DOCSLIB.ORG

High-Occupancy Vehicle Project Case Studies History and Institutional December 1990 Arrangements

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
High-Occupancy Vehicle Project Case Studies History and Institutional December 1990 Arrangements TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE 1. Report No. 3. Recipienl't CaWog No. UMTA/TX-89/1-925-3 S. Report Date High-Occupancy Vehicle Project Case Studies History and Institutional December 1990 Arrangements 1. AUl.bm(•) &. Pezforming Orpniwio11 Report No. Katherine F. Turnbull Technical Report 925-3 9. Performill& Orpniwioa Name ud Addnm 10. Wodt UAil No. Texas Transportation Institute Texas A&M University System 11. Conlract or Gnat No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Study No. 2·11-89/1-925 13. 1yPe of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation P.O. Box 5051 . Austin. Texas 78763 15. Supplememary Noces Research performed in cooperation with DOT, UMTA. Technical Study Title: An Assessment of Freeway High-Occupancy Vehicle Projects 16. Abstncl This report presents an analysis of the history and institutional arrangements associated with high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) projects in Houston, Texas; Minnea~lis - St. Paul, Minnesota; Orange County, California; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Seattle, Washington; and Washington, D.C./Northern Virginia. The report provides a summary of the elements common to the different projects, and a detailed description of the background and institutional arrangements associated with each of the case studies. The analysis includes an examination of the reasons behind the development of the projects, the background and history of the facilities, a discussion of the relevant issues associated with the HOV projects, and roles and responsibilities of the different agencies and organizations involved in the process. The analysis was conducted to identify common elements and unique characteristics leading to the implementation and operation of the HOV facilities. 17. Key Words No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161 19. Sealrily a-it (of thill n:pol'I) 20. Sccwily c..it. (of Ibis page) 21. No.of...,.. Unclassified Unclassified 326 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-69) METRIC (SI*) CONVERSION FACTORS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS Symbol WIHln You Know Multiply ly To Find Symbol Symbol WMn You Know Multlptr By To Find Sy111bol LENGTH .. ... LENGTH - .. - mm mllllmetres 0.039 Inches In In Inches 2.54 centimetres cm m metres 3.28 feet ft It feet 0.3048 metres m m metres 1.09 yards yd yd yards 0.914 metres m - ~ • km kilometres 0.821 miles ml km a ml miles 1.81 kilometres - - - ~ - - AREA AREA .. - = :! - mm• millimetres squared 0.0016 square Inches ln 1 - = !:: m• metres squared square feet 1 ln1 square lnche1 945.2 centimetres squared cm I 10.78' ft km1 kilometres squared 0.39 square mlles ml 1 ft' square feet 0.0929 metres squared m• - =-- :! yd' square yards 0.836 metres squared m• .. - ha hectores (10 000 ml) 2.53 acres ac - ::!! ml1 square mllea 2.59 kilometres squared km• - ~ ac acres 0.395 hectares ha : MASS (weight) - :: .. 0 grams 0.0353 ounces oz MASS (weight) :: kg kilograms 2.205 pounds lb - = Mg megagrams (1 000 kg) 1.103 short tons T oz ounces 28.35 grams g - = = lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg .. - ~ ~ VOLUME T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 megagrams Mg - .. ~ ml mlllllltres 0.03-4 fluid ounces fl oz - L lltres gallons gal .. ~ 0.264 VOLUME .. m• metres cubed 35.315 cubic feet ft' - m• metres cubed 1.308 cubic yards yd' fl oz fluld ounces 29.57 mlllllltres ml - = .. gal gallons 3.785 ntres L .. - = .. ft• cubic feet 0.0328 metres cubed m• - - TEMPERATURE (exact) yd' coble yards 0.0765 metres cubed m• ... - E "C Celsius 915 (then Fahrenheit OF NOTE: Volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown In m'. - ==- temperature add 32) temperature OF - .,, 32 98.8 212 - - 1 TEMPERATURE (exact) 3 - -~.I I~ I I~~ •• I f!O. bo''~. I • ~. I .2?0J =-- • - 40 I - io I 0 iO I i 80 I Jo I 100 ! - -- " ~ ~ ~ Of Fahrenheit 519 (alter Celslus "C temperature subtracting 32) temperature These factors conform to the requirement of FHWA Order 5190.1A. • SI ts the symbol for the International System of Measurements IDGH OCCUPANCY VEIDCLE PROJECT CASE STUDIES History and Institutional Arrangements By Katherine F. Turnbull Assistant Research Scientist Technical Report 925-3 An Assessment of Freeway High-Occupancy Vehicle Projects Technical Study 2-11-89/1-925 Sponsored by Texas Department of Transportation in Cooperation with the United States Department of Transportation Urban Mass Transportation Administration Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843 December 1990 This study was financed in part through a grant from the Urban Mass Transportation Administration, United States Department of Transportation, under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Summary of Case Study Findings . 