DOCSLIB.ORG

2017 Study What Is NCTCOG?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2017 Study What Is NCTCOG? 2017 Study What is NCTCOG? The North Central Texas Council of Governments is a voluntary association of cities, counties, school districts, and special districts which was established in January 1966 to assist local governments in planning for common needs, cooperating for mutual benefit, and coordinating for sound regional development. It serves a 16-county metropolitan region centered around the two urban centers of Dallas and Fort Worth. Currently the Council has 236 members, including 16 counties, 168 cities, 24 independent school districts, and 28 special districts. The area of the region is approximately 12,800 square miles, which is larger than nine states, and the population of the region is about 7 million which is larger than 38 states. NCTCOG's structure is relatively simple; each member government appoints a voting representative from the governing body. These voting representatives make up the General Assembly which annually elects a 17-member Executive Board. The Executive Board is supported by policy development, technical advisory, and study committees, as well as a professional staff of 350. NCTCOG's offices are located in Arlington in the Centerpoint Two Building at 616 Six Flags Drive (approximately one-half mile south of the main entrance to Six Flags Over Texas). North Central Texas Council of Governments P. O. Box 5888 Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 NCTCOG's Department of Transportation Since 1974 NCTCOG has served as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for transportation for the Dallas-Fort Worth area. NCTCOG's Department of Transportation is responsible for the regional planning process for all modes of transportation. The department provides technical support and staff assistance to the Regional Transportation Council and its technical committees, which compose the MPO policy-making structure. In addition, the department provides technical assistance to the local governments of North Central Texas in planning, coordinating, and implementing transportation decisions. Prepared in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and Federal Transit Administration. "The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the opinions, findings, and conclusions presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, or the Texas Department of Transportation." CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE IH30 CORRIDOR 2017 Study September 2017 NCTCOG Executive Board 2017-2018 President Director Director Director Tom Lombard Kelly Allen Gray Nick Sanders B. Glen Whitley Councilmember Councilmember Mayor, Town of Trophy Club County Judge City of North Richland Hills City of Fort Worth Tarrant County Director Director Vice President Keith Self Director Clay Lewis Jenkins Kevin Strength County Judge, Collin County Bruce Wood County Judge, Dallas County Mayor, City of Waxahachie County Judge Director Director Kaufman County Secretary-Treasurer Ray Smith Lee M. Kleinman Mayor, Town of Prosper Ex-Officio, Non-Voting J. D. Clark Councilmember, City of Dallas Member County Judge, Wise County Director Ron Simmons Director Paul Voelker Past President Texas House of Curtistene McCowan Mayor, City of Richardson Lissa Smith Mayor, City of DeSoto Representatives Former Mayor Pro Tem Director Executive Director City of Plano Director Kathryn Wilemon R. Michael Eastland Bobbie Mitchell Councilmember Director Commissioner, Denton County City of Arlington Douglas Athas Mayor, City of Garland Regional Transportation Council 2017-2018 Rob Franke, P.E., Chair Sandy Greyson Mark Riley Mayor, City of Cedar Hill Councilmember, City of Dallas County Judge, Parker County Gary Fickes, Vice Chair Mojy Haddad Kelly Selman, P.E. Commissioner, Tarrant County Board Member, North Texas Tollway Authority District Engineer Texas Department of Transportation Andy Eads, Secretary Roger Harmon Dallas District Commissioner, Denton County County Judge, Johnson County Gary Slagel Douglas Athas Clay Lewis Jenkins Board Secretary, Dallas Area Mayor, City of Garland County Judge, Dallas County Rapid Transit Tennell Atkins Ron Jensen Will Sowell Councilmember, City of Dallas Mayor, City of Grand Prairie Mayor Pro Tem, City of Frisco Sara Bagheri Jungus Jordan Mike Taylor Mayor Pro Tem, City