DOCSLIB.ORG

Stoughton Road Revitalization Project Plan City of Madison, Wisconsin Adopted: June 3, 2008

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Stoughton Road Revitalization Project Plan City of Madison, Wisconsin Adopted: June 3, 2008 Stoughton Road Revitalization Project Plan City of Madison, Wisconsin Adopted: June 3, 2008 Prepared for: The Stoughton Road Revitalization Project Group (SRRP) and the City of Madison, Wisconsin Prepared by: Cuningham Group Architecture, P.A. Meyer Mohaddes Associates, Inc. Acknowledgements Stoughton Road Revitalization Project Plan Group Members: Neighborhood & Business Representatives Fred Arnold, Project Chair; Elvehjem Neighborhood Jim Polewski, Project Vice-Chair; Elvehjem Neighborhood Tonya Hamilton-Nisbet, Project Secretary; East Buckeye Neighborhood Jim Roloff , Project Treasurer; Glendale Neighborhood Sandie Custer, Business Liaison & Glendale Neighborhood Chris Dyson, Glendale Neighborhood Tim Saterfi eld, Lake Edge Neighborhood City of Madison Alderpersons Judy Compton, City of Madison Alderperson, 16th District Larry Palm, City of Madison Alderperson, 15th District Lauren Cnare, City of Madison Alderperson, 3rd District Dane County Supervisors Tom Stoebig, Dane County Supervisor, 17th District Dave DeFelice, Dane County Supervisor, 16th District City of Madison Planning Divison Staff Liaison Rebecca S. Cnare, ASLA, Urban Design Planner City of Madison-Department of Planning and Community and Economic Development: Mark A. Olinger, Planning and Community and Economic Development Director Brad Murphy, Planning Division Director City of Madison Staff : Bill Bauer, Parks Division William Fruhling, Planning Division Matthew Mikolajewski, Offi ce of Business Michael Waidelich, Planning Division Resources Rebecca Cnare, Planning Division Michael Gay, Offi ce of Business Resources Archie Nicolette, Planning Division Peggy Yessa, Offi ce of Business Resources Linda Horvath, Planning Division Joe Gromacki, Economic Development Rick Roll, Planning Division Robert McDonald, Transportation Planning Board Brian Grady, Planning Division David Dryer, Traffi c Engineering Division Tim Parks, Planning Division Dan McCormick, Traffi c Engineering Division Kevin Firchow, Planning Division Rob Phillips, City Engineering Division Tim Sobota, Metro Transit Joel Plant, Mayor’s Offi ce This Project was funded this project through the following fi nancial contributions, awarded grants and in-kind services: Dane County Better Urban Infi ll Development (BUILD) Program Matching Grant Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) Meeting space: Dean Clinic East Fiscal agent: East Isthmus Neighborhood Planning Council and Common Wealth Development Neighborhood Association and Individual Donations: South Stoughton Road Business Donations City of Madison Neighborhood Grant City of Madison TID #24 Preliminary Planning Funds Additional technical information about the WisDOT US Highway 51 Corridor study was provided by: Gerry Schmitt, Kim Lobell: KL Engineering Adam Clayton, Th omas Kaprowski and Michael Hoelker: Wisconsin Department of Transportation Adopted by the City of Madison Common Council Date:June 3, 2008 Resolution #:RES-08-00616 Legislative File ID#:09550 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents 1. Introduction Pages 5-12 Th e SRRP Plan Th e SRRP Plan Stakeholders Stakeholders Purpose of the SRRP Plan Purpose of the SRRP Plan Plan Boundaries Plan Boundaries SRRP Vision SRRP Vision Principles & Goals Principles & Goals Two Plans Two Plans Plan Implementation Plan Implementation 2. Planning Process Pages 13-16 Public Participation Public Participation Existing Plans & Policies Existing Plans & Policies 3. Analysis Pages 17-32 Study Area Study Area Existing Conditions Existing Conditions Urban Systems Urban Systems Natural Systems Natural Systems Transportation Systems Transportation Systems Land Use Land Use 4. Development Areas Pages 33-38 Corridor Image & Identity Corridor Image & Identity Development Area Selection Development Area Selection Proposed Land Use Classifi cations Proposed Land Use Classifi cations 4a. Garden Development Area Pages 39-50 4b. Grid Development Area Pages 51-64 4c. Gateway Development Area Pages 65-84 For Each Development Area: For Each Development Area: Identity Identity Placemaking Placemaking Community Connections Community Connections Stoughton Road & WisDOT Stoughton Road & WisDOT Strategic Phasing Strategic Phasing Land Use Land Use Block Guidelines Block Guidelines Building Types Building Types Landscape Types Landscape Types 5. Implementation Pages 85-105 Plan Adoption & Process Plan Adoption & Process City of Madison Planning Process City of Madison Planning Process Implementation Tools & Strategies Implementation Tools & Strategies Short-Term Implementation Short-Term Implementation Medium-Term Implementation Medium-Term Implementation Long-Term Implementation Long-Term Implementation Continued Implementation Eff orts Continued Implementation Eff orts Executive Summary Available Upon Request 1. Introduction The SRRP Plan