The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts

and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official

policy of the Department of Transportation.

The metric units reported are those used in common practice by the persons interviewed.

They have not been converted to pure SI units because in some cases, the level of precision

implied would have been changed.

The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or

manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the

document.

The publication of this document was sponsored by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration

under contract number DTFH61-99-C00005. awarded to American Trade Initiatives, Inc. Any

opinions, options, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed herein are those of

the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Government, the authors’ parent

institutions, or American Trade Initiatives, Inc.

This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No.

FHWA-PL-00-001

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Methods and Procedures to Reduce Motorist Delays 

in European Work Zones

5. Report Date

October 2000

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) Donald P. Steinke, Len Sanderson, James F. Byrnes, Jr., John 

Conrad, Richard Forrestel, Kathryn Harrington-Hughes, Ken F. Kobetsky, 

Stan Lanford, Karla Snyder-Petty, Dean Testa, Joe D. Wilkerson

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

American Trade Initiatives

P.O. Box 8228

Alexandria, VA 22306-8228

10. Work Unit No.(TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-99-C-0005

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Office of International Programs

Office of Policy

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

FHWA COTR: Donald W. Symmes, Office of International Programs

16. Abstract

Reconstruction of the aging highway system in the United States is resulting in work zone delays, which are a 

growing irritant for motorists. The Federal Highway Administration and the National Cooperative Highway 

Research Program sponsored a scanning tour through Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Scotland, and France 

to look at how those countries manage traffic flow through temporary work zones.

The scanning team observed that highway agencies in those countries view the work zone as a marketplace, with 

drivers as “customers” who should be inconvenienced as little as possible. Emphasis is placed on developing a 

good communications plan and using Intelligent Transportation System technologies to keep drivers informed 

about roadwork projects.

The scanning team recommendations include shortening contract times; improving communication with 

motorists; adopting a coordinated policy, planning, and programming approach to work zone planning and 

operations; possibly reducing lane widths; designing for future maintenance; and evaluating the use of yellow 

markings in work zones.

17. Key Words

Work zone, real-time traffic conditions, contraflow 

lanes, ITS technologies, yellow pavement markings, 

lane rental charges

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the public 

from the 

Office of International Programs

FHWA-HPIP, Room 3325

US Dept. of Transportation

Washington, DC 20590

international@fhwa.dot.gov

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages 

48

22. Price

Free

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
i

Methods and Procedures

to Reduce Motorist Delays

in European Work Zones

Prepared by the study tour team

and

American Trade Initiatives, Inc.

&

Avalon Integrated Services, Inc.

for the

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

and

The National Cooperative Highway Research Program

(Panel 20-36)

of the

Transportation Research Board

October 2000

Donald P. Steinke

FHWA

(Co-chair)

Len Sanderson

North Carolina DOT

(Co-chair)

James F. Byrnes, Jr.

Connecticut DOT

John Conrad

Washington State DOT

(Technical Writer)

Richard Forrestel

Cold Spring Construction Company

Kathryn Harrington-Hughes

Harrington-Hughes & Associates

(Reporter)

Ken F. Kobetsky

AASHTO

Stan Lanford

Lanford Brothers Company

Karla Snyder-Petty

FHWA

Dean Testa

Kansas DOT

Joe D. Wilkerson

FHWA
ii

FHWA INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY

EXCHANGE PROGRAMS

The FHWA’s international programs focus on meeting the growing demands of its

partners at the Federal, State, and local levels for access to information on state-of-theart technology and the best practices used worldwide. While the FHWA is considered a

world leader in highway transportation, the domestic highway community is very

interested in the advanced technologies being developed by other countries, as well as

innovative organizational and financing techniques used by the FHWA’s international

counterparts.

INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SCANNING PROGRAM

The International Technology Scanning Program accesses and evaluates foreign

technologies and innovations that could significantly benefit U.S. highway

transportation systems. Access to foreign innovations is strengthened by U.S.

participation in the technical committees of international highway organizations and

through bilateral technical exchange agreements with selected nations. The program

has undertaken cooperatives with the American Association of State Highway

Transportation Officials and its Select Committee on International Activities, and the

Transportation Research Board’s National Highway Research Cooperative Program

(Panel 20-36), the private sector, and academia.

Priority topic areas are jointly determined by the FHWA and its partners. Teams of

specialists in the specific areas of expertise being investigated are formed and sent to

countries where significant advances and innovations have been made in technology,

management practices, organizational structure, program delivery, and financing.

Teams usually include Federal and State highway officials, private sector and industry

association representatives, as well as members of the academic community.

The FHWA has organized more than 35 of these reviews and disseminated results

nationwide. Topics have encompassed pavements, bridge construction and maintenance,

contracting, intermodal transport, organizational management, winter road

maintenance, safety, intelligent transportation systems, planning, and policy. Findings

are recommended for follow-up with further research and pilot or demonstration

projects to verify adaptability to the United States. Information about the scan findings

and results of pilot programs are then disseminated nationally to State and local

highway transportation officials and the private sector for implementation.

This program has resulted in significant improvements and savings in road program

technologies and practices throughout the United States, particularly in the areas of

structures, pavements, safety, and winter road maintenance. Joint research and

technology-sharing projects have also been launched with international counterparts,

further conserving resources and advancing the state of the art.

For a complete list of International Technology Scanning topics, and to order free copies

of the reports, please see the last page of this publication.

Website: www.international.fhwa.dot.gov

Email: international@fhwa.dot.gov
iii

FHWA INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE REPORTS

Infrastructure

Geotechnical Engineering Practices in Canada and Europe

Geotechnology—Soil Nailing

International Contract Administration Techniques for Quality EnhancementCATQEST

Pavements

European Asphalt Technology

European Concrete Technology

South African Pavement Technology

Highway Information Management

Highway/Commercial Vehicle Interaction

Bridges

European Bridge Structures

Asian Bridge Structures

Bridge Maintenance Coatings

European Practices for Bridge Scour and Stream Instability Countermeasures

Advanced Composites in Bridges in Europe and Japan

Planning and Environment

European Intermodal Programs: Planning, Policy and Technology

National Travel Surveys

Recycled Materials in European Highway Environments

Safety

Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety in England, Germany and the Netherlands

Speed Management and Enforcement Technology: Europe & Australia

Safety Management Practices in Japan, Australia, and New Zealand

Road Safety Audits—Final Report

Road Safety Audits—Case Studies

Innovative Traffic Control Technology & Practice in Europe

Commercial Vehicle Safety Technology & Practice in Europe

Operations

Advanced Transportation Technology

European Traffic Monitoring

Traffic Management and Traveler Information Systems

European Winter Service Technology

Snowbreak Forest Book – Highway Snowstorm Countermeasure Manual (Translated

from Japanese)

Policy & Information

Emerging Models for Delivering Transportation Programs and Services

Acquiring Highway Transportation Information from Abroad—Handbook

Acquiring Highway Transportation Information from Abroad—Final Report

International Guide to Highway Transportation Information

Also available on the internet

Only on the internet at www.international.fhwa.dot.gov
iv

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................. v

General Observations ................................................................................................. v

Recommendations ...................................................................................................... vi

CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 1

CHAPTER TWO – GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ........................................................... 3

Customer Focus ........................................................................................................... 3

Effective, Extensive Communication Plan ................................................................. 3

Extensive Use of ITS Technologies ............................................................................. 3

Communications Links ............................................................................................... 4

Yellow Pavement Markings ........................................................................................ 4

CHAPTER THREE – KEY FINDINGS ............................................................................ 5

Shorter Construction Periods...................................................................................... 5

Better Communications with Motorists ..................................................................... 7

Coordinated Policy, Planning, and Programming Approach for Work Zones .......... 10

Narrowed Lanes in Work Zones ................................................................................ 13

Designs that Accommodate Future Maintenance .................................................... 13

Yellow Markings in Work Zones ............................................................................... 14

Highly Visible Traffic Control Devices and Equipment........................................... 14

Quality Control/Quality Assurance Programs for Traffic and Worker Safety ........ 15

An Emphasis on Innovation...................................................................................... 16

CHAPTER FOUR – RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 17

Shorten the Contract Time ....................................................................................... 17

Improve Communication with Motorists.................................................................. 17

Adopt a Coordinated Policy, Planning, and Programming Approach to

 Work Zone Planning and Operations..................................................................... 17

Don’t be Afraid to Reduce Lane Widths in Work Zones ........................................... 18

Design for Future Maintenance................................................................................ 18

Evaluate the Use of Yellow Pavement Markings in Work Zones............................. 18

Use Highly Visible Traffic Control Devices and Equipment to Warn

 Motorists of, and Guide them Through, Work Zones ............................................. 18

Implement Quality Control/Quality Assurance Programs for Traffic

 and Worker Safety .................................................................................................. 18

Encourage Innovation ............................................................................................... 18

CHAPTER FIVE – IMPLEMENTATION ...................................................................... 20

CHAPTER SIX – CONCLUSION ................................................................................... 21

APPENDIX A – RESEARCH PROBLEM STATEMENT OF THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH ........................................................................ 22

APPENDIX B – TEAM MEMBERS................................................................................ 23

APPENDIX C – HOSTS .................................................................................................. 26

APPENDIX D – PRODUCT MANUFACTURERS/VENDORS ..................................... 32

APPENDIX E – AMPLIFYING QUESTIONS ............................................................... 33
v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Work zone delays are an increasing irritant for U.S. motorists. Throughout the nation,

the aging highway system is undergoing unprecedented amounts of reconstruction and

maintenance, creating detours and traffic jams that delay and irk travelers and

shippers. Instances of “road rage” in work zones are becoming more prevalent.

Motorists often find work zones confusing and frustrating, forcing them to navigate

changing traffic patterns and distractions. In 1997, more than 600 fatalities occurred in

work zone crashes, at a high personal and societal cost.

Directing and managing traffic through work zones is an important, high-stakes task.

If the task is done properly, motorists will able to travel safely and smoothly through

the work zone and crews will be able to perform their work safely. If the task is done

improperly, accidents will likely increase, traffic will back up, motorist frustration will

grow, and goods shipments will be delayed.

The Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) and the National Cooperative

Highway Research Program (NCHRP)

sponsored a scanning tour to give U.S.

highway agency and contractor

representatives a first-hand look at how

several other countries manage traffic flow

through temporary work zones. The tour

started in Cologne, Germany, and then

went to the Hague, the Netherlands;

Antwerp, Belgium; Edinburgh, Scotland;

and Paris, France.