1 Introduction . 1 Background and Purpose . 2 Report Organization . 3 Summary of Common Elements . 3 Common Characteristics in the Decision-Making Process .... 3 Common Characteristics in the Implementation Process . 6 Conclusion . " . 8 II. HOV Project Case Studies . 11 Houston, Texas - Richard J. Kabat, Texas Transportation Institute . 13 Minneapolis - St. Paul, Minnesota - Katherine F. Turnbull, Texas Transportation Institute . 4 7 Orange County, California - Charles Fuhs . 101 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania- Kilareski and Mason, P.C. ...... 173 Seattle, Washington - G. Scott Rutherford . 217 Washington, D.C./Northern Virginia: Shirley Highway - JHK & Associates . 251 Washington, D.C./Northem Virginia: I-66 - JHK & Associates . 277 iii I. SUMMARY OF CASE STUDY FINDINGS Introduction The Texas Transportation Institute (IT!), a part of The Texas A&M University System, is conducting an assessment of high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) projects located either on freeways or in separate rights-of-way in North America. The three-year research study is being funded by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration through the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). The research study includes an overall assessment of the status of HOV projects on freeways and in separate rights-of-way in North America, an examination of procedures for conducting before-and-after evaluations of HOV facilities, and detailed examinations of specific case study HOV projects. 1 One of the major elements of this assessment is the detailed examination of selected HOV facilities in six case study sites. High-occupancy vehicle facilities in Houston, Texas; Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota; Orange County, California; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Seattle, Washington; and Washington, D.C./northem Virginia represent the selected case study sites. An intent of the case study analysis is to provide an examination of the history, institutional arrangements, operating characteristics, utilization rates, and impact of selected HOV projects in different parts of the country. This report contains the analysis of the history and institutional arrangements associated with HOV projects in the six case study sites. The report provides a summary of the elements common to the different projects, and a detailed description of the background and institutional arrangements of each case study. 1The first two elements of the three-year research study, the examination of existing HOV projects in North America and procedures for evaluating HOV facilities, have been completed. The reports, A Description ofHigh-Occupancy Vehicle Facilities in North America and Suggested Procedures for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Freeway HOV Facilities, are available through the United States Department of Transportation Technology Sharing Program. 1 Backcround and Pur:pose Since the opening of the Shirley Highway exclusive bus lanes in the Washington, D.C. area in 1969, numerous metropolitan areas have developed priority facilities on freeways for high-occupancy vehicles. As of April, 1990, there were some 40 HOV facilities in 20 metropolitan areas in operation on either freeways or in separate rights-of-way. These facilities, while sometimes differing in design and operation, have similar purposes. In general, HOV facilities are intended to help maxi~ze the person-carrying capacity of the roadway. This is done through altering the design and/or the operation of the facility in order to provide priority treatments, such as travel time advantages and improved travel time reliability, for high­ occupancy vehicles (HOVs). High-occupancy vehicles are usually defined as buses, vanpools, and carpools. In order to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the variety of factors associated with the planning, implementation, operation, and