State Facilities Action Plan
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Town Standards Index (Select to View) • Collector Street Cross Section
Town Standards Index (select to view) • Collector Street Cross Section - Standard #3.00 • Collector Street Cross Section w/ Bike Lanes - Standard #3.01 • Local Street Cross Section - Standard #3.02 • Local Street Cross Section (No Curb) - Standard #3.03 • Industrial Street Cross Section - Standard #3.04 • 4-Lane Divided Street Cross Section - Standard #3.05 • Alley Cross Section - Standard #3.06 • Greenway Asphalt Path Cross Section - Standard #3.07 • Utility Trench Pavement Repair - Standard #3.08 • Typical Pavement Repair - Standard #3.09 • Standard Driveway Turnout - Standard #3.12 • Standard Curb & Gutter - Standard #3.13 • Median Curb - Standard #3.14 • Rolled Curb - Standard #3.15 • Residential Cul-de-sac - Standard #3.16 • Barricade for Dead End Streets - Standard #3.17 • Standard Concrete Drop Inlet - Standard #4.10 • Standard Brick Drop Inlet - Standard #4.11 • Standard Drop Inlet Grates - Standard #4.12 • Standard Concrete Catch Basin - Standard #4.13A • Standard Concrete Catch Basin - Standard #4.13B • Standard Brick Catch Basin - Standard #4.14A • Standard Brick Catch Basin - Standard #4.14B • HDPE Pipe - Standard #4.16 • Trench Installation for HDPE - Standard #4.16A • Polypropylene Pipe - Standard #4.17 • Trench Installation for Polypropylene - Standard #4.17A • Dissimilar Pipe Connections to RCP - Standard #4.18 • Curb Ramps - Standard #5.00 • Curb Ramps - New Development - Standard #5.01 • Curb Ramps - New Development - Standard #5.02 • Curb Ramps - New Development - Standard #5.03 • Curb Ramps - Retrofit - Standard #5.04 -
Annual Concurrency Report
pra Report Ciry of June 2016 Olympia I TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 .2 A. Actual Traffic Growth and Six Year Forecast .J B. Level of Service (LOS) Analysis .8 Conclusions .......9 A. Conformance with Adopted LOS Standards 9 B. Marginal Projects.... .....10 C. Level of Service on State Facilities .....1 I Summary .... ....1 1 Appendix A: Maps of Traffic Growth in the Four Concurrency Analysis Zones..... 1 Appendix B: Intersection Level of Service Analysis vs. Project Needs .. Appendix C: Unsignalized Intersection Warrant Analysis ................. vll Appendix D: Link Level of Service Analysis .....................xi Olympia 2OtS Concurrency Report INTRODUCTION ln 1995, the City of Olympia (City), in compliance with the Growth Management Act's (GMA) internal consistency requirement, adopted the Transportation Concurrency Ordinance (No. 55aO). One objective of GMA's internal consistency requirement is to maintain concurrency between a jurisdiction's infrastructure investments and growth. Following this objective, the City's Ordinance prohibits development approval if the development causes the Level of Service (LOS) on a transportation facility to declíne below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the Olympia's Comprehensive Plon (Comp Plan). The ordinance contains two features, as follows: a Development is not allowed unless (or until) transportation improvements or strategies to provide for the impacts of the development are in place at the time of development or withín six years of the time the project comes on line. a Annual review of the concurrency management system is required along with the annual review and update of the Copital Facilíties Plon (CFP) and transportation element of the Comp Plan. -
Transportation Concurrency Requirements Level of Service
