SCR Flyer Layout 1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Maricopa County Department of Transportation MAJOR STREETS and ROUTES PLAN Policy Document and Street Classification Atlas
Maricopa County Department of Transportation MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES PLAN Policy Document and Street Classification Atlas Adopted April 18, 2001 Revised September 2004 Revised June 2011 Preface to 2011 Revision This version of the Major Streets and Routes Plan (MSRP) revises the original plan and the 2004 revisions. Looking ahead to pending updates to the classification systems of towns and cities in Maricopa County, the original MSRP stipulated a periodic review and modification of the street functional classification portion of the plan. This revision incorporates the following changes: (1) as anticipated, many of the communities in the County have updated either their general or transportation plans in the time since the adoption of the first MSRP; (2) a new roadway classification, the Arizona Parkway, has been added to the Maricopa County street classification system and the expressway classification has been removed; and (3) a series of regional framework studies have been conducted by the Maricopa Association of Governments to establish comprehensive roadway networks in parts of the West Valley. Table of Contents 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................1 2. Functional Classification Categorization.............................................................................1 3. Geometric Design Standards..............................................................................................4 4. Street Classification Atlas..................................................................................................5 -
Chapter 7: Transportation Mode Choice, Safety & Connections
Chapter 7: Transportation Mode Choice, Safety & Connections Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-2 TRANSPORTATION City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan 2040 INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Transportation Chapter is to guide development, maintenance, and improvement of the community’s transportation network. This Chapter incorporates and addresses the City’s future transportation needs based on the planned future land uses, development areas, housing, parks and trail systems. The City’s transportation network is comprised of several systems including roadways, transit services, trails, railroads and aviation that all work together to move people and goods throughout, and within, the City. This Chapter identifies the existing and proposed transportation system, examines potential deficiencies, and sets investment priorities. The following Chapter plans for an integrated transportation system that addresses each of the following topics in separate sections: • Roadway System 7-1 • Transit Facilities • Bikway & Trail System • Freight & Rail • Aviation The last section of this Chapter provides a summary and implementation section which addresses each of the components of the system, if any additional action within this planning period is expected. The Implementation Plan sets the groundwork for investment and improvements to the transportation network consistent with the goals, analyses, and conclusions of this Plan. As discussed in preceding Chapters of this Comprehensive Plan, the Transportation Chapter is intended to be dynamic and responsive to the City’s planned land uses and development patterns. As the City’s conditions change and improvements occur, this Chapter should be reviewed for consistency with the Plan to ensure that the transportation systems support the City’s ultimate vision for the community through this planning period. -
Civil Consultants Memorandum
CIVIL CONSULTANTS MEMORANDUM TO: Town of York Planning Office FROM: Thomas W. Harmon, PE SUBJECT: Waiver Requests – Town of York Ordinance Section 6.3.3A.4, 7.3.1 D9.5.8.A, & 17.18.16 DATE: MAY 6, 2020 PROJECT: GULF HILL SUBDIVISION 1780 US ROUTE 1 (16-295.00) Town of York Site Plan and Subdivision Regulations: SECTION 6.3. Physical environment of property; 3.A 4. vegetation in general, specifically noting any trees larger than 24” in diameter in breast height; As part of the subdivision plan review process, we are requesting a waiver to locate any trees greater than 24” at breast height that are located within any proposed open space. This would be a large undertaking on a parcel of this size and the intent of the cluster subdivision is to leave a large portion of the property in its natural state. This will be turned over to the land trust to manage which should insure vegetative cover is properly managed. An extremely large portion of the property will be left untouched maintaining any large growth in those areas. SECTION 7.1.3 D New slopes established by re-grading a site shall not exceed 20%, except for the allowed 33% shoulder slope along proposed roads. To minimize disturbance, roadway ledge cuts occurring outside the required roadway right of way may have slopes up to a vertical face.a vertical face SECTION 9.5.8 Developments containing fifteen (15) residential units or more, or which generates average daily traffic of 150 trips per day or more, shall have at least two street connections either with existing public streets, or with streets on an approved Subdivision Plan for which a performance guarantee has been filed and accepted. -