evaluation of HOV facilities, a series of case studies is being conducted of selected HOV projects. The case study sites were selected to provide a mix of old and new projects, HOV design treatments, and geographic coverage. One element of the case study analysis focuses on the history of the HOV projects and the institutional arrangements associated with the planning, development, implementation, and ongoing operation of the facilities. This analysis includes an examination of the reasons behind the development of the projects, the background and history of the facilities, a discussion of relevant issues associated with the HOV projects, and the roles and responsibilities of the different agencies and organizations involved in the process. The analysis was conducted to identify common elements, as well as the unique characteristics, leading to the implementation and operation of the HOV facilities. 2 Report Or2anization This report presents the
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]
  • Madison Avenue Dual Exclusive Bus Lane Demonstration, New York City
    HE tV 18.5 U M T A-M A-06-0049-84-4 a A37 DOT-TSC-U MTA-84-18 no. DOT- Department SC- U.S T of Transportation UM! A— 84-18 Urban Mass Transportation Administration Madison Avenue Dual Exclusive Bus Lane Demonstration - New York City j ™nsportat;on JUW 4 198/ Final Report May 1984 UMTA Technical Assistance Program Office of Management Research and Transit Service UMTA/TSC Project Evaluation Series 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. NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. - POT- Technical Report Documentation Page TS . 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient s Catalog No. 'A'* tJMTA-MA-06-0049-84-4 'Z'i-I £ 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date MADISON AVENUE DUAL EXCLUSIVE BUS LANE DEMONSTRATION. May 1984 NEW YORK CITY 6. Performing Organization Code DTS-64 8. Performing Organization Report No. 7. Authors) J. Richard^ Kuzmyak : DOT-TSC-UMTA-84-18 9^ Performing Organization Name ond Address DEPARTMENT OF 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) COMSIS Corporation* transportation UM427/R4620 11501 Georgia Avenue, Suite 312 11. Controct or Grant No. DOT-TSC-1753 Wheaton, MD 20902 JUN 4 1987 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address U.S. Department of Transportation Final Report Urban Mass Transportation Admi ni strati pg LIBRARY August 1980 - May 1982 Office of Technical Assistance 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 10 Grade Separations and Interchanges
    2005 Grade Separations and Interchanges CHAPTER 10 GRADE SEPARATIONS AND INTERCHANGES 10.0 INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL TYPES OF INTERCHANGES The ability to accommodate high volumes of traffic safely and efficiently through intersections depends largely on the arrangement that is provided for handling intersecting traffic. The greatest efficiency, safety, and capacity, and least amount of air pollution are attained when the intersecting through traffic lanes are grade separated. An interchange is a system of interconnecting roadways in conjunction with one or more grade separations that provide for the movement of traffic between two or more roadways or highways on different levels. Interchange design is the most specialized and highly developed form of intersection design. The designer should be thoroughly familiar with the material in Chapter 9 before starting the design of an interchange. Relevant portions of the following material covered in Chapter 9 also apply to interchange design: • general factors affecting design • basic data required • principles of channelization • design procedure • design standards Material previously covered is not repeated. The discussion which follows covers modifications in the above-mentioned material and additional material pertaining exclusively to interchanges. The economic effect on abutting properties resulting from the design of an intersection at-grade is usually confined to the area in the immediate vicinity of the intersection. An interchange or series of interchanges on a freeway or expressway through a community may affect large contiguous areas or even the entire community. For this reason, consideration should be given to an active public process to encourage context sensitive solutions. Interchanges must be located and designed to provide the most desirable overall plan of access, traffic service, and community development.