of Denton Councilmember, City of Fort Worth Councilmember, City of Colleyville Carol Bush Lee M. Kleinman Stephen Terrell County Judge, Ellis County Councilmember, City of Dallas Mayor, City of Allen Loyl C. Bussell, P.E. Harry LaRosiliere T. Oscar Trevino, Jr., P.E. Acting District Engineer, Mayor, City of Plano Mayor, City of North Richland Hills Texas Department of Transportation David Magness Fort Worth District William Tsao, P.E. Commissioner, Rockwall County Citizen Representative, City of Dallas Rickey D. Callahan Scott Mahaffey Councilmember, City of Dallas Oscar Ward Chairman, Fort Worth Councilmember, City of Irving Mike Cantrell Transportation Authority Commissioner, Dallas County Duncan Webb B. Adam McGough Commissioner, Collin County David L. Cook Councilmember, City of Dallas Mayor, City of Mansfield B. Glen Whitley Wiliam Meadows County Judge, Tarrant County Rudy Durham Board Vice Chair Mayor, City of Lewisville Dallas Fort Worth International Airport Kathryn Wilemon Councilmember, City of Arlington Charles Emery Steve Mitchell Chairman, Councilmember, City of Richardson W. Jeff Williams Denton County Transportation Authority Mayor, City of Arlington Cary Moon Kevin Falconer Councilmember, City of Fort Worth Ann Zadeh Mayor, City of Carrollton Councilmember, City of Fort Worth Stan Pickett George Fuller Mayor, City of Mesquite Michael Morris, P.E. Mayor, City of McKinney Director of Transportation, NCTCOG Surface Transportation Technical Committee Loyl Bussell, P.E., Chair, Texas Department of Transportation, Fort Worth District TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Overview ………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 1.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………… 1 1.2 Study Area …………………………………………………………………………. 2 1.3 Goals and Objectives ……………………………………………………………. 3 2 Current Systems and Operations ……………………………………………………………… 5 2.1 Corridor Characteristics …………………………………………………………. 5 2.2 Corridor Technology ……………………………………………………………… 5 2.3 Corridor Operators ………………………………………………………………. 8 2.4 Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities ……………………………………. 12 3 Operational Scenarios …………………………………………………………………………. 15 3.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………. 15 3.2 Crash in the Managed Lanes …………………………………………………. 19 3.3 Crash in the General Purpose Lanes ……………………………………….. 21 3.4 Crash on Frontage Roads …………………………………………………….. 22 3.5 HAZMAT Spill in Managed or General Purpose Lanes …………............ 22 3.6 Large Debris Removal in Managed or General Purpose Lanes............. 24 3.7 Planned Events …………………………………………………………………. 25 3.8 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………….. 25 4 Issues and Needs for IH 30 Corridor …………………………………………………………. 27 4.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………. 27 4.2 Technology Issues and Needs ……………………………………………….. 27 4.3 Resource Issues and Needs ………………………………………………….. 28 4.4 Policy Issues and Needs ………………………………………………………. 30 4.5 Conclusion …................................................................................... 31 5 Regional Framework ………………………………………………………………………….. 33 APPENDICES Appendix A: Memorandum of Understanding………………………………………………. A1 1 OVERVIEW 1.1 Introduction The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) has served as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for transportation in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan Area since 1974. NCTCOG’s Transportation Department works closely with regional, state and federal partners to plan and recommend transportation projects that will improve mobility and encourage more efficient land use. The Department provides technical support and staff assistance to the Regional Transportation Council and its technical committees, which compose the MPO policy- making structure. This document is the Concept of Operations (ConOps) for the Interstate Highway (IH) 30 Corridor from Arlington to Dallas. A ConOps provides a broad scope and outlines operational issues and achieves operational objectives for a transportation corridor. The ConOps for this corridor will also be used as a framework for ConOps to be developed for other corridors within the Dallas-Fort Worth region. The Dallas-Fort Worth region has varying operators and modes along corridors involving multiple partner agencies. This framework will allow the region to identify and engage the appropriate stakeholders as well as systems and operations. IH 30 Corridor The ConOps defines how components or agencies work together to operate a corridor. The following elements serve as a framework: Motivation (Why): Reasons for developing a ConOps, based on operational concerns, including the documentation of responsibilities for operations on the facility. In addition, ConOps outlines how the current corridor functions, including technology and human resources. 