Stakeholders Purpose of the SRRP Plan Plan Boundaries SRRP Vision Principles & Goals Two Plans Plan Implementation 1. Introduction The SRRP Plan and visitors all contribute to the vibrancy of the East Side, and help foster a sense of community to Stoughton Road connects places within Madison’s provide future generations a welcoming place to call East Side, an area of established neighborhoods, home. successful businesses, and emerging opportunities. Th is Plan encourages progressive growth along Here, Stoughton Road acts as a local street, the corridor. Growth will deliver new housing, functions as a State highway, and is a visual symbol employment, retail, and commercial services for of Madison’s growth and change. residents and visitors to the East Side. Th e future Neighbors and businesses view Stoughton Road as corridor will present a high quality, aesthetically the “main street” of the community – a community pleasing image to all who use Stoughton Road. It of treasured parks, national corporations, small will become a memorable gateway to Madison businesses, great schools, signifi cant natural features, and front door to the East Side. Th rough broad and major initiatives like the Wisconsin BioAg participation, a common vision, and appropriate plans, the area’s strengths will fl ourish. Gateway Campus and the Royster Clark Special Area Planning Project. Th ree guiding elements are necessary to help make Th is Plan, the Stoughton Road Revitalization this happen: Project (SRRP) Plan, is organized around the • Adopt a shared vision that enhances the strengths and assets of the Stoughton Road corridor’s strengths, eliminates its weaknesses, corridor: vital neighborhoods, engaged businesses, and capitalizes on its opportunities. natural qualities, strong parks, and areas of • Apply the shared vision through collaborative opportunity. Th is Plan recognizes the incremental eff orts among public and private stakeholders. nature of growth in urban areas. Realization of • Realize improvements incrementally; some may the Plan’s vision will require collective resources be made within the next year and others may and collaborative eff orts. Residents, employers, take ten years or more. Buckeye Road Stoughton Road Acewood Pond North Project Setting: Neighbors and businesses view Stoughton Road as the community’s “main street.” Th is aerial photograph overlooks the Buckeye Road intersection with South Stoughton Road, just behind Acewood Park and Pond. Lake Monona is on the far right horizon, and Lake Waubesa is on the far left horizon. 6 1. Introduction Stakeholders The SRRP Group In 2005, a group of residents, business contacts and elected offi cials, representing varied links to over 25,000 city residents, eight neighborhood associations, and many local businesses, started Pfl aum Road meeting to discuss the changing nature of South Stoughton Road. Th is grassroots neighborhood eff ort began the process to create a new vision to help guide future growth and development along the corridor. Th is group recognized that the East Side is home—and Stoughton Road is the way home—for everyone living and working in East Stoughton Road Madison. Stoughton Road is a highly visible corridor and is considered a valuable asset for East Side neighborhoods. Th is informal group evolved into the “SRRP Group,” and continues to be the lead organizing force of this planning project. SRRP Group Members • Seven East Side residents, neighborhood association members and business representatives. • Th ree City of Madison Alderpersons. • Two Dane County Supervisors. Project Support & Funding Th e Plan has progressed with support from the Madison Mayor, the Dane County Executive, State Legislators representing the area, and the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT). Th e City of Madison Planning Division guided the process. Funding and support of this planning process was provided by: East Broadway • Private donations from neighborhood associations, individuals, business and property owners. • Dane County: Better Urban Infi ll Development (BUILD) Grant. North • City of Madison: Neighborhood Planning Grant. Project Setting: Stoughton Road can become a memorable • WisDOT: funding for public participation. gateway to Madison and a front door to the East Side. Th is view looks north from the Stoughton Road and East Broadway • City of Madison Department of Planning and intersection. Farm & Fleet, along with other commercial uses, is Community and Economic Development project near the top left of the photograph. management. 7 1. Introduction Purpose of the SRRP Plan Plan Boundaries Historically, U.S. Highway 51, known in Madison Th e general SRRP Plan boundaries extend along as Stoughton Road, was a major north-south the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Qncq More.Y T/Eers
