DOCSLIB.ORG

Tunnel Road Safety: a Look at Older Drivers’ Performance

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tunnel Road Safety: a Look at Older Drivers’ Performance TUNNEL ROAD SAFETY: A LOOK AT OLDER DRIVERS’ PERFORMANCE AND SIGHT IMPAIRMENT A Thesis presented to the Faculty of California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees Master of City & Regional Planning Master of Science in Engineering (Transportation Planning Specialization) by Edith Lopez Victoria March 2014 © 2014 Edith Lopez Victoria ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page ii COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP TITLE: Tunnel Road Safety: A Look at Older Drivers’ Performance and Sight Impairment AUTHOR: Edith Lopez Victoria DATE SUBMITTED: March 2014 COMMITTEE CHAIR: Dr. Cornelius Nuworsoo, Associate Professor City & Regional Planning Department COMMITTEE MEMBER: Dr. Anurag Pande Assistant Professor Civil Engineering Department COMMITTEE MEMBER: Chris Clark, JD, Lecturer City & Regional Planning Department Page iii ABSTRACT Tunnel Road Safety: A Look at Older Drivers’ Performance and Sight Impairment Edith Lopez Victoria In California, there is an observed trend in which collisions cluster in and around tunnels. The break in road continuity created by the tunnels disturbs traffic flow that can lead to collisions. One of the main contrasts between open roads and tunnel roads occurs in lighting. Drivers with sight deficiencies are unable to adapt their sight to the change in the lighting environment and may crash due to misperception of road alignment, vehicle’s speed and other physiological reactions, such as tension. The suspect population group of crashes occurring under the influence of tunnels conditions is older drivers. The literature suggests that sight and driving performance deteriorate with age. This research attempted to validate this claim by performing a study that looked at driver and crash characteristic of injury and fatal collisions that occurred in and around tunnels. The expectation was that a greater proportion of the older population, 60 years and older, would be represented in the crash data. However, this study found that it is young drivers and not older drivers who are more likely to crash in and around tunnels. This finding may be explained by the State of California’s vision requirements for the issue of a driver’s license, and the voluntary retirement of drivers that feel that they can no longer drive safely. Page iv A second explanation may be that high-risk taking behavior exhibited in younger drivers overcompensates for the physical impairments exhibited in older drivers. Page v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to dedicate this thesis to my thesis committee, thank your for all your help. A special thank you goes for Professor Nuworsoo for guiding me throughout the process and for being patient and supportive every time I explored a different thesis topic. Additionally, thank you to my family and friends who supported me throughout my thesis writing process. Page vi TABLE OF CONTENTS !"#$%&'%()*+,#%-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%.% !"#$%&'%/"012,#%-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%."% 3-%45$2&617$"&5%------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%3% 1.1. Statement of the Problem ........................................................................ 1 1.2. Statement of Purpose .............................................................................. 3 1.3. Relevance of Study .................................................................................. 4 8-%!"$,2)$12,%9,:",;%--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%<% 2.1. Physical Factors ....................................................................................... 7 2.1.1. Sunlight Glare ...................................................................................... 7 2.1.1.1. Sunlight Glare Mitigation .......................................................................... 9 2.1.2. Lighting .............................................................................................. 10 2.1.2.1. Flickering and Rhythmic Lighting ........................................................... 11 2.1.3. Ventilation .......................................................................................... 11 2.2. Human Factors ....................................................................................... 12 2.2.1. Age .................................................................................................... 12 2.2.1.1. Crash Severity ........................................................................................ 13 2.2.1.2. Driving Behavior and Performance ........................................................ 13 2.2.1.3. Vision ..................................................................................................... 15 2.2.1.4. Physiological and Psychological Factors ............................................... 