Arizona milepost: your local technical assistance program

              AZ Milepost, Spring 2003
1
Spring 2003, Vol. 3 No. 2
INSIDE
PG. TITLE
2 Pavement Surface
Type as the First
Noise Mitigation
Strategy
3 What is Noise and
How is it
Controlled?
7 Common Indoor and
Outdoor Noise
Levels
9 Road Scholar
Graduates
10 FHWA Unveils New
Website
11 Calendar Of Events
12 Center News!
SOUND BARRIERS AND NOISE CONTROL
Does Traffic Noise Affect the Quality of Your Life?
In many major urban areas noise is becoming one of the more important
aspects of transportation and of the community itself. People are realizing
the impact of noise on the quality of their life. In the past decade, noise has
become an ever-increasing environmental pollution that affects peoples’
health, comfort and general well being. Noise is something that is almost
impossible to escape, whether it is during daytime or nighttime hours. It
affects most of our lives in one form or another. As communities expand and
increase in traffic, noise becomes an unwanted by-product of the times. It’s
one of the prices for progress! Or is it?
Old News or New News?
Noise pollution is not a new issue. It has been around since the beginning of
transportation, and its roots closely parallel that of transportation development.
The invention of the wheel is often credited to around 5,000 BC in Mesopotamia.
This provided a major break through in the movement of goods and people as loads
were no longer constrained to just what a human or animal could carry or drag.
Although it is not known whether it applied just to transportation or not, by 4,000
BC, excessive noise was a punishable offense in Mesopotamia. So even as far
back as 6,000 years ago, communities recognized the importance of noise on the
quality of life.
As transportation progressed, iron “tyres” were developed around 800 BC. The
origin of the term tyre (i.e. tire), by the way, refers to the iron rim around a wooden
wheel, not the pneumatic tire we associate it with today. While making the tire
much more durable and efficient, this invention created the first serious noise source.
Previously, animal hooves and people were the primary noise sources. Now a more
efficient noise generator had been invented. Namely, the clickety clank of iron
wheels on cobblestone and block roads.
This problem no doubt helped produce the first documented noise regulation. In
44 BC Julius Caesar declared: “Hence-forward, no wheeled vehicle whatsoever
will be allowed within the precincts of the city, from sunrise until the hour before
dusk….Those which shall have entered during the night, and are still within the
city at dawn, must halt and stand empty until the appointed hour”.
AZ Milepost, Spring 2003 2 The Arizona LTAP Center is a
part of the nationwide Local
Technical Assistance Program.
It is financed jointly by Federal
Highway Administration,
Arizona Department of Trans-portation,
and Arizona local
agencies.
The Arizona Milepost may
contain rewritten and reprinted
material compiled from reliable
sources, but it assumes no
responsibility for the correct-ness
of the information.
The Arizona Milepost is
published quarterly.
For more information contact:
Annie Parris
Arizona LTAP Center
aparris@dot.state.az.us
Office: (602) 712-8461
Fax: (602) 712-3007
It may not be known why Caesar preferred noise at night instead of during daytime, but it
most assuredly led to the reason why Roman author Martial wrote “the noise on the streets
at night sounded as if the whole of Rome was traveling through my bedroom”.
Almost two thousand years later the problem still existed. In 1869 a similar noise issue
regarding wagons traveling over granite blocks was reported in London. The British Phy-sician,
Sir Norman Moore wrote: “Most of the streets were paved with granite sets(blocks)
and on them the wagons with iron-tyred wheels made a din that prevented conversation
while they passed by. The roar of London by day was almost terrible – a never varying
deep rumble that made a background to all other sounds”.
Pavement Surface Type as the First Noise Mitigation Strategy
For the first several thousands years in the history of transportation, manmade roadways
consisted of cobblestone and stone block construction. This technology dates back to
about 4000 BC in Ur in the Middle East. In fact, with the decline of the Roman Empire
around 450 AD, the art of road building was essentially lost until the late 1700s and early
1800s. Around 1820, a Scotsman named John McAdam developed an improved roadway
design called macadam. This roadway design consisted of an eight-inch thick layer of
three-inch aggregate followed by a two-inch thick layer of three quarter inch aggregate.