    NORTH CASCADES CONSERVATION COUNCIL Volume V June lgbl' Number b Trl8 secure the support of the people and the government in the protection and preservation of scenic, scientific, wildlife, wilderness, and outdoor recreational resources values in the North Cascades. ..." QnCQ MoRe.y DQBR T/eeRs/ How many millions of Americans read, and saw, the case for wilderness presented recently in Life? We don't know. But we do know this unprecedentedly wide distri­ bution of "our side" is one more reason for saying the time for action is now. CONRAD WLRTH, Director of the National Park Service: "... people are aaking up to the problem . and are beginning to take the initiative. ..." "STEWART UDALL, Secretary of the Interior: "... never before has a President of the United States given such a broad and comprehensive mandate to conservation. ..." DR. IRA N. GABRIELSON, President of the Wildlife Management Institute: "The Wilderness Bill, before Congress each of the past five years has the President's support. It has the people's support. it merits immediate approval by Congress." CDJLPFORD V. HEIMBUCHER, President of Trustees for Conservation: "The Wilder­ ness Bill. has in the 87th Congress the best chance for enactment it has ever had." SENATOR CLINTON ANDERSON, Chairman of the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee: ". I believe the sfth Congress will send a Wilderness Act to the Presi­ dent and he will sign it into law." HENRY V: "Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more. In peace there's nothing so becomes a man As modest stillness and humanity; But when the blast of war blows in our ears, Then imitate the action of the tiger.
    [Show full text]
  • Toand Television Irrom June 25
    TOAND TELEVISION IRROM JUNE 25 1tVeledrillt 44 111vot-ir Percy MILTON BERLE GRACIE ALLEN ')N McNEILL RALPH EDWARDS BIG SISTER LANNY ROSS filter Winchell Contest Winners - i (o+1) Vie, fodLut, tiA9ti otcuut SKIN -SAFE SOLITAIRI The only founda- tion- and -pawder make -up with clinicol evidence- certified by leading skin specialists from coast to coast -that it DOES NOT CLOG PORES, cause skin texture change or inflammation of hair follicle ar other gland opening. Na other liquid, powder, creom or cake "founda- tion" moke -up offers such positive proof of safety for your skin. biopsy- specimen flown by Cell Chapman. Jewels by Seaman-Schepps. See the loveliest you that you've ever seen -the minute you use Solitair cake make -up. Gives your skin a petal- smooth appearance -so flatteringly natural that you look as if you'd been born with it! Solitair is entirely different- a special feather -weight formula. Clings longer. Outlasts powder. Hides little skin faults -yet never feels mask -like, never looks "made -up." Like finest face creams, Solitair contains Lanolin to protect against dryness. Truly -you'll be lovelier with this make -up that millions prefer. No better quality. Only $1.00. Cake Make -Up * Fashion -Point Lipstick Seven new fashion -right shades Yes -the first and only lipstick with point actually shaped to curve of your lips. Applies color quicker, easier, more evenly. New, exciting "Dreamy Pink" shade - and six new reds. So creamy smooth- contains Lanolin -stays on so long. Exquisite case. $1.00 *Slanting cap with red enameled circle identifies the famous 'Fashion -Point and shows you exact (¡orí*iwnn tameGm color of lipstick inside.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Intersections Comparative Analysis
    Alternative Intersections Comparative Analysis Morgan State University The Pennsylvania State University University of Maryland University of Virginia Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University West Virginia University The Pennsylvania State University The Thomas D. Larson Pennsylvania Transportation Institute Transportation Research Building University Park, PA 16802-4710 Phone: 814-865-1891 Fax: 814-863-3707 www.mautc.psu.edu OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTIONS By: John Sangster and Hesham Rakha Mid-Atlantic University Transportation Center Final Report Department of Civil and Environment Engineering Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University July 23, 2015 1 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. VT-2012-03 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Operational Analysis of Alternative Intersections July 21, 2015 6. Performing Organization Code Virginia Tech 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. John Sangster and Hesham Rakha 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Virginia Tech Transportation Institute 3500 Transportation Research Plaza 11. Contract or Grant No. Blacksburg, VA 24061 DTRT12-G-UTC03 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report US Department of Transportation Final Report Research & Innovative Technology Admin UTC Program, RDT-30 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract Alternative intersections and interchanges, such as the diverging diamond interchange (DDI), the restricted crossing u-turn (RCUT), and the displaced left-turn intersection (DLT), have the potential to both improve safety and reduce delay. However, partially due to lingering questions about analysis methods and service measures for these designs, their rate of implementation remains low.
