DOCSLIB.ORG

EVALUATING the IMPACT of OVERWEIGHT LOAD ROUTING on BURIED UTILITY FACILITIES By

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-11/0-6394-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF OVERWEIGHT LOAD October 2010 ROUTING ON BURIED UTILITY FACILITIES Published: February 2011 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Edgar Kraus, Emmanuel Fernando, Eric Yingfeng Li, Jeong Ho Oh, Report 0-6394-1 Nicholas Koncz, and Cesar Quiroga 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 0-6394 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 2009–August 2011 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: Evaluation of Overweight Load Routing on Buried Utility Plant URL: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-6394-1.pdf 16. Abstract Overweight traffic movements can negatively affect pavement integrity and quality. However, it is less known to what degree buried utility plant along and across the right of way is affected by these overweight loads, especially if the utility facility is aged, placed under an exception to the Utility Accommodation Rules (UAR), and/or subjected to repetitive loads. Routing decisions for repetitive overweight loads may be determined without consideration of cumulative impacts to utility infrastructure, particularly municipally owned lines that could be aged, accommodated under an exception, or of substandard materials. Given the growth in volume in overweight load (particularly mid-heavy and superload) permits, the adequacy of the UAR is unknown. This report focuses on the year one project objectives, which were (a) provide a review of technical design and engineering requirements for utility accommodation in Texas, (b) provide a preliminary assessment of potential impact of overweight loads on buried utilities, (c) provide a preliminary assessment of UAR adequacy to deal with overweight loads on buried utilities, (d) provide preliminary recommendations for a business process for TxDOT overweight routing coordination, and (e) provide recommendations for the phase 2 utility damage evaluation. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Utility Accommodation Rules, UAR, Underground No restrictions. This document is available to the Utility, Utility Damage, Pipes, Heavy Load Damage, public through NTIS: Overweight Load National Technical Information Service Springfield, Virginia 22161 http://www.ntis.gov 19. Security Classif.(of this report) 20. Security Classif.(of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 212 EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF OVERWEIGHT LOAD ROUTING ON BURIED UTILITY FACILITIES by Edgar Kraus, P.E. Associate Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute Emmanuel Fernando Senior Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute Eric Yingfeng Li Assistant Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute Jeong Ho Oh Assistant Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute Nicholas Koncz Assistant Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute and Cesar Quiroga, P.E. Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute Report 0-6394-1 Project 0-6394 Project Title: Evaluation of Overweight Load Routing on Buried Utility Plant Performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration October 2010 Published: February 2011 TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 DISCLAIMER The contents of this document reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). This document does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation, nor is it intended for construction, bidding, or permit purposes. The engineer in charge of the project was Edgar Kraus, P.E. (Texas Registration #96727). The United States Government and the State of Texas do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was conducted in cooperation with TxDOT and FHWA. The researchers would like to acknowledge the assistance provided by many individuals at these agencies, in particular the following: • Randy Anderson. • John Campbell. • Frank Espinosa. • Raymond Hutchinson. • Justin Obinna. • Guy Sledge. • Stephen Stakemiller. • Duncan Stewart. • Dean Wilkerson. • Charon Williams. The researchers also wish to acknowledge the support provided by Jerry Le with the analysis of the overweight truck routing data. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ x LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ xii LIST OF ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND TERMS ..................................................... xv CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 2. TECHNICAL DESIGN AND ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS FOR UTILITY ACCOMMODATION ................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 3 UNDERGROUND UTILITY STRUCTURE TYPES AND MATERIALS .............................. 3 Underground Utility Structure Material Standards ................................................................. 4 UNDERGROUND UTILITY STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS .................. 11 Embedment and Backfill ....................................................................................................... 11 Compaction ........................................................................................................................... 12 Casings .................................................................................................................................. 12 Depth of Cover ...................................................................................................................... 13 External Loads ...................................................................................................................... 13 REVIEW OF EXISTING PRACTICE FOR INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY STRUCTURES IN TEXAS ..................................................................................... 26 City of Grapevine Water Utility Systems ............................................................................. 27 City of Grapevine Water Sanitary Sewer System ................................................................. 30 City of North Richland Hills ................................................................................................. 33 City of Fort Worth ................................................................................................................ 36 City of Bedford ..................................................................................................................... 38 Exxon Mobile Pipeline Company ......................................................................................... 39 ATMOS Energy .................................................................................................................... 40 REVIEW OF MILITARY SPECIFICATIONS FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ........... 40 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 40 Water Distribution ................................................................................................................ 41 Sanitary Sewers ..................................................................................................................... 51 Natural Gas/Liquid Petroleum Piping ................................................................................... 52 CHAPTER 3. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY STRUCTURES IN THE TEXAS UTILITY ACCOMMODATION RULES ............................. 59 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 59 CURRENT UTILITY ACCOMMODATION RULES ............................................................ 59 SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO UTILITY ACCOMMODATION RULES SINCE 1979 .... 63 Adopted Changes in 1982 (151) ........................................................................................... 63 Adopted Changes in 1989 (152) ........................................................................................... 63 Adopted Changes in 1990 (153) ........................................................................................... 67 Adopted Changes in 1996 (154) ........................................................................................... 67 vii Adopted Changes in 1997 (155) ..........................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • 4. Rail Capacity