The scanning team was led by Don Steinke, director of FHWA’s Office of Transportation

Operations, and Len Sanderson, North Carolina State Highway Administrator. The

other members of the team were: James F. Byrnes, Jr., chief of the Bureau of

Engineering and Highway Operations and chief engineer for the Connecticut

Department of Transportation (DOT); John Conrad, assistant secretary for field

operations support with the Washington State DOT; Richard Forrestel, chief executive

officer and chairman of the board of Cold Spring Construction Company in New York;

Stan Lanford, president of Lanford Brothers Company in Virginia; Karla Snyder-Petty,

assistant division administrator for FHWA’s Missouri Division; Dean Testa,

construction and maintenance engineer and chief of the Bureau of Construction and

Maintenance, Kansas DOT; Joe Wilkerson, division administrator for FHWA’s Alabama

Division; Ken Kobetsky, program director for engineering at the American Association

of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO); and Kathryn HarringtonHughes, president of Harrington-Hughes & Associates, who served as reporter.

In each country, the team members toured construction and maintenance work zones

and met with, and heard presentations from, highway agency representatives.

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

The team noted several general observations about how the five countries deal with

traffic operations and safety in work zones:

Directing and managing traffic

through work zones is an

important, high-stakes task. If the

task is done properly, motorists

will able to travel safely and smoothly

through the work zone and crews will be

able to perform their work safely.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

vi

• When planning rehabilitation or maintenance projects, the highway agencies

focus a great deal of attention and resources on evaluating how the project will

affect their customers—the highway users—and then on developing and

implementing strategies to minimize those effects. Work zones are viewed as

much more than construction zones; they are viewed, in a sense, as a

marketplace, i.e., the highway agency wants to ensure that its goods (the

highway) are pleasing to its customers and meet its customers’ needs, even

during construction and maintenance activities.

• Highway agencies place a great deal of emphasis on developing and

implementing a communications plan to inform the public about work zones and

provide alternative routes well in advance of the project start date, as well as on

keeping the public informed about real-time traffic situations.

• Agencies and contractors extensively use ITS technologies to communicate with

the public.

• Intra-agency and inter-agency communication links are strong, reliable, and

effective.

• In Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Belgium, yellow pavement markings

are used in work zones (in normal conditions, lane markings are white in these

countries), as a visual reminder to the motorist that “something is different” and

extra caution is needed.

RECOMMENDATIONS

After discussing and evaluating what they had seen, heard, and experienced in the five

countries, the scanning team developed the following recommendations for improving

traffic flow and safety in U.S. highway work zones:

1. Shorten the contract time. Lane rental charges can provide significant incentives

for shaving time from construction projects and ensuring that construction is

done right the first time.

2. Improve communications with motorists. Advance and real-time information

flows can be enhanced through the use of ITS and other technologies.

3. Adopt a coordinated policy, planning, and programming approach to work zone

planning and operations. Work zone operations should be considered early in the

project development stage.

4. Don’t be afraid to reduce lane widths in work zones. By narrowing the lanes in

work zones, agencies can maintain the same number of lanes and thus minimize

delays. Narrower lanes have the added benefit of encouraging traffic to slow

down.

5. Design for future maintenance. In new construction, design and build shoulders

to have adequate structural capacity so that traffic can be rerouted onto the

shoulder during future construction and maintenance operations.

6. Evaluate the use of yellow markings in work zones. Yellow markings were

effectively used to delineate traffic lanes in temporary work zones. (This
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

vii

evaluation could perhaps be piggybacked onto an ongoing NCHRP study

evaluating the use of all-white markings on highways.)

7. Consider using highly visible traffic control devices and equipment to warn

motorists of, and guide them through, work zones. These devices include large

truck- or trailer-mounted signs and portable sign gantries.

8. Implement quality control/quality assurance programs for traffic and worker

safety. Safety audits, quality audits based on the ISO certification process, and

job-specific traffic control plans can improve safety for both motorists and

workers.

9. Encourage innovation. As exemplified by the Dutch “Roads for the Future”

project, agencies should concentrate on long-term thinking and short-term

action.
viii
1

Chapter One

INTRODUCTION

Work zone delays are a growing irritant for U.S. motorists. Across the nation, the aging

highway system is undergoing unprecedented amounts of reconstruction and

maintenance, creating detours and traffic jams that delay and irk travelers and

shippers. Instances of “road rage” are becoming more prevalent.

Work zones can be confusing and frustrating to motorists, who must navigate through

narrowed, shifting traffic lanes, adapt to sudden changes in travel speed, and avoid

being distracted by adjacent project work. In 1997, 658 fatalities occurred in work zone

crashes in the United States, at a high cost to highway workers and highway travelers,

as well as to their families, employers, and society.

Directing and managing traffic through work zones is an important, high-stakes task.

If the task is done properly, it will allow motorists to travel safely and smoothly

through the work zone and allow work crews to accomplish their tasks safely. If the

task is done improperly, the result will likely be more crashes, more traffic backups,

growing motorist frustration, and delayed goods shipments.

The Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) and the National Cooperative

Highway Research Program (NCHRP)

sponsored a scanning tour to give U.S.

highway agency and contractor

representatives a first-hand look at

how several other countries manage

traffic flow through temporary work

zones. The tour started in Cologne,

Germany, and then continued to the

Hague, the Netherlands; Antwerp,

Belgium; Edinburgh, Scotland; and

Paris, France (Figure 1).

The scanning team was led by Don

Steinke, director of FHWA’s Office of

Transportation Operations, and Len

Sanderson, North Carolina State

Highway Administrator. The other

members of the team were: James F.

Byrnes, Jr., chief of the Bureau of

Engineering and Highway Operations

and chief engineer for the Connecticut

Department of Transportation (DOT);

John Conrad, assistant secretary for

field operations support with the

Washington State DOT; Richard

Forrestel, chief executive officer and

chairman of the board of Cold Spring

Construction Company in New York,

Figure 1. The team visited highway agencies and work

zones in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Scotland,

and France.

Germany

The Netherlands

Belgium

France

Scotland
CHAPTER 1

2

who also represented the Associated General Contractors of America; Stan Lanford,

president of Lanford Brothers Company in Virginia, who also represented the American

Road and Transportation Builders Association; Karla Snyder-Petty, assistant division

administrator for FHWA’s Missouri Division; Dean Testa, construction and

maintenance engineer and chief of the Bureau of Construction and Maintenance,

Kansas DOT; Joe Wilkerson, division administrator for FHWA’s Alabama Division; Ken

Kobetsky, program director for engineering at the American Association of State

Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO); and Kathryn Harrington-Hughes,

president of Harrington-Hughes & Associates, who served as reporter.

The team members compiled a list of amplifying questions (see Appendix 5), which was

sent to each country before the start of the tour. The highway agencies in each country

were thus aware of the team’s principal areas of interest. The team members toured

temporary work zones in each country and met with, and heard presentations from,

highway agency representatives.

The team members were charged with reporting back on innovative practices or

technologies that merit evaluation or consideration in the United States. Their findings

and recommendations are included in this report, which is intended to spur U.S.

highway agencies to “think outside the box” and consider trying some of the practices

and technologies used in Europe. The report is not intended to be a synthesis of

European practice.
3

Chapter Two

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

The five countries visited share some common key practices and policies regarding

traffic operations and safety in work zones.

CUSTOMER FOCUS

In all five countries, the highway agencies focus a great deal of attention and resources

on ensuring that the needs of their customers—the people who use and rely on the

road—are met during construction and maintenance operations. The work zone is

viewed as more than a roadway construction or maintenance site; rather, it is seen as a

marketplace of sorts, and the highway agency wants to ensure that its goods (the

roadway) are meeting its customers’ needs, even during construction and maintenance

operations. The agencies thoroughly evaluate how a maintenance project will affect the

safety, travel, and convenience of their customers and then develop and implement

strategies to minimize the effects of the work zone on their customers.

Several countries have established specific limits or goals regarding traffic operations

in work zones. For example, France is striving to limit delays caused by construction

and maintenance work to no more than a 6 percent loss of time over a 100-km stretch of

roadway, and in the Netherlands, where 13 percent of all traffic delays are attributed to

roadway work, the goal is to reduce the amount of work zone delays to 6 percent.

EFFECTIVE, EXTENSIVE COMMUNICATION PLAN

A great deal of emphasis is placed on developing and implementing a communications

plan to effectively and extensively inform highway users about scheduled road work,

alternative routes, and real-time traffic conditions. Every available means of reaching

motorists is used, including Internet sites, leaflets, brochures, variable message signs,

and highway advisory radio.

The agencies do not restrict their communications to those living and working in the

immediate area. For example, France distributes leaflets to motorists in neighboring

countries each year, as many of those

motorists will travel on French

highways to vacation destinations in the

south of France.

EXTENSIVE USE OF ITS TECHNOLOGIES

Loop detectors, pole-mounted cameras,

traffic control centers, variable message

signs, and other components of

intelligent transportation systems are

in widespread use (Figure 2). The data

collected are put to many uses,

including ascertaining real-time travel

conditions, calculating expected travel

times, advising motorists, and

determining lane-rental charges.

Figure 2. An extensive series of detector loops

continually collects information on traffic volumes

and speeds on the A6 highway in Scotland.
4

CHAPTER 2

COMMUNICATIONS LINKS

Departments within highway agencies that in the past operated autonomously are now

striving to forge and maintain intra-agency communications links. Where these links

are strong, reliable, and effective, the result is improved coordination and leveraging of

resources, which in turn means fewer delays and improved traffic management.

YELLOW PAVEMENT MARKINGS

In Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Belgium, yellow pavement markings are

used to mark travel lanes in work zones. Permanent pavement markings in those

countries are white, so the yellow

markings serve as a visible reminder to

motorists that something is “markedly

different” and extra caution is needed.

France and the Netherlands remove the

existing white markings in work zones,

so that only the yellow markings are

visible; Germany and Belgium, however,

do not believe this is necessary, as

motorists have been “trained that yellow

takes precedence over white” (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Germany uses yellow markings to

delineate travel lanes in work zones; the white

markings are left in place, and motorists are

taught that yellow markings take precedence

over white markings.
5

Chapter Three

KEY FINDINGS

SHORTER CONSTRUCTION PERIODS

“Get in, stay in, get out, and stay out” is an approach common to all five countries

visited. In their bidding processes, the highway agencies encourage proposals that

minimize the duration of the work zone and hence minimize the amount of motorist

delays.

Germany uses incentive and disincentive payments to encourage contractors to shorten

the duration of the roadwork; the higher the average daily traffic on the road, the

higher the bonus or penalty. The payments are staggered based on the conditions

actually experienced by motorists (number of restricted or closed lanes, capacity,

average speed, etc.). German contractors are required to provide a warranty on all

projects (typically for 2 to 5 years).

In Belgium, contractors must be certified as capable, based on prior experience and

quality of work, before being allowed to bid on a roadway project. Only the most

qualified contractors are allowed to compete for the more complex projects. Monetary

incentives are provided for contractors to finish ahead of schedule.