    [Show full text]
  • Intersections - Final Report
    Operational Applications of Signalized Offset T- Intersections - Final Report Institute for Transportation Research and Education (ITRE) North Carolina State University Christopher M. Cunningham, P.E., P.I. Shannon Warchol, P.E., Co-P.I. Juwoon Baek Guangchuan Yang, Ph.D. NCDOT Project 2019-31 July 2020 NCDOT 2019-31 Project Report This page is intentionally blank. II North Carolina Department of Transportation Research Project No. 2019-31 Operational Applications of Signalized Offset T-Intersections Christopher M. Cunningham Shannon E. Warchol Juwoon Baek Guangchuan Yang July 2020 NCDOT 2019-31 Project Report 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA/NC/2019-31 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Operational Applications of Signalized Offset T-Intersections July 22, 2020 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Chris Cunningham, MSCE, P.E., Shannon Warchol, MSCE, P.E., Juwoon Baek, Guangchuan Yang, Ph.D. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Institute for Transportation Research and Education North Carolina State University 11. Contract or Grant No. Centennial Campus Box 8601 Raleigh, NC 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered North Carolina Department of Transportation Final Report Research and Analysis Group August 2017 – July 2020 104 Fayetteville Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 2019-31 Supplementary Notes: 16. Abstract NCDOT maintains a significant number of T intersections with developable land occupying the vacant fourth leg. When a need for a fourth leg is established, NCDOT must determine the optimal location of the leg.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Manual M 22-01.15 July 2018
    Publications Transmittal Transmittal Number Date PT 18-056 July 2018 Publication Distribution To: Design Manual Holders Publication Title Publication Number Design Manual – July 2018 M 22-01.15 Originating Organization WSDOT Development Division, Design Office – Design Policy, Standards, and Safety Research Section Remarks and Instructions What’s changed in the Design Manual for July 2018? See the summary of revisions beginning on Page 3. How do you stay connected to current design policy? It’s the designer’s responsibility to apply current design policy when developing transportation projects at WSDOT. The best way to know what’s current is to reference the manual online. Access the current electronic WSDOT Design Manual, the latest revision package, and individual chapters at: www.wsdot.wa.gov/publications/manuals/m22-01.htm We’re ready to help. If you have comments or questions about the Design Manual, please don’t hesitate to contact us. Area of Practice Your Contacts Geometric Design, Roadside Safety Jeff Petterson 360-705-7246 [email protected] and Traffic Barriers Chris Schroedel 360-705-7299 [email protected] General Guidance and Support John Donahue 360-705-7952 [email protected] To get the latest information on individual WSDOT publications: Sign up for email updates at: www.wsdot.wa.gov/publications/manuals/ HQ Design Office Signature Phone Number /s/ Jeff Carpenter 360-705-7821 Page 1 of 6 Remove/Insert instructions for those who maintain a printed manual NOTE: Also replace the Title Page CHAPTER/SECTION REMOVE
    [Show full text]
  • 2007-32 Benefit-Cost Analysis for Intersection Decision Support
    2007-32 Benefit-Cost Analysis for Intersection Decision Support Report #5 in the Series: Developing Intersection Decision Support Solutions e ativ Solutions! nov ..In earch...Knowledge. es Take the steps... R Transportation Research Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipients Accession No. MN/RC-2007-32 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Benefit-Cost Analysis for Intersection Decision Support October 2007 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Michael Corbett, David Levinson, Xi Zou 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. University of Minnesota Department of Civil Engineering 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. 500 Pillsbury Drive S.E. (c) 81655 (wo) 33 Minneapolis, MN 55455 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Department of Transportation Final Report 395 John Ireland Boulevard Mail Stop 330 14. Sponsoring Agency Code St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 15. Supplementary Notes http://www.lrrb.org/PDF/200732.pdf Report #5 in the Series: Developing Intersection Decision Support Solutions 16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words) The Intersection Decision Support (IDS) system is designed to assist drivers on stop-controlled low-volume rural roads choosing gaps when confronted with busy multiple lane divided-highways, without affecting traffic on the high-volume road. The hope is, that by providing better gap guidance, fewer crashes (and fatalities) will occur. This research develops a framework for analyzing such a new, and presently under-specified technology, and illustrates that framework by comparing that with more conventional engineering approaches, as well as a “do- nothing” base case.