22 =-%>$16?%@,$A&6&+&0?%----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%8B% 3.1. Data .......................................................................................................... 25 3.1.1. Data Source ...................................................................................... 25 3.1.2. Data Limitations ................................................................................. 27 Page vii 3.2. Analytic Framework ............................................................................... 28 3.2.1. Site Selection .................................................................................... 29 3.2.1.1. Tunnels .................................................................................................. 30 3.2.1.2. Age Cohorts ........................................................................................... 36 3.2.1.3. Age Cohort Determination ...................................................................... 37 A,%B3(*=#"#%(34%7+#/*$#%,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,%;C% 4.1. Expectations ........................................................................................... 38 4.2. Crash characteristics ............................................................................. 39 4.2.1. Temporal Distribution ........................................................................ 39 4.2.1.1. Yearly ..................................................................................................... 39 4.2.1.2. Monthly ................................................................................................... 40 4.2.1.3. Hourly ..................................................................................................... 41 4.2.1.4. Tunnel Location – Entrance, In Tunnel and Exit .................................... 45 4.2.1.5. Collision Type ......................................................................................... 48 4.2.2. Driver and Party Characteristics ........................................................ 50 4.2.2.1. Sex ......................................................................................................... 50 4.2.2.2. Old Drivers vs. Young Drivers ................................................................ 51 4.2.2.3. Involvement ............................................................................................ 54 4.2.2.4. Violation Category .................................................................................. 58 4.2.2.5. Sobriety .................................................................................................. 59 @,%D&35*/#"&3%(34%7+5&EE+34($"&3#%,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,%F6% 5.1. Concluding Observations ...................................................................... 62 5.2. Recommendations ................................................................................. 63 5.3. Further Investigation .............................................................................. 65 G")*"&.0(H?=%,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,%FF% Page viii BHH+34"5+#%,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,%:I% A. Population Projections ............................................................................. 80 B. Crash Characteristics ............................................................................... 81 C. Driver and Party Characteristics ............................................................. 87 D. Population Proportion Analysis .............................................................. 92 Page ix LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Mean Minimum Speed (km/h) Reached During Hazard. ....................... 14! Table 2. Information Provided in Crash Records ................................................ 26! Table 3. Tunnel Characteristics (2002-2011) ...................................................... 35! Table 4. Tunnel Location: Chi-Square Frequency (2002-2011) .......................... 47! Table 5. Age Distribution of Percent Involve in Crash and Age Percentage ....... 52! Table 6. Crash Severity – Chi-Square Frequency (2002-2011) .......................... 57! Table 7: Sobriety – Chi-square Frequency (2002-2011) ..................................... 61! Page x LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Cluster
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transbay Terminal/Caltrain Downtown Extension
