DOCSLIB.ORG

High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes: Not Always More Effective Than General Purpose Lanes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes: Not Always More Effective Than General Purpose Lanes UC Berkeley Earlier Faculty Research Title High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes: Not Always More Effective Than General Purpose Lanes Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1v11k99t Author Dahlgren, Joy Publication Date 2001 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes: Nat Always More Effective Than General Purpose Lanes Joy D~lgren Reprint UCTC No 504 The University of California Transportation Center Uraversity of Caldorma Berkeley, CA94720 The University of California Transportation Center The Umversity of Cdlforma Center actavmes Researchers Transportauon Center (UCTC) at other umversmes wlthm the Is one of t~n regional ur&s regaon also have oppormmnes mandated by Cong’mss and to collaborate with UCfaculty established in Fail 1988to on selected studies. supportresearch, education, and~ai~{ng in surfacetraas° UCTC’s edueauonal and portation.The UC Ccnrzr ~search progr’aras are focused servesfederal Reglon IX and on strategic planning for Is supported by matching xmprovmg metropohtan granr~ from the U.S Depart- aecessibzhty, with emphasxs men~ of Transpo~a~on, the on the spemalcondmons m California Departmcm of Regaon IX Particular attennon Transportation (C~dtrans), mud is d.urect~dto strategies for the Umversity. using transpormUon as an instrument of economic Based on the Berkeley developmenL while also ac- C~pus, UCTC draws upon commodatingto theregion’s exJstang capabihUes and persistentexpansion and resources of the Institutes of whileramntaz~ng and enhanc+ Tmnspormuen Sm&es at ing thequahty of life there Berkeley, Davxs, Irvme, and Los Angeles, the Insumte of The Center dastnbutes reports Urban and Regaon~d Deve|op- on its research in worlong merit at Berkeley, and several papers, monographs, and in academmdepartments at the reprints of published arlScies Berkeley, Davis, Irvine, and It also pubhshes Access, a Los Angeles campuses. magazane presenung sum- Faculty and smdems on other mariesof selectedsmdms For Umvermty of Cahforma a hst of publicationsm pnnt, campuses may participate m writeto theaddress below. Thecontents efthis repo~ reflect the views ofthe authors, whoare responsibleforthe facts an+ the +ecuracy ofthe information presented Unrversxtyof Cahforma herein,Thes document is disseminated underthe sponsorship ofthe Tra~or~at,onCenter Departmentoflransportatien, University Trensporta, +.Cem+r$ Program, in theinterest of information exchange. TheU.S. Government assumes no 108 NavalArehzlzeture Building liabihtyfar the contents oruse thereof. Berkeley, Cahforma94720 TcI. 5101643-7378 FAX:510./643-5456 The eom~a~of thls reportreflect the vmwsof theauthor whozs responmble forthe facts and aeeurazy of the dam presented herein. The conmnts do not aeeessmalyreflect the official v~ews or pohci~s of the State of Calffomm orthe U.SDepartment ofTransport~on. Tl’asreport does not eonsutute a ~and,~rd, specafiaaUot~or regulaUon High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes: Not Always More Effective Than General Purpose Lanes Joy Dahlgren Insutute of TransportahonStudies Umversltyof Cahfomta Berkeley, CA94720 Reprinted from Transportatzon Research A Vol 32A, no 2, pp 99-114 (1998) UCTCNo. 