Portland Bike Forums (by BikePortland.org)

Go Back   Portland Bike Forums (by BikePortland.org) > General Discussion > General Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 10-28-2011, 10:06 AM
K'Tesh's Avatar
K'Tesh K'Tesh is offline
Super Moderator
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Subject To Change
Posts: 2,742
Red face I guess...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Maus View Post
hey folks,

Just finished reading this thread after seeing it linked from the recent story about ODOT and I-5 bridge markings.

Did anyone ever confirm that the long reflective stripe was installed by ODOT? I assume it was. K'Tesh?
I personally did the yellow on the bases (including the self-adhesive foil backed reflective material), and the reflective stripes on the poles.

I can only assume that ODOT installed the white "shy" lines. I haven't heard anything from them for some time despite my requests for feedback in the emails.
__________________
Riding my bike is MY pursuit of Happiness!!!
beam.to/UFOBike
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:35 AM
wsbob's Avatar
wsbob wsbob is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,755
Default

Here's a little side note;

Guess I didn't post it into the forum, because q'Tzal seemed to be taking much of the lead into seeing improvements made to this point on the Sunset MUP. Previous to the improvements, on the 27 of September, I posted the following pm to q'Tzal:

q`Tzal

Today, I rode up the hill from Beaverton, noticed ODOT's gate open(Hwy 26/Scholl's Ferry Rd), so decided to go in, ask about the path (first door on your right.). Guy there...says he rides the path regularly. Says responsibility for it falls within ODOT's Landscape Division, but he checks it himself, blows stuff off of the path...whatever, on occasion. Says he put some kind of indicator strips on the Pointer St pole, but they disappeared. No formal introduction, but he gave me a name and number for a guy he says is ODOT's bike coordinator. In case you haven't already got it, here it is:

Basil Christoper 731-3261 ODOT's bike coordinator

I think he told me the guy's office is in this very complex. Said something about 'the building over there in the corner.'. So that could be convenient for the coordinator to do a drive/bike over, look-see. I wanted to ask a few more questions of the guy I was talking to, about whether work for a potential fix of the Pointer St light pole issue would be done out of the Sylvan office, by a crew from there, but I felt like I couldn't take up any more of his time at the moment. Good luck...keep us posted. Not sure if I can do anything to help, but if you let me know...maybe. ....

His mention of the indicator strips on the pole, is interesting. More than one person apparently had been making efforts to improve visibility of the pole. He didn't know why the strips had disappeared. Thought it may have been kids, since there's a school nearby.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-27-2011, 02:20 AM
q`Tzal's Avatar
q`Tzal q`Tzal is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwix logic and emotion, reason and insanity.
Posts: 354
Default Double posting

After all that was done I think the best solution is this:
install a bunch of outdoor "garden rock" LED lights on the sound wall anywhere from 10' to 12' high.
Something like this:

Aimed down of course with fixtures that prevent direct glare in to homes.
If I wanted to sell the idea the first thing I would do would be to contact any manufacturer in Oregon who can make the lights; see if I could arrange a low purchase cost deal for sponsorship-publicity for the installation of the lights.
Then contact SolarWorld in Hillsboro and see if I could get them interested in funding a local safety improvement that would bump up their local public image and potentially help some of their employees at the same time.

With some batteries and solar panels on top of the wall the lighting would require little from code compliance other than permission to attach something to the sound wall.
__________________
Knowledge is NOT a crime.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-27-2011, 07:59 AM
K'Tesh's Avatar
K'Tesh K'Tesh is offline
Super Moderator
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Subject To Change
Posts: 2,742
Unhappy Theft

Quote:
Originally Posted by q`Tzal View Post
After all that was done I think the best solution is this:
install a bunch of outdoor "garden rock" LED lights on the sound wall anywhere from 10' to 12' high.
I'm sure someone would think that they were too cool to share with others, and take it home with them.
__________________
Riding my bike is MY pursuit of Happiness!!!
beam.to/UFOBike
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-03-2012, 10:19 AM
K'Tesh's Avatar
K'Tesh K'Tesh is offline
Super Moderator
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Subject To Change
Posts: 2,742
Lightbulb Latest change to the MUP...

ODOT added new reflectors to the poles recently...



I'll add that these reflectors are a lot more reflective than the tape I put up.

Looks more like what q'Tzal diagrammed each time I go out there.
__________________
Riding my bike is MY pursuit of Happiness!!!
beam.to/UFOBike
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-03-2012, 12:03 PM
wsbob's Avatar
wsbob wsbob is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,755
Default

Well...those ODOT mounted reflectors look great in the picture Jim took of them. I'm looking forward to the next time I ride up there so I can see them in person.