This new design allowed highway speeds (up to 9 mph) to be dictated by the vehicle(wagon)
instead of the roadway for the first time. This design became popular in the US for rural
road construction during the 1830s and 40s.
As US cities became more modernized they reverted to the use of block and brick street
construction similar to what existed in Europe. And, similar to what was previously re-ported
by the British Physician in London, major US communities began experiencing
similar noise issues. This led most major US cities during the 1870s to start using wooden
blocks in lieu of granite blocks for roadway construction. Although wooden blocks were
first used in Russia in the 14th century, their re-emergence provided a welcome relief from
the clickety clank of the wagons and the pounding of the horseshoes. During the late
1800s wooden blocks saw wide spread use in major cities as a quiet pavement strategy.
Just how important the noise issue was during the late1800s is exemplified by the willing-ness
of the communities to accept pavement service lives of half to one fourth of what
could be obtained with granite block streets. Wooden blocks were considered to have an
expected service life of only10 years while the granite blocks they were replacing had an
expected life of 15-25 years under heavy traffic and 40-50 years under normal traffic.
During this same time period the use of mastic streets, consisting of native asphalt spread
over a prepared base, was also becoming common and, like wooden blocks, this design
produced quiet pavements. As is true today, each design had its strengths and weaknesses.
Although mastic streets proved to be quiet, they had traction issues. In those days, this was
related to the number of falls of horses. A study in the 1890s reported typical distances a
horse could travel between falls. For sheet or mastic asphalt it was 220 km, for granite
blocks 320 km, and for wood blocks, 550 km.
OLD NEWS OR NEW NEWS ? - CONTINUED
3 AZ Milepost, Spring 2003
CENTER STAFF &
CONTACT INFORMATION
Arizona LTAP Center
1130 N. 22nd Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85009
Phone: 602-712-8461
Fax: 602-712-3007
www.azltap.org
STAFF
Erika Martinez
Director
(602) 712-4252
emartinez@dot.state.az.us
Annie Parris
Program Manager
(602) 712-8461
aparris@dot.state.az.us
Teressa Lopez
Program Assistant
(602) 712-7157
teressa@dot.state.az.us
Patricia Bravo
Course Administration
(602) 712-7382
pbravo@dot.state.az.us
Lori Sayers
Marketing Assistant
(602) 712-4939
lsayers@dot.state.az.us
Brian Reed
Heavy Equipment Trainer
(602) 712-6786
breed@dot.state.az.us
Alex Durazo
Regional Trainer
(602) 712-6175
adurazo@dot.state.az.us
On the other hand, wood blocks also had problems as was vividly recognized after the Chicago
fire of 1871. That’s right, Chicago had wooden streets.
Along with the advent of hot mix asphalt in the early 1900s came the development of motorized
travel. So at about the same time that technology was beginning to allow a smoother, quieter
roadway, technology was providing a nosier vehicle. However, instead of tires making the noise
as with wagons, engines and exhausts were the new culprits. As the use of motorized vehicles
became more common, noise levels increased.
As motorized transportation expanded during the 1900s noise problems continued un-abated
until the early 1950s when US manufacturers imposed voluntary limitations on exhaust noise.
This was followed by California noise legislation in the late 1960s and eventually Federal noise
regulations in the early 1970s.
During the 1900s, except for isolated instances, pavement surface type was not used to control
noise as was commonly done at the end of the 1800s. By the end of the 1900s, pavement surface
type, could not be used for noise mitigation in the US for federally funded projects- quite a turn
about in just one hundred years!
What is Noise and How is it Controlled?
The term noise refers to “unwanted sound”. Different people have different perceptions of what
sound they like and what sound they don’t like. The roar of the crowd when the Diamond backs
won the World Series or the laughter of children would commonly be considered pleasant sounds,
while the sound of a lawnmower or garbage truck would be considered noise or unwanted sound.
Noise like all other sounds is a form of acoustic energy. It differs from pleasant sounds only in the
fact that it often disturbs us and has the characteristics of an uninvited guest. To understand noise
or sound, requires both an understanding of the physics of sound and how humans respond to it.