    4. Rail Capacity

    69719 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Transport Capacity Analysis Procedures for Developing Cities Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Jack Reilly and Herbert Levinson September, 2011 World Bank, Transport Research Support Program, TRS Public Disclosure Authorized With Support from UK Department for International Development 1 The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of a number of people in the development of this manual. Particular among these were Sam Zimmerman, consultant to the World Bank and Mr. Ajay Kumar, the World Bank project manager. We also benefitted greatly from the insights of Dario Hidalgo of EMBARQ. Further, we acknowledge the work of the staff of Transmilenio, S.A. in Bogota, especially Sandra Angel and Constanza Garcia for providing operating data for some of these analyses. A number of analyses in this manual were prepared by students from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. These include: Case study – Bogota Ivan Sanchez Case Study – Medellin Carlos Gonzalez-Calderon Simulation modeling Felipe Aros Vera Brian Maleck Michael Kukesh Sarah Ritter Platform evacuation Kevin Watral Sample problems Caitlynn Coppinger Vertical circulation Robyn Marquis Several procedures and tables in this report were adapted from the Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, published by the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. Public Transport Analysis Procedures for Developing Cities 2 Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................
  • Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide

    Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide

    Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide A Complete Compendium Of RV Dump Stations Across The USA Publiished By: Covenant Publishing LLC 1201 N Orange St. Suite 7003 Wilmington, DE 19801 Copyrighted Material Copyright 2010 Covenant Publishing. All rights reserved worldwide. Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide Page 2 Contents New Mexico ............................................................... 87 New York .................................................................... 89 Introduction ................................................................. 3 North Carolina ........................................................... 91 Alabama ........................................................................ 5 North Dakota ............................................................. 93 Alaska ............................................................................ 8 Ohio ............................................................................ 95 Arizona ......................................................................... 9 Oklahoma ................................................................... 98 Arkansas ..................................................................... 13 Oregon ...................................................................... 100 California .................................................................... 15 Pennsylvania ............................................................ 104 Colorado ..................................................................... 23 Rhode Island ...........................................................
  • MDTA Metromover Extensions Transfer Analysis Final Technical Memorandum 3, April 1994

    MDTA Metromover Extensions Transfer Analysis Final Technical Memorandum 3, April 1994

