Scanned Document
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The City of Edinburgh Council Edinburgh LRT Masterplan Feasibility Study Final Report
The City of Edinburgh Council Edinburgh LRT Masterplan Feasibility Study Final Report The City of Edinburgh Council Edinburgh LRT Masterplan Feasibility Study Final Report January 2003 Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd Admiral House, Rose Wharf, 78 East Street, Leeds LS9 8EE Tel +44 (0)113 242 8498 Fax +44 (0)113 242 8573 REP/FI Job number 68772 The City of Edinburgh Council Edinburgh LRT Masterplan Feasibility Study Final Report CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. INTRODUCTION 9 1.1 Scope of the Report 9 1.2 Study Background and Objectives 9 1.3 Transport Trends 10 1.4 Planning Context 10 1.5 The Integrated Transport Initiative 11 1.6 Study Approach 13 1.7 Light Rapid Transit Systems 13 2. PHASE 1 APPRAISAL 18 2.1 Introduction 18 2.2 Corridor Review 18 2.3 Development Proposals 21 2.4 The City of Edinburgh Conceptual Network 22 2.5 Priorities for Testing 23 2.6 North Edinburgh Loop 24 2.7 South Suburban Line 26 2.8 Appraisal of Long List of Corridor Schemes 29 2.9 Phase 1 Findings 47 3. APPROACH TO PHASE 2 50 3.1 Introduction 50 3.2 Technical Issues and Costs 50 3.3 Rolling Stock 54 3.4 Tram Services, Run Times and Operating Costs 55 3.5 Environmental Impact 55 3.6 Demand Forecasting 56 3.7 Appraisal 61 4. NORTH EDINBURGH LOOP 63 4.1 Alignment and Engineering Issues 63 4.2 Demand and Revenue 65 4.3 Environmental Issues 66 4.4 Integration 67 4.5 Tram Operations and Car Requirements 67 4.6 Costs 68 4.7 Appraisal 69 5. -
Guide Signs for Freeways and Expressways Are Primarily Identified by the Name of the Sign Rather Than by an Assigned Sign Designation
2011 Edition Page 235 CHAPTER 2E. GUIDE SIGNS—FREEWAYS AND EXPRESSWAYS Section 2E.01 Scope of Freeway and Expressway Guide Sign Standards Support: 01 The provisions of this Chapter provide a uniform and effective system of signing for high-volume, high- speed motor vehicle traffic on freeways and expressways. The requirements and specifications for expressway signing exceed those for conventional roads (see Chapter 2D), but are less than those for freeway signing. Since there are many geometric design variables to be found in existing roads, a signing concept commensurate with prevailing conditions is the primary consideration. Section 1A.13 includes definitions of freeway and expressway. 02 Guide signs for freeways and expressways are primarily identified by the name of the sign rather than by an assigned sign designation. Guidelines for the design of guide signs for freeways and expressways are provided in the “Standard Highway Signs and Markings” book (see Section 1A.11). Standard: 03 The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to any highway that meets the definition of freeway or expressway facilities. Section 2E.02 Freeway and Expressway Signing Principles Support: 01 The development of a signing system for freeways and expressways is approached on the premise that the signing is primarily for the benefit and direction of road users who are not familiar with the route or area. The signing furnishes road users with clear instructions for orderly progress to their destinations. Sign installations are an integral part of the facility and, as such, are best planned concurrently with the development of highway location and geometric design. -
FINAL REPORT SWLRT Engineering Evaluation of Freight Rail
Submitted to Metropolitan Council Submitted by TranSystems March 21, 2014 FINAL REPORT SWLRT Engineering Evaluation of Freight Rail Relocation Alternatives SWLRT Engineering Evaluation of Freight Rail Relocation Alternatives FINAL REPORT Table of Contents I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... ........... 1 II. Background ............................................................................................................................... ............ 2 A. TC&W Network and Operations ....................................................................................................... 2 B. Freight Rail Industry Changes ........................................................................................................... 4 III. Scope of Engineering Evaluation ....................................................................................................... 6 IV. Review of Past Studies ...................................................................................................................... 7 A. St. Louis Park Railroad Study (March 1999) ...................................................................................... 7 B. TCWR Freight Rail Realignment Study (November 2009) ................................................................. 7 C. Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan (January 2010).................. 7 D. Freight Rail Study – Evaluation of TCWR Routing Alternatives -