    [Show full text]
  • Traditional Intersections Vs. Town Center Intersections Traditional
    Traditional Intersections vs. Town Center Intersections Similar to Split Intersection ‐ roads are split into 1‐way streets and space in center developed or preserved Traditional Intersection Traditional iiintersection signal cycle has 4 phases – 2 for left turns 2 for through movements Traditional Intersection 4 Phase Signal Cycle Times* 10% 6% 22% 62% lefts straight through *average intersection 75% of the traffic (through movement) gets only about 60% of the cycle time Too much time spent on left turns and yellow signals (transition between movements) Innovative Intersection Innovative intersection signal cycles have only 2 (or 3) phases – left turns are moved or redirected Innovative Intersections create more green time 4 Phase Signal ItiInnovative 2 Phase Cycle Times Signal Cycle Times 6% 4% 10% 6% 22% 62% 90% lefts straight straight through through 75% ‐ 80% of traffic 100% of traffic gets 90% of time – gets only about 60% of time no waiting for left turns Town Center Intersection A town center split intersection, intersection (tci) but both streets is similar to the are separated FUTURE USE open or developed “Town Center” available FUTURE USE for public open or developed into 1‐way ora private 4 simple uses. streets, creating d intersections Assist Town Center Intersection A town center split intersection, intersection (tci) but both streets is similar to the are separated FUTURE USE open or developed “Town Center” available FUTURE USE for public open or developed into 1‐way ora private 4 simple uses. streets, creating d intersections Assist Town Center Intersection A town center split intersection, intersection (tci) but both streets is similar to the are separated FUTURE USE open or developed “Town Center” available FUTURE USE for public open or developed into 1‐way ora private 4 simple uses.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Performance Matrices for Evaluating Innovative Intersections and Interchanges
    Report No. UT-15.13 DEVELOPMENT OF PERFORMANCE MATRICES FOR EVALUATING INNOVATIVE INTERSECTIONS AND INTERCHANGES Prepared For: Utah Department of Transportation Research Division Submitted By: University of Utah Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering Authored by: Milan Zlatkovic, Ph.D. September 2015 DISCLAIMER: ―The authors alone are responsible for the preparation and accuracy of the information, data, analysis, discussions, recommendations, and conclusions presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, endorsements, or policies of the Utah Department of Transportation and the US Department of Transportation. The Utah Department of Transportation makes no representation or warranty of any kind, and assumes no liability therefore.‖ i 1. Report No. UT-15.13 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date September 2015 DEVELOPMENT OF PERFORMANCE 6. Performing Organization Code MATRICES FOR EVALUATING INNOVATIVE INTERSECTIONS AND INTERCHANGES 7. Authors 8. Performing Organization Report No. Milan Zlatkovic 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. 8RD1630H University of Utah 110 Central Campus Dr. Room 2000 11. Contract No. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 14-8754 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Utah Department of Transportation Final Report (Mar 2014 – September 2015) Research Division 4501 South 2700 West 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-8410 UT13.316 15. Supplementary Notes Prepared in cooperation with the Utah Department of Transportation. 16. Abstract Innovative intersections and interchanges, primarily Continuous Flow Intersection (CFI) and Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI), have seen an increase in numbers in the State of Utah over the past several years, making Utah a leader in the country in implementation of these designs.