504 The Umversltyof CaliformaTransportation Center Urdversltyof California at Berkeley Transpn Rea-A, Vol 32, No 2, pp 99-114, 1998 © 1998 Etsevmr Science Ltd Pergamon All rights reserved Pnntcd m Great Bntmn 0963-8364/98$19 00 + 0 00 PII: S0965-8564(97)00021-9 HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES: NOT ALWAYS MORE EFFECTIVE THAN GENERAL PURPOSE LANES JOY DAHLGREN CahformaPATH, Headquarters, Instltute of Transportation Studies, UmversRyof Cahfornla, Berkeley, RichmondField Stauon, Bldg 452, 1357 S 46th Street, Rachmond,CA 94804-4698, U S A (Received15 October1996, in revised form 2 May1997) Abstract--Thesuccess of a haghoccupancy vehicle lane m motivatingpeople to shift to carpools and buses dependson maintaininga travel time differential betweenit and the adjacent general purpose1aries This differential, In turn, dependson the level of continuingdelay on the generalpurpose lanes Therefore,it is clear that a high occupancyvehicle lane that will motivatepeople to shift to high occupancyvehicles wII1not ehmmatecongestion Consequently,it is not clear that constructing a high occupancyvehicle lane will necessarilyreduce delay morethan constructaonof a generalpurpose lane Theobjectave of this researchis to determinethe circumstancesin whichthis wouldbe the case Thehypothesis is that such circumstanceswould be qtute llrruted, andthis provesto be the case Theintended benefits of high occupancylanes are definedas reducedperson-delay and reducedemtssmns A modelis developedto calculate these benefits for four alter- natives add a high occupancyvehMe lane, add a general purpose lane, convert an existing lane to a high occupancyvehicle lane, and do nothing The model takes into account the mmalcondmons, the dynamic nature of the travel time differential betweenthe high occupancyvehicle lane and other lanes, and the uncertainty regarding the extent to whichpeople will shift modesIt combinesqueuemg theory and mode chozce theory and provides a robust methodfor companngalternatives using a small amountof easily observeddata Apphcatlonof the modelm typical situations showsthat with initial delays on the order of 15 mmor more,adding a high occupancyvehicle lane wouldprovide substantial reductions m delay and some reduction in emissionsHowe~,er, in a w~derange of such situations, addinga general purposelane wouldbe evenmore effective Onlyif the initial delay is long andthe mltmlproportion of high occupancyvehicles falls in a rather narrowrange, wouldan addedhigh occupancyvehicle lane be moreeffective Thepropomon of high occupancyvehacles must be suchthat it allowsgood utilization of the h~ghoccupancy vehicle lane while maintaininga sufficient travel time differential to motivatea shift to busesor carpoolsAdding a high occu- pancyvehicle lane to a three lane freewaywill be moreeffectwe than addinga generalpurpose lane only if the mmalmaximum delay Is on the order of 35 mmor moreand the proportion of high occupancyvehJcles is on the order of 20%Federal potlcles encourageconstruction of high occupancyvehmle lanes and restrict fundingfor general purposelanes mareas that havenot attained air quality standards Thefindings of this research suggesta needto reconsiderthese policies © 1998Elsevier ScienceLtd All rights reserved Keywords high occupancy vebacle, hlgh occupancy vehicle lane, carpool Iane I INTRODUCTION Thebenefits of constructing a high occupancyvehicle (HOV)lane are obviousby providing incentive for peopleto shaft fromautomobiles w~th one or twooccupants to carpoolsor buses, the HOVlane reducesvehicle-trips, therebyreducing congestion and air pollutmn.Less obvious~s the fact that mmany situations the benefits wouldbe as great or greaterif the newlane werea general purposelane instead. The reasons for thas are s~mpleThe umquebenefits of an HOVlane as comparedto a general purposelane~that ~t motwatesa shaft to HOVsand gives pnontyat the bottleneck to HOVs--do net arise unless delay continueson the general purposelane. If delay ~s ehminatedwhen the HOV lane is constructed,there will be no incentive to shift to an HOVBut evenff delay continueson the generalpurpose lanes, twofactors limit the extentof the modeshaft. In-vehicle travel time has been foundto have a weakeffect on modechoice. Small(1977) founda minuteof out-of-vehicle walt time to be valuedat almost10 minutesof m-vehicle time anda transfer, at 13.6nunutesof