Scotland uses lane rental charges to hasten the completion of roadway work. The aim is

to reduce delays to the traveling public by encouraging the contractor to carry out the

work as quickly as possible without compromising safety. The most common type of lane

rental is a bonus/charge system. The highway agency determines a value for each “lane

occupation” (i.e., a lane closed for

construction and maintenance work); this

figure is provided to all bidders prior to the

bid deadline. Each bid must include the

number of lane occupations that will be

required during the construction phase and

the maintenance phase. The highway

agency then calculates the cost of each

bidder’s proposed lane occupations and

considers that information when

evaluating the proposals. The offer with the

lowest combined cost (project cost plus lane

occupation cost) is determined to be the most economically advantageous offer.

If the contractor takes longer than proposed (i.e., the actual number of lane occupations

exceeds that proposed in the bid), the highway agency “charges” the contractor for the

difference; when the value is lower than proposed, the agency pays the difference

(“bonus”) to the contractor.

“The lane rental charges provide the single biggest benefit,” says Ian Anderson, senior

engineer with the Scottish National Roads Directorate. “The competitive nature of the

industry encourages contractors to want to do a quality job in an incredibly short time

frame. We’ve found that lane rental charges provide an excellent incentive for

contractors to do it right the first time—we’re seeing major work done in 6 to 8 days.”

The savings in delay costs far outweigh any increase in contract price.

In their bidding processes, the

[European] highway agencies

encourage proposals that minimize the

duration of the work zone and hence

minimize the amount of motorist delays.
CHAPTER 3

6

The lane rental charges are determined by the time of day and the number of lanes

affected, and are set in proportion to the value of the contract. QUADRO, a software

program (Queues And Delays at ROadworks), is used to calculate the cost of motorist

delays. The bonus/charge amount is normally set at half the QUADRO daily rate, plus

the Scottish Roads Directorate’s daily cost to supervise the project (rounded to the

nearest L1000). Bids are evaluated first by quality of prior work, and then by price.

Scotland recently opened its first privately designed, built, financed, and operated

highway—the AutoLink (M6) highway (Figure 4). The AutoLink, which serves as the

primary link between the central and

southern parts of Scotland, is

maintained and operated by a

consortium of private companies. The

consortium also built 37 km of the 100-

km route. The public sector (highway

agency) defines the service required,

and the private sector (the consortium)

delivers the service and assumes all

risks. The key objectives of this project

are to identify and eliminate problems

at an early stage and to “get it right the

first time.”

The contract between the highway

agency and the consortium includes

incentives to ensure that the road is

built and maintained to specified

standards. The contract calls for the

consortium to keep the road in a safe condition and to carry out all repairs and

maintenance, including clearing snow and ice from the motorway, dealing with

accidents, maintaining signs, cutting grass, and landscaping.

Traffic counts, collected by detectors embedded in the pavement, are used as the basis

for “shadow tolls,” which the Scottish highway agency will pay to the consortium for 30

years. If the road requires an inordinate amount of repairs, causing lanes to be

frequently closed, the traffic counts will drop, and so will the tolls—providing a

powerful incentive for roadwork to be done right the first time.

In addition, the consortium is assessed lane rental charges for any lanes closed for

whatever reason (maintenance, crashes, etc.)—again, a powerful incentive for

performing work efficiently and effectively. The consortium must make itself known as

the road operator (through signs, advertising, and other means) and must post its

telephone number on roadside signs.

In France, contractors are assessed a penalty for every day that a project extends

beyond the agreed-upon completion date. Typically, the daily penalty is 0.3 percent of

the project cost.

Figure 4. The M6 highway, known as AutoLink, is

Scotland’s first privately designed, built, financed,

and operated highway.
CHAPTER 3

7

BETTER COMMUNICATIONS WITH MOTORISTS

All five countries do an admirable job of

communicating with motorists, both before and

during construction and maintenance work.

German roadworks are heralded by “We Build

for You” signs (Figure 5), which clearly indicate

that the work is being done for the benefit of

motorists. The signs state the reason for the

roadwork, as well as the duration and length of

the work zone. The German highway agency also

hosts a website that includes information on

current and planned maintenance and

construction projects; the site is updated weekly.

Germany makes extensive use of variable

message signs to reroute traffic as necessary; the

signs are part of an areawide signage and

information system, including permanent orange

trailblazers that indicate alternate routes that

travelers can take to avoid work zone delays.

Overhead signs are more prevalent in Europe

than in the United States. European drivers are

much more attuned to looking upward, to

overhead signs, for guidance and advice on road

conditions. The overhead signs are hard to miss,

as they are directly in the driver’s line of sight. When roadside signs are used, they are

often placed on the left side of the roadway, in the median, where they are less likely to

be obstructed by trucks (which are typically barred from the left lane). For example, on

German motorways, permanent

overhead sign gantries are routinely

used to post signs over traffic lanes.

Signs posted over each lane convey

information about speed limits, and

signs between lanes post information

about work zones and detours. A similar

situation exists in the Netherlands

(Figure 6).

Most of the countries extensively use

symbols/pictograms on warning signs,

instead of text, whenever possible. In

Germany, for example, words are

allowed only on signs warning of

crashes or fog conditions. Symbols are

considered much easier to recognize,

especially in areas where drivers hail

from numerous countries and speak

Figure 5. Sign prevalent in German

work zones. “Renewing the Line until

September 2000. Length 7 km. We Build

for You.”

Figure 6. Overhead signs are extensively used in

the Netherlands to communicate with motorists.

Speed limits change in response to actual travel

conditions.
CHAPTER 3

8

various languages. France is considering

increasing its use of pictograms on signs because of

the growing number of non-French-speaking

drivers.

The Netherlands uses portable sign gantries to

advise motorists of road conditions in advance of a

work zone (Figure 7). The signs, which cost

approximately $150,000 each, can be towed to the

work zone and set up along the roadside; the

gantry is then swung into place over the lanes.

Installation takes 15 minutes, and it is not

necessary to halt traffic during installation. Placed

approximately 5 m above the roadway, the signs

are visible at a distance of 800 to 1000 m.

Messages warning of traffic delays focus more on

the duration of the delay rather than the length of

the backup (for example, the sign might warn of a

20-minute queue, rather than a 2-mile queue);

similar messages, couched in time rather than

length of delay, are used in France and Scotland. As

explained by a French highway agency staff

person, motorists don’t necessarily change their

route in response to such a sign, but “they are calmed.” Trailer-mounted signs, with

multicolored fiberoptic lights, are also used in temporary work zones.

Germany is implementing an in-vehicle system, similar in size and appearance to a

pager, which can receive messages concerning local traffic conditions.

When a section of the ring road around Rotterdam (with an average daily traffic count

of 200,000 vehicles) was scheduled to be reconstructed, necessitating that the road be

closed in both directions for a 2-month period, the Dutch highway agency funded an

aggressive, $4 million public relations/outreach campaign. Three hundred thousand

informational booklets were distributed, providing alternate routes and offering free

use of public transportation during the duration of the construction project. Motorists

were advised: “If you have to be in Rotterdam, take public transportation, or take your

time.”

Motorists were skeptical at first, and the result was chaos during the first week.

According to the highway agency, it took motorists 4 hours to travel 6 miles. But people

soon changed their travel behavior. And despite the enormous congestion and

inconvenience, motorists said that they were “happy to be informed.” The highway

agency reports that only one major crash occurred during the 3 months when the road

was completely closed. Staff members say this experience has taught them the value of

good communications with the public; the costs are all on the agency’s side, and the

benefits are all on society’s side.

The additional agency costs totaled $2.15 million ($0.25 million for detour signage,

$0.40 million for free public transportation, and $1.5 million for public relations), but

Figure 7. Currently 24 Mobile Lane

Signalling Systems (MRS) are in use in

the Netherlands, where they are

installed as needed to warn motorists

of work zones.
CHAPTER 3

9

the effort resulted in $0.25 million less in motorist claims (for a net agency cost of $1.9

million). The estimated benefits in the form of reduced motorist delays totaled $4.3

million. When agency costs are subtracted from user benefits, the agency determined

the net benefit to be $2.4 million. The public relations campaign accounted for 10

percent of the project cost (and 1 percent of that was spent before the project even got

under way); in the future, the highway agency believes it can devise and implement an

effective public outreach program for much less than 10 percent of the project cost.

Belgium has added the numeral “1” or “2” to signs on all major roads leading to the ring

road around Antwerp. In the event that Antwerp-bound traffic must be rerouted

because of work zones or incidents, motorists can be advised, through radio, variable

message signs, and the Internet, to follow the “1” or “2,” which indicate the two main

alternate routes. On its trailer-mounted signs, Belgium uses red and yellow lightemitting diodes on the top half, and yellow light-emitting diodes on the bottom half.

To keep motorists advised of real-time conditions and smooth traffic flow, Belgium

installs portable queue detectors in work zones. The detectors consist of video cameras

mounted on poles on a series of trailers parked at designated points in advance of the

work zone; variable message signs are also mounted to the rear of the trailers. The

cameras transmit lane-occupancy data to a central computer control system, which is

linked to the trailer-mounted variable message signs. The system monitors traffic speed

and lane occupancy; when it detects a slowdown,

indicating the formation of a backup, it automatically

posts warning messages, such as “FILE [Queue] 500 m”

and “FILE 1000 m” on variable message signs located

500 m and 1000 m in advance of the work zone (Figure

8). If the backup continues to grow, the system posts

additional warning messages at 1500, 2000, 2500, and

3000 m in advance of the work zone—thus ensuring that

motorists are given ample advance warning to slow

down and thus avoid rear-end crashes. The highway

agency reports that the use of this system cut rear-end

crashes at one location by 60 percent.

Scotland has found that signs announcing the number of

people ticketed for speeding in work zones in the

previous week are a very effective means of reducing

speeds in work zones. Cameras are also extensively and

effectively used to detect speeders and thus slow traffic

in work zones. Tickets are automatically issued to

speeders caught on camera. Although only one-tenth of

the cameras are actually operational (i.e., loaded with

film) at one time, all cameras are set to periodically flash

so that motorists will not be able to discern which

cameras are “off” at any time.

Scotland relies heavily on brochures that are routinely

distributed to motorists across the country. The

brochures cover such topics as advice for drivers, safe

Figure 8. Trailer-mounted

variable message signs are

linked to video cameras in

Belgium; as traffic slowdowns

are detected, a warning is

posted on the sign.
CHAPTER 3

10

winter driving, roadside variable message signs, and

the meaning of traffic signs (Figure 9).

Each year for more than two decades, France has

distributed 11 million free calendars, showing when

and where roadway projects are scheduled, as well as

13 million free roadmaps showing recommended

alternative routes during the duration of those projects.

This information is also now available on the Internet.

In all cases, the public perceives the information

provided, regardless of medium, as credible.