1 Operational Objectives (What): What are the near-term (within the next five years) outcomes that are necessary for successful operation of the corridor? Approach (How): At a high level describe how the operational objectives will be met. Relationships and Procedures: What institutional agreements are in place? Are there existing or needed Memorandums of Understanding, protocols, information
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sustaining the KCMO Boulevard and Parkway System
    KCMO Boulevard and Parkway System The “Three Legs” Sustaining the KCMO Boulevard and Parkway System KCMO Boulevard and Parkway System History Geometry Land Use Questions What was the purpose of the parks and boulevard system in Kansas City, Missouri? History What are the defining characteristics of a boulevard and a parkway? Geometry What makes them different from an ordinary street or each other? Land Use Perspective History, geometry, and land use are the three things that set our Boulevards & Parkways apart from being “any other street”. The changes requested to the zoning code are a necessary and vital part to the preservation of Kansas City’s Neighborhoods and the Boulevard & Parkway system! History The answers can be found in: a) the 1893 Report of the Board of Park Commissioners; “The Kansas City Park System and Its Effect on the City Plan” by George E. Kessler; b) various Annual Reports to the Board of Commissioners; c) the 1920 booklet “Souvenir” The Park and Boulevard System of Kansas City, Missouri; d) the historic surveys that were completed in 1989 and 1991 and e) the Boulevard and Parkway Standards adopted by Board of Park Commissioners August 28, 2010 History In 1917 Kessler stated: “The boulevards and parkways of Kansas City have accomplished the real purpose outlined by Mr. Meyer in the first report 1893, namely, the tying together all sections and the uniting of Kansas City as a whole into a community whose purposes and actions are for the benefit of the city as a whole at all times.” History Purpose of the Historic Parks, Boulevard & Parkway System Make communication between the different sections of the city, commercial, residential and to some extent industrial direct and distinctive.
    [Show full text]
  • Truly Spectacular!
    Directions to Western Park Entrance Directions to Eastern Park Entrance Hiking Paths Observation Decks Sussex WESTERN PARK ENTRANCE Sussex Corner Fundy Trail All trail distances are one-way unless indicated with an * Accessible off trails within the parkway - may require a Parkway Easy Moderate Strenuous short hike Waterford St. Martins Hearst Lodge A Multi-Use Trail 10 km 1 Flowerpot Rock – 1 9 Sluiceway Observation Deck Alma Harbour 39 km Opening B Sea Captains’ Burial Ground Footpath 0.34 km 2 Flowerpot Rock – 2 10 Suspension Footbridge Sea Caves 2021 7 km H C Flowerpot Rock Scenic Footpath 1.5 km 3 Flowerpot Rock – 3 Observation Deck P9 I D 11 Interpretive Centre Bradshaw Scenic Footpath 0.6 km 4 Fuller Falls EASTERN PARK ENTRANCE Observation Deck E Pioneer Trail Loop * 0.48 km Observation Deck Fundy Trail Parkway 12 Tufts’ Plateau F Big Salmon River Loop * 1.2 km 5 Lighthouse Map Legend Lookouts Beaches G Suspension Footbridge Trail 0.39 km 13 Long Beach Observation Deck Easily accessed by driving James Catt Observation Deck 0 Beach 1 Melvin Beach L H 14 McCumber Brook 4 the parkway Monument 7 10 Hearst Lodge Scenic Footpath 2.7 km 6 Isle Haute EASTERN PARK Electric Vehicle Charge Station 2 Pangburn Beach I Cranberry Brook Loop * 4.8 km Observation Deck 1 1 Fox Rock Lookout Mitchell Franklin Bridge Observation Deck ENTRANCE S F Fundy Trail Parkway - 30 km 3 Big Salmon River Beach Suspension 6 J Big Salmon to Long Beach Footpath 4.4 km 15 McCumber Brook 2 Fownes Head Lookout 7 Waterfowl ROUTE TO (cars, buses, motorcycles) 4 Long Beach
    [Show full text]
  • See Our Park Map of Water Bottle Refill Stations!