Sound is an acoustic energy that is measured in decibels. The decibel combines the magnitude of
sound with how humans hear. Since human hearing covers such a large range of sounds, it does
not lend itself to be measured with a linear scale. If a linear scale was used to measure all sounds
that could be heard by the human ear, most sounds (assuming a linear scale of 0 to 1) occurring in
daily life would be recorded between 0.0 and 0.01. Thus, it would be difficult to discriminate
between sound levels in our daily lives on a linear scale.
Instead of a linear scale, a logarithmic scale is used to represent sound levels and the unit is called
a decibel or dB. The term dBA will most often be used and this refers to the loudness that a
human ear would perceive. It, in affect, is a dB corrected to account for human hearing. The ear
has its own filtering mechanisms and the inclusion of the A after dB indicates that the scale has
been adjusted or “fine tuned” to hear like a human.
On a logarithmic scale a doubling of the sound is represented by a ten dBA increase. So anytime
you see a sound ten dBA higher than another, its twice as loud. Similarly, if you combine two
sounds of equal loudness you increase the total noise by only 3 dBA. A three dBA increase
represents a change of 50%. This is how logarithms work.
PAVEMENT SURFACE TYPE AS THE 1ST NOISE MITIGATION STRATEGY
AZ Milepost, Spring 2003 WHAT IS NOISE AND HOW IS IT CONTROLLED? - CONTINUED
Represents Freeway Noise Level at 65 Decibels Adding Two Noise Levels of 65dB each Results in
a Total Noise Level of Only 68 dB
The decibel scale ranges from 0 dBA, the threshold of human hearing, to 140 dBA where serious hearing damage can occur.
Table 1(page8) represents this scale and some of the levels associated with various daily activities. A serene setting might have a
decibel level of 30 dBA while a peaceful subdivision might be at 40 to 50 dBA. Alongside a freeway the sound level (i.e. noise)
might be in the range of 70 to 80 dBA. The transition from a peaceful environment to a noisy environment is around 50 to 70 dBA.
Sustained exposure to noise levels in excess of 65 dBA can have health effects.
As a general rule of thumb, we can only discriminate between two sounds levels that are at least 3 dBA different in loudness.
Values that are less than that oftentimes cannot be told apart. A healthy human ear, under ideal conditions can hear sounds at 1
dBA, but sounds at 1dBA and 3 dBA might be perceived as the same loudness.
In addition to sound level, people hear over a range of frequencies (and this is the reason for the A weighting described earlier). A
person with good hearing can typically hear frequencies between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. An older person, however, may not be
able to hear frequencies above 5,000 Hz. So this indicates, to some extent, some of the reasons why we all hear things somewhat
differently.
In addition to the decibel, a useful measurement for assessing traffic noise is the Equivalent Sound Level or Leq. Leq is the energy-based
average of the sound energy over time. It effectively represents all the sound observed over the specified time period with
an average value for that time period. This allows for consistent comparisons from site to site.
How is Noise Controlled?
For highway purposes it is useful to think of noise in terms of a source, a path and a receiver. A typical source would be a passenger
car or a truck. A path would be the area between the vehicles making noise and any location where noise is objectionable. The
receiver is the facility or residence where noise is objectionable.
4 AZ Milepost, Spring 2003
Although trucks and cars are both sources of noise,
they differ in how they create noise. Passenger cars,
at highway speeds, typically produce noise predomi-nantly
from their tires. This results in a steady whine
type noise. Trucks on the other hand, produce noise
from their tires, exhaust, and engines. Since truck
exhausts are elevated, this noise tends to travel far-ther.
Although trucks are louder as sources, traffic
that is comprised almost exclusively of cars can be
more annoying due to the constant whine effect.
The path is where noise control is generally attempted. Noise control can occur along the path in two ways: through distance or by
inserting an obstruction. Both methods reduce noise levels.
Distance is an effective noise control because geometric spreading reduces the level of sound. For a stationary single source of
noise (aka, a point source), the noise expands in a bubble shape and at double the distance the noise level will decrease by 6 dBA.