It's a bit amazing to me what government agencies can be persuaded to do once they've received sufficient inspiration. Never did learn for sure whether the guy I talked to up at the ODOT office at Sylvan was Basil Christopher, but do distinctly remember the person I talked to there saying, as I mentioned earlier, they regularly ride the path and watch for things to keep it in order. Involvement like that can go a really long way towards helping MUP's like this one be functional.

q`Tzal...those garden light rocks are interesting. So you're suggesting they be mounted on the wall 10-12 feet above the ground and projecting downward? I suppose that distance would basically be the top of the wall. I suppose they could be mounted on the ground and project up, but that location might be more subject to vandalism. Besides practical benefits, the potential to have the wall look more interesting is one of the things that interests me about use of lights to illuminate the wall.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-03-2012, 12:44 PM
q`Tzal's Avatar
q`Tzal q`Tzal is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwix logic and emotion, reason and insanity.
Posts: 354
Wink Anti-Theft but Pro-Climbing Implementation

Quote:
Originally Posted by K'Tesh View Post
I'm sure someone would think that they were too cool to share with others, and take it home with them.
Yeah that could be a problem but my original installation technique, which is was most labor intensive and would require involving more bureaucracy, was to install lights that merely looked like what I included a picture of prior.

I'd prefer a stone that matches the wall aesthetically. To create a light fixture with the stone encasing the LEDs and reflectors such that light is not wasted spread out 180 pissing off the neighbors with light glare.
To do all that it would be better to go with a custom cast concrete "stone". This is logical, however, because the wall it self is concrete. It also allows the maker to put cheap UL approved fixtures inside the concrete casting mold.
This casting technique is cheap (minus the fake stone mold sculpting - volunteer artists?), very durable and would allow the use of any compliant light fixture that can fit inside the mold.
From there the
code compliant electrical conduit supply comes out the back of the stone and goes through the noise wall. With the conduit on the Sunset Highway side:
  • repair can be done from a truck in the emergency lane with an elevated platform
  • no ugly conduit on the MUP/residential side
  • theft prone metals are on the side with video cameras, lots of traffic and copious light
  • power can come from multiple sources
    • solar
    • batteries
    • main lines
    • some high tech way to harness road rage and turn it in to useful electricity
  • if some "green" energy source is used its installation can be centralized in one place rather than in multiple small pieces that are easier to steal. I think such a bank of large photovoltaic with attached heavy lead acid batteries would be best installed at the west end of the noise wall just north of West Sylvan School between the flip down road sign and the Hwy 26 light pole: see G street view http://g.co/maps/u4qvu. Mains could be attached as a back up or as a local net generator if lots of panels are provided thus eliminating the need for batteries.
Height is a balancing act. Too high and you need stronger more expensive LED sources and fixtures to get the needed light on the target; too low and they are prey to vandalism and climbing.
I state without having done proper research that 12 foot high is most likely the minimum. Over 20 foot is also probably too high. I think that costly damage can be prevented by not scrimping on the fixture glass. Like the concrete it needs to be strong: I think an minimum of 1/2 inch tempered glass. 3 to 4 inch rounds shouldn't cost more than 5$~10$ a piece - good investment in not having to rip out and reinstall.

And that leads back to the difficult bit: stone installation.
Not only would a hole have to be drilled for the electrical conduit but I am firmly of the belief that these LED light fixture stones need to be somewhat recessed in to the surface of the wall (appx 33%~50% of total fixture thickness) and attached with a couple 1 inch though lag bolts or rebar. The recessing also lends slightly to the
aesthetic of a real looking block wall not merely something plugged on to the side in an ugly manner.
There is fake block work patterning on the noise wall, use those rectangular sizes to dictate the size of 3 to 5 different stone light mold patterns.
Cast each with the lag bolts or rebar, conduit and UL fixture.
Feed the whole lot through the wall.
However the stone is mechanically attached to the wall a high strength architectural grade epoxy should be used between the stone and the noise wall followed by a decorative grout line that ties in to the
aesthetics of the stone wall motif.



__________________
Knowledge is NOT a crime.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-03-2012, 01:03 PM
q`Tzal's Avatar
q`Tzal q`Tzal is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwix logic and emotion, reason and insanity.
Posts: 354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wsbob View Post
q`Tzal...those garden light rocks are interesting. So you're suggesting they be mounted on the wall 10-12 feet above the ground and projecting downward? I suppose that distance would basically be the top of the wall.
Some parts of the wall are 10-12 feet high like either end. The dark parts in particular are at least 16 foot high.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wsbob View Post
I suppose they could be mounted on the ground and project up, but that location might be more subject to vandalism. Besides practical benefits, the potential to have the wall look more interesting is one of the things that interests me about use of lights to illuminate the wall.
I can recall no lights in public safety installations that are on the ground or aiming up. It provides no safety improvement to the path user; it only makes their night vision worse as they deal with fixture glare.
They would be much easier to steal, vandalize and would require more costly methods of weatherproofing and corrosion prevention.