    D V L B S Spotts Park O’Reilly St T Sawyer St H I E Snover St Snover Jackson Hill St Hill Jackson THEWATERWORKS H Zane and Brady Washington Glenwood N Memorial Way HOUSTONAVE SHEPHERDDR Cemetery Cemetery buffalo BAYO U EORIALDR Carruth Overlook Carruth STUDEONTST Bridge EORIALDR Green Tree to Sixth Ward Nature Area 0.40 M.D. Anderson Buffalo Bayou has been a focal point in Houston’s Foundation Stairway Cleveland Park Fonde history since the Allen brothers founded the city in 0.42 Rec. Center (weekends and evenings aer 1836. Today, the bayou is once again the centerpiece Houston Police Tapley 5pm only) Hamill Foundation Stairway Officers’ Memorial Tributary St Sabine of its development. Rosemont Bridge Rusk St » St. Thomas High School 0.18 Buffalo Bayou Partnership (BBP) is the non-profit organiza- 0.80 0.56 Shepherd Gateway Scurlock Foundation Overlook LDR ORIA Lee & Joe Jamail Hobby Center tion revitalizing and transforming Buffalo Bayou from a gi from the Radoff Family E Sabine Promenade Jackson Hill Bridge Skatepark Bridge Shepherd Drive to the Port of Houston Turning Basin. From to Memorial Park 0.39 Jane Gregory spearheading capital projects such as the 160-acre Buffalo EORIALDR Hobby 1.14 Garden Center 0.45 Bayou Park to constructing hike and bike trails, operating Neumann Family Barbara Fish Daniel comprehensive clean-up and maintenance programs and Wortham Foundation Stairway Nature Play Area Waugh Grove offering thoughtful programming, Buffalo Bayou Partnership Bat Colony ALLENPKWY Brookfield Bridge « Walker St is reclaiming Houston’s unique waterfront. JOHNNYSTEELE Federal Reserve Bank City Hall Bud Light Amphitheater Crosby McKinney St » Annex This map will guide you as you walk, run, cycle or paddle LOSTLAKE DOPARK Outfall ONTROSEBLVD TAFTST Gillette St Gillette ELEANORTINSLEYPARK Bagby St City along the waterway and visit the many parks and historic SHEPHERDDR WAUHDR Sam Houston Park Hall sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Boulevards and Parkways Seattle Open Space 2100 Boulevards + Parkways Diego Velasco
    Boulevards and Parkways Seattle Open Space 2100 Boulevards + Parkways Diego Velasco Ocean Parkway, Brooklyn in 1890 - Jacobs, Macdonald, Rofe, The Boulevard Book, 2002 Photo Jacobs, Macdonald, Rofe, The Boulevard Book, 2002 A multiway boulevard is a “ mixed-use public way that is by its very nature complex” Alan Jacobs, 2002 A boulevard or parkway is a wide urban street with tree-lined sidewalks and often multiple lanes of both fast and slow moving traffic. Boulevards are usually pleasant and grand promenades, flanked by rich, monumental architecture and supporting a variety of street uses. They are often “monumental links between important destina- tions.” 1 More importantly, boulevards can be open space systems that serve multiple functions at once: movement of traffic, provision of green space in the city, relief of congestion in overcrowded areas, accommodation of pedestrians and bicycles, and the nurturing of vital street life and activity in the city. Boulevards date back to the 16th century, when medieval towns abandoned their fortified walls and converted them to tree-lined walkways for public recreation. Cities like Amsterdam and Strasbourg were among the first to develop obsolete ramparts into pleasure promenades. In 1670, Louis XIV abandoned the walls of Paris and replaced these with promenades that served as the parade grounds of aristocrats and the well-to-do. These were also known as cours or allees, such as the Cour de la Reine, which extended alongside the palatial gardens of the Tuileries.1 In the mid-19th to early-20th century, boulevards came to be associated with large- scale planning efforts, such as those of Napoleon III and Baron Haussmann in Paris or City Beautiful movements in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • SOUTHERN PARKWAY Rightsizing for a Safer, Calmer, and More Inclusive Street WELCOME