In the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION BLACK WARRIOR RIVERKEEPER, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ) ENGINEERS; JON J. CHYTKA, DISTRICT ) COMMANDER, MOBILE DISTRICT; ) NO. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF ) TRANSPORTATION; and JOHN R. ) COOPER, DIRECTOR, ALDOT, ) ) Defendants. ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Plaintiff Black Warrior Riverkeeper, Inc., by and through its undersigned counsel, files this Complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief, stating as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. This action challenges violations of Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act ("Clean Water Act" or "CWA"), as well as the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 ("NEPA"), in connection with Defendant United States Army Corps of Engineers' ("the Corps') September 30, 2013 decision to issue a permit for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States ("Section 404 permit") for the construction of a 1.86- mile segment of the Northern Beltline near Palmerdale, Alabama. When completed, the proposed 52-mile, six-lane Northern Beltline would be a new controlled-access highway between Interstate 459 in Bessemer, Alabama and Interstate 59 in Trussville, Alabama. 2. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires the Corps to issue permits only for those projects that represent the least damaging practicable alternative that will satisfy the project's purpose and need. In determining the least damaging practicable alternative, the Corps must evaluate a number of environmental and economic factors pursuant to CWA regulations and must look at the entire project. 3. The Section 404 permit issued for the Northern Beltline is an improper and illegal segmentation that prevents an objective look at the entire project's impacts and alternatives. -
Project Listing Final
KANSAS CITY METROPOLITAN REGION TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2012-2016 Revision Date: Friday, August 30, 2013 Bistate TIP #: 956004 Juris: JOHNSON COUNTY Location/Improvement: FIXED ROUTE LINE HAUL SERVICE TRANSIT State #: Federal #: County: REGIONAL Type: Vehicle Operations Length (mi): N/A Phase Year of Type Source Cost (IN THOUSANDS) Description: Includes Capital Cost of Contracting, Preventive Maintenance Activities, Obligation Vehicle Purchases, and Miscellaneous Capital Items. Other2010 Federal 5307 $2,125.0 Status: Other2011 Non-Federal LOCAL $2,062.5 Other2013 Federal 5307 $1,950.0 Other2014 Federal 5307 $1,800.0 Other2011 Federal 5307 $1,650.0 Other2012 Federal 5307 $1,650.0 Other2013 Non-Federal LOCAL $760.0 Other2010 Non-Federal LOCAL $531.3 Other2014 Non-Federal LOCAL $450.0 Other2012 Non-Federal LOCAL $412.5 Federal Total: $9,175.0 Non-Federal Total: $4,216.3 Total: $13,391.3 TIP #: 996077 Juris: JOHNSON COUNTY Location/Improvement: I-35 BUS ON SHOULDER TRANSIT State #: Federal #: County: REGIONAL Type: Other (capital) Length (mi): 19.0 Phase Year of Type Source Cost (IN THOUSANDS) Description: I-35 Bus on Shoulder and related activities Obligation Other2004 Federal 5309 $1,500.0 Status: Other2006 Federal 330-KS $397.4 Other2004 Non-Federal STATE-KS $375.0 Other2005 Federal 5309 $300.0 Other2005 Non-Federal STATE-KS $75.0 Federal Total: $2,197.4 Non-Federal Total: $450.0 Total: $2,647.4 TIP #: 996087 Juris: JOHNSON COUNTY Location/Improvement: TRANSPORTATION SERVICE FOR THE JO ROUTES 669/I AND 677/R TRANSIT State #: Federal #: County: REGIONAL Type: Other (Transit) Length (mi): N/A Phase Year of Type Source Cost (IN THOUSANDS) Description: Maintain service on two current routes that provide transportation services to Obligation welfare recipients, eligible low-income individuals, and employees who work in Other2012 Non-Federal LOCAL $124.4 portions of the metropolitan area that are underserved by transit. -
State Agenda Consists of Policy Priorities That Are Critical to the Economic Development Success of Our Region
STATE201 AGENDA8 STATE 2018 AGENDA The Birmingham Business Alliance (BBA) supports policies that will help the region grow in jobs and capital investment. Advocating for legislative priorities that put the Birmingham region in a competitive position increases our ability to attract and retain business and a quality workforce. The BBA’s State Agenda consists of policy priorities that are critical to the economic development success of our region. The BBA advocates for policies and legislation that may require action, as well as closely monitors legislation and issues that stand to positively or negatively impact the business climate of our region. ACTION AGENDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Technology-Based Economic Development The BBA supports the development of a statewide incentive based program for high-growth startups to intentionally foster a strategic approach to accelerate organic growth of these companies in, and recruitment to, the Birmingham region. This complimentary economic development strategy will provide for growth, retention and scale of high- growth startups in the state of Alabama, which will increase the state’s skilled technology workforce, create an attractive ecosystem that boosts entrepreneurship, attract venture capital and better position Alabama to compete with neighboring states. Birmingham Jefferson Civic Center Authority The BBA strongly supports efforts underway by the Birmingham Jefferson Civic Center Authority (BJCCA) to improve Birmingham’s ability to host large-scale conventions, trade shows, sporting and entertainment events by updating and enhancing the convention facilities, modernizing the arena and constructing a new flexible-use stadium at the BJCC. Alabama Drug Discovery Alliance The BBA supports a request for matching funds from the state of $20 million over five years to support the Alabama Drug Discovery Alliance. -