COORDINATED POLICY, PLANNING, AND

PROGRAMMING APPROACH FOR WORK ZONES

Early involvement and coordination by all public-sector

agencies and private-sector organizations involved in

roadway work pays big dividends, according to the

highway agencies visited. Working together, they can

ensure that all operations are coordinated, that the

maximum gain is made of the work zone (i.e., scheduling

several projects simultaneously, rather than sequentially,

in the work zone whenever possible), and that

inconvenience to the public is minimized. For example, the agencies and organizations

might concurrently schedule guardrail maintenance, bridge repairs, and a pavement

surface treatment.

In the Netherlands, the responsibilities of all involved in, or affected by, the

construction and maintenance operations are clearly delineated and communicated. The

work planner is responsible for deciding exactly what is to be done, where, when, and

how. His or her choices will affect traffic flow and safety. The local road authority is

responsible for putting the plans into practice, inspecting the work zones and

equipment, and verifying the proper use and placement of devices and signs. Road

workers are responsible for wearing the proper clothing, behaving responsibly, knowing

their rights, and never relying on routine (always expect the unexpected). Road users

are expected to adhere to speed limits, behave responsibly, follow instructions, and be

informed. A pocket-sized training booklet explains these responsibilities to highway

agency and contractor staff.

Each country sets performance goals in work zones and then works with all members of

the project team to ensure these goals are met. For example, Germany’s goals include

reducing motorist delays by maintaining the same number of lanes in work zones

whenever possible (i.e., by shifting traffic onto the shoulder or onto contraflow lanes)

and by severely restricting the number of roadway projects that can be carried out on

holidays. A computer model is used to calculate traffic flows during the work period; if,

for example, the roadway carries more than 105,000 vehicles per day, no lane can be

closed for roadway work, to prevent backups. German highway agencies also strive to

limit roadway projects to no more than 6 or 7 km in length (with an absolute maximum

of 15 km).

Figure 9. Safety brochures are

widely distributed to Scottish

drivers.
CHAPTER 3

11

Table 1 shows adjustment factors for heavy vehicles and grades, which the German

highway agency applies to traffic flow calculations when computing the amount of

traffic that can be expected to reasonably travel through a work zone.

Table 1. Adjustment factors for heavy vehicles and grades used when calculating the amount of

traffic that can be reasonably expected to traverse a work zone.

TERRAIN

Level Rolling Mountainous

 (<2% grade) (2-4% grade) (>4% grade)

Adjustment factor

(relative to passenger 1.5 3 6

car units)

Source: G. Kellerman, BASt

Table 2 reveals the adjustment factors and capacity values for various traffic elements

or work zone situations that have an impact on the traffic flow in work zones.

Table 2. Capacity values and adjustment values for traffic elements or work zone situations that

have an impact on traffic flow in work zones.

Capacity Value

(Cwork) pcphpl under

various constraints

in work zones Cwork (pcphpl)

WL, Truck >3.25 m WL, Truck <3.25 m

Adjustment Factor or or

WL, Car >2.75 m WL, Car <2.75 m

Capacity value (basis)

depending on 1.00 1830 1720

lane width

Reduced capacity

explained by:

CR or RNL 0.95 1740 1630

CR and RNL 0.95*0.95 1650 1550

NC 0.9 1640 1550

NC and CR 0.9*0.95 1560 1470

NC and CR and RNL 0.9*0.95*0.95 1480 1400

pcphpl=passenger cars per hour per lane

CR=crossing median

RNL=reduced number of lanes in front of the work zone

NC=less than 50 percent commuters
CHAPTER 3

12

German highway agencies do not request traffic enforcement in work zones, as they

believe it would increase the risk of crashes. The contractors working on the project are

responsible for ensuring the safety of the work zone, and they are held accountable for

any crashes that occur. All traffic sign messages are stored in a database at the German

Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt); this makes it easy to improve the message

graphics (typeface, wording,) as needed, and sign manufacturers can access these data

to produce signs of uniform size and design.

The Netherlands—which has three equal goals: minimize delay, maximize safety of

road users, and maximize safety of road workers—has determined that it can often be

cost-effective to close down a road for maintenance or reconstruction.

To ensure that all road maintenance and construction projects are coordinated among

the various highway and public works agencies in the country, the Dutch have

developed a national computerized planning system for roadworks and related lane

closures (known as the Meldwerk system, or “report works”). More than 40 planners in

local road authorities and 30 consulting companies use the system, which includes

information on more than 2,000 roadwork projects (including daily maintenance

projects) planned each month nationally. The system provides a uniform means of

collecting and using traffic information. It also serves as an aid for traffic operators

(who consult the Meldwerk system to determine the appropriate overhead signs

warning of roadworks) and for better traffic management (during a traffic incident, a

highway agency can easily review the location of roadwork projects and thus determine

optimum alternate routes). By allowing adjacent jurisdictions to track each other’s

planned and ongoing roadworks, Meldwerk helps ensure that neighboring agencies will

not conduct road projects in the same area at the same time and that nearby roads will

be ready to handle diverted traffic.

The Netherlands is developing a computer model that can be used to reduce motorist

delay. The model will also be used to solicit opinions from the public—for example, as to

whether it would be better to close a road entirely for a short period, or to leave the

road open, but disrupted by roadway work, for a longer period.

Scotland’s goal is to design and plan projects to minimize site occupancy and traffic

interference. To help meet these goals, and to reach consensus on the details of the

following week’s work, weekly meetings of all involved in the project are held. Two

police inspectors also attend every meeting. Each agency has a roadworks coordinator

who serves as a single point of contact, making coordination and cooperation easier.

To cut down on the amount of traffic in work zones, Scotland provides alternate routes;

assists travelers in planning their routes; provides temporary park-and-ride lots, where

motorists can switch to public transportation; and coordinates ridesharing programs.

In an exceptional example of reaching out to motorists and asking their opinions,

France conducts user-satisfaction surveys at motorist rest areas. The surveys assess the

users’ satisfaction with the motorway and provide “food for thought” for the road

authorities. Each year over a 10-year period, 20,000 drivers are surveyed. To augment

these surveys, user forums, which allow road administration representatives to hold indepth discussions with a small group of motorists, are also held.
CHAPTER 3

13

NARROWED LANES IN WORK ZONES

To avoid backups in work zones, the five

countries strive to maintain the number of

lanes in work zones. To do this, they convert

shoulders to traffic lanes and create new traffic

patterns, and the lanes are narrowed as

necessary. In Scotland, for example, lanes that

are normally 3.65 m wide are reduced to 2.5 m

or 3 m wide in work zones. Typically, one of the

two lanes in work zones is wider than the

other, and trucks are restricted to the wider

lane. In Belgium, work zones typically consist

of a 3-m-wide lane that is open to all vehicles

and a 2.5-m-wide lane that is restricted to

automobiles. The French highway agency,

which narrows its 3.5-m lanes to 2.5 m in work

zones as needed, says that narrower lanes also

serve as a traffic control device, encouraging

motorists to slow down and pay attention.

Figure 10 shows the narrowing of lanes

preceding a work zone operation in Germany.

Both the left and right lanes have been

narrowed; trucks are restricted to the

somewhat-wider right lane.

Figure 11 shows the results of a

German highway agency study,

which found that narrow lanes do

have a slowing effect on speeds.

The German highway engineers

report that narrower lanes are also

effective in getting drivers’

attention and encouraging them to

slow down as they approach a

crossover on a motorway (i.e., where

one lane of traffic crosses the

median and then operates as a

contraflow lane in the other

direction of travel) (Figure 12).

DESIGNS THAT ACCOMMODATE FUTURE MAINTENANCE

Highway agencies in the five countries visited are designing new roads and upgrading

existing roads to accommodate future maintenance needs. Whenever possible, for

example, they are building or rebuilding their shoulders to be strong enough to serve as

traffic lanes during maintenance work.

Figure 10. Both lanes have been

narrowed in advance of a work zone in

Germany, and trucks are restricted to the

somewhat wider right lane.

Figure 11. As lanes narrow, speeds drop, according to

a German road authority study.

distance to starting point of transition

speed (km/h)

speed limit

before

after

wall of BAKEN

left lane

slow lane

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

80 60
CHAPTER 3

14

These agencies say that the higher

upfront costs are more than offset by

the efficiencies gained later, when

traffic can be shifted onto the

shoulders so that a travel lane can

be closed for maintenance.

The European countries are also

incorporating long-life pavement

designs and ensuring that the width

of roadways and bridges is sufficient

to allow for travel lanes to be

maintained during maintenance.

YELLOW MARKINGS IN WORK

ZONES

In four of the five countries visited

(all but Scotland), yellow pavement

markings are used exclusively in

work zones, and pavement markings in all other cases are white (including those for

centerlines and left edgelines).

In Germany and Belgium, the original white pavement markings are not removed from

the pavement when the yellow markings are applied. According to the German highway

agency, the mix of white and yellow markings does not cause problems for drivers, as

they are taught that yellow markings supercede white markings. Delineators are also

used to indicate the boundaries of the travel way. In France and the Netherlands, the

white markings are removed from the pavement in work zones, so that only the yellow

markings appear.

HIGHLY VISIBLE TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT

Portable fiberoptic or light-emitting diode signs and technologies can be very effective

in guiding motorists safely through work zones. Trailer-mounted variable message

signs can be used to display symbols and words relaying real-time traffic information.

The bright colors and real-time information are intended make these signs more

effective than static “Work Zone Ahead” signs, which are customarily used in the United

States. The European practice is to use larger, much more visible and understandable

signs, particularly overhead signs.

Germany is evaluating a new vertical panel developed in the Netherlands, which is

intended to clearly convey to the motorist the correct travel path.

To improve safety and work quality and efficiency, the Netherlands requires its

contractors to install lighting in work zones. In many areas, the lights are left on

during the night, even when no work is in progress, to assist drivers in navigating

through the work zone.

The Netherlands uses Andreas strips (portable rumble strips) to provide a final warning

to motorists that they have intruded into a work zone and that they should be following

Figure 12. Narrowed lanes help slow traffic

approaching a crossover in Germany.
CHAPTER 3

15

a new traffic pattern (Figure 13). For

example, when traffic is shifted so

that the left lane can be closed for

maintenance, three Andreas strips

are placed 150 m before a truck

parked at the beginning of the work

zone. The rubber strips are 2 m long,

20 cm wide, and 4 cm thick. They are

spaced 5 m apart, in the lane that is

closed to traffic, and at right angles

to traffic. The driver feels a series of

jolts as the vehicle travels over the

strips, which serve as a final

warning that the vehicle has strayed

into a closed travel lane. The

Andreas strips are similar in concept

to the portable rumble strips

developed by the U.S. Strategic Highway Research Program, but they are smaller and

are placed in a lane that is closed to traffic, making them more effective.

The Netherlands also uses many more traffic cones in work zones, positioning them

much closer together than is the custom in the United States.