    SOUTHERN PARKWAY Rightsizing for a safer, calmer, and more inclusive street WELCOME To help this meeting run as smoothly If you are new to WebEx, please take note of as possible, please consider the following some of the functions below. tips: If you have a question type it in the chat box and the facilitator will address​ You were automatically muted when you entered the meeting. To request to be un-muted, please raise your hand or put your request in the chat box. If others in your house are using streaming services, consider asking them to pause for the duration of the presentation Who, what, when, where, why? WHO: Louisville Metro Government and Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) WHAT: Rightsizing is restriping the road from 4 lanes to 3, with a two-way left turn lane (center turn lane) and dedicated left turn lanes at certain intersections. WHEN: May 2021 WHERE: Southern Parkway between 3rd Street/Oakdale Avenue and Woodlawn Avenue/Kenwood Way WHY: This section of Southern Parkway, which is owned and maintained by KYTC, will be milled, paved, and striped in May. To save costs and improve safety at the same time, we intend to restripe Southern Parkway with a new configuration proven to improve safety. 3rd Street / Oakdale Ave. Where? Woodlawn Ave. / Kenwood Way Why rightsize? TO IMPROVE SAFETY Proven safety countermeasure to DECREASE both the number and severity of CRASHES (FHWA). Reduce speeding. Reduce weaving by separating left- turning traffic from through-traffic. Improve pedestrian safety by reducing the number of lanes people must cross at intersections.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 LIMITED ACCESS STATE NUMBERED HIGHWAYS As of December 31, 2020
    2021 LIMITED ACCESS STATE NUMBERED HIGHWAYS As of December 31, 2020 CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF Transportation BUREAU OF POLICY AND PLANNING Office of Roadway Information Systems Roadway INVENTORY SECTION INTRODUCTION Each year, the Roadway Inventory Section within the Office of Roadway Information Systems produces this document entitled "Limited Access - State Numbered Highways," which lists all the limited access state highways in Connecticut. Limited access highways are defined as those that the Commissioner, with the advice and consent of the Governor and the Attorney General, designates as limited access highways to allow access only at highway intersections or designated points. This is provided by Section 13b-27 of the Connecticut General Statutes. This document is distributed within the Department of Transportation and the Division Office of the Federal Highway Administration for information and use. The primary purpose to produce this document is to provide a certified copy to the Office of the State Traffic Administration (OSTA). The OSTA utilizes this annual listing to comply with Section 14-298 of the Connecticut General Statutes. This statute, among other directives, requires the OSTA to publish annually a list of limited access highways. In compliance with this statute, each year the OSTA publishes the listing on the Department of Transportation’s website (http://www.ct.gov/dot/osta). The following is a complete listing of all state numbered limited access highways in Connecticut and includes copies of Connecticut General Statute Section 13b-27 (Limited Access Highways) and Section 14-298 (Office of the State Traffic Administration). It should be noted that only those highways having a State Route Number, State Road Number, Interstate Route Number or United States Route Number are listed.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Value of Travel Time Savings Estimation for More Effective Transportation Project Evaluation
    Improving Value of Travel Time Savings Estimation for More Effective Transportation Project Evaluation BDK85 977-21 Final Report December 2011 i Improving Value of Travel Time Savings Estimation for More Effective Transportation Project Evaluation BDK85 977-21 Final Report Prepared for: Florida Department of Transportation Research Center 605 Suwannee Street, MS 30 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 Project Manager: Amy Datz Prepared by: Victoria A. Perk Joseph S. DeSalvo, Ph.D. Tara A. Rodrigues Nina M. Verzosa Steven C. Bovino Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT-100 Tampa, FL 33620-5375 December 2011 i DRAFT October 2011 ii 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. iii iv Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Improving Value of Travel Time Savings Estimation for More December 2011 Effective Transportation Project Evaluation 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Victoria A. Perk, Joseph S. DeSalvo, Tara A. Rodrigues, Nina M. Verzosa, Steven C. Bovino 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT-100 11. Contract or Grant No. Tampa, FL 33620 BDK85 977-21 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Florida Department of Transportation Final Report Research Center March 2010 – December 2011 605 Suwannee Street, MS 30 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Brooklyn-Queens Greenway Guide