in-vehicle time. Kollo(1986), in updatingthe travel model for the MetropohtanTransportatmn Commissmn m the San Franctsco Bay Area, foundeven less sensmwtyto in-vehicle travel time than Small 99 I00 J Dahlgren (b) The mot:vat:on to shaft mode depends on the &fferentaaI m travel times on the HOVlane and the other freeway lanes. As people stnft to HOVs,th:s &fferential is eroded. Therefore, regardless of how muchoverall traffic :ncreases, there :s an upper hmat on the travel time dafferentlal and the propomonof people who will be motavated to shaft to an HOVlane. Furthermore, af the mmal propomon of HOVsis greater than the propomon of capacity that w111be devoted to HOVsafter the HOVlane is added, the HOVtane w~ll be as con- gested as the general purpose lanes and will offer no travel time advantage. The key questaon :s under what carcumstances does constructang an HOVlane result in less delay and lower emass:ons than constructing a general purpose lane* To answer this question, the effects of constructing either type of lane are identified and a modelto comparethe benefits of the each as developed Constructing an HOVlane has several anterrelated effects (Fag 1) The most significant effect the shaft of current HOVsto the HOVlane Thas shaft reduces delay on the general purpose lanes, perhaps ehmmatmgat altogether If delay remains on the general purpose lanes, some people shaft to HOVs,further reducing delay on the general purpose lanes The reduced delay for both HOVs and non-HOVs(hereafter referred to as LOVs--low occupancy ve~cles) motavates some people traveling on the shoulders of the peak to shaft their trip to the peak It also motivates people to sh~ft from other routes that are nowslower. It mayreduce traps by people who prev:ously dad not travel because of the delay In the long run, the reduced delay may result an more developmentand trips than wouldhave otherw:se been the case. These last four effects offset the original reductions m delay. Except for the shaft to HOVs,constructing a general
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Behavior-Based Framework for Assessing Barrier Effects to Wildlife from Vehicle Traffic Volume 1 Sandra L
    CONCEPTS & THEORY A behavior-based framework for assessing barrier effects to wildlife from vehicle traffic volume 1 Sandra L. Jacobson,1,† Leslie L. Bliss-Ketchum,2 Catherine E. de Rivera,2 and Winston P. Smith3,4 1 1USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Davis, California 95618 USA 1 2Department of Environmental Science & Management, School of the Environment, 1 Portland State University, Portland, Oregon 97207-0751 USA 1 3USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, La Grande, Oregon 97850 USA 1 Citation: Jacobson, S. L., L. L. Bliss-Ketchum, C. E. de Rivera, and W. P. Smith. 2016. A behavior-based framework for assessing barrier effects to wildlife from vehicle traffic volume. Ecosphere 7(4):e01345. 10.1002/ecs2.1345 Abstract. Roads, while central to the function of human society, create barriers to animal movement through collisions and habitat fragmentation. Barriers to animal movement affect the evolution and tra- jectory of populations. Investigators have attempted to use traffic volume, the number of vehicles passing a point on a road segment, to predict effects to wildlife populations approximately linearly and along taxonomic lines; however, taxonomic groupings cannot provide sound predictions because closely related species often respond differently. We assess the role of wildlife behavioral responses to traffic volume as a tool to predict barrier effects from vehicle-caused mortality and avoidance, to provide an early warning system that recognizes traffic volume as a trigger for mitigation, and to better interpret roadkill data. We propose four categories of behavioral response based on the perceived danger to traffic: Nonresponders, Pausers, Speeders, and Avoiders.