    Center for Urban Transportation Research METRO-DADE TRANSIT AGENCY MDTA Metromover Extensions Transfer Analysis FINAL Technical Memorandum Number 3 Analysis of Impacts of Proposed Transfers Between Bus and Mover CUllR University of South Florida College of Engineering (Cf~-~- METRO-DADE TRANSIT AGENCY MDTA Metromover Extensions Transfer Analysis FINAL Technical Memorandum Number 3 Analysis of Impacts of Proposed Transfers Between Bus and Mover Prepared for Metro-Dade.. Transit Agency lft M E T R 0 D A D E 1 'I'··.·-.·.· ... .· ','··-,·.~ ... • R,,,.""' . ,~'.'~:; ·.... :.:~·-·· ,.,.,.,_, ,"\i :··-·· ".1 •... ,:~.: .. ::;·~·~·;;·'-_i; ·•· s· .,,.· - I ·1· Prepared by Center for Urban Transportation Research College of Engineering University of South Florida Tampa, Florida CUTR APRIL 1994 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NUMBER 3 Analysis of Impacts of Proposed Transfers between Bus and Mover Technical Memorandum Number 3 analyzes the impacts of the proposed transfers between Metrobus and the new legs of the Metromover scheduled to begin operation in late May 1994. Impacts on passengers walk distance from mover stations versus current bus stops, and station capacity will also be examined. STATION CAPACITY The following sections briefly describe the bus terminal/transfer locations for the Omni and Brickell Metromover Stations. Bus to mover transfers and bus route service levels are presented for each of the two Metromover stations. Figure 1 presents the Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) in the CBD, as well as a graphical representation of the Metromover alignment. Omni Station The Omni bus terminal adjacent to the Omni Metromover Station is scheduled to open along with the opening of the Metromover extensions in late May 1994. The Omni bus terminal/Metromover Station is bounded by Biscayne Boulevard, 14th Terrace, Bayshore Drive, and NE 15th Street.
  • M a S S a C H U S E T T S EXISTING ITS DEVICES in DISTRICT 5 and TURNPIKES October 1, 2021

    M a S S a C H U S E T T S EXISTING ITS DEVICES in DISTRICT 5 and TURNPIKES October 1, 2021

    Installed ITS Devices Roadways MAP E CCTV )" Patrol Sheds Interstate 89 DMS Interstate 93 MVDS Interstate 293 " VSL Interstate 393 Existing Devices District 5 & Turnpikes Everett Turnpike October 1, 2021 RWIS NH 101 0 2.25 4.5 9 US Routes Miles State Routes LACONIA BROOKFIELD DANBURY HILL SANBORNTON GILFORD 28A SPRINGFIELD DISTRICT 2 «¬ «¬106 DISTRICT 3 MIDDLETON TILTON BELMONT WILMOT 93 ALTON 11 NEW DURHAM ANDOVER FRANKLIN ¨¦§ «¬ 11 GILMANTON «¬140 MILTON «¬ ¤£4 NORTHFIELD NEW LONDON 103A SALISBURY «¬ FARMINGTON CANTERBURY BARNSTEAD SUTTON «¬129 «¬127 BOSCAWEN LOUDON NEWBURY «¬132 2 WEBSTER 103 PITTSFIELD T «¬ STRAFFORD C I 126 WARNER R ¤£3 «¬ T 89 CHICHESTER S ¨¦§ I 93 ¨¦§ 4 D CONCORD ¤£ BRADFORD EPSOM NORTHWOOD HOPKINTON WASHINGTON DISTRICT 6 202 PEMBROKE HENNIKER ¤£ HILLSBOROUGH «¬43 ALLENSTOWN 152 BOW DEERFIELD «¬ WINDSOR NOTTINGHAM DUNBARTON DEERING WEARE 156 «¬149 «¬77 HOOKSETT «¬ CANDIA ANTRIM EPPING 101 «¬ RAYMOND 101 GOFFSTOWN «¬ BENNINGTON «¬47 FRANCESTOWN 136 114A 293 «¬ «¬ ¨¦§ «¬28A AUBURN FREMONT HANCOCK NEW BOSTON BRENTWOOD MANCHESTER CHESTER GREENFIELD 13 «¬ 102 BEDFORD «¬ SANDOWN DISTRICT 4 121 DANVILLE 28B «¬ 6 «¬ T LYNDEBOROUGH C DUBLIN MONT VERNON I R 111 137 PETERBOROUGH 31 DERRY ¬ T «¬ «¬ « LONDONDERRY HAMPSTEAD S AMHERST I D MERRIMACK 28 NEWTON LITCHFIELD 128 «¬ «¬ ATKINSON WILTON JAFFREY TEMPLE SHARON MILFORD 3A «¬ WINDHAM 123 45 «¬ «¬ 101A «¬ SALEM 122 HUDSON «¬ FEE ¬ 111 GREENVILLE « «¬ HOLLIS RINDGE NEW IPSWICH MASON BROOKLINE NASHUA «¬38 ¬130 PELHAM 1«¬23A « M A S S A C H U S E T T S EXISTING ITS DEVICES IN DISTRICT 5 AND TURNPIKES October 1, 2021 DIRECTION OF MILE DEVICE NAME CITY/TOWN ROUTE LOCATION DESCRIPTION TRAVEL MARKER NH Route 101 Eastbound slope of the Meetinghouse RD/US 101 E 53.8 CCTV AX 5 Bedford NH 101 Eastbound 53.8 Route 3 intersection between US 3 and the Route 101 Eastbound on ramp.
  • Narrative Report