Assistance Bulletin Transportation Concurrency Snohomish County #59 Planning and Development Services Requirements Updated April 2016 WWW.SNOCO.ORG Keyword: Assistance Bulletins Concurrency Visit us at : 2nd Floor Robert J. Drewel Bldg. Q: What is Chapter 30.66B SCC? 3000 Rockefeller Avenue Everett, WA 98201 A: Chapter 30.66B SCC is the chapter in Title 30 SCC, the County’s Unified Develop- 425-388-3311 ment Code (UDC), that contains the Concurrency and Road Impact Mitigation require- 1-800-562-4367, ext. 3311 ments relating to new development. Chapter 30.66B SCC includes requirements for con- currency to comply with the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) and re- quires developers to mitigate the traffic impacts on the County’s arterial road network from new development. Q: What is the concurrency management system? A: The Snohomish County concurrency management system provides the basis for moni- toring the traffic impacts of land development, and helps determine if transportation im- provements are keeping pace with the prevailing rate of land development. In order for a development to be granted approval it must obtain a concurrency determination. Q: What is a “ concurrency determination” ? A: Each development application is reviewed to determine whether or not there is enough PERMIT SUBMITTAL capacity on the County’s arterial road network in the vicinity of the development to ac- Appointment commodate the new traffic that will be generated by the development, without having traf- 425.388.3311 fic congestion increase to levels beyond that allowed in Chapter 30.66B SCC. Simply Ext. 2790 stated, if there is sufficient arterial capacity, the development is deemed concurrent and can proceed. -
Sr 826/Palmetto Expressway Project Development & Environment Study from Sr 93/I‐75 to Golden Glades Interchange
METHODOLOGY LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING SR 826/PALMETTO EXPRESSWAY PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT STUDY FROM SR 93/I‐75 TO GOLDEN GLADES INTERCHANGE SYSTEMS INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION REPORT (SIMR) Financial Project ID: 418423‐1‐22‐01 FAP No.: 4751 146 P / ETDM No.: 11241 Miami‐Dade County Prepared For: FDOT District Six 1000 NW 111th Avenue Miami, Florida 33172 Prepared by: Reynolds, Smith and Hills, Inc. 6161 Blue Lagoon Drive, Suite 200 Miami, Florida 33126 March 9, 2012 SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study METHODOLOGY LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING MEMORANDUM DATE: March 9, 2012 TO: Phil Steinmiller, AICP Florida Department of Transportation District Six Interchange Review Committee Chair FROM: Dat Huynh, PE FDOT, District Six Project Manager SUBJECT: Methodology Letter of Understanding (MLOU) SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study Systems Interchange Modification Report (SIMR) FDOT, District Six FM No.: 418423‐1‐22‐01 Dear Interchange Coordinator: This document serves as the Methodology Letter of Understanding (MLOU) between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Systems Planning Office, Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (Cooperating Approval Authority) and FDOT District Six Interchange Review Committee (Applicant) regarding the preparation of a Systems Interchange Modification Report (SIMR) for a portion of SR 826/Palmetto Expressway located in Miami‐Dade County, Florida. The SIMR relates to the proposed improvements for the segment of SR 826 between I‐75 and the Golden Glades Interchange (GGI). The project proposes to widen SR 826 mainline from I‐75 to Golden Glades Interchange to provide additional lanes that could serve as general use lanes or special use lanes (managed lanes). -
( Crcp ) Transverse Construction Header Joint
OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD REVISIONS T DESCRIPTION DATE N . E T M I E C A ONG L L S P R E R ' 26'-0'' CONTINUOUS REINFORCED LONGITUDINAL CONSTRUCTION JOINT DIRECTION L O A A 12 SEE DETAIL B F AN B CONCRETE PAVEMENT ( SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET ) OF TRAFFIC SEE DETAIL A C . L I S 12'-0'' 14'-0'' F PAVEMENT DESIGN DATA - ( C.R.C.P. ) T T I N R JOINTED CONC. I M E E W C C W SHOULDER 90 I L FIRST BAR Y LONGITUDINAL L FIRST BAR T V L R TRANS. NO. LBS. JOINT DESIGN SLAB BAR SPACING DES. #5 BAR OF PER 2 / TYPE THICK- SIZE (%) RAMP T LENGTH BARS SY 90 TAPER T JUNCTURE CC RAMP NESS W Y ECTION OINTED P DIR DOWEL J IC A1 8" 25'-1 1/2" #6 4 7/8" 7 3/4" 40 25.3 0.71 F TRAFF O T TRANSVERSE BAR LENGTH W MINUS W MINUS N A 9" 25'-0 3/16" #6 5 9/16" 6 11/16" 46 27.7 0.72 " E ETE OR 1/2 BAR DIA. 1/2 BAR DIA. 0 - NCR M O ' INTED C NT B 10" 24'-11 3/4" #7 5 11/16" 8 1/8" 38 30.2 0.73 JO EME E ETE PAV TYPICAL DOWEL JOINTED ENTRANCE RAMP CONCR 26 HALT ) B1 11" 25'-1 1/2" #7 4 13/16" 7 3/8" 42 33.5 0.73 SP T A ANS AV ( SEE PL 26'-0" WIDE PAVEMENT SECTION P N . -
