• No results found

1. Call to Order. Chair Ray Krammes called the meeting to order at 2:45 pm.

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2020

Share "1. Call to Order. Chair Ray Krammes called the meeting to order at 2:45 pm."

Copied!
6
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

2006 TRB MIDYEAR MEETING

COMMITTEE AHB65 — OPERATIONAL EFFECTS OF GEOMETRICS August 16, 2006 2:45 to 5:00 pm

Park City Marriott, Ballroom 4

1. Call to Order. Chair Ray Krammes called the meeting to order at 2:45 pm.

2. Welcome and Introductions. Chair Ray Krammes welcomed members and friends. Members and friends introduced themselves.

3. Announcements. Chair Ray Krammes said that there were no announcements

4. Approval of 2006 Annual Meeting Minutes. Copies of the draft minutes from the 2006 Annual Meeting were distributed. A motion to approve the minutes then passed unanimously.

5. Paper Review Activities. Chair Ray Krammes said that a total of 29 papers were submitted for review by the committee. He assigned papers on August 15; most members responded to Ray’s earlier request regarding their interests. Twenty-four committee members and 32 friends have been assigned papers, with 5 reviewers to each paper.

Ray noted that the number of papers received has increased over the past few years. He asked those who were assigned papers to scan the abstracts as soon as possible and to let him know immediately if they feel uncomfortable reviewing a paper.

For the 2007 Annual Meeting, 50% of the submitted papers will be accepted for presentation and 25% will be accepted for publication.

6. Subcommittee Reports.

Paper Review Subcommittee

Gerry Sudimick gave a presentation summarizing recommendations from the Decision and Process and Reviewer’s Perspective sub-sub committees. (See handouts) It was suggested that the Reviewer’s Perspective PowerPoint presentation could be posted to the committee Web Board.

Doug Harwood gave his perspective on the review process, based on his experience as the past committee chair:

 Regarding the “Data Valid” item, Doug said that this refers to whether the authors

(2)

 Box B on the paper review form should be used by the reviewer to communicate to the committee chair something that is not reflected in Box A or the paper ratings. This is used for sensitive information, not be shared with the author.

 As committee chair, Doug always tried to have a good mix of reviewers for each paper (i.e., at least one practitioner, one researcher, etc.) He agrees that the idea of having more guidance for new reviewers is good, but doesn’t agree with the major changes to the review process as proposed.

Rich Cunard took issue with item 7 (“…there is no reward for short-term value”), pointing out that papers with only short-term value are not the focus of TRR’s.

Kay Fitzpatrick asked Rich if there could be a “Help” button for certain items on the review site. Rich responded that it could be done, but won’t anytime soon.

Rich said that item 8 (“A committee should not have to accept a certain percentage of papers each year. The number could instead be a six-year total…”) cannot be done.

Ray asked the Paper Review Subcommittee to react to comments and revise their recommendations. Regarding the first set of recommendations (i.e., “for AHB65, can be

implemented immediately”), he plans to provide reminders to reviewers. Regarding item 6 (form a new presentation and publication subcommittee), Ray wants the subcommittee to think about how to select members and what roles would they serve. In general, he wants to see more details from the subcommittee on these issues.

Strategic Planning Subcommittee

Ray said that the Strategic Planning Subcommittee was tasked with looking at our niche; defining our role among other committees. At this meeting, our focus is on establishing priorities, identifying what’s missing and where we “missed the mark.”

Ray explained the process that the subcommittee has gone through since the Annual Meeting: taking feedback from the initial strategic planning discussion at the 2006 Annual Meeting; developing an outline for a strategic plan; conducting several conference calls and working independently and in small groups between calls to flesh out a strategic plan covering

approximately the next five years. Ray distributed a “Strategic Planning – Summary; 8/7/2006 Draft,” which includes a summary table (listing goals, focus areas and proposed AHB65 role), as well as more detailed tables (listing goals, focus areas, objectives, actions, dates, AHB65 role, and other committees).

Reactions from the committee included:

 Jim Brewer noted a difference between the process and the tools; what should the analyses be and what are the tools to do the analyses?

 Eric Donnell commented that the Plan looked great in general, and he brought up an issue regarding the supporting role function.

(3)

o Regarding the proposed lead role for AHB65 with “Freeways (segments and interchanges)” under the safety goal, Doug noted that the Highway Safety Manual Task Force (HSM TF) has shown interest in this area.

o Regarding “Freeways (segments and interchanges)” under the operational

performance goal, he is concerned that we show a lead role for AHB65, given the existence of the Freeway Operations Committee.

o Regarding “Intersections and interchanges on non-freeway facilities”, Doug noted that interchanges on non-freeway facilities may be “falling through the cracks,” since this area is not being addressed by the Freeway Ops Committee and our plan shows only a support role for AHB65.

 Ray said that AHB65 would lead in certain design-related areas, but not necessarily lead in everything.

 Kay Fitzpatrick questioned some of the roles listed, wondering if we are placing too much emphasis on freeways. She suggested splitting intersections and interchanges into 2 rows.

