References

1. AASHTO. Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware, 2nd ed. Washington, DC, 2016.

2. AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th ed. Washington, DC, 2012.

3. U.S. Access Board. Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines. https://www.access-board.gov/prowag/.

4. Mogawer, W. S., Austerman, A. J., and Gazzi, J. J. Shared Use Path Fencing Usage. Vermont Agency of Transportation, Montpelier, 2007.

5. Texas Department of Transportation. Bridge Railing Manual. Austin, 2018.

6. Ritter, M. A. Chapter 10: Rail Systems for Timber Decks, in Timber Bridges: Design, Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, 1990.

7. Lechtenberg, K. A., Faller, R. K., Bielenberg, R. W., Schmidt, J. D., Guajardo, A. L., and Reid, J. D. Development of a Crashworthy Pedestrian Rail. Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Madison, 2016.

8. AASHTO. LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 9th ed. Washington, DC, 2020.

9. AASHTO. Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, 1st ed. Washington, DC, 2004.

10. AASHTO. Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, 2nd ed. Washington, DC, 2021.

11. Sarkar, S. Evaluation of Different Types of Pedestrian-Vehicle Separations. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1502, 1995, pp. 83–95.

12. Sanders, R. L. We Can All Get Along: The Alignment of Driver and Bicyclist Roadway Design Preferences in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 91, 2016, pp. 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.06.002.

13. Sanders, R. L. Examining the Cycle: How Perceived and Actual Bicycling Risk Influence Cycling Frequency, Roadway Design Preferences, and Support for Cycling Among Bay Area Residents. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 2013.

14. Li, Z., Wang, W., Liu, P., and Ragland, D. R. Physical Environments Influencing Bicyclists’ Perception of Comfort on Separated and On-Street Bicycle Facilities. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 17(3), 2012, pp. 256–261.

15. DuBose, B. 2011. Physically Separated Bikeways: A Game Changer for Bicycle Mode Split? ITE Journal 81(4), 2011, p. 54.

16. Huybers, S., Van Houten, R., and Malenfant, J. E. L. Reducing Conflicts Between Motor Vehicles and Pedestrians: The Separate and Combined Effects of Pavement Markings and a Sign Prompt. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 37(4), 2004, pp. 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2004.37-445.

17. McNeil, N., Monsere, C. M., and Dill, J. Influence of Bike Lane Buffer Types on Perceived Comfort and Safety of Bicyclists and Potential Bicyclists. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2520, 2015, pp. 132–142.

18. Caltrans. Roadside Management Toolbox. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-roadside-management-toolbox.

19. Dunn, M. Evaluation of DuroTrim Vegetation Control Mats. Iowa Department of Transportation, Ames, 2002. http://publications.iowa.gov/19902/.

20. Yelverton, F., and Gannon, T. Vegetation Management Under Guardrails for North Carolina Roadsides. No. FHWA/NC/2004-02. U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 2003. https://ntlrepository.blob.core.windows.net/lib/24000/24700/24799/Final_Report_2001-06.pdf.

21. Bligh, R. P., Skinger, N. R., Abu-Odeh, A. Y., Roschke, P. N., Menges, W. L., and Haug, R. R. Dynamic Response of Guardrail Systems Encased in Pavement Mow Strips. No. FHWA/TX-04/0-4162-2. Texas Department of Transportation, Austin, 2004. https://static.tti.tamu.edu/tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-4162-2.pdf.

22. Raine, W. Tire-Rubber Anti-Vegetation Tile Evaluation. Recycled Materials Resource Center, Quarterly and Final Report for RMRC Research Project No. 30. 2004. https://rmrc.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/P30Final.pdf.

23. Arsenault, A., Teeter-Balin, J., Velinsky, S. A., and White, W. 2008. Alternatives to Labor Intensive Tasks in Roadside Vegetation Maintenance (No. UCD-ARR-08-06-30-01). AHMCT Research Center, University of California, Davis, 2008. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/research-innovation-system-information/documents/f0016966-ucd-arr-08-06-30-04.pdf.

24. Arrington, D. R., Bligh, R. P., and Menges, W. L. Alternative Design of Guardrail Posts in Asphalt or Concrete Mowing Pads. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, 2009. http://www.roadsidepooledfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/405160-14-1.pdf.

25. Willard, R. G., Morin, J. R., and Tang, O. K., Assessment of Alternatives in Vegetation Management at the Pavement Edge. No. WA-RD 736.1. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, 2010. https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/research/reports/fullreports/736.1.pdf.

26. Barton, S., and Budischak, V. Guardrail Vegetation Management in Delaware. Delaware Center for Transportation. Delaware Center for Transportation, Newark, 2013. https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.udel.edu/dist/1/1139/files/2013/10/Rpt-247-Guardrail-vegetation-Barton-PLSC-1bw8586.pdf.

27. Scott, D. W., Stewart, L. K., and White, D. W. Crash Tests on Guardrail Systems Embedded in Asphalt Vegetation Barriers in Accordance with GDOT Design Specifications. No. FHWA-GA-18-1626. Georgia Department of Transportation, Atlanta, 2018. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/40283.

28. Sheikh, N. M., Menges, W. L., and Kuhn, D. L. MASH TL-3 Evaluation of 31-Inch W-Beam Guardrail with Wood and Steel Posts in Concrete Mow Strip. No. 608551-01-1-5. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, 2019. https://www.roadsidepooledfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/TRNo608551-1-45-Final.pdf.

29. Ross, H. E., Jr., Sicking, D. L., Zimmer, R. A., and Michie, J. D. 1993. NCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1993.

30. Michie, J. D. NCHRP Report 230: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Appurtenances. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1981.

31. AASHTO. Roadside Design Guide, 4th ed. Washington, DC, 2011.

32. Letter to Aris Stathopoulos, New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Bridges and Tunnels, from Wanda L. Menges, TTI Proving Ground, Jan. 30, 2017. https://www.roadsidepooledfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/b274-1.pdf.

33. Bligh, R., Abu-Odeh, A., and Menges, W. L. MASH Test 3-10 on 31-Inch W-Beam Guardrail with Standard Offset Blocks. No. FHWA/TX-11/9-1002-4. Texas Department of Transportation, Austin, 2011. https://static.tti.tamu.edu/tti.tamu.edu/documents/9-1002-4.pdf.

34. Moran, S., and Bligh, R. TxDOT Thrie-Beam Transition to Concrete Barrier MASH TL-3 Study Pooled Fund-Engineering Support. Letter Report. Texas A&M Transportation Institute, College Station, 2020. https://www.roadsidepooledfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/TxDOT-Thrie-Beam-Transition-to-Concrete-Barrier-Professional-Opinion-Letter-Report.pdf.