    [Show full text]
  • I-75/Laplaisance Road Interchange Reconstruction Presentation
    I-75 / LAPLAISANCE ROAD INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT OVERVIEW END construction limits along PROJECT LIMITS LaPlaisance Road Limited ROW Albain Ramp E City of Monroe Road Davis Ramp C Drain Monroe Township Fire Station No. 2 LaPlaisance Creek Limited Monroe Charter Township extends through ROW the project limits Ramp D Monroe Links of Lake Boat Club Erie Golf Course adjacent to Ramp B project limits Harbor Marine Trout’s Yacht Ramp A Basin Lake Erie BEGIN construction limits along LaPlaisance Road PROJECT DETAILS Interchange study completed to determine best alternative for design and construction Structure study approval from Federal Highway Reconstruction of LaPlaisance bridge over I-75 Reconstruction of LaPlaisance Road interchange Reconstruction of LaPlaisance Road Reconfiguration of interchange PROJECT TIMELINE Project Letting March 5, 2021 Spring 2021 to Spring 2022 Construction! Bridge and • LaPlaisance Rd bridge over I-75 and LaPlaisance Road pavement constructed in 1955 condition • LaPlaisance Rd interchange ramps reconstructed in 1974 • 25-year (2045) traffic projections Interchange • Reconfiguration of interchange Modernization • Shorter bridge to reduce upfront and future maintenance costs PROJECT NEED SPECIFIC PROJECT INFORMATION (INTERCHANGE RECONFIGURATION) LaPlaisance Road over I-75 (existing condition) Bridge currently closed to traffic Requires replacement due to current condition Existing 14 ft-3 inch (SB) minimum posted underclearance LaPlaisance Road and Ramps The existing interchange operates at an
    [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]
  • 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]
  • ALLEY (NS) – Washington Avenue to Wright Avenue, Deane Boulevard to Quincy Avenue
    ALLEY (NS) – Washington Avenue to Wright Avenue, Deane Boulevard to Quincy Avenue Alderman District 9 – Trevor Jung Existing pavement - Bituminous Right-of-way width - 16’ PCI – Alleys not rated Improvement Cost - Concrete at $74.00/ft Alderman Request Last Public Hearing Date – Never City of Racine - Assessment Schedule CITY ENGINEER'S OFFICE AUTHORITY - Benefits and Damage FOR: PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVING RESOLUTION NUMBER 058319 15-May-20 LOCATION - Alley (NS) from Washington Ave to Wright Ave, Deane Blv Page 1 of 2 TAXNO NAME FRONTAGE RATE BENEFITS ADJUST SPEC. ADJ. ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS ASSESSMENT 10192000 Mauer, Kristi L. 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1367 Deane Boulevard 1367 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10193000 Arndt, Ryan 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1365 Deane Boulevard 1365 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10194000 Kosterman, Robert P. & Margaret M. 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1363 Deane Boulevard 1363 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10195000 Lochowitz, Justin 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1359 Deane Boulevard 1359 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10195000 Lochowitz, Justin 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1359 Deane Boulevard 1359 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10196000 Johnson, Kenneth Sr. 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 Cloyd, Christina 1355 Deane Boulevard 1355 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10197000 Garcia, Gregory 40.000$74.00 $2,960.00 $0.00 $0.00 1351 Deane Boulevard 1351 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,960.00 10198000 Williams, Randall 40.000$74.00 $2,960.00 $0.00 $0.00 Veltus, Julie 1345 Deane Boulevard 5735 Ridgecrest Drive Racine, WI 53403 $2,960.00 10199000 Degroot, Matthew J.
    [Show full text]
  • IOWA COUNTY Highway Access for Special Events ORDINANCE
    Ordinance No. 300.05 IOWA COUNTY Highway Access for Special Events ORDINANCE SECTION 1.0: INTRODUCTION 1.1 NAME This Ordinance shall be called the Iowa County Highway Access for Special Events Ordinance. 1.2 INTENT It is the purpose of this Ordinance to regulate the date, time, place, and manner of Special Events occurring on the County Trunk Highway system when the event's impact upon health, safety, sanitary, fire, police, transportation or utility services exceeds those regularly provided to the location of the event. This Ordinance is enacted in order to promote the health, safety, and welfare of the residents and visitors of Iowa County by ensuring that Special Events do not create disturbances, become nuisances, menace or threaten life, threaten health or property, disrupt traffic flow, or damage property. It is not the intent of the County Board enacting this Ordinance to regulate in any manner the content of speech or infringe on the right to assemble; except for regulating the time, place, and manner of assembly. This Ordinance is adopted under the authority of Wisconsin state Statutes 349.185. 1.3 DEFINITIONS A. Extra-ordinary Services means work performed or assistance by any department of county government (Sheriff's office, highway, emergency management, etc.) to provide a service to assist an organizer of a Special Event with the delivery of their event whether required through the permit process or by a voluntary request by the organizer. B. Organizer means the event coordinator, planner, scheduler, corporation, government entity, club, association, or other person(s) who have the responsibility for hosting an event.