 Chris Poe commented that due to the existence of the Intersection Joint Subcommittee (JSC), we had tended to show our role as one of support for intersection-related activities. However, given the discussion earlier today at the joint meeting with the Geometric Design Committee - during which it was noted that the Intersection JSC might not be making as much progress as hoped for – it might be that we need to take more of a lead role related to intersections.

 Doug Harwood feels that an important role for us is to look at the HSM when the HSM TF is trying to get the 1st Edition finalized. We can help identify what is needed for the 2nd

Edition.

 Regarding suburban arterials and residential streets, Kay Fitzpatrick said that states do not do much residential street work. Need to focus more on the local/county level.  Doug Harwood said that the urban/suburban issue is a knotty problem. He does not feel

that NCHRP project 17-26 (Methodology to Predict the Safety Performance of Urban and Suburban Arterials) will resolve all the issues. To distinguish between urban and

suburban, the best single indicator is speed. However, the ability to develop prediction models with speed for urban vs. suburban is not good at this time. Therefore, Doug suggested that AHB65 should have a role in addressing this.

Ray distributed a one page “Strategic Planning – Implementation; 8/7/2006 Draft,” listing goals, focus areas, AHB65 role and Implementation. The following table summarizes the three main implementation categories:

AHB65 Role Implementation Time frame

Lead Standing subcommittee 3-5 years

Co-lead Standing joint subcommittee or joint steering committee with the

Geometric Design Committee Support Liaise with others and form ad hoc

task groups

(4)

Ray said that in looking at how many people we need to implement the plan, approximately half of the committee members would need to take a lead role in an activity, plus be involved with 2 or 3 other activities. This is doable, but would strain us to the limit. So, we will need to

prioritize. This will be a major discussion topic at the 2007 Annual Meeting.

At the Annual Meeting, Ray wants to discuss: Which areas are most important to us? Which areas are members willing to commit their time to?

Doug Harwood recommended that we combine some areas into a single subcommittee and noted that we need to consider timing when establishing priorities.

Ray noted that the plan is overly optimistic regarding what we can do in 2007-08. If anyone has any feedback on the plan before the Annual Meeting, they should send it to Ray via e-mail.

7. Old Business.

2007 Annual Meeting. Current plans are to sponsor two podium sessions and one poster session. 50% of papers submitted will be presented. Last year, we looked for several papers on a common topic. The intersections session was popular.

In 2007, we will sponsor a conference session on “Navigating the Straights of Geometrics – Safety, Operations and Funding,” organized by Kathy King. She would like to have speakers representing the state perspective, a researcher and a practitioner. The floor was opened for ideas on potential speakers:

 Kathy said that she talked with Jim Brewer about being the state speaker. Tim Neuman and Kevin Mahoney were mentioned as possible researchers. Duane Eitel suggested someone from the Nebraska DOR; he will discuss further with Kathy. Marc Butorac was mentioned as a possibility, based on his presentation on Intersection Access Management Plans (IAMP) at the Access Management Conference. Kay Fitzpatrick noted that

Canadians have a different approach to design (i.e., the design domain concept) and suggested that we consider someone to speak from that perspective.

 Ray said that Tim Neuman was involved with the Sea to Sky project (to Vancouver, Canada), in which the government provided performance criteria that the contractor had to figure out how to meet.

 Mike Dimaiuta suggested that Steve Harris (New Mexico DOT) might be considered, based on his efforts to promote “design optimization” within his state. The goal of design optimization is to maximize the safety performance of the state highway system given the existing financial constraints. Mike will send Kathy contact information for Steve Harris, and any materials he has related to design optimization.

 Ray suggested having a speaker to represent the Highway Safety Manual perspective. Rich Cunard then suggested that John Zegeer would be a good choice.

(5)

Rich Cunard suggested having a “strong consultant” as a speaker. Ray suggested that the Sea to Sky project would be a good case study with John Collings (Canada) as a potential speaker.

 The roster must be set by October 1. Kathy will take suggestions and develop a proposed roster to run by Ray. She will prepare a paragraph description of the session along with the roster of speakers.

Doug Harwood proposed co-sponsoring a conference session with the Safety Data, Analysis and Evaluation Committee on Road Assessment Programs (RAPs). Current efforts include

EURORAP and AUSRAP. In general, RAPs are safety efficiency ratings for roads. USRAP is sponsored by the AAA Foundation for Safety. There are existing pilots in Iowa and Michigan, and there will be pilots in Florida and New Jersey soon. There will also be a 5th pilot state in the

future. Proposed speakers include John Dawson (head of EURORAP), someone from

International Road Assessment Programs (IRAP), Peter Kissinger of the AAA Foundation, Doug Harwood and someone from one of the pilot states. A vote was taken and the committee agreed to co-sponsor the session.

Ray mentioned that we might be asked to co-sponsor another session by the Freeway Ops committee. The session would focus on a recent European scan tour on managed lanes (including HOV, HOT, truck restrictions, variable pricing, congestion pricing, etc.) The committee voted to co-sponsor the session if we are asked. Rich Cunard noted that high speed toll lanes are a safety and operations issue.