A stationary vehicle is a point source, but a vehicle in motion and bumper-to-bumper with other vehicles, behaves like an endless
train and is viewed as a line source of noise. Line source noise expands in a cylindrical shape and will decrease 3 dBA each time
the distance from the (line) source is doubled. For example, if the noise level from a stream of vehicles (a line source) at 50 ft the
noise level was at 70 dBA, at 100 ft it would be at 67 dBA and at 200 ft it would be at 64 dBA. So if enough distance is possible,
the noise will be less objectionable.
Noise Generation by Traffic Trucks Can Generate Noise Differently than Cars
HOW IS NOISE CONTROLLED? - CONTINUED
Definition of Source, Path, and Receiver
5
AZ Milepost, Spring 2003 AZ LTAP Board of
Directors
Bill Badger
Director, Del E. Webb School
of Construction
Arizona State University
Mike Domino
Chairman AGC
Education Committee
International Surfacing
Systems
Bill Higgins
Acting State Engineer
ADOT
Albert Letzkus
County Traffic Engineer
Pima County
Aryan Lirange
Technical Services Engineer
FHWA
Roger Milroy
Past President APWA
Gannett Fleming
Mike Ortega
Board Chairman
City Manager
City of Douglas
Dusty Parsons
Highway Superintendent
Navajo County
Tom Schmitt
Professional Engineer
RLS; T &S Diversified, Inc
HOW IS NOISE CONTROLLED? - CONTINUED
Sound not only diffracts over the tops of walls it also diffracts around the ends of walls. This
typically requires that the wall or berm to extend 400 ft beyond the last receptor for each one
hundred feet behind the wall that it is situated. It is for this reason that walls are not effective
on arterial streets for noise control due to the many driveways and side streets that would
allow the noise to bend around the ends of walls.
Barriers Must Be At
Least as High as the
Line of Sight to the
Receiver
The second form of noise control consists of the use of walls or berms to intercept the noise.
This forces sound waves to bend around them or diffract. This diffraction causes the sound
waves to consume energy and thus reduces the sound level. To be effective, walls need to be
at least as high as the line of sight to the facility—that is, block the view. Once the wall
height is equal to an intercep-tion
of the line of sight, a
good rule of thumb is that it
requires an additional 2 ft of
wall height for each addi-tional
1dB reduction in noise
levels. For example, after a
wall is placed to intercept the
line of sight and the result-ant
noise level at the resi-dence
is 70 dBA, it would re-quire
an increase of approxi-mately
6 ft of wall height to
get the reading to 67 dBA.
6 How Noise is Reduced Through Distance
From a Line Source
AZ Milepost, Spring 2003
Sound Diffracting Around
the End of a Noise Wall
In Arizona, the three forms of noise control currently employed
are walls, berms, and a combination of the two. Berms are an
effective solution because they blend in with the surrounding area
and will provide a slightly greater noise reduction than would a
wall of the same height. However, berms require a lot of land to
construct. To construct 10 ft of berm height requires 70 feet of
horizontal distance. Noise walls typically range in height from 8
to 20 ft depending on what is needed to reduce the noise to an
acceptable level. In Arizona, noise walls cost between $150 to
$400 per lineal foot depending on height.
It is often hoped that vegetation will reduce noise levels. How-ever,
in the desert environment this is unlikely. Research has
indicated that vegetation has to be dense, deep and tall to be ef-fective.
A rule of thumb is that a forest needs to be 100 ft deep to
reduce noise levels by 5 dB.
What Levels Are Noise Mitigation
Designed To?
Federal guidelines require mitigation levels to 67 dBA or less at
the residence. In Arizona, the Department of Transportation
(ADOT) designs to below 64 dBA. This is the lowest value used
in the United States by state agencies and provides the quietest
neighborhoods. ADOT also goes back for three years after con-struction
to verify that the design values were obtained. If they
are not met, additional mitigation measures are pursued such as
increasing wall heights or lengths.
Pavement Surface Type as the Next
Noise Mitigation Strategy
As previously mentioned, the use of pavement surface type
as a noise mitigation strategy has not occurred in the US for
almost a century. However, the ever-increasing pressure to
improve the quality of life in urban areas by reducing traffic
noise levels has resulted in renewed interest in this quiet pave-ment
strategy. To address this, ADOT and the California
DOT (Caltrans) have pursued noise research programs to in-vestigate
the use of pavement surface type as a noise miti-gation
strategy. ADOT and Caltrans have worked coop-eratively
in this effort.