    [Show full text]
  • Module 6. Hov Treatments
    Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS Module 6. TABLE OF CONTENTS MODULE 6. HOV TREATMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 6.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................ 6-5 TREATMENTS ..................................................... 6-6 MODULE OBJECTIVES ............................................. 6-6 MODULE SCOPE ................................................... 6-7 6.2 DESIGN PROCESS .......................................... 6-7 IDENTIFY PROBLEMS/NEEDS ....................................... 6-7 IDENTIFICATION OF PARTNERS .................................... 6-8 CONSENSUS BUILDING ........................................... 6-10 ESTABLISH GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ............................... 6-10 ESTABLISH PERFORMANCE CRITERIA / MOES ....................... 6-10 DEFINE FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ............................. 6-11 IDENTIFY AND SCREEN TECHNOLOGY ............................. 6-11 System Planning ................................................. 6-13 IMPLEMENTATION ............................................... 6-15 EVALUATION .................................................... 6-16 6.3 TECHNIQUES AND TECHNOLOGIES .................. 6-18 HOV FACILITIES ................................................. 6-18 Operational Considerations ......................................... 6-18 HOV Roadway Operations ...................................... 6-20 Operating Efficiency .......................................... 6-20 Considerations for 2+ Versus 3+ Occupancy Requirement ............. 6-20 Hours of Operations ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • American Title a Sociation ~ ~
    OFFICIAL PUBLICATION AMERICAN TITLE A SOCIATION ~ ~ VOUJME XXXVI JUNE, 1957 NUMBER 6 TITLE NEWS Official Publication of THE AMERICAN TITLE ASSOCIATION 3608 Guardian Building-Detroit 26, Michigan Volume XXXVI June, 1957 Number 6 Table of Contents Introduction-The Federal Highway Program ......... ... ................ .. .................... 2 J. E. Sheridan Highway Laws Relating to Controlled Access Roads ..... .. ....... ........... 6 Norman A. Erbe Title Companies and the Expanded Right of Way Problems ...... ............. .. 39 , Daniel W. Rosencrans Arthur A. Anderson Samuel J. Some William A . Thuma INTRODUCTION The Federal Highway Program J. E. SHERIDAN We are extremely grateful to Nor­ veloped its planning sufficiently to man A. Erbe, Attorney General of the show to the satisfaction of the dis­ State of Iowa, for permission to re­ trict engineer the effect of the pro­ print his splendid brief embracing posed construction upon adjace.nt the highway laws of various states property, the treatment of access con­ relating to the control in access roads. trol in the area of Federal acquisi­ Mr. Erbe originally presented this m tion, and that appropriate arrange­ narrative form before the convention ments have been made for mainte­ of the Iowa Title Association in May nance and supervision over the land of this year. As is readily ascertain­ to be acquired and held in the name able, this is the result of a compre­ of the United States pending transfer hensive study of various laws touch· of title and jurisdiction to the State ing on the incidents of highway regu­ or the proper subdivision thereof." lations. Additionally, we are privi­ It is suggested that our members leged to carry the panel discussion bring this quoted portion to the at­ of the American Right of Way Asso­ tention of officers of the Highway ciation Convention held in Chicago, Department and the office of its legal May 16 and 17, dealing with "Title division, plus the Office of the Attor­ Companies and the Expanded Right ney General within the members' ju­ of Way Problems".
    [Show full text]
  • "2. Sidewalks". "Boston Complete Streets Design Guide."
    Sidewalk Zone Widths The width of the sidewalk contributes to the degree of When making decisions for how to allocate sidewalk space, comfort and enjoyment of walking along a street. Narrow the following principles should be used: sidewalks do not support lively pedestrian activity, and may create dangerous conditions where people walk in the Frontage Zone street. Typically, a five foot wide Pedestrian Zone supports > The Frontage Zone should be maximized to provide space two people walking side by side or two wheel chairs passing for cafés, plazas, and greenscape elements along build- each other. An eight foot wide Pedestrian Zone allows two ing facades wherever possible, but not at the expense of pairs of people to comfortably pass each other, and a ten reducing the Pedestrian Zone beyond the recommended foot or wider Pedestrian Zone can support high volumes of minimum widths. pedestrians. Pedestrian Zone Vibrant sidewalks bustling with pedestrian activity are not > The Pedestrian Zone should be clear of any obstructions only used for transportation, but for social walking, lingering, including utilities, traffic control devices, trees, and furniture. and people watching. Sidewalks, especially along Downtown When reconstructing sidewalks and relocating utilities, all Commercial, Downtown Mixed-Use, and Neighborhood Main utility access points and obstructions should be relocated Streets, should encourage social uses of the sidewalk realm outside of the Pedestrian Zone. by providing adequate widths. > While sidewalks do not need to be perfectly straight, the SIDEWALKS Pedestrian Zone should not weave back and forth in the When determining sidewalk zone widths, factors to consider right-of-way for no other reason than to introduce curves.