Roadway Design Manual
Roadway Design Manual Adopted: November 3, 1993 Updated: August 2021 Maricopa County Department of Transportation 2901 W. Durango Street Phoenix, AZ 85009 MCDOT Roadway Design Manual Table of Contents Authorization Memorandum Summary of 2021 Roadway Design Manual Changes Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Transportation Planning Chapter 3 Environmental Analysis, Clearance and Mitigation Chapter 4 Design Procedure Chapter 5 Geometric Design Standards Chapter 6 Intersections Chapter 7 Access To Maricopa County Road System Chapter 8 Bicycle Facility Guidelines Chapter 9 Landscaping Chapter 10 Pavement Design Guide Summary of 2021 Roadway Design Manual Changes Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1.1 Purpose: 4th paragraph: Functional classifications shall determine RW requirements. 6th paragraph, 2nd bullet: Additional design exhibits may be required… 7th paragraph: added “... as described in the Project Development Manual (PDM), Section 2-2-4 Design Exceptions.” 8th paragraph: increased design exception decision from 3 weeks to 4 weeks. 9th paragraph: changed chairman to Engineering Division Manager 10th paragraph (NEW): Encouraging discussions with County staff prior to submitting a Design Exception. Minor updates and rewording. 1.2 Applicability Paragraph 3 - minor text change. Chapter 2 Transportation Planning 2.1 Functional Classifications 2nd paragraph: Added “and ultimate” and “Roadway” Planning “Level Traffic”. Roadway Planning Level Traffic Volumes as shown in Table 2.1. 2.1.1 Rural System: 2.1.1.1 Rural Parkway: added Divided roadway, wide median and Uncurbed. 2.1.1.3 Rural Minor Arterial: added Uncurbed. 2.1.1.4 Rural Major Collector: added, Undivided lanes and Uncurbed. 2.1.1.5 Rural Minor Collector: added Uncurbed. 2.1.1.6 Rural Local Road System (Residential): added Uncurbed. -
US 34 Business Access Control Plan
BUSINESS Access Control Plan 34 State Highway 257 to 35th Avenue 52nd Ave. Ct. 45th Ave. 34 BUSINESS Promontory Pkwy. 54th Ave. 34 101st Ave. 95th Ave. Ave. 83rd 77th Ave. 71st Ave. 35th Ave. BUSINESS 59th Ave. 47th Ave. Promontory Cir. 34 Prepared by: In cooperation with: COLORADO DOT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION November 2012 US 34 Business Route Access Control Plan (West 10th Street) State Highway 257 to 35th Avenue Greeley Prepared by: North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization In cooperation with: Colorado Department of Transportation, Region 4 City of Greeley Weld County November 2012 Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Reference No. 10-045-06 Greeley: Access Control Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES Page Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Figure 2.1 Mobility vs. Access ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 1.1 Project Background and Goal --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Figure 2.2 State Highway Access Category Assignments in Greeley and the Surrounding Area ---------- 9 1.2 Access Control Benefits ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Figure 2.3 City of Greeley Official 2012 Zoning Map ----------------------------------------------------------------- 10 1.3 Coordination with Local and Regional Transportation Planning Efforts ---------------------------- 2 Figure 2.4 Existing -
Design and Construction Standards Pavement Markings
Design and Construction Standards Volume 8 Pavement Marking Posted to the City of Edmonton’s Website in April 2012 PAVEMENT MARKING Design and Construction Standards Index April 2012 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS VOLUME 8 PAVEMENT MARKING PAVEMENT MARKING GUIDELINES For a detailed list of contents refer to the front of the Guidelines SPECIFICATIONS Section Title Issued 02760 Plastic Pavement Markings April 2012 02761 Glass Beads April 2012 02762 Traffic Paint April 2012 02763 Water Borne Traffic Paint April 2012 02764 Crosswalk and Stopline Painting January 1996 02765 Lane Markings - Hot Applied Paint February 1997 02767 Prefabricated Roadmarking Material April 2012 02768 MMA Spray Plastic February 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 1.0 LONGITUDINAL MARKINGS 2 1.1 DIRECTIONAL DIVIDING LINES 2 1.2 LANE LINES 3 1.3 PAVEMENT EDGE LINES 4 1.4 RESERVED LANE PAVEMENT MARKINGS 4 1.5 GUIDE LINES 5 1.6 REVERSIBLE LANE PAVEMENT MARKINGS 6 1.7 TWO - WAY LEFT TURN LANES 6 FIGURE 1.1 LINE TYPES 7 FIGURE 1.2 LANE AND LEAD - IN LINES 8 FIGURE 1.3 PAVEMENT EDGE LINES AT YIELDS AND 9 MERGE ENTRANCES FIGURE 1.4 PAVEMENT EDGE LINES AT EXITS 10 FIGURE 1.5 PAVEMENT EDGE LINES AT ON - OFF 11 AUXILIARY LANES TABLE 1 RESERVED LANE PAVEMENT MARKINGS 12 FIGURE 1.6.0 ROAD MARKINGS FOR FULL TIME WITH - FLOW 13 AND CONTRA - FLOW RESERVED LANES FIGURE 1.6.1 ROAD MARKINGS FOR FULL TIME WITH - FLOW 14 RESERVED LANE FIGURE 1.6.2 ROAD MARKINGS FOR FULL TIME CONTRA-FLOW 15 RESERVED LANE FIGURE 1.6.3 ROAD MARKINGS FOR PART TIME WITH - FLOW 16 RESERVED LANE FIGURE -
Construction Update