Since enactment of federal legislation requiring noise mitiga-tion
for transportation facilities, pavement type has not been
allowed as a noise mitigation strategy by the FHWA. This is
due to the belief that pavement conditions change and noise
characteristics are not permanent. And, since pavement con-ditions
change, no consistent noise level value could be as-sumed
over the pavement design period.
However, current research, by ADOT and Caltrans, indicates
that the pavement properties can be managed, and that effec-tive
noise reductions can be obtained through the use of pave-ment
surface selection. This resulted in the two states becom-ing
pilot states for this issue.
In the Phoenix metropolitan area ADOT is currently planning
on covering most of the PCCP using an Asphalt Rubber As-phalt
Concrete Friction Course (AR-ACFC). This will occur
over the next three years. Results to date have been well re-ceived
by the community.
All Sound Barrier and Noise Control
Articles were prepared By Larry Scofield,
Arizona Department of Transportation
(ADOT) and Bruce Rymer, California DOT
(CALTRANS)
HOW IS NOISE CONTROLLED? - CONTINUED
7
AZ Milepost, Spring 2003 INDOOR AND OUR DOOR NOISE LEVELS
8 Table 1
AZ Milepost, Spring 2003
CONGRATULATIONS! ROAD SCHOLAR GRADUATES
The AZ LTAP Center would like to take this opportunity to
congratulate all of our Level I Road Scholar graduates. Their
achievement represents a level of professionalism, and demon-strates
their commitment to self-improvement and personal de-velopment.
With their added knowledge, skills, and capabili-ties
these Road Scholars can more effectively maintain and re-pair
roads in their communities. It is hoped that the cities and
towns they serve will also recognize their achievement.
City of Casa Grande
Pedro Apodaca, Robert Bartelson, Charles Bojoorquez
Bobby Costales, Orlando Gonzales, Chris Lawson
Todd Miller, David Rodriguez, Lonnie Sanders
Rojelio Sotelo, Francisco Velasco
Coconino County
Wes Beauchamp, Dennis Bracken,,Richard Canizales
Richard Cox, Jim Santiago Griego, Robert Kimball
Billy Lane, Danny Lann, Benny Lucero
John McKeever, Thomas Murphy, John Roberds
Greg Sanchez, Sam Strange, Jim Westra
City of Cottonwood
Claude Lankford, James Wixom
La Paz County
Kenneth Putman
Town of Marana
Deana Ellis, Myrlene Francis
Maricopa County
Katherine Baker, Mark Clark, Dan Clements
Ted Collins, Severiano Coronado, Armando DeLaRosa
Benjamin Dominguez, William Grimes, Scott Johnson
Michael Jones, Ron Juarez, Michael Messina
Jose Morales, James Newman, Ralph Peterson
Rudy Rios, David Ritzler, Julie Ruegsegger
Richard Steiner, Frank Urquiza, Frankie Valencia,
Soteno Max Zavala
Town of Parker
Dan Hiatt, Mike Lattin
Navajo County
George Amador, Bill Barnard, Cameron Crandell
Wade Ellison, Larry Fernau, Joy Halvorsen
Patrick Hancock, Tommy Hunt, Vernon Lewis
Bill Lucero, Marty McNeil, Jimmie Patterson
David Robinson, Brett Schmitt, Robert Smith
V. Pride Spurlock, Bill Sturgeon, Randall Whipple
Tracy Young
Pinal County
Linda Althoff, Ray Garcia, Brian McGinnis,
Thomas Miller, Charles Mitchell, Frank Reed
John Sharp, Gilbert Tarango, Dustin Wold
City of Safford
Martin Avillar, Bobby Chavez, Ublado Flores
MartinJurado, Art Mata, Marlin Martin
Jesus Mendez, Granger Moffet
Mike Mott, Don Oaks, Bill Peck,
Jose Romero, Arnold Sanchez
City of Sedona
Robert Larson
Show Low
John Barwicki, Phil Meyers, Chris Wade
Kennard Wilcock
If you work with or know any of the above gradu-ates
please join us in congratulating them on their
achievement.