    TABLE OF CONTENTS The Brooklyn-Queens Greenway Guide INTRODUCTION . .2 1 CONEY ISLAND . .3 2 OCEAN PARKWAY . .11 3 PROSPECT PARK . .16 4 EASTERN PARKWAY . .22 5 HIGHLAND PARK/RIDGEWOOD RESERVOIR . .29 6 FOREST PARK . .36 7 FLUSHING MEADOWS CORONA PARK . .42 8 KISSENA-CUNNINGHAM CORRIDOR . .54 9 ALLEY POND PARK TO FORT TOTTEN . .61 CONCLUSION . .70 GREENWAY SIGNAGE . .71 BIKE SHOPS . .73 2 The Brooklyn-Queens Greenway System ntroduction New York City Department of Parks & Recreation (Parks) works closely with The Brooklyn-Queens the Departments of Transportation Greenway (BQG) is a 40- and City Planning on the planning mile, continuous pedestrian and implementation of the City’s and cyclist route from Greenway Network. Parks has juris- Coney Island in Brooklyn to diction and maintains over 100 miles Fort Totten, on the Long of greenways for commuting and Island Sound, in Queens. recreational use, and continues to I plan, design, and construct additional The Brooklyn-Queens Greenway pro- greenway segments in each borough, vides an active and engaging way of utilizing City capital funds and a exploring these two lively and diverse number of federal transportation boroughs. The BQG presents the grants. cyclist or pedestrian with a wide range of amenities, cultural offerings, In 1987, the Neighborhood Open and urban experiences—linking 13 Space Coalition spearheaded the parks, two botanical gardens, the New concept of the Brooklyn-Queens York Aquarium, the Brooklyn Greenway, building on the work of Museum, the New York Hall of Frederick Law Olmsted, Calvert Vaux, Science, two environmental education and Robert Moses in their creations of centers, four lakes, and numerous the great parkways and parks of ethnic and historic neighborhoods.
    [Show full text]
  • Residential Street Standards & Neighborhood Traffic Control
    Residential Street Standards & Neighborhood Traffic Control: A Survey of Cities' Practices and Public Officials' Attitudes Eran Ben-Joseph Institute of Urban and Regional Planning University of California at Berkeley Abstract The failure of the local street system to provide livability and safety in the residential environment can be seen in the application of neighborhood traffic management programs by local authorities to mitigate traffic problems. In order to further identify the extent of the conflict associated with "livability" and geometrical design of residential street, the following issues are examined: (1) Existing and proposed residential streets standards and regulations as practiced by various cities and their evaluation by public and city officials. (2) Traffic problems associated with residential streets and their mitigation through traffic management and control programs. Data are collected from Public Works and Traffic Engineering Departments of 56 Californian cities and 19 cities nation-wide. The findings show that most cities are still adhering to published street standards as recommended by different professional and federal organizations. Although some city officials see the need to amend certain aspects of their regulations and create a more flexible framework for street design, most of them believe that the current practice is satisfactory. Yet, the extant of residents' complaints about traffic problems on their streets might indicate an inconsistency between professional practice, as manifested in street design, and its actual performance as experienced by the residents. This can also be seen in the application of traffic control devices used by local authorities to mitigate these problems of which the most common are the installation of speed humps and 4-way stop signs.