    [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]
  • GUIDELINES for TIMING and COORDINATING DIAMOND November 2000 INTERCHANGES with ADJACENT TRAFFIC SIGNALS 6
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. TX-00/4913-2 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date GUIDELINES FOR TIMING AND COORDINATING DIAMOND November 2000 INTERCHANGES WITH ADJACENT TRAFFIC SIGNALS 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Nadeem A. Chaudhary and Chi-Leung Chu Report 4913-2 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project No. 7-4913 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Research: Construction Division September 1998 – August 2000 Research and Technology Transfer Section 14. Sponsoring Agency Code P. O. Box 5080 Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Research performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation. Research Project Title: Operational Strategies for Arterial Congestion at Interchanges 16. Abstract This report contains guidelines for timing diamond interchanges and for coordinating diamond interchanges with closely spaced adjacent signals on the arterial. Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) researchers developed these guidelines during a two-year project funded by the Texas Department of Transportation. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Diamond Interchanges, Capacity Analysis, Traffic No restrictions. This document is available to the Signal Coordination, Traffic Congestion, Signalized public through NTIS: Arterials National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161 19. Security Classif.(of this report) 20. Security Classif.(of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 50 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized GUIDELINES FOR TIMING AND COORDINATING DIAMOND INTERCHANGES WITH ADJACENT TRAFFIC SIGNALS by Nadeem A.
    [Show full text]
  • Mercy Behavioral Health Training and Development Department Location
    Mercy Behavioral Health Training and Development Department Location & Directions Our Location Mercy Behavioral Health Training and Development Department 249 South 9th Street 2nd Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15203 412.488.4374 Free parking is available in our parking lot and in adjacent lots. Limited on-street parking is available on South 9th and South 10th streets. Our location is so new that it may not appear on all GPS systems or on internet map searches, however, directions are provided below. It may be possible to enter 330 South 9th Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15203 in to a map search engine as it is one of our facilities located across the street. Directions from the North From PA Route 28 North Head west on PA Route 28 South toward Exit 5. Take the Interstate 579 South exit toward Liberty Bridge/Chestnut Street. Keep left at the fork and merge onto I-579 South. Take the Seventh Avenue Exit toward Sixth Avenue/Downtown. Keep left at the fork and follow signs for CONSOL Energy Center/Sixth Avenue. Merge onto Bigelow Boulevard. Continue onto Ross Street. Turn left onto Forbes Avenue. Turn right onto South 10th Street/Armstrong Tunnel. Continue to follow South 10th Street across the bridge. Take the first right after the bridge onto Bingham Street. Take the first right onto South 9th Street. Travel three blocks. The Training and Development Department of Mercy Behavioral Health is located in the last building on the right before the railroad tracks. The 10th Street Bridge will be on your right. The Training and Development Department is located on the second floor.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Ramp Design Procedures for Facilities Without Frontage Roads
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-05/0-4538-3 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date RECOMMENDED RAMP DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR September 2004 FACILITIES WITHOUT FRONTAGE ROADS 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. J. Bonneson, K. Zimmerman, C. Messer, and M. Wooldridge Report 0-4538-3 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project No. 0-4538 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report: Research and Technology Implementation Office September 2002 - August 2004 P.O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Project Title: Ramp Design Considerations for Facilities without Frontage Roads 16. Abstract Based on a recent change in Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) policy, frontage roads are not to be included along controlled-access highways unless a study indicates that the frontage road improves safety, improves operations, lowers overall facility costs, or provides essential access. Interchange design options that do not include frontage roads are to be considered for all new freeway construction. Ramps in non- frontage-road settings can be more challenging to design than those in frontage-road settings for several reasons. Adequate ramp length, appropriate horizontal and vertical curvature, and flaring to increase storage area at the crossroad intersection should all be used to design safe and efficient ramps for non-frontage-road settings.
    [Show full text]