    SCH No.95063004 City Project No. 2000.048E VOLUME I TRANSBAY TERMINAL / CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION / REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT in the City and County of San Francisco FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION Pursuant to National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, §102 (42 U.S.C. §4332); Federal Transit Laws (49 U.S.C. §5301(e), §5323(b) and §5324(b)); Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C. §303); National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, §106 (16 U.S.C. §4700; 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508; 23 CFR Part 771; Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice); and California Environmental Quality Act, PRC 21000 etseq.; and the State of California CEQA Guidelines, California Administrative Code, 15000 et seq. by the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION and the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD, AND SAN FRANCISCO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY March 2004 . ,- o c»uNrt I 1 *A#:II-04 rwr-7 ...41"EaLI.ii '». 1 =74=,./MB, Fl , r r-y=.rl .t*FIAA,fil, ,aae¥=<2* Beiwv Iald' 9"..1/5//2/ ea Acknowledgement This Final Environmental Impact Statement / Environmental Impact Report (Final EIS/EIR) was prepared in part from a grant of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) and Transportation Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) funds received from the California Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. SCH No.95063004 City Project No. 2000.048E TRANSBAY TERMINAL / CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION / REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT in the City and County o f San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa C]ara Counties FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION Pursuant to National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
    [Show full text]
  • State of California Department of Transportation Statement of Ongoing Contracts As of 01 District
    State of California Department of Transportation Page 1 Statement of Ongoing Contracts as of 06/20/21 06/28/21 District 01 Location Awarded Contract Bid + CCOs Approved %Time Storm Water Resident Fed Aid Description Comp To date Est Comp % Work Plan Engineer Pgm Code Type Of Work Contractor This Month Accepted Message 01-DN-101-8.2/8.7 IN DEL NORTE COUNTY NEAR KLAMATH AT GOLDEN STATE BRIDGE, INC. CLAYTON MALMBERG $18,896,414 04/21/20 34% 01-0B0904 $5,157,126 05/08/20 PANTHER CREEK BRIDGE #01-0025 AND AT 3701 MALLARD DRIVE; 207 PROCE MALL 27% $1,310,631 08/05/22 HUNTER CREEK BRIDGE #01-0003 CRESCENT CITY, CA 95531 BENICIA CA 94510 REPLACE BRIDGE (707)496-5581 (925)372-8000 HA21 01-DN-101-12.5/15.5 IN DEL NORTE COUNTY NEAR KLAMATH FROM G R SUNDBERG, INC. SANDERS, KAREN $11,985,000 02/16/16 100% 01-0G1004 $11,984,109 05/04/16 0.4 MILE SOUTH OF WILSON CREEK BRIDGE 5211 BOYD ROAD 207 PRICE MALL 100% $0 04/09/21 TO 1.7 MILES NORTH OF RUDISIL ROAD CRESCENT CITY, CA 95531 ARCATA, CA 95521 DIR'S EMERGENCY F. (707)498-4009 OVER RUN (707)825-6565 ROADWAY STABILIZATION AND RETAINING 20.20 WALL R 201130 01-DN-101-25.5/27.4 IN DEL NORTE COUNTY IN AND NEAR S.T. RHOADES CONSTRUCTION, KAREN SANDERS $6,279,838 12/08/20 20% 01-0C6604 $1,447,194 12/29/20 CRESCENT CITY FROM 0.2 MILE SOUTH OF INC.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidio of San Francisco an Outline of Its Evolution As a U.S
    Special History Study Presidio of San Francisco An Outline of Its Evolution as a U.S. Army Post, 1847-1990 Presidio of San Francisco GOLDEN GATE National Recreation Area California NOV 1CM992 . Special History Study Presidio of San Francisco An Outline of Its Evolution as a U.S. Army Post, 1847-1990 August 1992 Erwin N. Thompson Sally B. Woodbridge Presidio of San Francisco GOLDEN GATE National Recreation Area California United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Denver Service Center "Significance, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder" Brian W. Dippie Printed on Recycled Paper CONTENTS PREFACE vii ABBREVIATIONS viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ix INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1: THE BEGINNINGS, 1846-1861 5 A. Takeover 5 B. The Indians 8 C. The Boundaries 9 D. Adobes, Forts, and Other Matters 10 CHAPTER 2: CIVIL WAR, 1861-1865 21 A. Organizing 21 B. Keeping the Peace 22 C. Building the Post 23 CHAPTER 3: THE PRESIDIO COMES OF AGE, 1866-1890 31 A. Peacetime 31 B. The Division Comes to the Presidio 36 C. Officers' Club, 20 46 D. Other Buildings 47 E. Troop Duty 49 F. Fort Winfield Scott 51 CHAPTER 4: BEAUTIFICATION, GROWTH, CAMPS, EARTHQUAKE, FORT WINFIELD SCOTT, 1883-1907 53 A. Beautification 53 B. Growth 64 C. Camps and Cantonments 70 D. Earthquake 75 E. Fort Winfield Scott, Again 78 CHAPTER 5: THE PRESIDIO AND THE FORT, 1906-1930 81 A. A Headquarters for the Division 81 B. Housing and Other Structures, 1907-1910 81 C. Infantry Terrace 84 D. Fires and Firemen 86 E. Barracks 35 and Cavalry Stables 90 F.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Society of Southern California Collection -- Charles Puck Collection of Negatives and Photographs: Finding Aid