Rmanent Steel Plates 3" Xo.D‰" 6 " 6 " ( T Y P
````` (Opposite Handle Not Shownfor Lifting Handle Steel TubeSleeve 6" x‰" Permanent Steel Plates 3" xO.D‰" 6" 6" (Typ.) Bollard Clarity) Clear (Typ.) ˆ" O.D. x‰"Steel 2 •"x A Tube Post 3" (Typ.) REMOVABLE SQUAREBOLLARD 2" (Typ.) 6" (Typ.) (Typ.) …" Rad. Two Each-6"x‰"SteelPlates SECTION A-A Yellow Reflective Lane Width+1' Sheeting (Typ.) PLAN BOLLARD PLACEMENT 2" Wide ‚" ELEVATION VIEW 1 •" 1 •" 1 ƒ" •" ƒ " Slot 18" 1" Bikeway | ƒ " ‚ " ‚" 6" (Typ.) ‚" 1 • " ‚" ‚ " Bollard Removable Steel Plate Rod (Typ.) Solid Steel ‰" dia. Handles Lifting Lane Width+1' A (Opposite Handle Not Shownfor Lifting Handle 6" x‰" Steel Plates 6" 6" (Typ.) Clarity) B Nominal Steel Steel Pipe 3" Nominal Pipe Post Sleeve REMOVABLE ROUNDBOLLARD 2 •" 2" (Typ.) Clear ‘" Bollard Permanent (Typ.) …" Rad. Two Each-6"x‰"SteelPlates SECTION B-B PLAN ‚" 1 Š" •" 1 Œ" 1 —" 1" ƒ " Slot Bollards (Typ.) ƒ " ‚ " ‚" See DETAIL"A" Š" Permanent Bollard (Typ.) 1 • " ‚" ‚ " Steel Plate Removable Steel Rod(Typ.) ‰" dia.Solid BOLLARD PLACEMENT B PLAN VIEW Note: PlacePadlockon | the SideFacingAway Bikeway From Intersection. Lifting HandlesNotShownforClarity roadwayClearZone. belocatedoutsidethe * NOTE:Bollardsshould 30' (min.) From Pavement Edge Unless Otherwise Shown on the Plans * | Roadway 1'-0" PLAN VIEW DETAIL "A" 1'-0" shall beomitted.Encasepostsdirectlyinconcrete. Bollards, exceptthatthesteelplates,sleevesandliftinghandles PERMANENT BOLLARDS:PermanentBollardsshallbethesameasRemovable (drawn seamlesstubes&plates),B211(rods),andF901(bolts). meeting thefollowingASTMSpecifications:B209(plate),210or241 -
Concrete Joints
THE CITY OF GALVESTON CONCRETE JOINTS SECTION 02523 CONCRETE JOINTS PART 1 G E N E R A L 1.01 SECTION INCLUDES A. Joints for concrete paving; concrete sidewalks; and curbs, and curb and gutter. B. Saw-cutting existing concrete or asphalt pavements for new joints. 1.02 UNIT PRICES A. No separate payment will be made for concrete joints under this Section. Include payment in unit price for Concrete Paving. B. No separate payment will be made for formed or sawed street pavement contraction joints and longitudinal weakened plane joints. Include payment in unit price for Concrete Paving. C. No separate payment will be made for joints or sawcutting for Curb, Curb and Gutter; Concrete Sidewalks; Wheelchair Ramps; and Concrete Driveways. Include payment in unit price for Curb and Gutter; Concrete Sidewalks; Wheelchair Ramps; and Concrete Driveways. 1.03 SUBMITTALS A. Submit product data and samples in accordance with requirements of all sections and provisions of these specifications. B. Submit product data for joint sealing compound and proposed sealing equipment for approval. C. Submit samples of dowel cup, metal supports, and deformed metal strip for approval. PART 2 P R O D U C T S 2.01 MATERIALS A. Board Expansion Joint Material: Filler board of selected stock. Use wood of density and type as follows: 1. Clear, all-heart cypress weighing no more than 40 pounds per cubic foot, after being oven dried to constant weight. 02523-1 THE CITY OF GALVESTON CONCRETE JOINTS 2. Clear, all-heart redwood weighing no more than 30 pounds per cubic foot, after being oven dried to constant weight. -
Chapter 3. Driveways, Sidewalks, and Other Non- Motorized Facilities