Long Range Transportation Plan 2016
LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.” -- Benjamin Franklin 2016 PENNSYLVANIA LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Message................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Purpose of ‘PA On Track’ .................................................................................................................................................3 History of Transportation Planning in Pennsylvania .........................................................................................................4 Document Navigator ........................................................................................................................................................5 Outreach Summary ................................................................................................................................ 7 Stakeholder Involvement .................................................................................................................................................7 Public Outreach ...............................................................................................................................................................7 Planning Context ................................................................................................................................. -
SPECIAL COMMITTEE on U.S. ROUTE NUMBERING SPRING 2015 REPORT to the STANDING COMMITTEE on HIGHWAYS May 14, 2015
SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON U.S. ROUTE NUMBERING SPRING 2015 REPORT TO THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON HIGHWAYS May 14, 2015 The Special Committee on U.S. Route Numbering met on May 13, 2015, in Cheyenne, WY. Present were the following members: Gregory C Johnson (Chair), Michigan Department of Transportation Mark McConnell, Mississippi Department of Transportation John A. Barton, Texas Department of Transportation (called in by conference phone) Richard M Tetreault, Vermont Agency of Transportation The meeting convened at 5:10 PM with several guests present: Joe Garvey (Agile Assets), Cory Pope (UT), Del McOmie (WY), Rob Effinger (AASHTO), Blake Rindusbacher (ITD), Mark Gieske (MN), Virginia Sullivan (Adventure Cycling), Jim Sayer (Adventure Cycling), John Sepp (Decision Lens), and Jim McDonnell (AASHTO), Paul Degges (TN). Since John Barton, TX is no longer a SCOH member he is therefore no longer eligible to serve on the Special Committee. Del McOmie, WY has indicated his willingness to volunteer and serve as the Region 4 representative. His nomination and appointment will only be official with the approval of his CEO and appointment by the AASHTO President. Mr. McOmie’s appointment will be announced at the appropriate time. The meeting adjourned at 6:00 PM. Respectfully submitted by: Marty Vitale, Secretary USRN USRN Received 26 applications from 13 States and approved the following (some with conditions) 16 U. S. Routes 6 Interstate Routes 4 U.S. Bicycle Routes State Route Description Decision Number ARKANSAS U.S. 412 - The route begins at the junction of US 49 in Affirmative establish as Paragould, Arkansas and travels along the eastern with the a spur edge of the city limits of Paragould on a two-lane condition that undivided roadway on new location. -
RECEIVED Hon
PILLAR AND MULROY, P.C. ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW SUITE 700 312 BOULEVARD OF THE ALLIES PITTSBURGH, PA 15222 TELEPHONE (412) 471-3300 FAX: (412) 471-6068 JOHN A. PILLAR THOMAS M. MULROY December 6, IS'^O " ANTHONY A. SEETHALER, JR. Re: Transamerican Trucking Service, Inc.—Purchase (Portion)— 'Off. Nicklaus Freight Lines, Inc. File No. 1342 RECEIVED Hon. Jerry Rich, Secretary Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission DEC 81990 P. O. Box 3265 SECRETARY'S Gr-HuE Harrisburg, PA 1712 0 Public UtiJity Commission Dear Mr. Rich: We enclose herewith for filing the original and two copies of the application of Transamerican Trucking Service/ Inc. to purchase a portion of the operating rights of Nicklaus Freight Lines, Inc. The filing fee of $350.00 is also enclosed. Please acknowledge receipt on the duplicate copy of this letter of transmittal and return it to the undersigned. If any further information is required, please advise. Very, truly yours JOHN A. PILLAR sw Enclosures cc: Transamerican Trucking Service, Inc William J. Lavelle, Esq. F mm^S5 UP.-190 : Transfer ^Rev 8/88) APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF TRANSFER^ / ' ^ 9c AND EXERCISE OF COMMON OR CONTRACT CARRIER-RIGHTS BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIQNr*-^^-*^ Application of TRANS AMERICAN TRUCKING SERVICE, INC. (Appl icant/Transferee-Buyer) for approval of the transfer and to exercise the right PUC USE ONLY as a common carrier, described at Docket Docket No. /D 1 7 1 3 (common-contract) Folder No. No. A -iO{flOl Folder No. , issued to NICKLAUS FREIGHT LINES, INC (Transferor-Seller) for transportation of property (persons-property) DEC 81990 iSECRETARY'S'OFBIGE Public utility Commission SEE INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING^APPLICATION ym TRANS AMERICAN TRUCKING SERVICE, INC. -