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf2p30028s No online items Historical Society of Southern California Collection -- Charles Puck Collection of Negatives and Photographs: Finding Aid Finding aid prepared by Jennifer Watts. The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens Photo Archives 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2191 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org © August 1999 The Huntington Library. All rights reserved. Historical Society of Southern photCL 400 volume 2 & volume 3 1 California Collection -- Charles Puck Collection of Negatives a... Overview of the Collection Title: Historical Society of Southern California Collection -- Charles Puck Collection of Negatives and Photographs Dates (inclusive): 1864-1963 Bulk dates: 1920s-1950s Collection Number: photCL 400 volume 2 & volume 3 Creator: Puck, Charles, 1882-1968 Extent: 11,400 photographs in 42 boxes (30.29 linear feet) Repository: The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens. Photo Archives 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2191 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org Abstract: The Puck Collection consists of more than 11,000 photographs and negatives both taken and collected by Los Angeles resident and local history enthusiast Charles Puck (1882-1968), which he donated to the Historical Society of Southern California over more than twenty years in the mid-20th century. The photographs date from 1864 to 1963 (bulk 1920s-1950s) and depict buildings, monuments, civic happenings, modes of transportation, flora and fauna, and anything else that captured his particular interests. Puck compiled several scrapbooks on topics such as adobes and buildings of Los Angeles, illustrating them with his photographs and annotating them with historical anecdotes and personal recollections.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Health Service Hospital Final Supplemental
    Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Public Health Service Hospital, The Presidio of San Francisco, CA This document provides new analysis, information, and changes made in response to public comments on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Public Health Service Hospital (PHSH), which was circulated and filed in August 2004. This document, together with the accompanying Response to Comments, will be filed as the Final SEIS. The Final SEIS is a supplement to and tiers from the 2002 Final EIS for the Presidio Trust Management Plan (PTMP), the Presidio Trust’s comprehensive land use plan and policy framework for Area B of the Presidio. The PTMP evaluated in the 2002 Final EIS included planning guidelines for the PHSH district. LEAD AGENCY The Presidio Trust (Trust), a federal corporation and executive agency created by Congress in 1996, is the lead agency for the proposed action under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Trust maintains jurisdiction over the interior 80 percent of the Presidio of San Francisco (Area B), while the National Park Service has jurisdiction over the coastal areas of the former army post (Area A). The Trust must preserve and enhance the Presidio and also become financially self-sufficient by the year 2013. ABSTRACT The Trust is proposing to rehabilitate and reuse buildings within the PHSH district of the Presidio, to re-introduce residential uses to the district, and to undertake related site improvements. These actions represent the “proposed action” evaluated in this Final SEIS. The Final SEIS evaluates five alternatives, including a publicly requested “no action” alternative and the PTMP baseline alternative.
    [Show full text]
  • PERCY GRAINGER a Hollywood Bowl Wedding Story by Abraham Hoffman
    LACHS Nwsltr Nov2012 Final_Layout 1 10/31/12 2:23 PM Page 2 Los Angeles City HISTORICAL SOCIETY NEWSLETTER VOLUME XLV ISSUE 4 November 2012 GrandesThe Old Dames of Southern California Today’s hotels have many conveniences and luxuries that The “Del” opened in 1888 with many amenities: An those of the past may have lacked, but it would have been Olympic-sized salt water pool, tennis courts, a yacht club, fun to have visited some in their glory. a Japanese tea garden, an ostrich farm, billiards, and bowling alleys. At the time, it was the largest resort hotel At least one historic grande dame still exists, and it is even in the world (680 rooms), and was once listed as one of the possible to stay there, provided you are willing to pay “Top 10 Resorts In The World” by USA Today. It s a today’s prices: Hotel del Coronado, across the bay from National Historic Landmark and a California Historical San Diego in the small town of Coronado. Landmark. Land in California was fairly cheap in the 19th Century, Not surprisingly, many notable people have stayed there: and investments by East-coasters helped build California. In 1920, Edward, Prince of Wales, was a guest. It is After much interest on the part of several investors, three Continued on page 12 men from Indiana were ultimately responsible for this hotel: Josephus Collett, Herber Ingle, and John Ingleheart. They hired architect James W. Reid of Canada to build the UPCOMING 2012 Victorian masterpiece. It required the labor of 2,000 Chinese immigrants from Northern California.