All this said ...
... I believe that much of the need for lines, signs, paint and warnings could be alleviated by an appropriate amount of light being put on the pathway. By "appropriate" we have to take in to account that there are few cost effective ways to slow down cyclists coming down the hill at high warp. An annoying surface texture might help but sufficient light levels negate the need by allowing all AWARE users to avoid hazards.
Nothing can be done for iPod Zombies (tm).
__________________
Knowledge is NOT a crime.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-03-2012, 05:44 PM
wsbob's Avatar
wsbob wsbob is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,755
Default

Re; post #38: q`Tzal...idea was that lights on the ground projecting up at the wall would help the wall be a reference point helping to indicate where the edge of the path is. Some of that light would reflect back onto the path itself. True though, that high mounted downward projecting lights would more directly light the path.
Downhill, that path invites very swift riding, especially the section directly exposed to freeway traffic, since 'who wants to expose themselves to that racket any longer than necessary?'. Don't know, what the answer is, besides common sense, to keeping people below 20mph on the path. It's already got those rather deep expansion joints which create an annoying 'thump-thump-thump' on the climb. Wouldn't really like speed bumps on this path.

I just got back from a downhill run on the path at about 5pm. This time of year, though not completely, it's already quite dark at this point along the MUP. The new reflective panels ODOT mounted showed up very well in the beam of my 150 lumen headlight. Much better in fact than the shy lines (though the shy lines are very effective in daylight heavy overcast days that tend to make surface differences of concrete and aluminum not distinctly marked or colored, indistinguishable because of their monotone blah-gray.)
In fact, I first noticed the panels reflecting in my headlight when I was to the east end of the galvanized railing for the ravine that's also east of the light poles that ODOT has marked with the shy lines and reflective panels. This is a distance of at least 200 feet, maybe more.

There were 5-10 people biking on the path as I traveled it downhill. All had lights. From far away...200'-300', one white light was distinctive for the sequence it was flashing. After 2-3 seconds, I realized this had to be a person walking, and the flashing that was different than any I've seen typical of bike lights, was due the person with the light letting it swing with the natural motion of his arms back and forth as he walked. As I approached and passed him...sure enough, he was on foot.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-03-2012, 08:52 PM
q`Tzal's Avatar
q`Tzal q`Tzal is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwix logic and emotion, reason and insanity.
Posts: 354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wsbob View Post
Re; post #38: q`Tzal...idea was that lights on the ground projecting up at the wall would help the wall be a reference point helping to indicate where the edge of the path is. Some of that light would reflect back onto the path itself.
I looked up "In-Roadway Lights" and "internally illuminated raised pavement markers" in the MUTCD.
"In-Roadway Lights" are strictly used for one purpose such that it is almost not worth linking to:
CHAPTER 4N. IN-ROADWAY LIGHTS

Section 4N.01 Application of In-Roadway Lights
Standard:

02 In-Roadway Lights shall not be used for any application that is not described in this Chapter.
04 When used, In-Roadway Lights shall be flashed and shall not be steadily illuminated.
Section 4N.02 In-Roadway Warning Lights at Crosswalks


Basically In-Roadway Lights are blinkies for crosswalks ONLY.


"Internally illuminated raised pavement markers" are a bit more fiddly. They crop up in several places:

Section 3B.05 Other White Longitudinal Pavement Markings
Section 3B.11 Raised Pavement Markers – General
Section 3B.12 Raised Pavement Markers as Vehicle Positioning Guides with Other Longitudinal Markings
Section 3B.13 Raised Pavement Markers Supplementing Other Markings
Section 3B.14 Raised Pavement Markers Substituting for Pavement Markings
Section 3B.23 Curb Markings
Section 3H.01 Channelizing Devices
Section 3I.05 Island Delineation
Section 6F.79 Temporary Raised Pavement Markers


The use of which can all be summed up as: these are to be used in support of existing white or yellow lane or curb striping when engineering studies show that it is needed.


So in a roundabout way I'm saying the same thing that the MUTCD says: surface mounted lighting is used for
highlighting the specific point only not for providing area lighting.
Even in airport runway lighting standards they are only concerned with marking the runway and not attempting to light the tarmac with ground lights.
As you demonstrated with your prior narrative about the walker 200'~300' away lit by a blinky you were not able to distinguish what it was for sure until it was until you were in spitting distance - literally.
No amount of surface lighting will solve that and will likely make it worse - like car headlights.


The Sunset MUP needs to be brought up to the standard for mid block crosswalks as stated at Informational Report on Lighting Design for Midblock Crosswalks:
"The research documented ... found that a vertical illuminance level in the crosswalk of 20 lx ... provided adequate detection distances for most midblock crosswalks."
__________________
Knowledge is NOT a crime.

Last edited by q`Tzal; 01-03-2012 at 08:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:12 PM.




A production of Pedaltown Media Inc. / BikePortland.org
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.