CHAPTER 3. DRIVEWAYS, SIDEWALKS, AND OTHER NON- MOTORIZED FACILITIES 3.1 Driveways This section provides driveway standards for connections to public and private roads. It is not the intent of these Standards to govern design or location of driveways on private property except where they connect to the road right-of-way. No new driveway connection shall be constructed which does not conform to this chapter and minimum sight distance criteria established in 2.12 and 2.13. A. Dimensions, slope, and detail shall be as indicated in Figures 3-003, through 3-009, as further specified in the following subsections. See Section 2.13 for entering sight distance and 2.12 for stopping sight distance requirements. B. New Driveways Requirements: 1. Driveways directly giving access to arterials will be denied if alternate access is available. 2. Maintenance of driveway approaches shall be the responsibility of the owner whose property they serve. 3. Driveways shall be paved with asphalt, or approved surface, between the edge of the paved surface and the right-of-way line, except when on curb and gutter section roadways. See Figure 3-003. 4. For driveways crossing an open ditch section, culverts shall be adequately sized to carry anticipated storm water flows and in no case be less than 12 inches in diameter, and at a minimum the culvert shall be equal to or larger than existing pipes within 500 feet upstream. Pipe should be long enough to allow for the minimum 3:1 beveled ends, figure 7-001. The property owner making the installation shall be responsible for determining proper pipe size. -
A83c9c5f-7Ef0-4B18-A0df-60674Ef940e5
TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................................. 2 PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN ................................................................................................................................... 2 STUDY AREA ................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUME CONDITIONS .................................................................................................... 2 ESTIMATE OF SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC ................................................................................................................................. 3 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT ................................................................................................................... 5 ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................................. 7 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 - TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY ROADWAY NETWORK SEGMENTS ..................................................................................... -
Transportation Concurrency Review
Transportation Concurrency Review December 30, 2019 TO: Eric Shjarback, PE City Engineer Anacortes Public Works Engineering FROM: Andrew Bratlien, PE SUBJECT: Anacortes 2019 Citywide LOS Summary INTRODUCTION This memorandum describes the method and assumptions of the 2019 Anacortes transportation concurrency model development process. It summarizes the results of the 2019 and 2025 transportation Level of Service analysis and identifies transportation improvement project recommendations. CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT BACKGROUND Concurrency is mandated under the 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA) passed by the Washington State legislature to address and mitigate problems associated with growth. The GMA requires that transportation improvements or strategies necessary to accommodate development must be made concurrently with land development. Concurrency requires transportation improvements to be either (a) in place at the time of development or (b) that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements within six years of development (RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b)). Transportation concurrency requires that the transportation impacts of land use development actions do not reduce transportation Level of Service (LOS) below the responsible agency’s adopted LOS standards. If it is determined during the development review process that the proposed land use action would reduce LOS below the adopted standard, the development must be modified to reduce its transportation impact or provide corrective transportation improvements. Transportation improvements, which may include project funding, must be identified and programmed within a six-year period from development permitting. Should any of these requirements fail to be met, the development proposal cannot be granted approval. EXISTING CONDITIONS Travel Demand Model Recalibration The Anacortes travel demand model represents the most current planning-level traffic forecasting tool for the City of Anacortes. -