    Narrative Report

    䤀ⴀ㠀㤀 䰀攀戀愀渀漀渀Ⰰ 一䠀 ⴀ 䠀愀爀琀昀漀爀搀Ⰰ 嘀吀 䈀爀椀搀最攀 刀攀挀漀渀猀琀爀甀挀琀椀漀渀 ☀ 圀 椀搀攀渀椀渀最 倀爀漀樀攀挀琀 吀䤀䜀䔀刀 㤀 ⴀ 䜀爀愀渀琀 䄀瀀瀀氀椀挀愀琀椀漀渀 U.S. Department of Transportation Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery ”TIGER” GRANT APPLICATION PROJECT NARRATIVE REPORT Project Name: I-89 Lebanon, NH – Hartford, VT Bridge Reconstruction and Widening Project Project Type: Bridge Rehabilitation Project Location: Urban, Lebanon, NH and Hartford, VT Project Website: https://www.nh.gov/dot/projects/lebhart16148/index.htm Funds Requested: $10,000,000 (28%) Other State and Federal Funds New Hampshire: $17,056,000 (48%) Vermont: $ 8,544,000 (24%) Total Construction Costs: $35,600,000 Contact: Mr. L. Robert Landry, Jr., P.E. Administrator, Bureau of Bridge Design New Hampshire Department of Transportation 7 Hazen Drive, PO Box 483 Concord, NH 03302-0483 Telephone: 603.271.3921 [email protected] DUNS #: 80-859-1697 Vietnam Veterans Memorial Bridges Interstate 89 Lebanon, NH – Hartford, VT 1 Table of Contents OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................. 5 TRANSPORTATION CHALLENGES THE PROJECT AIMS TO ADDRESS ........................................................... 7 HOW THE PROJECT WILL ADDRESS THESE CHALLENGES ............................................................................ 7 PROJECT PARTIES ........................................................................................................................................
  • Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (Part B)

    Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (Part B)

    7UDQVLW&DSDFLW\DQG4XDOLW\RI6HUYLFH0DQXDO PART 2 BUS TRANSIT CAPACITY CONTENTS 1. BUS CAPACITY BASICS ....................................................................................... 2-1 Overview..................................................................................................................... 2-1 Definitions............................................................................................................... 2-1 Types of Bus Facilities and Service ............................................................................ 2-3 Factors Influencing Bus Capacity ............................................................................... 2-5 Vehicle Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-5 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-13 Fundamental Capacity Calculations .......................................................................... 2-15 Vehicle Capacity................................................................................................... 2-15 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-22 Planning Applications ............................................................................................... 2-23 2. OPERATING ISSUES............................................................................................ 2-25 Introduction..............................................................................................................
  • Load Quantification of the Wheel–Rail Interface of Rail Vehicles for The