    [Show full text]
  • Control of Highway Access Frank M
    Nebraska Law Review Volume 38 | Issue 2 Article 4 1959 Control of Highway Access Frank M. Covey Jr. Northwestern University Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr Recommended Citation Frank M. Covey Jr., Control of Highway Access, 38 Neb. L. Rev. 407 (1959) Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol38/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law, College of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. CONTROL OF HIGHWAY ACCESS Frank M. Covey, Jr.* State control of both public and private access is fast becom- ing a maxim of modern highway programming. Such control is not only an important feature of the Interstate Highway Program, but of other state highway construction programs as well. Under such programs, authorized by statute, it is no longer possible for the adjacent landowner to maintain highway access from any part of his property; no longer does every cross-road join the highway. This concept of control and limitation of access involves many legal problems of importance to the attorney. In the following article, the author does much to explain the origin and nature of access control, laying important stress upon the legal methods and problems involved. The Editors. I. INTRODUCTION-THE NEED FOR ACCESS CONTROL On September 13, 1899, in New York City, the country's first motor vehicle fatality was recorded. On December 22, 1951, fifty- two years and three months later, the millionth motor vehicle traffic death occurred.' In 1955 alone, 38,300 persons were killed (318 in Nebraska); 1,350,000 were injured; and the economic loss ran to over $4,500,000,000.2 If the present death rate of 6.4 deaths per 100,000,000 miles of traffic continues, the two millionth traffic victim will die before 1976, twenty years after the one millionth.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Road Standards
    PUBLIC ROAD STANDARDS COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS March 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1 1.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................. 1 l.2 PURPOSE .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 EXCEPTIONS .................................................................................................................................. 1 SECTION 2 GENERAL DEFINITIONS .........................................................................................2 2.1 GENERAL DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................. 2 2.2 OTHER DOCUMENTS ................................................................................................................... 4 SECTION 3 GENERAL POLICY .....................................................................................................6 3.1 PLANS TO BE APPROVED BY DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ......... 6 3.2 WHERE NO STANDARD IS SPECIFIED .................................................................................... 6 3.3 PAYMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS .......................................................................................... 6 3.4 WIDENING AND IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING
    [Show full text]
  • Right of Way Permit Application
    Right of Way Permit Permit #: ______________________________ Application Bond #: _______________________________ City of Evanston Permit Fee: $ _________ Acct 100.40.4105.52126 2100 Ridge Avenue Evanston, IL 60201 Winter Fee: $ _________ Acct 100.40.4105.53736 (847) 448-4311 Dumpster Fee: $_______ Acct 100.40.4105.52081 www.cityofevanston.org Approved by: __________________________ Start Date:___________ Expires:___________ Obstruction ___ Excavation/Opening ___ Utility Agency ___ Driveway ___ Contractor/Firm: _______________________ Contact Name: _____________________________________ Address: ______________________________________________________________________________________ Phone: ______________________ Fax: ____________________ Email: _________________________________ SITE LOCATION: _____________________________________________________________________________ (Street, property address, or distance and direction from nearest public street intersection) ON SITE/EMERGENCY CONTACT: Name:____________________________ Number___________________ NATURE OF WORK: ____________________________________________________________________ DESCRIPTION: Please include a detailed description & scaled drawing or plans of the work for all permits including the identification of any structures to be installed, the size and depth of proposed excavation, any changes to existing materials, and the proposed traffic control. A plat of survey must also be submitted for driveway permits. Please indicate below the items to be disturbed and include this information
    [Show full text]