Citation

Zegeer CV, Cynecki MJ. Transp. Res. Rec. 1984; 970: 52-64.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1984, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences USA, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

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.

Record URL:
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/trr/1984/970/970-008.pdf

Language: en

Keywords

HIGHWAY ENGINEERING; ACCIDENT PREVENTION; POLES