Construction Update West Rutland Paving/Intersection Project [Business Route 4 and VT 4A] DATE: Thursday, 6/4/20 PROJECT TYPE: Roadway LOCATION: This project begins at the US-4 and BUS-4 intersection in West Rutland and heads east along BUS-4 to the Class 1 Town Highway limit in front of the Rutland Town Clerk's Office (MM 0.997). The total project length is 3.094 miles. The intersection project is located in the town of West Rutland at the intersection of Business Route 4 and Vermont Route 4A (near the Price Chopper Plaza). SCOPE OF WORK: Construction activities include coarse milling (grinding) of the roadway, paving with a leveling and wearing (final) course, intersection reconfiguration (removal of the jughandle), traffic signal improvements, reconstruction of an at-grade railroad crossing, guardrail, pavement markings, signs, drainage rehabilitation and other highway related items. As part of Governor Scott’s “Work Smart, Stay Safe” order, all construction crews are currently subject to safety restrictions and precautions. ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, WEEK of 6/8: Work at the signalized intersection of Route 4 and Route 4A will continue next week. A trench crossing at the intersection with associated signal work is tentatively scheduled for next week. If this work occurs, it will take approximately three days to complete, and motorists can expect lane closures and delays at the intersection. Work at the railroad crossing is almost complete. On Monday and Tuesday next week crews will be milling and paving the approaches at the railroad crossing. Traffic diversions will be in place. Minor track work will occur next week as well. -
Guide Signs—Conventional Roads
2011 Edition - Revision 2 Page 143 CHAPTER 2D. GUIDE SIGNS—CONVENTIONAL ROADS Section 2D.01 Scope of Conventional Road Guide Sign Standards Standard: 01 The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to any road or street other than low-volume roads (as defined in Section 5A.01), expressways, and freeways. Section 2D.02 Application Support: 01 Guide signs are essential to direct road users along streets and highways, to inform them of intersecting routes, to direct them to cities, towns, villages, or other important destinations, to identify nearby rivers and streams, parks, forests, and historical sites, and generally to give such information as will help them along their way in the most simple, direct manner possible. 02 Chapter 2A addresses placement, location, and other general criteria for signs. Section 2D.03 Color, Retroreflection, and Illumination Support: 01 Requirements for illumination, retroreflection, and color are stated under the specific headings for individual guide signs or groups of signs. General provisions are given in Sections 2A.07, 2A.08, and 2A.10. Standard: 02 Except where otherwise provided in this Manual for individual signs or groups of signs, guide signs on streets and highways shall have a white message and border on a green background. All messages, borders, and legends shall be retroreflective and all backgrounds shall be retroreflective or illuminated. Support: 03 Color coding is sometimes used to help road users distinguish between multiple potentially confusing destinations. Examples of valuable uses of color coding include guide signs for roadways approaching or inside an airport property with multiple terminals serving multiple airlines, and community wayfinding guide signs for various traffic generator destinations within a community or area. -
Engineering Assessment of the Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives
Appendix D – Engineering Assessment of the Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives: By Sub-Segment Milwaukee-Twin Cities High-Speed Rail Corridor Program Appendix D Technical Report Engineering Assessment of the Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives Prepared for: Minnesota Department of Transportation Wisconsin Department of Transportation Prepared by: Quandel Consultants, LLC Version: March 10, 2011 Appendix D: Engineering Assessment Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 3 TRACK SUB-SEGMENTS: ................................................................................................................. 5 Track Sub-Segment 1 (Segment A) ............................................................................................. 5 Track Sub-Segment 2 (Segments B & C) .................................................................................... 9 Track Sub-Segment 3 (Segment D) ........................................................................................... 13 Track Sub-Segment 4 (Segment II)............................................................................................ 16 Track Sub-Segment 5 (Segment II)............................................................................................ 20 Track Sub-Segment 6 (Segment F) ........................................................................................... 23 Track Sub-Segment 7 (Segment II)........................................................................................... -
Mini Roundabouts Back-In Angle Parking the Two Mini-Roundabouts Will Be Constructed at the Is Surrounded by a Continuous Travel Lane
