.._= zr:n��:�i:a'.: r}r n': {{n;it�L:;L ..��:.� .
�
Figure F.7 Construction Information Meeting Flyer (NCDOT)
.•