    [Show full text]
  • Shared Streets and Alleyways – White Paper
    City of Ashland, Ashland Transportation System Plan Shared Streets and Alleyways – White Paper To: Jim Olson, City of Ashland Cc: Project Management Team From: Adrian Witte and Drew Meisel, Alta Planning + Design Date: February 2, 2011 Re: Task 7.1.O White Paper: “Shared Streets and Alleyways” - DRAFT Direction to the Planning Commission and Transportation Commission Five sets of white papers are being produced to present information on tools, opportunities, and potential strategies that could help Ashland become a nationwide leader as a green transportation community. Each white paper will present general information regarding a topic and then provide ideas on where and how that tool, strategy, and/or policy could be used within Ashland. You will have the opportunity to review the content of each white paper and share your thoughts, concerns, questions, and ideas in a joint Planning Commission/Transportation Commission meeting. Based on discussions at the meeting, the material in the white paper will be: 1) Revised and incorporated into the alternatives analysis for the draft TSP; or 2) Eliminated from consideration and excluded from the alternatives analysis. The overall intent of the white paper series is to explore opportunities and discuss the many possibilities for Ashland. Shared Streets Introduction Shared Streets aim to provide a better balance of the needs of all road users to improve safety, comfort, and livability. They are similar to European concepts such as the Dutch based ‘Woonerf’ and the United Kingdom’s ‘Home Zone’, with some distinct differences. This balance is accomplished through integration rather than segregation of users. By eschewing many of the traditional roadway treatments such as curbs, signs, and pavement markings, the distinction between modes is blurred.
    [Show full text]
  • Reversible Traffic Lanes
    Traffic Management System Efficiency Reversible Traffic Lanes REVERSIBLE TRAFFIC LANES Description Reversible traffic lanes add capacity to a road and decrease congestion by borrowing capacity from the other (off- peak) direction. Reversing lanes reduces congestion during morning and evening commutes, when there is an incident blocking a lane of traffic, or when construction or maintenance is being done on the road. Roads can be adjusted to become a one- way street or have one middle lane operate in the peak direction. These adjustments, indicated by changeable message signs and/or Cost: arrows, occur at specified times of the day or when volume Time: Short exceeds certain limits. Impact: Corridor Target Market Who: City/State . Congested work zone areas or during incidents Hurdles: Public Awareness/ . Roads with highly directional congestion Operation . Bridges, tunnels, and toll booth areas difficult to widen . Surrounding or leading to/from special event centers Reversible lanes work well in corridors where traffic flow is heavily imbalanced for a short period of time, and there are few other solution options. How Will This Help? . Reduce congestion by temporarily “borrowing” capacity from the other direction. Increase safety in work zones. Postpone the need to add capacity through conventional lane additions. Implementation Issues Success Story Proper communication and public participation are crucial to Arlington, Texas, installed reversible ensuring the strategy’s success. Local agencies should identify lanes to mediate congestion around two the best locations for implementation and ensure the public and professional sports stadiums agencies understand the concept and operation. The endpoint . FM 157/Collins Street treatment requires particular care and attention—common .
    [Show full text]
  • What Are the Advantages of Roundabouts?