Data Dictionary Location ID Is a Four to Six Digit Count Section Identifier Used to Reference Locations Where Traffic Data Is Collected
Traffic Monitoring Section Data Dictionary Location ID is a four to six digit count section identifier used to reference locations where traffic data is collected. The Location ID can be utilized to access detailed traffic data in the Transportation Data Management System (TDMS) • Four digit count section identifiers (i.e. 7701) are associated with ramps and crossovers on the state highway system (i.e. 7701) • Five digit count section identifier (i.e. 53035) are associate with traffic count section located on roadway sections owned by local agencies • Six digit count section identifiers (i.e. 100007) are associated with mainline roadway segments on the state highway system (i.e. 100007) Definitions of Alpha-Numeric Route Designations Route is the alpha numeric route designation of the highway. The number is the signed route number of the highway appearing on the shield. Interstate (I) represents the networks of access controlled highways that form the National Highway System • Interstates (I) are signed with an Interstate Highway shield US Routes (US) are a nationwide network of roads and highways that form the Federal Highways • US Routes (US)are signed with a US Highway shield State Routes (SR) are roadways that are owned and maintained by the state of Arizona. • State Routes (SR) are signed by the Arizona Route shield The following are Signed Route Qualifiers where: • A is an Alternate Route • B is a Business Route • L Is Loop Route • S is a Spur Route • T is a Truck Route • X is a Temporary Route • Y is a Wye Leg Route • (N) indicates the numerical sequence of a discontinuous route. -
USRN Application Updated 2011
Updated August 1, 2016 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials An Application from the State Highway or Transportation Department of North Carolina for: Elimination of a U.S. (Interstate) Route AASHTO Use Only Establishment of a U.S. (Interstate) Route I-587 (Future) Extension of a U.S. (Interstate) Route Relocation of a U.S. (Interstate) Route Establishment of a U.S. Alternate Route Establishment of a Temporary U.S. Route **Recognition of a Business Route on U.S. (Interstate) Route **Recognition of a By-Pass Route on U.S. Route Between US-64 in Zebulon (Wake County) and US-264 in Greenville (Pitt County) The following states or states are involved: North Carolina • **“Recognition of…”A local vicinity map needed on page 3. On page 6 a short statement to the effect that there are no deficiencies on proposed routing, if true, will suffice. • If there are deficiencies, they should be indicated in accordance with page 5 instructions. • All applications requesting Interstate establishment or changes are subject to concurrence and approval by the FHWA DATE SUBMITTED: September 16, 2016 SUBMIT APPLICATION ELECTRONICALLY TO [email protected] • *Bike Routes: this form is not applicable for US Bicycle Route System The purpose of the United States (U.S.) Numbered Highway System is to facilitate travel on the main interstate highways, over the shortest routes and the best available roads. A route should form continuity of available facilities through two or more states that accommodate the most important and heaviest motor traffic flow in the area. The routes comprising the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways will be marked with its own distinctive route marker shield and will have a numbering system that is separate and apart from the U.S. -
Memphis Regional Freight Infrastructure Plan
Memphis Regional Freight Infrastructure Plan Prepared For: Greater Memphis Chamber March 2010 Report Title Here Contact Information Joseph Waldo Senior Consultant 610-490-2636 [email protected] Table of Contents INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................... 5 CHAPTER 1: MEMPHIS IN THE GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN ................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER 2: MEMPHIS REGIONAL FREIGHT INFRASTRUCTURE INVENTORY ...................................................... 9 CHAPTER 3: MEMPHIS REGIONAL FREIGHT INFRASTRUCTURE EVALUATION .................................................. 10 CHAPTER 4: MEMPHIS REGIONAL FREIGHT INFRASTRUCTURE RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................... 11 Future Developments........................................................................................................................... 13 Memphis Regional Infrastructure Plan Recommendations By State................................................... 15 CHAPTER 1: MEMPHIS IN THE GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN.................................................................... 17 THE GLOBAL ECONOMIC PICTURE .............................................................................................................. 17 The World Economic Outlook .............................................................................................................. 17 Regional Economic Outlook ...............................................................................................................