    [Show full text]
  • Exigency Report to the Board of Supervisors Re. SFPD's Joint
    CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT HEADQUARTERS 3 1245 R1 Street San Francisco, California 94158 LONDON N. BREED WILLIAM SCOTT MAYOR CHIEF OF POLICE August 5, 2021 Board of Supervisors City and County of San Francisco City Hall, Room 244 1 Dr. Canton B Goodlett P1 San Francisco, CA 94102 President Walton and Members: Re: S.F. Administrative Code 1913.7, Exigency Report: Joint Search Operation and Unmanned Aerial Support (UAS/Drone) Involvement on June 7, 2021 Chapter 19B of the San Francisco Administrative Code ("Chapter 19B") was enacted in August 2019. Under Section 19B.7, the San Francisco Police Department ("SFPD" or "Department") is required to report to the Board of Supervisors the acquisition or use of Surveillance Technology, as defined by Chapter 19B, in exigent circumstances. On June 7, 2021, the Department participated in a multi-agency search for a missing 84-year-old person where the Mann County Sheriff's Office's Small Unmanned Aerial System Team used and operated an Unmanned Aerial System (UAS), commonly known as a drone. At no time did SFPD members operate or use the UAS directly, nor did SFPD members acquire the UAS. But SFPD members aiding with the terrain search benefitted from observations and information provided by Mann County Sheriffs Deputies operating the UAS. As the Department partnered with the Mann County Sherriff's Department's use of its Surveillance Technology, as defined by Chapter 19B, the Department issues this 19B.7 Exigency Report to the Board of Supervisors. As required, this exigency
    [Show full text]
  • A Century of Fighting Traffic Congestion in Los Angeles 1920-2020
    A CENTURY OF FIGHTING TRAFFIC CONGESTION IN LOS ANGELES 1920-2020 BY MARTIN WACHS, PETER SEBASTIAN CHESNEY, AND YU HONG HWANG A Century of Fighting Traffic Congestion in Los Angeles 1920-2020 By Martin Wachs, Peter Sebastian Chesney, and Yu Hong Hwang September 2020 Preface “Understanding why traffic congestion matters is … not a matter of documenting real, observable conditions, but rather one of revealing shared cultural understandings.” Asha Weinstein1 The UCLA Luskin Center for History and Policy was founded in 2017 through a generous gift from Meyer and Renee Luskin. It is focused on bringing historical knowledge to bear on today’s policy deliberations. Meyer Luskin stated that “The best way to choose the path to the future is to know the roads that brought us to the present.” This study is quite literally about roads that brought us to the present. The Los Angeles region is considering alternative forms of pricing roads in order to address its chronic congestion. This is a brief history of a century of effort to cope with traffic congestion, a perennial policy challenge in this region. The authors, like the Luskins, believe that the current public debate and ongoing technical studies should be informed by an understanding of the past. We do not duplicate technical or factual information about the current situation that is available elsewhere and under scrutiny by others. We also do not delve deeply into particular historical events or past policies. We hope this overview will be useful to lay people and policy practitioners participating in the public dialog about dynamic road pricing that will take place over the coming several years.
    [Show full text]
  • Measurements Alt a Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails
    GOGA Dog Management SEIS acreage/mileage summary October 2012 Milagra Ridge Measurements Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 2.73 1.48 1.48 1.65 1.48 Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Beach - On leash miles Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA Sweeney Ridge Measurements Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 6.84 4.13 2.43 Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Beach - On leash miles Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA Cattle Hill Measurements Alt A* Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 1.12 1.12 1.12 Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Beach - On leash miles Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA *not yet GGNRA GGNRA004235 GOGA Dog Management SEIS acreage/mileage summary October 2012 Pedro Point Measurements Alt A* Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 0.31 0.31 2.40 0.31 Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Beach - On leash miles Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA *not yet GGNRA Rancho Corral de Tierra Measurements Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 16.2* 6.48 6.48 1.10 6.48 6.48 Alt A mileage for info only Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Note: alts B, C, D, E updated Beach - On leash miles trail milage to reflect alt maps Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash 3858.00 Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA 1.39 1.39 GGNRA004236 Golden Gate National
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Named Freeway Publication