    What is a roundabout? A roundabout is an intersection where traffic travels around a Circulatory central island in a counter- Truck Apron Roadway clockwise direction. Vehicles entering or exiting the roundabout must yield to vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Figure 1 presents the elements of a roundabout. Yield Line Splitter Island Figure 1: Elements of a Roundabout What are the advantages of roundabouts? • Less Traffic Conflict: Figure 2 compares the conflict points between a conventional intersection and a modern roundabout. The lower number of conflict points translates to less potential for accidents. • Greater safety(1): Primarily achieved by slower speeds and elimination of left turns. Design elements of the roundabouts cause drivers to reduce their speeds. • Efficient traffic flow: Up to 50% increase in traffic capacity • Reduced Pollution and fuel usage: Less stops, shorter queues and no left turn storage. • Money saved: No signal equipment to install or maintain, plus savings in electricity use. • Community benefits: Traffic calming and enhanced aesthetics by landscaping. (1) Statistics published by the U.S. Dept. of transportation, Federal Highway Administration shows roundabouts to have the following advantages over conventional intersections: • 90% reduction in fatalities • 76% reduction in injuries • 35% reduction in pedestrian accidents. Signalized Intersection Roundabout Figure 2: Conflict Point Comparison How to Use a Roundabout Driving a car • Slow down as you approach the intersection. • Yield to pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the roadway. • Watch for signs and pavement markings. • Enter the roundabout if gap in traffic is sufficient. • Drive in a counter-clockwise direction around the roundabout until you reach your exit. Do not stop or pass other vehicles.
    [Show full text]
  • Rules for Driving Roundabouts
    RULES FOR DRIVING ROUNDABOUTS www.wisconsinroundabouts.gov General information for all roundabouts Steps for driving a roundabout: Roundabouts are becoming more common 1. Slow down. Obey traffic signs. in the U.S. because they provide safer and 2. Yield to pedestrians and bicyclists. more efficient traffic flow than standard 3. Yield to traffic on your left intersections. By keeping traffic moving one-way already in the roundabout. in a counterclockwise direction, there are fewer 4. Enter the roundabout when conflict points and traffic flows smoothly. there is a safe gap in traffic. Crash statistics show that roundabouts 5. Keep your speed low reduce fatal crashes about 90%, reduce within the roundabout. injury crashes about 75%, and reduce overall 6. As you approach your exit, crashes about 35%, when compared Draft 5 February 2, 2009 turn on your right turn signal. to other types of intersection control. 7. Yield to pedestrians and When driving a roundabout, the same bicycles as you exit. general rules apply as for maneuvering Emergency vehicles in the roundabout through any other type of intersection. P Always yield to emergency vehicles. Truck apron P If you have not entered the roundabout, pull Large vehicles need more space when driving over and allow emergency vehicles to pass. in a roundabout. A truck apron is a paved area P If you have entered the roundabout, on the inside of the roundabout for the rear wheels continue to your exit, then pull over of large trucks to use when turning, sometimes and allow emergency vehicles to pass. referred to as off-tracking.
    [Show full text]
  • Highway Traffic Operations and Freeway Management
    HIGHWAY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AND FREEWAY MANAGEMENT STATE-OF-THE-PRACTICE FINAL REPORT March 2003 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade and manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the object of the document. 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA-OP-03-076 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Highway Traffic Operations and Freeway Management: State-of-the-Practice March 2003 Final Report 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Leslie N. Jacobson Report 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) PB Farradyne 999 Thrid Avenue, Suite 2200 11. Contract or Grant No. Seattle, WA 98104 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Office of Transportation Management Research Federal Highway Administration Room 3404 HOTM 400 Seventh Street, S.W. 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington D.C., 20590 15. Supplementary Notes Jon Obenberger, FHWA Office of Transportation Management, Contracting Officers Technical Representative (COTR) 16. Abstract This paper focuses on the proactive management of freeway facilities to balance the capacity of the transportation system and the prevailing demands, and response to out-of-the-ordinary conditions (e.g., incidents, adverse weather, work zones, special events, and emergency evacuations).