    Load Quantification of the Wheel–Rail Interface of Rail Vehicles for The

    Original Article Proc IMechE Part F: J Rail and Rapid Transit 0(0) 1–10 Load quantification of the wheel–rail ! IMechE 2016 Reprints and permissions: interface of rail vehicles for the sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0954409716684266 infrastructure of light rail, heavy rail, journals.sagepub.com/home/pif and commuter rail transit Xiao Lin, J Riley Edwards, Marcus S Dersch, Thomas A Roadcap and Conrad Ruppert Jr Abstract The type and magnitude of loads that pass through the track superstructure have a great impact on both the design and the performance of the concrete crossties and fastening systems. To date, the majority of North American research that focus on quantifying the rail infrastructure loading conditions has been conducted on heavy-haul freight railroads. However, the results and recommendations of these studies may not be applicable to the rail transit industry due to a variety of factors. Unlike the freight railroads, which have standardized maximum gross rail loads and superstructure design practices for vehicles, the rail transit industry is home to a significant variety of vehicle and infrastructure designs. Some of the current transit infrastructure design practices, which were established decades ago, need to be updated with respect to the current loading environment, infrastructure types, and understanding of the component and system-level behavior. This study focuses on quantifying the current load environment for light rail, heavy rail, and commuter rail transit infrastructure in the United States. As an initial phase of this study, researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) have conducted a literature review of different metrics, which is used to evaluate the static, dynamic, impact, and rail seat loads for the rail transit infrastructure.
  • I-89 Commuter Transit Service Study FINAL REPORT April 2017

    I-89 Commuter Transit Service Study FINAL REPORT April 2017

    I-89 Commuter Transit Service Feasibility Study FINAL REPORT Upper Valley Lake Sunapee Regional Planning Commission April 2017 I-89 Commuter Transit Service Feasibility Study AECOM Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 1 3. Previous Studies .......................................................................................................................................... 1 4. Existing Transit Services .............................................................................................................................. 3 4.1 Local Bus Transit ............................................................................................................................... 3 4.2 Commuter Bus Transit ....................................................................................................................... 5 4.3 Intercity Transit .................................................................................................................................. 6 4.4 Rideshare Services ........................................................................................................................... 6 4.5 Park-and-Ride Lots ...........................................................................................................................
  • You Can't Get There from Here: the Coming of the Interstates to Vermont

    You Can't Get There from Here: the Coming of the Interstates to Vermont

    You Can't Get There From Here: the coming of the Interstates to Vermont LS07036_000 LS07036_001 Interstate 89 between Williston and South Burlington in 1962 and then two years later in 1964. These photos illustrate the transition from small roads to major highways. By Nancy Columb The first idea for a set of superhighways came from President Eisenhower when he traveled across the US as a lieutenant colonel in the army (right)1 and when he was in Germany and witnessed the Autobahn2. The Autobahn increased vehicular safety and could be used for military purposes; this is what President Eisenhower envisioned for the United States. In 1956 President Eisenhower received support from the Federal- Aid Highway Act to begin constructing what he called the “National System of Interstate and Defense Highways.” 3 LS08768 It didn’t take long for construction to start in Vermont. This is the beginning of some construction on Interstate-91 in Brattleboro in 1958. There was more than just road to be built when it came to Vermont’s hilly and uneven areas. This is construction of bridges on Interstate-91 in Rockingham. LS05905 Signs had to be posted as well so that drivers would know how far to the next destination they were, and where to expect an exit ramp; another example of safety features LS08123 The terrain around Vermont was not always conducive to straight-up paving of roads. Here outside of Montpelier a crane removes steep rock outcroppings along where the road will go. LS06519 Before the Interstate Highway System, many places in Vermont were farmland with a few scattered houses and one or two main roads.
  • M-7 Long Island Railroad .Montreal EMU .Gallery Car Electric Multiple Unit -M- ~ New York, Usj

    M-7 Long Island Railroad .Montreal EMU .Gallery Car Electric Multiple Unit -M- ~ New York, Usj