The Road Scholar Program is intended to serve
Arizona municipalites. We welcome any suggestions
for workshops and for Road Scholar improvement.
9
AZ Milepost, Spring 2003 FHWA UNVEILS NEW WEB SITE FHWA Unveils New Web Site to Help State, Local Agencies Manage Traffic Congestion
The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA announced a new Web site to provide state and
local agencies simple access to a variety of tools and information on traffic congestion and to help them find solutions to traffic
problems in their areas.
“Relieving traffic congestion is one of our top priorities,” FHWA Administrator Mary E. Peters said. “We are working closely with
state and local officials to develop and carry out a comprehensive set of solutions designed to help reduce traffic congestion
nationwide. This includes providing them with valuable information that can help them manage traffic conditions in their areas.”
The new “Congestion and Traffic” Web site – at www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion – is part of the FHWA’s efforts to help state and
local transportation agencies develop initiatives to reduce congestion through effective system management and operations strat-egies.
A section on program tools offers specific information on the most prevalent causes of traffic congestion: traffic incidents and work
zones. About half of all traffic congestion is caused by temporary disruptions such as traffic incidents and work zones, dramatically
reducing the available capacity and reliability of the entire transportation system.
The agency developed the Congestion and Traffic Web site in response to the need on the part of state and local partners for
technical guidance and best practices. The new site consolidates all the information found about traffic congestion on FHWA’s
Web site onto one portal, linking to the various FHWA programs and services designed to help mitigate congestion. It also links to
specific state programs designed to manage congestion and to articles, research, and other information related to traffic conditions.
More information on traffic operations is available at www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov.
ACROSS THE USA AND IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD
Colorado: CDOT will install continuous shoulder rumble strips on interstate system statewide. In an effort to reduce run-off-the-road
crashes in Colorado, CDOT has initiated a Statewide Rumble Strip project. The installation of shoulder rumble strips on 86
miles of I-25, 143 miles of I-70 and 61 miles of I-76 will result in continuous rumble strips on the Interstate System throughout the
state (excluding the Denver Metro area). CDOT uses a bicycle-friendly rumble strip design that was adopted as a result of a study
their Research Division completed in May 2001. The project will go to ad this month and all work will be complete by September
30, 2003.
Iowa: New Paved Shoulder Policy Adopted: The Iowa Department of Transportation has adopted a policy of providing four-foot
paved shoulders on all state roadways that are part of the NHS system or have a traffic volume exceeding 3,000 vehicles a day. In
addition, milled in rumble strips will be provided on interstates and expressways. One third of all fatalities in Iowa result from a
single vehicle running off the road
FLH: Hoover Dam Bypass, Arizona/Nevada: On January 8, the Central Federal Lands Highway Division awarded the first
highway contract for the Hoover Dam Bypass. The 1.8 miles project will construct the Arizona approach and is the first of four
major contracts anticipated to complete the project. Thirteen highly competitive bids were received with the low bid of $21.5
million awarded to a joint venture of R. E. Monks Construction and Vastco Inc. A+B bidding was utilized to reduce public impacts,
administrative costs, and accelerate completion. The joint venture committed to completing the project in 620 days, 80 days less
than estimated. Work is expected to begin in late January. Work on the Nevada Approach will begin in mid-2003 and Colorado
River Bridge in late 2003. The entire Hoover Dam Bypass Project is expected to be complete in 2007 at a cost of $234 million.
1 0
AZ Milepost, Spring 2003
1 1
CALENDAR OF EVENTS
April 1-3, 2003: Escambia County Pavement Preservation Program in Pensacola, FL
April 7-11, 2003: National Work Zone Awareness Week, CONTACT: American Traffic Safety Services Association, (540)
368-1701, general@atssa.com , <http://www.atssa.com> (Second week of April every year)
April 8, 2003: WASHTO-X Video Conferencing on Construction: QC/QA Practices.
For more information http://www.washto-x.org
April 9, 2003 Click, Listen & Learn Selection of Consultants. For more information
http://www.apwa.net/Education/CLL/April 29, 2003: Adjustable Manhole Covers in
Logan, UT
April 16,17,18, 2003: Roads & Streets Conference Driving Our Future in Tucson, AZ.