On heavily trafficked roads with poor sight distance in France, a series of hinged

barriers or gates is sometimes used to close lanes (forming a merging taper) as

necessary in response to an incident or roadwork. The barriers can be operated by hand

or by remote control. The barriers are expensive, but effective, reports the highway

agency, with an average installation price of 50,000 French francs (approximately

US$7,600) for manually operated gates and 1 million French francs (approximately

US$153,000) for remote-control gates.

A 12-m-long moveable metal barrier, marketed as Safeguard, is also used to separate

traffic from work zones in France. The barriers can easily be shifted from one side of a

lane to another (to accommodate peak-hour flows) using a machine that operates at 6

km/hour. The barriers can be positioned without closing a traffic lane. The machine’s

design has its roots in big-wheeled vineyard equipment.

Germany uses metal barriers in lieu of cones. Similar in shape to the U.S. Jersey

barriers, but offering less protection in a crash, the barriers provide guidance, not

protection. Trucks are barred from traveling in the lane adjacent to the barriers. The

barriers are marked with reflectors every 1 m, supplemented by occasional flashing

yellow lights.

QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS FOR TRAFFIC AND WORKER

SAFETY

Quality control and quality assurance (QC/QA) programs are effectively used in the five

countries to improve traffic and worker safety.

Figure 13. Andreas strips placed in closed traffic

lanes and perpendicular to traffic flow provide a very

noticeable warning to drivers in the Netherlands.
CHAPTER 3

16

Scotland uses safety audits, conducted by an independent evaluator, together with the

ISO certification process, to ensure safety in work zones.

In its alternative tendering initiative, Scotland holds the contractor responsible for a

quality plan that meets ISO 9001 conditions, which is a “fairly onerous” task, says

David Mustard of the National Roads Directorate. But industry had already taken steps

in this direction, realizing 10 years ago that ISO accreditation was necessary to

compete in the marketplace.

In France, highway agencies establish a separate, job-specific traffic control plan, and

then allow contractors to tailor it as necessary.

AN EMPHASIS ON INNOVATION

For highway agencies saddled with growing maintenance needs, it can be difficult to

think beyond the tried and true. But as is evident in Europe, innovative solutions

require investments of time and resources. The Netherlands, for example, has

established a “Roads to the Future” program, which focuses on “long-term thinking and

short-term action.” Currently, 14 pilot projects are under way, including one focusing on

maintenance without obstruction. As explained by the road agency, innovation means

constantly looking ahead, creating support, explaining why, and staying flexible.

In Belgium and Scotland, replacement bridges have been built offline and then are

“slid” into place over a weekend, minimizing inconvenience to motorists.

France uses a software program to provide roadway bridge designs in a 2-day period.

The agency enters the span length and type of bridge required, and the software

program produces a complete, standardized design. The agency saves time and money.

Since 1992, the French Directorate of Roads has encouraged innovation through its

“road innovation charter.” Each year, the Director of Roads determines the priority

needs for the national road network, and companies then prepare proposals for

addressing those needs. Once a solution has been tested, evaluated, and found

acceptable, it is then “certified,” as means of encouraging agencies to try new products.

“Innovation is always more expensive at the start, so we help out by certifying the

proven innovations,” says the agency. Out of 10 certifications awarded to date, two

concern innovative ways to speed up maintenance work.

The Forum of European Highway Research Laboratories (FEHRL) is sponsoring a

research project to determine best practices for reducing road closures through

improved maintenance procedures. The main objective of the project is to redirect

practice from an engineering approach to a user-cost approach in order to reduce the

number and duration of road closures.
17

Chapter Four

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on what they saw and learned on this scanning tour, the team members

recommend that U.S. highway agencies consider taking steps to accomplish the

following goals.

Shorten the contract time.

Lane rental charges can provide significant incentives for reducing the duration of

construction and maintenance projects and ensuring the work is done right the first

time. This will minimize motorist delays and improve traffic safety.

Improve communication with motorists.

Communications should be a high priority when planning and conducting any

construction or maintenance project. Motorists need ample warning before the project

starts, and then continuous, credible, easily accessible information once the project gets

under way. This will allow motorists to choose alternate routes or to plan for additional

travel time on the route under construction. Advance and real-time information flows

can be enhanced through the use of ITS and other technologies. The German highway

research center (BASt) has prepared a matrix showing various measures, depending on

expected traffic impact, that should be taken to communicate with motorists (see Table 3).

Table 3. Measures for advising motorists of expected delay in work zones.

Difference between peakhour capacity and demand Traffic Condition Communication Measures

<100 No delay. None.

>100 and <200 Delays are expected. Newspapers, radio stations,

and television stations should

be informed.

>200 Strong impact on traffic flow. Newspapers, radio stations,

and television stations should

be informed; variable

message signs should be

posted in advance of the work

zone, and should include

alternative routes/options.

Source: G. Kellerman, BASt

Adopt a coordinated policy, planning, and programming approach to work zone planning

and operations.

Early involvement in work zone operations can pay dividends. While a roadway section

is being reconstructed or rehabilitated, agencies should maximize the use of the project

site by concurrently scheduling any other necessary work. The work plan should be

shared with all agency departments and with local jurisdictions, the media, and the

police.
18

CHAPTER 4

Don’t be afraid to reduce lane widths in work zones.

By narrowing the lanes in work zones, agencies can maintain the same number of lanes

and thus minimize delays. Motorists will accept narrower lanes, provided they are

amply marked and trucks are restricted from those lanes.

Design for future maintenance.

U.S. highway agencies typically do not build shoulders with sufficient structural

capacity to carry traffic when a lane must be closed for maintenance, nor do they

typically rebuild the shoulders to carry traffic during a maintenance project. To

minimize traffic delays in work zones, U.S. agencies should strengthen shoulders in new

construction projects so that the shoulder can serve as a traffic lane during future

maintenance projects.

Evaluate the use of yellow pavement markings in work zones.

In the United States, both white and yellow pavement markings are used to direct

traffic. Yellow pavement markings are, however, used only to indicate the left edge of

the travel way (centerlines and left edgelines). In the countries visited, yellow markings

were used to demarcate traffic lanes in temporary work zones. Although the use of

yellow markings in work zones is counter to the U.S. Manual on Uniform Traffic

Control Devices, the use of yellow or other color markings in work zones deserves

further study. A draft proposed research problem statement is included as an appendix

to this report. (This recommendation was also made in the report from the Innovative

Traffic Control scanning tour, conducted in 1998.)

Use highly visible traffic control devices and equipment to warn motorists of, and guide them

through, work zones.

U.S. agencies should consider using large truck- or trailer-mounted signs and portable

sign gantries to direct traffic in work zones. U.S. agencies should also consider

shortening the gap between reflectors or lights on barriers and evaluating the use of

lightweight steel barriers, such as those used in Germany and France, in situations

where cones would normally be placed to direct traffic and mark the edge of the travel

way. (This might require that U.S. crash test procedures be revised.)

The new vertical panel being evaluated in Germany could have application in the

United States. Vertical panels currently used in the United States have stripes that

begin at the upper right side and slope downward to the lower left indicating “right,”

and panels with stripes sloping downward to the right indicate “left.” Most motorists,

however, do not understand these meanings and cannot distinguish between the two.

Implement QC/QA programs for traffic and worker safety.

U.S. highway agencies customarily use QC/QA programs for pavement construction or

similar projects. Safety audits, together with the ISO certification process and jobspecific traffic control plans, can improve safety for both motorists and workers.

Encourage innovation.

As exemplified by the Dutch “Roads for the Future” project, agencies should concentrate

on long-term thinking and short-term action. U.S. agencies should encourage thinking
19

CHAPTER 4

“outside the box” to find solutions to work zone delays. A first step might be to

participate in the Forum of European Highway Research Laboratories’ project on

reducing road closures through improved maintenance procedures.
20

Chapter Five

IMPLEMENTATION

To ensure that this information is disseminated within the U.S. highway community

and that the recommendations receive attention, the team members have committed to

making presentations at professional meetings. Already, several such presentations

have been made, including at meetings of the AASHTO Subcommittees on Maintenance

and Construction and the AASHTO Standing Committee on Research, the AASHTO

annual meeting in October 1999, and the annual meeting of the Transportation

Research Board in January 2000.

The team is concerned that the materials (brochures, notes, videotapes) collected during

the scanning material not be “lost” to future researchers. The team recommends that

the materials be turned over to the Work Zone Safety Clearinghouse sponsored by the

American Road and Transportation

Builders Association and the FHWA.

The team has also requested that the team

leaders send a copy of this report to each of

the AASHTO subcommittee chairs, with a

letter pointing out the relevant findings

and recommendations. The goal is to find a

“home” and champion for each of the

recommendations in an AASHTO

subcommittee, to ensure that they receive

adequate review and that they lead to

action, where warranted.

The problem statement included in Appendix A will be submitted to the AASHTO

Subcommittee on Traffic, for review and, it is hoped, eventual submittal to the Standing

Committee on Research.

The goal is to find a “home” and

champion for each of the

recommendations in an AASHTO

subcommittee, to ensure that they

receive adequate review and that they

lead to action, where warranted.
21

Chapter Six

CONCLUSION

Highway agencies in the United States are grappling with growing travel demand,

aging highways, and reduced staffs. At the same time, their customers are demanding

smoother roads, less congestion, fewer work zones, and safe, unimpeded travel. The

innovative strategies described in this report could play a role in overcoming those

obstacles and in meeting their customers’ needs.

The scanning team members (Appendix B) strongly recommend that the innovative

ideas described in this report be considered and evaluated for use in the United States,

as they could improve service and cut

delays in work zones, reduce motorist

frustration, and improve safety for both

highway workers and travelers.

The true value of any scanning tour is

when the information is brought home,

shared, and critically evaluated. That is the

challenge ahead—to find “homes” or

“champions” for this information, in the

hopes that U.S. highway engineers and

managers can benefit from the experiences

of their peers in other countries.

The scanning team members strongly

recommend that the innovative ideas

described in this report be considered

and evaluated for use in the United

States, as they could improve service

and cut delays in work zones, reduce

motorist frustration, and improve safety

for both highway workers and travelers.
22

Appendix A

RESEARCH PROBLEM STATEMENT OF THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH

I. Problem Title—Special Pavement Marking in Work Zones

II. Research Problem Statement

There are notable differences between roadway markings in work zones in the

United States and Europe. The Methods and Procedures to Reduce Motorist Delays

in Work Zones Scanning Tour team members recently observed that pavement

markings in five European countries are typically all white, with yellow markings,

of various widths and patterns, reserved for use in work zones. This system allows

drivers to instantly recognize a work zone.

In the United States, yellow is used only to denote two-way traffic in the United

States, serving as the centerline or the left edgeline.