    Photograph taken by Caltrans Photography 2020 Named Freeways, Highways, Structures and Other Appurtenances in California Prepared by The California Department of Transportation © 2021 California Department of Transportation. All Rights Reserved. [page left intentionally blank] 2020 Named Freeways, Highways, Structures and Other Appurtenances in California STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY David S. Kim, Secretary CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Toks Omishakin, Director CALTRANS DIVISION OF RESEARCH, INNOVATION and SYSTEM INFORMATION Office of Highway System Information and Performance January 2021 [page left intentionally blank] PREFACE 2020 Named Freeways, Highways, Structures and Other Appurtenances in California Named Freeways, Highways, Structures and Other Appurtenances in California is produced by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as a reference on the many named facilities that are a part of the California State Highway System. This publication provides information on officially named freeways; highways; structures such as bridges, tunnels, and interchanges; Blue Star Memorial Highways; Safety Roadside Rest Areas; and memorial plaques. A section concerning historical names is also included in this publication. The final section of this publication includes background information on each naming. HOW FREEWAYS, HIGHWAYS AND STRUCTURES ARE NAMED Each route in the State Highway System is given a unique number for identification and signed with distinctive numbered Interstate, United States, or California State route shields to guide public travel. The State Legislature designates all State highway routes and assigns route numbers, while the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has authority over the numbering of Interstate and United States routes. In addition to having a route number, a route may also have a name and, in some cases, multiple names.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Health Service Hospital Final Supplemental
    Contents APPENDICES A FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF PHSH ALTERNATIVES B TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL MEMORANDA Technical Memorandum 1 – Expanded Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum 2 – Expanded Travel Demand Assumptions Technical Memorandum 3 – Expanded Transportation Impact Analysis of Alternatives Technical Memorandum 4 – Existing Year (2005) + Project Transportation Impact Analysis of Alternatives Technical Memorandum 5 – Sensitivity Analysis for Trip Generation and Assignment Technical Memorandum 6 – Alternative 1 Trip Generation Variation Technical Memorandum 7 – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis C ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SUMMARY Public Health Service Hospital Final SEIS Appendices i Appendix A Financial Analysis of PHSH Alternatives APPENDIX A FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF PHSH EIS ALTERNATIVES PHSH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS MAY 2006 Requested No Action Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Project Description Gross Building Area Residential 0 0% 209,200 52% 337,100 84% 233,000 85% 332,000 92% Non-Residential 68,000 100% 190,800 48% 62,900 16% 42,000 15% 30,000 8% Total 68,000 100% 400,000 100% 400,000 100% 275,000 100% 362,000 100% Unit Count Market Rate 0 210 230 230 114 Senior Housing 0 0 0 0 155 Total Units 0 210 230 230 269 Unit Mixed Studio N.A. 52 6 88 21 1 Bedroom N.A. 146 103 130 146 2 Bedrooms N.A. 1 105 1 88 3 Bedrooms/ Wyman N.A. 11 16 11 14 Unit Size Studio N.A. 380 460 517 500 1 Bedroom N.A. 700 747 700 700 2 Bedrooms N.A. 1,100 1,241 1,100 1,100 3 Bedrooms/ Wyman N.A. 2,100 1,609 2,100 1,650 Weighted Average N.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Main Subject Headings
    MAIN SUBJECT HEADINGS ACCIDENTS ARCHAEOLOGY & PALEONTOLOGY AWARDS BEAUTIFICATION--See LANDSCAPE & LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE BRIDGES BUILDINGS BYPASSES--See ROADSIDE BUSINESSES & BYPASSES CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY COMMISSION CONVENTIONS--See EVENTS CONVICT LABOR CULVERTS--See also EROSION CONTROL CURBS--See SAFETY DAMS & CANALS DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS--See also PERSONNEL/EMPLOYMENT RELATED DOCUMENTS & RECORDS DRAINAGE--See EROSION CONTROL EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES--See also LANDSCAPE & LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT EROSION CONTROL--See also FLOODING EVENTS EXHIBITS--See INFORMATIONAL SERVICES FERRIES FLOODING FOREST HIGHWAYS--See ROAD CONSTRUCTION FREEWAYS GRADE CROSSINGS, SEPARATIONS & INTERCHANGES GUARD RAILS--See SAFETY HIGHWAYS--See ROUTES HIGHWAY PLANNING & DESIGN HISTORIC LANDMARKS & MONUMENTS HISTORY: PEOPLE, PLACES & HISTORIC EVENTS--See also EVENTS INFORMATIONAL SERVICES INTERCHANGES--See GRADE CROSSINGS, SEPARATIONS & INTERCHANGES LANDSCAPE & LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE LEGISLATION LIGHTING--See SAFETY LITIGATION / LEGAL LITTER REMOVAL--See LANDSCAPE & LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE--See also SNOW; LANDSCAPE & LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE; EQUIPMENT MEDIANS--See SAFETY MOTOR VEHICLES--See also TRAFFIC NATIVE AMERICANS NATURAL DISASTERS--See also FLOODING ORGANIZATION OF DEPARTMENTS--See DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS OUTDOOR ADVERTISING PALEONTOLOGY--See ARCHAEOLOGY & PALEONTOLOGY PAVEMENT MARKINGS--See SAFETY MAIN SUBJECT HEADINGS PAVEMENT & PAVING--See also EQUIPMENT, Paving Related PEOPLE--See PEOPLE INDEX PERSONNEL/EMPLOYMENT-RELATED PUBLIC RELATIONS--See
    [Show full text]