Project Purpose & Description Project Purpose The purpose of the Highway 4 project is to achieve a smooth ride, To/From Sleepy Eye Legend replace poor utilities beneath the highway, and to enhance pedestrian Project Area Business Route accommodations. Hwy 4 Detour Proposed Mini-Roundabout Project Description Highway 4 through the City of St. James is in poor condition and in St. James1 Northside2 disrepair. The city utility infrastructure is also in poor condition and is Secondary Elementary currently experiencing multiple breaks each winter. MnDOT received School School municipal consent for the proposed project in December 2014. The 3 project includes reconstruction of approximately 1.6 miles of Highway 4, Armour Eckrich Meats including two new mini-roundabouts. 4 Project elements include: Nelson5 Furniture Reconstruct Highway 4 from approximately National Guard • Training & 6 200 feet south of 10th Avenue S. to 11th Ave N. Community Center • Realign 7th Avenue S. to address the skew and increase safety • Construct mini-roundabouts at the two existing signals on 1st Ave S. 8 • Provide back-in angle parking on 1st Ave S. • Replace existing sidewalks and install new sidewalks 10County Courthouse Library9 • Bring all pedestrian accommodations up to American’s with 11St. Paul’s Lutheran School Disability Act (ADA) standards 13 • Improve boulevard aesthetics and safety • Upgrade storm sewer throughout the corridor • Update lighting standards and fixtures 12 To/From Hwy 60 Armstrong Preschool/14 Community Education Project Schedule: County Apr. – Sept. 2015 .......................Project design Fair Grounds Oct. 2015 – Jan. 2016 ..............Agency approvals Feb. – Apr. 2016 .........................Project bidding May – Nov. 2016 ........................Planned construction To/From Hwy 60/Hwy 4 To/From Hwy 60 Highway 4 at 1st Avenue South Mini Roundabouts Back-In Angle Parking The two mini-roundabouts will be constructed at the is surrounded by a continuous travel lane. -
Arizona State Rail Plan March 2011
Arizona State Rail Plan March 2011 Arizona Department of Transportation This page intentionally left blank Acknowledgements The State Rail Plan was made possible by the cooperative efforts of the following individuals and organizations who contributed significantly to the successful completion of the project: Rail Technical Advisory Team Cathy Norris, BNSF Railway Chris Watson, Arizona Corporation Commission Bonnie Allin, Tucson Airport Authority Reuben Teran, Arizona Game and Fish Department Zoe Richmond, Union Pacific Railroad David Jacobs, Arizona State Historic Preservation Office Jane Morris, City of Phoenix – Sky Harbor Airport Gordon Taylor, Arizona State Land Department Patrick Loftus, TTX Company Cathy Norris, BNSF Railway Angela Mogel, Bureau of Land Management ADOT Project Team Jack Tomasik, Central Arizona Association of Governments Sara Allred, Project Manager Paul Johnson, City of Yuma Kristen Keener Busby, Sustainability Program Manager Jermaine Hannon, Federal Highway Administration John Halikowski, Director Katai Nakosha, Governor’s Office John McGee, Executive Director for Planning and Policy James Chessum, Greater Yuma Port Authority Mike Normand, Director of Transit Programs Kevin Wallace, Maricopa Association of Governments Shannon Scutari, Esq. Director, Rail & Sustainability Marc Pearsall, Maricopa Association of Governments Services Gabe Thum, Pima Association of Governments Jennifer Toth, Director, Multi-Modal Planning Division Robert Bohannan, RH Bohannan & Associates Robert Travis, State Railroad Liaison Jay -
Roundabout Solutions for Complex Traffic Environments
ROUNDABOUT SOLUTIONS FOR COMPLEX TRAFFIC ENVIRONMENTS Author/Presenter’s Name: Mike Bittner Mailing Address: 728 East Beaton Drive, West Fargo, ND 58078 Telephone Number: 701 271 4879 E-Mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Roundabouts have many distinct features the engineering community can employ to solve complex or unique traffic scenarios. This paper illustrates how to capitalize on many of the features through three real- world project examples. In the first example, a roundabout is used to combine two closely spaced skewed intersections into one five legged intersection. This example is located in the heart of a city exploding with population and traffic growth. Under existing conditions, the two closely spaced intersections experience spillback across one another resulting in poor intersection operations and frequent conflicts. This is further exacerbated by the 7 uncontrolled driveways within 215 feet of the major intersection. The proposed five-legged roundabout mitigates the negative effect of the skewed intersections, consolidates the two closely spaced intersections and provides access management for the uncontrolled driveways. Not only does this improvement provide an anticipated reduction in crash potential and improved intersection operations, the alternative also provides significant aesthetic benefits, leading to a revitalized city center. In the second example, roundabouts are employed upstream of a central intersection that is oversaturated and experiencing safety issues specific to permitted left-turn movements. The proposed bowtie intersection configuration converts left-turn movements at the central intersection to U-turn maneuvers at the upstream roundabouts. Eliminating left-turn maneuvers at the central intersection resolves safety issues corresponding to the movement. Eliminating left-turn maneuvers also prioritizes high volume through movements at the central intersection, reducing motorist delays and queues that block upstream intersections and business driveways.