III.Research Objective

Conduct an in-depth review of work zone pavement marking practices in the United

States and Europe. This review shall seek out information on the effectiveness of

those practices in controlling and managing traffic through work zones. The

researcher should consider the use of a special color, such as orange, and should

experiment with the use of different colors to determine how easily they are

understood by drivers and the overall effect they have on driver behavior.

IV. Estimate of Problem Funding and Research Time

12 months $100,000

V. Urgency, Payoff Potential, and Implementation

The Federal Highway Administration is currently in the process of revising the

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) to enhance the mobility and

safety of road users in work zones. This will promote uniformity of traffic control

applications and incorporate technology advances into work zone traffic control. The

data gathered from the ongoing NCHRP project on all-white markings would

provide a basis for including MUTCD standards for pavement marking in work

zones. The urgent goal of this study is also to recognize safety concerns in the work

zone.

VI. Person Developing the Problem Statement

The team members on the scanning tour for motorist delays in work zones (held

May 1999).
23

Appendix B

TEAM MEMBERS

Donald P. Steinke, Co-Chair, is Director, Office of Transportation Operations for the

FHWA in Washington, D.C. He is responsible for the nationwide administration and

direction of highway operation technologies, construction and maintenance work zone

operations, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and weather response,

including winter maintenance, emergency management, and highway capacity. Mr.

Steinke has 30 years of program administration and technical experience with the

FHWA. He has held assignments at many diverse U.S. locations, ranging from being a

project engineer on construction and directing the Federal-aid Highway Program

within a State, to his current national position. Mr. Steinke holds a B.S. degree in Civil

Engineering from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. He is a licensed Professional

Engineer. He serves as a member of the AASHTO Winter Maintenance Policy

Coordinating Committee and is Chairman of the FHWA Highway Operations Research

and Technology Coordinating Committee. He recently served as the Secretary of the

AASHTO Subcommittee on Construction.

Len Sanderson, Co-Chair, is the State Highway Administrator for the North Carolina

Department of Transportation. Mr. Sanderson currently directs the planning, design,

construction, and maintenance of the 78,500-mile State highway system in North

Carolina. His areas of emphasis are work zone safety and dissemination of information

to motorists. Prior to his appointment as Highway Administrator, he served as the

Construction Branch Manager for Statewide operations. Mr. Sanderson is a graduate of

North Carolina State University and holds a bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering. He

is a licensed professional engineer and serves on several AASHTO committees.

James F. Byrnes, Jr., is the Chief of the Bureau of Engineering and Highway

Operations and Chief Engineer of the Connecticut Department of Transportation. He

directs the Department’s programs in design, rights-of-way, and construction of roads,

bridges, facilities for rail and bus transportation, aviation, and ports. He has particular

interests in issues relating to traffic management during highway construction and

maintenance, balancing congestion, motorist safety, and worker safety. Mr. Byrnes holds

a Bachelor of Civil Engineering degree from Cooper Union, New York City, and a

Master of Science degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Connecticut. Mr.

Byrnes is the chairman of the joint Highway Research Advisory Council at the

University of Connecticut and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers,

the Institute of Transportation Engineers, and AASHTO. In AASHTO, he serves on the

standing Committee on Highways, the Special Committee on International Activities,

and as Vice Chair of the Highway Subcommittee on Design.

John Conrad is the Assistant Secretary for Field Operations Support with Washington

State Department of Transportation in Olympia, Washington. Mr. Conrad currently

directs the Department’s precontent, construction, maintenance, materials testing,

traffic operations, employee safety, architecture, and capital facilities programs. Prior to

being appointed to his current position, he served as the Chief Maintenance Engineer

and with the Department’s Seattle Region as Planning and Operations Engineer. Mr.

Conrad has a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Nebraska and a Master
APPENDIX B

24

of Science degree in Transportation Planning from Kansas State University. He is a

registered professional engineer in the States of Washington and Kansas. He is

chairman of the TRB Committee on Maintenance and Operations Management and has

authored several papers. Mr. Conrad is also a member of the AASHTO Subcommittees

on Maintenance and Construction and is chairman of the SHRP Implementation Task

Force.

Richard Forrestel is Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Cold

Spring Construction Company, in Akron, New York. Mr. Forrestel currently oversees job

execution, including the building of interstate highways, both concrete and superpave

asphalt, as well as the attendant excavation and bridge work involved therein. He has

been actively involved in highway construction for more than 50 years. Mr. Forrestel is

a graduate of the University of Michigan and holds a Bachelor of Science degree in

Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering, along with a Juris Doctor Law degree. He

serves on several committees of the National and State Associated General Contractors,

the Road Information Program, and the National and Northeast chapters of the

American Concrete Pavement Association.

Kathryn Harrington-Hughes, Reporter, is president of Harrington-Hughes &

Associates, Inc., an editorial and marketing services firm in Washington, D.C. She

researches, writes, and edits newsletters and magazine articles, as well as reports,

brochures, scripts, and other publications, on highway safety, construction,

maintenance, and operations. She is the editor of FHWA’s “Focus” newsletter and TRB’s

“TranScan” newsletter, as well as the “Superpave Models” newsletter. She previously

served as director of communications and marketing for the Institute of Transportation

Engineers and as director of communications for the SHRP. She has a Journalism

degree from the University of Maryland, and she is a member of TRB Committees

A5001 (Conduct of Research) and A5012 (Technology Transfer), the Institute of

Transportation Engineers, the Communications Committee of the Highway Innovative

Technology Evaluation Center (HITEC), the National Press Club, and the Construction

Writers Association.

Ken F. Kobetsky is the Program Director for Engineering for AASHTO in Washington,

D.C. In this position he serves as liaison for AASHTO‘s Standing Committee of

Highways, Standing Committee of Research, and technical subcommittees of Design,

Maintenance, and Materials, plus several task forces. The position also requires

coordination with many of the technical committees and task forces in the production of

engineering and related professional publications and responses to technical inquiries

on publications. The National Transportation Product Evaluation Program (NTPEP)

and the Snow and Ice Cooperative Program (SICOP) technical services programs are

also under his supervision. Mr. Kobetsky has 30 years of experience in a State highway

agency in traffic operations, design, and construction. He holds a Bachelor of Science

degree in Civil Engineering from the University of North Dakota, a graduate degree in

Traffic Engineering from Yale University, and a Master of Science degree in

Engineering from West Virginia College of Graduate Studies. He is a registered

engineer in two States, is currently the chairman of the National Committee on

Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and is active in many technical committees of the

TRB.
APPENDIX B

25

Stan Lanford is president of Lanford Brothers Company located in Roanoke, Virginia.

Lanford Brothers has about 150 employees who are regularly involved with

construction and maintenance work zones on interstate, primary, and urban highways.

The work consists of repairing more than 100 bridges per year and removing over 4

million square yards of asphalt pavement for recycling. Mr. Lanford is a graduate of the

University of Virginia, where he received a degree in Civil Engineering. He is

Chairman of the American Road and Transportation Builders Association, effective

March 1999, and has served on various committees for the NCHRP and for the Virginia

Department of Transportation.

Karla Snyder-Petty is Assistant Division Administrator for the FHWA, Missouri

Division, in Jefferson City, Missouri. The Missouri Division is responsible for delivering

the Federal-aid Highway Program in the State of Missouri. A current effort in Missouri

is to explore and evaluate methods for reducing motorist delays during construction.

Before joining the Missouri Division, Ms. Snyder-Petty was directly involved with the

development of the Regional Advanced Transportation Management System and

transportation demand management strategies in Atlanta, Georgia. She has a Bachelor

of Science degree in Civil Engineering from West Virginia Institute of Technology. She

is a licensed professional engineer and is a member of the National Society of

Professional Engineers and the Society of Women Engineers.

Dean Testa is a construction and maintenance engineer for the Kansas Department of

Transportation and serves as the Chief of the Bureau of Construction and Maintenance

in Topeka, Kansas. Mr. Testa currently develops policies and specifications and

administers programs in the construction and maintenance areas for the Kansas DOT.

Mr. Testa has a degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Kansas. He is a

licensed professional engineer and serves on several committees of AASHTO and TRB.

Joe D. Wilkerson is the State of Alabama Division Administrator for the FHWA. He is

responsible for directing the Federal-aid Highway Program in Alabama. Mr. Wilkerson

has more than 40 years of technical and program experience with the FHWA. He

graduated from the University of Tennessee in 1959 with a B.S. degree in Civil

Engineering. He has held a variety of engineering and engineering/administrative

positions during his career with FHWA, including engineering positions in Tennessee,

FHWA’s former regional offices in Atlanta, North Carolina, Alabama, and the Georgia

Divisions before being assigned to his current position as Division Administrator.
26

Appendix C

HOSTS

BELGIUM

ir. Patrick Debaere

inspecteur-generaal

afdelingshoofd

ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap

departement Leefmilieu en Infrastructuur

administratie Wegen en Verkeer

afdeling Wegen Antwerpen

Copernicuslaan 1, bus 12

2018 Antwerpen Belgium

Tel: (03) 224 69 22

Fax: (03) 224 69 05

ing. A. De Bie

adjunct van de directeur

ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap

departement Leefmilieu en Infrastructuur

administratie Ondersteunende Studies en

Opdrachten

afdeling Elektriciteit en Mechanica

Antwerpen

Copernicuslaan 1, bus 11

2018 Antwerpen Belgium

Tel: (03)449 38 95

Fax: (03)449 38 93

Dr. ir. L. Cypers

ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap

departement Leefmilieu en Infrastructuur

administratie Ondersteunende Studies en

Opdrachten

afteling Elektriciteit en Mechanica

Antwerpen

Copernicuslaan 1, bus 11

B-2018 Antwerpen Belgium

Tel: +32.3.224 66 11 or +32.3.224 66 16

Fax: +32.3.224 66 05

Eric Kenis

Traffic Engineer

Ministery of the Flemish Community

Environment and Infrastructure

Department

Graaf de Ferraris—5th floor

Emile Jacqmainlaan 156, bus 8

B1000 Brussels, Belgium

Tel: 32-2-553-7810

Fax: 32-2-533-7805

Email: ericjm.kenis@lin.vlaanderen.be

ir. Willy Frans

hoofdingenieur-directeur

Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap

Administratie Ondersteunende Studies en

Opdrachten

D.E.E.M. Antwerpen

Copernicus

Copernicus 1

2018 Antwerpen Belgium

Tel: 03-224-60-11

Fax: 03-224-66-05

Armand Rouffaert

director-graduate engineer

divisional manager

Ministery of the Flemish Community

Environment and Infrastructure

Department

Roads and Traffic Administration, Traffic

Division

Graaf de Ferraris, 5th floor

Emile Jacqmainlaan 156, bus 8

B1000 Brussels, Belgium

Tel: (32) 2 553 7801

Fax: (32) 2 533 7805

Email:

armandjp.rouffaert@lin.vlaanderen.be
27

APPENDIX C

FRANCE

Gilbert Batac

Technical Adviser for ITS

Service d’Etudes Techniques des Routes et

Autoroutes (SETRA)

Ministère de l’Equipement des Transports

et du Logement

46, avenue Aristide Briand

BP 100 - 92225 Bagneux Cedex - France

Tel: +33 (0)1 46 11 34 16

Fax: +33 (0)1 46 11 31 69

Email: batac@setra.fr

Jocelyne Le Boudec

International Activities

Service d’Etudes Techniques des Routes et

Autoroutes (SETRA)

Ministère de l’Equipement des Transports

et du Logement

46, avenue Aristide Briand

BP 100 - 92225 Bagneux Cedex - France

Tel: +33 (0)1 46 11 31 05

Fax: +33 (0)1 46 11 36 50

Email: leboudec@setra.fr

Othman Gaddhoum

Ingénieur des T.P.E.