Detail of Expansion Joint Various Examples for Use
REV. 7-1-72: CHANGED DEPARTMENT NAME. REV. 1-1-76: CHANGED DWG. NO. EXPANSION GRASS PLOT FROM P-S-7a(68) TO RP-S-7. JOINT EXPANSION JOINT POLE REV. 5-14-87: ADDED EXPANSION JOINTS BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK. EXPANSION REV. 4-15-91: REDREW, RENAMED JOINT AND REORGANIZED SHEET. MOVED 1 INFORMATION REGARDING CONCRETE STEPS TO DWG. NO. RP-S-8. SIDEWALK GRASS PLOT SIDEWALK REV. 7-29-96: CHANGED GENERAL NOTE G . EXPANSION JOINT REV. 5-7-13: ADDED MAIL BOX SIDEWALK EXPANSION DETAIL. SIDEWALK JOINT SIDEWALK REV. 6-4-13: REVISED NOTES WALKWAY C AND G AND ADDED NOTE L. EXPANSION GRASS JOINT PLOT VARIOUS EXAMPLES FOR USE OF PREMOLDED FIBER EXPANSION JOINTS IN SIDEWALKS EXPANSION JOINTS ARE TO BE PLACED 25 TO 30 FEET FOOTNOTE APART DEPENDING ON TRANSVERSE JOINT MARKINGS. 1 LEAVE SQUARE CUTOUT IN SIDEWALK. IT WILL BE DIAMETER OF POLE PLUS SIXTEEN INCHES. IT WILL BE BORDERED BY HALF EXPANSION TRANSVERSE JOINT MARKINGS EXPANSION INCH EXPANSION JOINT. JOINT JOINT MAIL BOX 2 LEAVE 12"X12" OPENING IN SIDEWALK OPENING FOR MAIL BOX POST. ORIENT BOXES TO 2 FACE THE DIRECTION OF ONCOMING TRAFFIC. EDGE OF MAIL BOX SHALL NOT A OVERHANG THE CURB. GRASS PLOT CURB 12" 41"-45" GENERAL NOTES CURB 12" A FOR SPECIFICATIONS SEE "STANDARD 5 FOOT SIDEWALK WITH GRASS PLOT SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION" OF THE TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. A B WHERE IT BECOMES NECESSARY TO REMOVE PARTS OF EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALKS EXPANSION JOINTS ARE TO BE PLACED 25 TO SECTION A-A OR RAMPS, THE RESULTING EDGES SHALL 30 FEET APART DEPENDING ON TRANSVERSE BE CUT TO A NEAT LINE, AND ANY JOINT MARKINGS AND THE NEED TO MATCH OFFSETS IN SUCH LINES SHALL BE MADE CURB EXPANSION JOINT WHERE SIDEWALK IS MAIL BOX DETAIL AT RIGHT ANGLES. -
Guide for Design of Jointed Concrete Pavements for Streets and Local Roads
ACI 325.12R-02 Guide for Design of Jointed Concrete Pavements for Streets and Local Roads Reported by ACI Committee 325 Jack A. Scott Norbert J. Delatte Chairman Secretary David J. Akers W. Charles Greer Robert W. Piggott Richard O. Albright John R. Hess David W. Pittman William L. Arent Mark K. Kaler Steven A. Ragan Jamshid M. Armaghani Roger L. Larsen* Raymond S. Rollings Donald L. Brogna Gary R. Mass Kieran G. Sharp Neeraj J. Buch* William W. Mein Terry W. Sherman Archie F. Carter James C. Mikulanec James M. Shilstone, Sr. Lawrence W. Cole* Paul E. Mueller Bernard J. Skar Russell W. Collins Jon I. Mullarky Shiraz D. Tayabji Mohamed M. Darwish Theodore L. Neff Suneel N. Vanikar Al Ezzy Emmanuel B. Owusu-Antwi David P. Whitney Luis A. Garcia Dipak T. Parekh James M. Willson Nader Ghafoori Thomas J. Pasko, Jr. Dan G. Zollinger* Ben Gompers Ronald L. Peltz *Significant contributors to the preparation of this document. The committee would also like to acknowledge the efforts of Robert V. Lopez and Dennis Graber. This guide provides a perspective on a balanced combination of pavement analyzing an elastic slab over a dense liquid subgrade, as modified by field thickness, drainage, and subbase or subgrade materials to achieve an observations and extended to include fatigue concepts. acceptable pavement system for streets and local roads. Such concrete pavements designed for low volumes of traffic (typically less than 100 Keywords: dowel; flexural strength; joint; pavement; portland cement; trucks per day, one way) have historically provided satisfactory perfor- quality control; reinforced concrete; slab-on-grade; slipform; subbase; mance when proper support and drainage conditions exist.