    APPENDIX 6 . M-7 Long Island Railroad .Montreal EMU .Gallery Car Electric Multiple Unit -M- ~ New York, Usj Under joint agreement to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority / Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) and the Metro-North Railroad (MNR), Bombardier Transportation is providing Electric Multiple Unit (EMU) M- 7 commuter cars to LIRR to begin replacement of its Metropolitan M-I commuter car fleet. Chartered in 1834, the Long The units are equipped with The interior of the LIRR' Island Rail Road is the largest Bombardier's renowned stainless "Car of the Future" was designel Commuter Rail system in North steel carbodies for long life and with the input of the passenger America. low maintenance, and asynchro- and employees and includes a] nous AC motors featuring state- ADA compliant toilet, cellula Bombardier's new Electric of-the-art IGBT {isolated gate bipo- telephone and wide, single-lea Multiple Units, its first railcar lar transistors) inverters. Use of sliding doors for ease of entry an contract for the LIRR, will service outboard-bearing bolsterless fab- exit. the Long Island commuter lines, ricated bogies offers considerable constituting 80% of the system. weight savings over cast bogies. ~ BOMBARDIER BOMBARD" TRANSPORTATION 'V Electric Multiple Unit -M- 7 POWERCAR WITH TOILET ---10' 6' B END FEND I 3,200 mi , -: -" 0 C==- ~=0 :- CJCJ ~~[] CJCJCJCJCJCJ [] I D b 01 " ~) -1::1 1211-1/2 t~J ~~W ~~IL...I ~w -A'-'1~~~- I ~~ 309~mmt ~ 1 I~ 11 m 2205~16~m-! 591..1.6" mm --I I 1- -- 59°6" ° 4°8-1/2. , ~ 16,~:,60~m ~-- -;cl 10435mm ~ .-1
  • COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM ANALYSIS | Volume II: Service Plan City of Minot

    COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM ANALYSIS | Volume II: Service Plan City of Minot

    COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM ANALYSIS | Volume II: Service Plan City of Minot City of Minot COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM ANALYSIS Volume II: Service Plan December 2013 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | i COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM ANALYSIS | Volume II: Service Plan City of Minot Table of Contents Page 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................1-1 Community Outreach ............................................................................................................................. 1-2 2 Vision, Goals, and Transit Planning Principles ................................................................2-1 Vision for Transit in Minot ..................................................................................................................... 2-1 Elements of the Complete Transit System .................................................................................... 2-3 Service Allocation and Design Principles .......................................................................................... 2-7 Service Allocation Goals................................................................................................................. 2-7 Service Design Guidelines .............................................................................................................. 2-9 3 Short-Term Service Plan ...................................................................................................3-1 Route Descriptions .................................................................................................................................
  • File 4 P. 48 • My Super Dense Crush Load Commute Every Morning I

    File 4 P. 48 • My Super Dense Crush Load Commute Every Morning I

    File 4 p. 48 • My Super Dense Crush Load Commute Every morning I start the day by squeezing into a train that is ‘super dense crush loaded’. These local trains carry more than twice the number of passengers than their capacity, which means I am crushed and sandwiched between at least eight other women from all sides1, hugging me from head to toe. […] There were times during my college days when I was almost hanging on the footboard2 of my train, trying to get myself inside the heavily loaded compartment. I would scream to the highest of my voice asking the women ahead to keep moving in to allow me and other women hanging outside to get inside the compartment. We don’t have any concept of doors closing before the train starts moving away from the station. This is what is really shocking about the world’s busiest railway lines here. […] Another amazing aspect of travelling on the local trains is that people have to board trains even before they halt at the station. I usually time my jump, leap inside the compartment holding the door handles, or even another commuter’s arm, then grab a seat before anyone else. Once this is done it is a feeling of great accomplishment! Kinjal Pandya-Wagh, bbc.co.uk, August 2016 1. Mumbai’s suburban trains have ladies’ carriages. 2. marchepied File 4 p. 49 • Chai Chai India can have no better symbol for national integration than the railways. The railway reservation form doesn’t ask you anything beyond your name, age, gender and address.