    [Show full text]
  • Access Control
    Access Control Appendix D US 54 /400 Study Area Proposed Access Management Code City of Andover, KS D1 Table of Contents Section 1: Purpose D3 Section 2: Applicability D4 Section 3: Conformance with Plans, Regulations, and Statutes D5 Section 4: Conflicts and Revisions D5 Section 5: Functional Classification for Access Management D5 Section 6: Access Control Recommendations D8 Section 7: Medians D12 Section 8: Street and Connection Spacing Requirements D13 Section 9: Auxiliary Lanes D14 Section 10: Land Development Access Guidelines D16 Section 11: Circulation and Unified Access D17 Section 12: Driveway Connection Geometry D18 Section 13: Outparcels and Shopping Center Access D22 Section 14: Redevelopment Application D23 Section 15: Traffic Impact Study Requirements D23 Section 16: Review / Exceptions Process D29 Section 17: Glossary D31 D2 Section 1: Purpose The Transportation Research Board Access Management Manual 2003 defines access management as “the systematic control of the location, spacing, design, and operations of driveways, median opening, interchanges, and street connections to a roadway.” Along the US 54/US-400 Corridor, access management techniques are recommended to plan for appropriate access located along future roadways and undeveloped areas. When properly executed, good access management techniques help preserve transportation systems by reducing the number of access points in developed or undeveloped areas while still providing “reasonable access”. Common access related issues which could degrade the street system are: • Driveways or side streets in close proximity to major intersections • Driveways or side streets spaced too close together • Lack of left-turn lanes to store turning vehicles • Deceleration of turning traffic in through lanes • Traffic signals too close together Why Access Management Is Important Access management balances traffic safety and efficiency with reasonable property access.
    [Show full text]
  • HOV Brochure
    P F 3 e O 3 d 5 e B 3 r o 0 a x l F 9 W i r Contact Us! 7 s t a 1 W y 8 , a W y A S o PUBLIC WORKS 9 u 8 t h 0 “What Your 6 253-661-4131 3 - 9 Washington 7 1 PUBLIC SAFETY 8 Driver Guide Does Not 253-661-4707 Teach E-MAIL This guide will You.” [email protected] ex p la in t o dr iv er s WEB SITE t he b est wa y t o cityoffederalway.com n a v iga t e o ur C it y usin g H O V la n es a n d U-t ur n s sa f ely , lega lly , a n d ef f ic ien t ly . BROUGHT TO YOU BY YOUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT As you may have USING HOV MYTH: When exiting business driveways and LEGAL noticed, Federal entering the roadway, I must drive through the HOV lane and enter traffic directly in the general Way is now home LANES U-TURNS purpose or ”through” lane to HOV lanes The City is along many of our The most common FACT: NO! The HOV lanes are intended as encouraging use of major roadways. question drivers of a single- acceleration lanes for vehicles entering the LEGAL U-turns HOV lanes have been installed on S 348th occupancy vehicle ask is: roadway. Enter the HOV lane to accelerate, and where appropriate. Street, on SR 99 (S 312th to S 324th), and on “When and where am I change lanes at your first safe opportunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Impact Analysis
    TRANSPORTATION Section 6-1 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS The Town Of Buckeye Arizona Engineering Design Standards Section 6-1 Adopted December 2012 Section 6-1 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS 6-1.000 GENERAL INFORMATION:..............................3 6-1.600 MASTER STREET PLANS FOR CMPS: ............. 25 6-1.001 INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS: ...................... 3 6-1.601 GENERAL INFORMATION: ................................25 6-1.002 DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS: ..................... 4 6-1.602 REQUIRED SHEETS: .........................................25 6-1.003 DESIGN POLICY: .............................................. 6 6-1.603 REQUIRED INFORMATION: ...............................25 6-1.004 DILIGENCE: ..................................................... 6 6-1.604 CMP MASTER STREET PLAN REVIEW NOTES:......28 6-1.005 IMPLEMENTATION: ........................................... 6 6-1.006 PRIVATE STREETS: ............................................ 7 6-1.007 STANDARDS: ................................................... 8 6-1.008 TIA PREPARATION PROCESS: ............................. 9 TABLE OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 TOWN ENGINEER SIGNATURE/APPROVAL BLOCK ......11 6-1.100 TRIP GENERATION LETTER: ............................9 6-1.101 REQUIRED SECTIONS: ....................................... 9 6-1.200 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS / REPORT: ........ 10 TABLE OF TABLES 6-1.201 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: .............................. 10 TABLE 1 TRIP GENERATION THRESHOLDS ............................18 6-1.202 REPORT REQUIREMENTS: ...............................
    [Show full text]