We will co-sponsor two activities with the Geometric Design Committee: a session on Complete Streets (Angelia Parham and Mike Dimaiuta are helping out) and a workshop on “The Future of Geometric Design: A New Approach to Geometric Design Decisions.” The workshop will consist of two parts: (A) Performance-Based Geometric Design Analysis and (B) Graduate Student Research.

8. New Business.

Form 2007 Paper Awards Subcommittee. Larry Shannon agreed to continue to chair the subcommittee. Ray Krammes indicated that he would contact the individuals who volunteered during the Annual Meeting to serve on the subcommittee in order to complete the subcommittee membership roster.

9. Liaison Reports. None.

10. Other Announcements. None.

11. Adjournment.

(6)

Attendance Roster

Operational Effects of Geometrics Committee 2006 Mid-Year Meeting

Name Telephone Fax

Organization &

Address E-mail Address AHB65Member/

Friend

Christopher Poe (972) 994-0433 (T) (972) 994-0522 (F)

TTI

9441 LBJ Freeway, Suite 103 Dallas, TX 75243

cpoe@tamu.edu Member

Gerald Sudimick

(407) 264-3429 (T) PBSJ- Florida’s TurnpikeMP263

Occoee, FL.

gerald.sudimick@dot.state.fl.us Friend

Mike Dimaiuta (202) 493-3332 (T) (202) 493-3416 (F)

Lendis Corp.

6300 Gerogetown Pike, HRDS-05

McLean, VA 22101

Michael.dimaiuta@fhwa.dot.gov Member

Day Harwood

(816) 753-7600x1571 (T) (816) 561-6557 (F)

Midwest Research Institute 425 Volker Boulevard Kansas City, MO 64110

dharwood@mriresearch.org Member

Duane S. Eitel (720) 810-7152 (T) (303) 694-2822 (F)

Kirkham Michael 5600 S Quebec Ste. 200D Greenwood Village, CO 80111

deitel@kirkham.com Member

Kay Fitzpatrick (979) 845-7321 (T) (979) 845-6481 (F)

TTI

CE/TTI Bldg.

College Station, TX 77843-3135

k-fitzpatrick@tamu.edu Member

Kathy King

(614) 466-4558 (T) Ohio DOT1980 W. Broad St.

Columbus, Ohio 43223

kathy.king@dot.state.oh.us

Larry Shannon (614) 898-7100 (T) (614) 898-7570 (F)

MS Consultants, Inc. 2221 Schrock Road Columbus, OH 43229

larry.shannnon@yahoo.com Member

Clayton Chen

(202) 366-4656 (T) FHWA- Office of Safety400 7th Street SW, Rm 3407

Washington, DC

clayton.chen@dot.gov Friend

Karen Schurr (402) 472-2233 (T) (402) 472-0859 (F)

University of Nebraska-Lincoln W 334 Nebraska Hall

Lincoln, NE 68588-0531

kschurr1@unlnotes.unl.edu Member

Wendell T. Ruff (601) 354-0696 (T) (601) 354-0433 (F)

ABMB Engineers, Inc. 700 N. State St. Jackson, MS 39202

wruff@abmb.com Member

Eric Donnell (814) 863-7053 (T) (814) 863-7304 (F)

Penn State University 223B Sackett Bldg. University Park, PA 16802

edonnell@eng.psu.edu Member

Jim Brewer (785) 296-3901 (T) (785) 296-4302 (F)

Kansas DOT

Eisenhower State Office Bldg. 200 SW Harrison 13th Fl.

Topeka, KS 66603-3754

jbrewer@ksdot.org Member

Ray Krammes (202) 493-3312 (T) (202) 493-3417 (F)

FHWA

Office of Safety R&D 6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA 22101

References

Related documents

7098, all of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Jaiyos Audit Co., Ltd., as auditors of the Bank for the year 2021 with the remuneration in the amount of Baht 19,467,000 and special

Roll call: All board members present voted to approve a 3-year contract from Lauterbach & Amen, LLP for monthly accounting and benefits management services for 2020, 2021 and

4,8 Com- paring rescue time of HEMS and ground ambulance, we found that helicopter dispatch to the cities including Lamerd, Lar, Khonj, Abadeh can be more effective be- cause

Remy Place, subject to the submission of the as-built drawings provided to Utilities Kingston for the existing sanitary manhole locations, elevations for the alignment and

Given that in the study by Greenwood and Bithell (2003) factors found to be important to BME young people in terms of career choice are having a “profession”, autonomy and

Whereas collision avoidance (CA) is normally based on adjusting the rate locally when a node is congested its child nodes are forced to adjust their rates mostly employing

more than four additional runs were required, they were needed for the 2 7-3 design, which is intuitive as this design has one more factor than the 2 6-2 design

I know that the Board of County Commissioners had a similar item on their agenda early in the year, and I think it is appropriate for staff to review what they've got as