For more information http://www.acea.org/Coming.htm
April 22, 2003: WASHTO-X Video Conferencing on Context Sensitive Designs & So-lutions.
For more information http://www.washto-x.org
April 27-30, 2003: North American Snow Conference, QuebecCity, Quebec, Canada.
CONTACT: American Public Works Association, (816) 472-6100, apwa@apwa.net, http:/
/www.apwa.net (LTAP Exhibit)
April 29, 2003: Adjustable Manhole Covers, Logan, UT. CONTACT: Product Demonstration Showcase Program, (352) 392-
2371 ext. 223, http://www.pdshowcase.org
May 1-2, 2003: AACE Spring meeting with AFMA at the Radison Poco Diablo Resort I Sedona, AZ. For more information
http://www.azace.org/2002mtgs.htm
May 13, 2003: WASHTO-X Video Conferencing on Work Zone Traffic Control & Safety. For more information http://www.washto-x.
org
May 16-21, 2003: ASTD International Conference and Exposition, San Diego, CA. CONTACT: American Society for Training
and Development, (703) 683-8100, (800) 628-2783, info@astd.org, http://www.astd.org
May 18-24, 2003: National Public Works Week, CONTACT: American Public Works Association, (816) 472-6100,
apwa@apwa.net, <http://www.apwa.net>
May 22, 2003: Click, Listen & Learn Managing the Public Response- How to Keep Your Foot Out of Your Month. For more
information http://www.apwa.net/Education/CLL/
May 27, 2003: WASHTO-X Video Conferencing on Planning & Programming: Incorporating Operations in the Process. For
more information http://www.washto-x.org
June 18, 2003: Click, Listen & Learn Where Does Public Works Fit into Smart Growth Planning? For more information http:/
/www.apwa.net/Education/CLL/
June 22, 2003: International Conference on Low Volume Roads, Reno, NV. CONTACT: Transportation Research Board, (202)
334-2934, http://www.trb.org/
June 25, 2003: WASHTO-X Video Conferencing on Highway Noise Abatement. For information http://www.washto-x.
org
AZ Milepost, Spring 2003 12
Please share this newsletter
with others.
!Supervisors
!Council Members
!Public Works Dept.
!Road/Maintenance Crew
!Managers
!City/County Engineers
!Mayors
!Others
Arizona LTAP Center
1130 N. 22nd Avenue
Phoenix Arizona 85009
Change Service Requested
CENTER NEWS!
AZ LTAP has established a new electronic mailing information process. A weekly update will be e-mailed to representa-tives
within local transportation agencies and consultants throughout Arizona, highlighting upcoming events (i.e. confer-ences,
video-conferencing, etc.), and available training opportunities. Also included is a link to bulletin boards from
various agencies that contain issues, discussions, and other transportation-related information. This information will
also be available on our web site www.azltap.org. If you are interested in joining our mailing list please contact Lori
Sayers at lsayers@dot.state.az.us.
Employment Opportunity
AZ LTAP has a position opening for a Regional Trainer. The ideal applicant will preferably have 10 or more years in the
transportation industry, preferably with at least 3 years of supervisory experience in a government setting. Candidates
will posses knowledge and experience in Transportation Safety, Work Zone Traffic Control, Maintenance and Highway
Construction, Highway Materials, basic surveying, communication, supervision, math (pertaining to transportation
technologies) and other transportation related areas. Excellent verbal and written skills, experience in classroom instruc-tion,
techniques and curriculum development, Statewide travel is mandatory.
Interested applicants should send a detailed Resume by April 15, 2003 to: Arizona Department of Transportation, Attn:
Arizona LTAP Center, 1130 N. 22nd Ave., Mail Drop 069R, Phoenix, AZ 85009.
AZ LTAP Wants To Hear from You!
We are continuously looking for ways to improve our program to better serve your needs. If you have ideas, comments
or suggestions regarding the program, please stop by the center, send us a letter or give us a telephone call at 1130 N.
22nd Ave., Mail Drop 069R, Phoenix AZ. 85009 (602)712-8461. We look forward to hearing from you!