Direction Departementale de

l’Equipement de l’Essonne

Service Travaux Routiers et Autoroutiers -

TRA 1

Route de Lisses - 91100 Villabé - France

Tel: 01 60 91 70 79

Fax: 01 60 86 21 26

Patrick Jacamon

Directeur de l’Exploitation

Société des Autoroutes Paris-Normandie

Echangeur des Essarts

B.P. 7 - 76530 Grand-Couronne - France

Tel: 02 35 18 31 01

Fax: 02 35 18 31 96

Denis Laville

Chef de District

Société des Autoroutes Paris-Normandie

District de Gaillon

27600 Saint-Aubin-sur-Gaillon - France

Tel: 02 32 77 36 00

Fax: 02 32 77 36 09

Gilles Robin

Chef de Service

Direction Departementale de

l’Equipement de l’Essonne

Service Travaux Routiers et Autoroutiers

Route de Lisses - 91100 Villabé - France

Tel: 01 60 91 70 50

Fax: 01 60 86 34 88

GERMANY

Dr.-Ing. Fritz Bolte

Baudirektor

Referatsleiter

Verkehrsablauf, Verkehrsbeeinflussung,

Verkehrsstatistik

Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen

Brüderstraße 53

51427 Bergisch Gladbach

Federal Republic of Germany

Tel: (0 22 04) 43 520

Fax: (0 22 04) 43 680

Email: bolte@bast.de

Dipl.-Ing. Jan grobe Beilage

Research Coordination, Research

Programmes, International Cooperation

Brüderstraße 53

51427 Bergisch Gladbach

Federal Republic of Germany

Tel: (49 22 04) 43 443

Fax: (49 22 04) 43 148

Email: beilage@bast.de

Dipl.-Math. Gerd Kellermann

Referat

Verkehrsablauf, Verkehrsbeeinflussung,

Verkehrsstatistik

Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen

Brüderstraße 53

51427 Bergisch Gladbach

Postfach 10 01 50

51401 Bergisch Gladbach

Federal Republic of Germany

Tel: (0 22 04) 43 585

Fax: (0 22 04) 43 673
APPENDIX C

28

Dipl.-Ing. Walter Kretschmann

Baudirektor

Referat S 28

Straßenverkehrstechnik

Bundesministerium für Verkehr

Robert-Schuman-Platz 1, 53175 Bonn

Postfach 20 01 00, 53170 Bonn

Federal Republic of Germany

Tel: (02 28) 300-0/-5281

Fax: (02 28) 300-3428/3429

Email:

walter.kretschmann@bmv.bmv.bund400.de

Dipl.-Ing. Harald Lischwe

Department of Road Construction

Section StB 12

Construction Contracts

Federal Ministry of Transport

Robert-Schuman-Platz 1

D-53175 Bonn

PO Box 20 01 00

D-53170 Bonn

Federal Republic of Germany

Tel: + 49 (228) 300-0/-5122

Fax: + 49 (228) 300-3428/-3429

Dipl.-Ing. Günter Lukas

wiss. Angestellter

Referat

Schutz- und Leiteinrichtungen

Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen

Brüderstraße 53

51427 Bergisch Gladbach

Postfach 10 01 50

51401 Bergisch Gladbach

Federal Republic of Germany

Tel: 0 22 04/43-547

Fax: 0 22 04/43-676

Dr.rer.nat. Hans-Hubert Meseberg

Referat

Verkehrsregelung, Wegweisung,

Lichttechnik

Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen

Brüderstraße 53

51427 Bergisch Gladbach

Federal Republic of Germany

Tel: (0 22 04) 43 561

Fax: (0 22 04) 43 408

Dipl.-Ing. Hans Mundry

Division for Road Construction Research

and Development, International

Cooperation

in Road Construction

Federal Ministry of Transport, Building,

and Housing

Robert-Schuman-Platz 1

D-53175 Bonn

Federal Republic of Germany

Tel: (+49) 2 28 - 300 - 5142

Fax: (+49) 2 28 - 300 - 3428/3429

Email: Mundry@bmv.bmv.bund400.de

Dr.-Ing. Wolfgang Schulte

Leader of Section, Bituminous Pavement

Federal Highway Research Institute

Brüderstraße 53

51427 Bergisch Gladbach

Federal Republic of Germany

Tel: +49 (22 04) 43 750

Fax: +49 (22 04) 43 673

Internet: www.bast.de

Frank Süsser

Referat S28

Federal Ministry of Transport

Robert-Schuman-Platz 1

D-53175 Bonn

PO Box 20 01 00

D-53170 Bonn

Federal Republic of Germany

Email:

frank.suesser@bmv.bmv.bund400.de

THE NETHERLANDS

R.A.P. Jordens

Road Monitoring

Ministry of Transport, Public Works and

Water Mgmt.

Directorate-General for Public Works and

Water Mgmt.

Road and Hydraulic Engineering Division

P.O. Box 5044

2600 GA Delft

Van der Burghweg 1

The Netherlands

Tel: +3115699319

Fax: +3115611361
APPENDIX C

29

Michel M. Kusters

Consultant, Highway Engineering

Division

Ministry of Transport, Public Works and

Water Mgmt.

Directorate-General for Public Works and

Water Mgmt.

Transport Research Centre (AVV)

Boompjes 200

P.O. Box 1031

3000 BA Rotterdam

The Netherlands

Tel: +31 (10) 282 58 95

Fax: +31 (10) 282 56 44

Email: m.m.kusters@avv.rws. minvenw.nl

Ben T.R.M. Mulderink

Director, International Affairs

Ministry of Transport, Public Works and

Water Mgmt.

Directorate-General for Public Works and

Water Mgmt.

General Directorate

Johan de Wittlaan 3

P.O. Box 20906

2500 EX The Hague

The Netherlands

Tel: +31 70 351 87 07

Fax: +31 70 351 80 87

Email: afdb@hdw.rws.minvenw.nl

dr. ir. Govert Sweere

Project Director

Strategic Highway Research Program

P.O. Box 5044

NL-2600 GA Delft

The Netherlands

Tel: +31 15 2518380

Fax: +31 15 2518555

Email: r.sitanala@dww.rws.minvenw.nl

John C.M. van Gent

Senior Expert, Division International

Affairs

Ministry of Transport, Public Works and

Water Mgmt.

Directorate-General for Public Works and

Water Mgmt.

Head Office

Johan de Wittlaan 3

P.O. Box 20906

2500 EX The Hague

The Netherlands

Tel: +31 70 351 93 05

Fax: +31 70 351 80 87

Email: j.c.m.vgent@hkw.rws.minvenw.nl

SCOTLAND

Ian C. Anderson, BSc CEng MIEE MILE

Senior Engineer, Driver Information and

AIP

The Scottish Office

Development Department

National Roads Directorate

Network Management Division

Victoria Quay

Edinburgh EH6 6QQ UK

Tel: 0131-244-0450

Fax: 0131-244-0492

Jake Dempster, IEng MIEIE MILE

Engineer, Lighting and Communications

The Scottish Office

Development Department

National Roads Directorate

Network Management Division

Victoria Quay

Edinburgh EH6 6QQ UK

Tel: 0131-244-0449

Fax: 0131-244-0492

Nick Fenton

Group Manager

Traffic Appraisal Modelling and

Economics

Highways Agency, Room 4/37

St. Christopher House

Southwark Street

London 5EI 0TE UK

Tel: 0171-921-4128

Email: nick.fenton@highways.gsi.gov.uk
APPENDIX C

30

John Gooday, BSc CEng MICE

Principal Engineer

Network Manager Tay, Forth and Clyde

The Scottish Office

Development Department

National Roads Directorate

Network Management Division

Victoria Quay

Edinburgh EH6 6QQ UK

Tel: 0131-244-7177

Fax: 0131-244-0492

Robert A. Inglis

Network Manager (North)

The Scottish Office

Development Department

National Roads Directorate

Network Management Division

Victoria Quay

Edinburgh EH6 6QQ UK

Tel: 0131-244-0484

Neil B. MacKenzie, BSc CEng MICE

MIHT

Deputy Chief Engineer

Head of Project Construction Division

The Scottish Office

Development Department

National Roads Directorate

Project Construction Division

Victoria Quay

Edinburgh EH6 6QQ UK

Tel: 0131-244-7168

Fax: 0131-244-7185

Bill McDowell, BSc CEng MICE

Senior Principal Engineer

CITRAC/NADICS

Roads and Transportation

Glasgow City Council

National Network Control Centre

32 Elmbank Street

Glasgow G2 4PF UK

Tel: 0141-287-9302

Fax: 0141-287-9288

Email: william.

mcdowell@roads.glasgow.gov.uk

John P. Murphy, BSc CEng MICE MIHT

General Manager, Clyde Premium Unit

Clyde Local Authority Consortium

Roads and Transportation Services

4 Auchingramont Road

Hamilton ML3 6JT UK

Tel: 01698 452170

Fax: 01698 891679

David J. Mustard, BSc MICE

Project Engineer

The Scottish Office

Development Department

National Roads Directorate

Project Construction Division

Victoria Quay

Edinburgh EH6 6QQ UK

Tel: 0131-244-7165

Fax: 0131-244-7185

Hamilton Purdie, MSc IEng MIEEIE

MCIT

Assistant Principal Engineer

CITRAC/NADICS

Roads and Transportation

Glasgow City Council

National Network Control Centre

32 Elmbank Street

Glasgow G2 4PF UK

Tel: 0141-287-9307

Fax: 0141-287-9288

Email:

hamilton.purdie@roads.glasgow.gov.uk

Robin K. Rankin, BSc CEng MICE MAPM

Agent Manager, M6 DBFO

Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick & Co. (Scotland)

Ltd.