    [Show full text]
  • VDOT Signal Justification Report (SJR)
    VDOT Signal Justification Report Template - Version 2.0 - December 2019 08/24/2020 VDOT Signal Justification Report (SJR) Northern District Note: Text in small gray font is sample input or guidance only & should be removed from the final Kayla Ord document before conversion to PDF. The full SJR, including appendices (A, B, and C as noted at the back 08/24/2020 of this template), should be submitted electronically as a PDF file to avoid unnecessary printing and allow for efficient review by VDOT. Gorove Slade Refer to the latest edition of IIM-TE-387 for additional information about the application of the SJR process Chantilly, VA in various scenarios. Traffic Engineer Date: August 24, 2020 I. Study Intersection Major Street Route # and Name: Leesburg Pike (Route 7) Direction: East/West Minor Street Route # and Name: Chestnut Street (Route 1750) & Commons Drive (NIS) Direction: Choose an item. County or Locality: City of Falls Church Is the Intersection on the Arterial Preservation Network (APN)?: Yes Sketch/Diagram/Aerial of the Intersection Geometry: Page 1 of 5 VDOT Signal Justification Report Template - Version 2.0 - December 2019 Describe the origin and nature of the request. If this SJR is based on a recommendation from another study (e.g. Traffic Impact Analysis or Safety Study), then note the name/date of the study and attach the study to this SJR. Submit the relevant study (e.g. traffic impact analysis, safety study, etc.) as Appendix C to the SJR if the study documents are available. If the relevant document is not available, please note the name and date of the study.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Innovative Alternative Intersection Designs in the Development of Safety Performance Functions and Crash Modification Factors
    Final Report Contract BDV24-977-27 Evaluation of Innovative Alternative Intersection Designs in the Development of Safety Performance Functions and Crash Modification Factors Mohamed A. Abdel-Aty, Ph.D., P.E. Jaeyoung Lee, Ph.D. Jinghui Yuan, Ph.D. Lishengsa Yue, Ph.D. Ma’en Al-Omari, Ph.D. Student Ahmed Abdelrahman, Ph.D. Student University of Central Florida Department of Civil, Environmental & Construction Engineering Orlando, FL 32816-2450 May 2020 DISCLAIMER “The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the State of Florida Department of Transportation.” ii UNITS CONVERSION APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL LENGTH in inches 25.4 millimeters mm ft feet 0.305 meters m yd yards 0.914 meters m mi miles 1.61 kilometers km SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL AREA in2 square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm2 ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m2 yd2 square yard 0.836 square meters m2 ac acres 0.405 hectares ha mi2 square miles 2.59 square kilometers km2 WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL SYMBOL VOLUME fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL gal gallons 3.785 liters L ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3 SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL MASS oz ounces 28.35 grams g lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg iii T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 megagrams (or Mg (or "t") "metric ton") SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW
    [Show full text]
  • Innovative Roadway Design Making Highways More Likeable
    September 2006 INNOVATIVE ROADWAY DESIGN MAKING HIGHWAYS MORE LIKEABLE By Peter Samuel Project Director: Robert W. Poole, Jr. POLICY STUDY 348 The Galvin Mobility Project America’s insufficient and deteriorating transportation network is choking our cities, hurt- ing our economy, and reducing our quality of life. But through innovative engineering, value pricing, public-private partnerships, and innovations in performance and manage- ment we can stop this dangerous downward spiral. The Galvin Mobility Project is a major new policy initiative that will significantly increase our urban mobility and help local officials move beyond business-as-usual transportation planning. Reason Foundation Reason Foundation’s mission is to advance a free society by developing, applying, and promoting libertarian principles, including individual liberty, free markets, and the rule of law. We use journalism and public policy research to influence the frameworks and actions of policymakers, journalists, and opinion leaders. Reason Foundation’s nonpartisan public policy research promotes choice, competition, and a dynamic market economy as the foundation for human dignity and progress. Reason produces rigorous, peer-reviewed research and directly engages the policy process, seeking strategies that emphasize cooperation, flexibility, local knowledge, and results. Through practical and innovative approaches to complex problems, Reason seeks to change the way people think about issues, and promote policies that allow and encourage individuals and voluntary institutions to flourish. Reason Foundation is a tax-exempt research and education organization as defined under IRS code 501(c)(3). Reason Foundation is supported by voluntary contributions from indi- viduals, foundations, and corporations. The views are those of the author, not necessarily those of Reason Foundation or its trustees.
    [Show full text]
  • 98Th Street Sw/Benavides Road Sw Albuquerque, New Mexico
    98TH STREET SW/BENAVIDES ROAD SW ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO Prepared For: Department of Municipal Development Project No. 7703.25 Task 17 Prepared By: 6100 Uptown Boulevard NE, Suite 700 Albuquerque, NM 87110 April 15, 2019 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................... 1 1.1 Study Purpose .................................................................................... 1 TABLE OF 2 STUDY AREA ........................................................................ 2 CONTENTS 3 INTERSECTION ASSESSMENT ............................................... 3 3.1 Geometric Assessment ....................................................................... 3 3.2 Intersection Layout ............................................................................ 5 4 OPERATIONS ASSESSMENT ............................................... 11 4.1 Data Collection ................................................................................ 11 4.2 Traffic Signal Warrant Study ............................................................ 11 4.3 Operations analysis ......................................................................... 21 4.4 Queuing analysis ............................................................................. 23 5 CRASH ASSESSMENT ......................................................... 25 5.1 Summary Data ................................................................................. 25 6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................... 27 6.1 Conclusions .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]