M6 DBFO Project

Beattock Road, Moffat

Dumfriesshire DG10 9SD UK

Tel: (01683) 222 000

Fax: (01683) 222 019

Email: robin.rankin@m6dbfo.co.uk
APPENDIX C

31

Ian S. Ross, BSc CEng MICE MIHT

National Network Manager

The Scottish Office

Development Department

National Roads Directorate

Network Management Division

Victoria Quay

Edinburgh EH6 6QQ UK

Tel: 0131-244-0482

Fax: 0131-244-0492

Bill Valentine, BSc MSc CEng MICE

Project Manager

The Scottish Office

Development Department

National Roads Directorate

Project Construction Division

Victoria Quay

Edinburgh EH6 6QQ UK

Tel: 0131-244-7263

Fax: 0131-244-7281
32

Appendix D

PRODUCT MANUFACTURERS/VENDORS

Portable Sign Gantries (Mobile Lane Signaling System and Mobile Route

Information System)

Kuiken Hytrans b.v.

Lemsterpad 56

NL-8531 AA Lemmer

The Netherlands

Tel: 31-(0)-514-56-24-15

Fax: 31-(0)-514-56-24-28

Mobile Queue Detection and Warning System

Abay TS

rue de Genevestraat 4

b 30, B 1140

Bruxelles, Belgium

Tel: 02-729-61-11

Fax: 02-729-61-61

Dynamic Route Information Panel

Brimos

4e Industrieweg 1

8051 CK Hattem

The Netherlands

Tel: 31-384-442-333

Fax: 31-384-446-428

Email: save@brimos.nl

Safeguard Moveable Barriers

TSS—Travaux, Signalisation et Securite B.T.P.

Siege Social

6 Avenue du 14 Juillet

Z.I. de la Gaudree

B.P. 30

91412 Dourdan Cedex, France

Tel: 01-60-81-52-00

Fax: 01-64-59-31-84
33

Appendix E

AMPLIFYING QUESTIONS

(Questions sent to the highway agencies in the five countries visited, prior to the

scanning tour.)

SCANNING TOUR OBJECTIVES

Through international technology exchange, improve highway construction and

maintenance operations to reduce motorist delay and improve worker/motorist safety

by:

I. Discovering new methods and procedures,

II. Identifying areas for research, and

III. Developing a “best practices” scanning tour report, presentation package, and

technology sharing plan.

Background Questions—To Be Addressed Before the Scanning Tour

• Are fuel and vehicle taxes dedicated to funding highway improvements? How

are the taxes calculated and collected?

• How is roadway construction and maintenance funded?

• What percentage of your roadway system is composed of freeways?

• How many miles of roadway is your agency responsible for maintaining?

• What is your maintenance budget?

• How do you measure traffic volumes in work zones? (e.g., vehicles per lane per

day?)

• What is the number of total annual highway fatalities? What is the number of

fatalities in highway construction and maintenance work zones?

Program Development

1. Motorists in the United States complain about the prevalence of highway work

zones and the resulting traffic delays and rough pavements. What do motorists

in your country expect—and accept—as the percentage of time that roadways

will be fully or partially closed for repairs?

2. When developing plans and proposals for highway construction and

maintenance projects, what type of, and how much, planning is done to ensure

adequate traffic flow and safety? At what point in the process is this planning

done?

• Is a preconstruction conference held to ensure that the contractor adheres to

the plans?

• Are cross-cutting and multi-agency teams used to develop corridor traffic

management plans? How?
34

APPENDIX E

• Are any prediction modeling or impact analysis activities performed for

individual projects or corridors to analyze various improvement strategies?

What models are used? What decision-making information is generated?

• What management system is used to assist with the programming and

scheduling of projects?

3. How are road user costs, economic impacts to the business community, and lifecycle costs used in the decision-making process?

• Is reducing user delays and costs a high priority in your decision making?

• How do you calculate traffic delays, impacts on business, and life-cycle costs?

• Have you ever selected a higher-cost treatment or action because it will last

longer and thus need fewer repairs and cause less disruption to traffic in the

future?

• How is the effect on traffic considered when deciding which treatment to

apply or action to take?

4. To what extent are long-range corridor improvements (capacity, operational,

periodic preventive maintenance, and structural strategies) used to reduce

motorist delays?

• U.S. highway agencies are increasingly following a “get in and stay in, and

then get out and stay out” strategy when designing maintenance and

construction activities in corridors. What strategy do you use?

5. Do you perform maintenance and construction at night, when traffic is lighter?

• What percentage is done by your staff, and what percentage is contracted

out?

• Is noise a concern in adjacent neighborhoods? What steps are taken to

mitigate the neighborhoods’ concerns and reduce noise?

Project Development

6. Do you use lane-rental fees or other monetary incentives/disincentives to speed

up completion of C&M work?

• Do your bid specifications specify the amount of delay allowed?

• If that amount is exceeded, do you impose any damages on the contractor?

• Are requirements different for contractors than for your own work crews?

• How are the incentives/disincentives calculated?

• Do you use other innovative contracting procedures to expedite C&M work?

• Are quality and timeliness of a contractor’s past performance included in

prequalification procedures?
35

APPENDIX E

7. Many of the impediments to innovative contracting in the United States result

from restrictive laws, regulations, and policies. Do you encounter similar

impediments? Have you developed any procedures that exempt experimental

projects from those policies?

8. Do you use design/build contracting?

• What are your experiences to date?

• Does D/B affect motorist delays or work zone safety?

9. What types of innovative contracting techniques are used? Are there guidelines

for their use? What problems have been encountered? Solutions?

• Do your contracts include contractor warranties?

• How successful is warranty contracting (compared with method

specifications without warranties)?

10. When selecting a contractor for a project, to what extent are the following

factors considered:

• Past performance in moving traffic safely and efficiently through a work

zone

• Proposed traffic plan for the project

11. Which factor is more important in awarding a contract—lowest price, or best

proposal?

12. Have you had success with using construction materials that significantly

reduce motorist delay by accelerating the construction process?

13. Is contractor involvement/input sought during planning? Design? Construction?

Maintenance?

• Do you provide any incentive for the contractor to develop and employ

innovative or challenging methods to reduce or eliminate motorist delay?

• Who is responsible for developing plans for moving traffic through work

zones? Are the plans based on standards/guidelines?

14. How is the safety of the work zone folded into the design of the traffic plan?

Operations

15. Are there any pavement markings, signs, or other devices that you have found to

be particularly effective in moving traffic safely through construction and

maintenance work zones?

• What positive barrier systems are used to separate workers from traffic for

various short-term and long-term construction and maintenance operations?

• Do you use erasable/removable temporary pavement markings? Are they

effective? Do they leave a discoloration or shadow on the pavement when

removed?
36

APPENDIX E

• Are your traffic control devices tested to meet CEN standards? Can you

provide names of manufacturers and specifications for these devices?

• Do you have any experience with intrusion alarms (i.e., devices that provide

work crews with audible warning that a vehicle has strayed into the work

zone)?

• If you use tall traffic warning devices (e.g., candlestick cones) to delineate

lane reductions, how effective are they? Are they crashworthy?

16. Do you use intelligent transportation system (ITS) technology to communicate

with motorists, monitor traffic operation, or improve traffic safety?

• Which ITS techniques are used?

• Are motorists provided real-time traffic information?

• Are messages automatically posted on variable message signs to warn

motorists of congestion ahead and/or to advise them to take alternate routes?

• Is the ITS technology incorporated into the roadway system once

construction and maintenance is compete (i.e., used to monitor/manage

traffic flow or communicate with road users after construction is finished)?

• How have motorists responded to the use of ITS technology?

17. What means are used to inform road users of delays caused by construction and

maintenance projects?

• Which means of communication seems to be the most effective?

• Describe successful public relations/information efforts.

• What methods have been useful in getting feedback from users?

• Have your efforts involved partnership with the construction industry?

• Have the media been supportive of your efforts?

18. How is the speed limit set in work zones?

• What techniques are used to enforce this speed limit?

• How effective is the lower limit in reducing traffic speeds?

• Is the lower limit in place 24 hours/day, or only when work is in progress?

• Do you impose higher fines for traffic violations in work zones?

• Do the lower limits and other restrictions hold up in court? What percentage

of cases is actually prosecuted?

• Do you have police officers assigned to work zones? What functions do they

perform? How are they paid?

• Do you use ITS technologies to detect and photograph speeders in work

zones? What methods do you use to warn drivers that they are under
37

APPENDIX E

surveillance and subject to ticketing? How has the public reacted? Any

lessons learned?

19. Have you developed or used any automated/robotic equipment to perform highexposure, short-term maintenance operations? Have you developed or used any

equipment specially designed to operate in the tight confines of temporary work

zones?

20. In developing public relations/outreach campaigns, how do you determine your

target audience, as well as the best methods to reach them?

• Are your public relations/outreach efforts tailored to each project or

conducted on a national level?

• What special programs do you have that incorporate public relations and

education efforts into your construction and maintenance program?

Performance Measures

21. Have your efforts to reduce motorist delay and improve safety in work zones

been successful?

• What is the crash rate in work zones? What factors seem to have the most

effect on the rate?

• How are work zone crash data collected, analyzed, and used?

22. How do you evaluate innovative materials or methods (including innovative

traffic control methods and innovative contracting) that may reduce the amount

of delays?

• Who does the evaluation? At what point in the process is the evaluation

done?

• Are computer models used?

• Do you have short-term testing and modeling procedures for newly

constructed highways that will allow you to predict long-term performance

and service life? (For example, can you reasonably predict how long a

particular asphalt mix design will perform under specified loads?)

• Are standardized design details used to encourage greater use of precast

materials?

• Do you have any formalized evaluation procedures? Can you provide an

example?

• Do your project development and design phases include funding for

innovative methods to reduce motorist delay and public information/

education activities?

23. What performance measures are used for traffic management?

• Who measures the performance—contractor, contracting agency, or third

party?
38

APPENDIX E

• Was the contracting industry involved in developing the measures?

• Has industry accepted the measures as an effective traffic management tool?

• How do you evaluate the costs versus benefits of ITS technology?

24. How do you obtain evaluation and feedback? Is this done by your staff or

contracted out?

• What do you do with the data obtained from the evaluation and feedback

(are they used as the basis for new initiatives, to change existing programs,

verify assumptions, etc.)?

• Do you conduct independent reviews/evaluations of work zone traffic

control?

• What techniques are used to make these reviews effective?

• Do you have any special program in place to recognize contractors who

implement effective traffic control plans?

General Issues

25. Do your traffic plans include any special considerations for older drivers in work

zones?

26. Do you have laws specifying maximum weights and dimensions for commercial

vehicles?

• How are vehicles that exceed these limits handled?

• Is there a fine? How is the fine determined?

27. Can you share with us what has not worked, and why?
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
	
	
	




	
 

!

 	
	!"#$%


& ##'())'%)()

*& ##'())'%)#)

	
	
	
+,-.
-

,,,-	
	
	
-,-.
-

/0

	1-'2''3

3'345