DOCSLIB.ORG

Us 17 Corridor Study, Brunswick County Phase Iii (Functional Designs)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Us 17 Corridor Study, Brunswick County Phase Iii (Functional Designs) US 17 CORRIDOR STUDY, BRUNSWICK COUNTY PHASE III (FUNCTIONAL DESIGNS) FINAL REPORT R-4732 Prepared For: North Carolina Department of Transportation Prepared By: PBS&J 1616 East Millbrook Road, Suite 310 Raleigh, NC 27609 October 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND..............................................1-1 1.1 US 17 as a Strategic Highway Corridor...........................................................1-1 1.2 Study Objectives..............................................................................................1-2 1.3 Study Process...................................................................................................1-3 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................2-6 2.1 Turning Movement Volumes...........................................................................2-7 2.2 Capacity Analysis............................................................................................2-7 3 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS..............................................................3-19 3.1 Turning Movement Volumes.........................................................................3-19 3.2 Capacity Analysis..........................................................................................3-19 4 DEFINITION OF ALTERNATIVES .............................................4-30 4.1 Intersection Improvements Alternative..........................................................4-31 4.2 Superstreet Alternative...................................................................................4-44 4.3 Freeway Alternative.......................................................................................4-61 5 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES ..........................................5-80 5.1 Corridor Traffic Simulation ...........................................................................5-80 5.2 Environmental and Community Impacts .......................................................5-82 6 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT..............................................................6-84 6.1 Steering and Working Committee Meetings..................................................6-84 6.2 Public Workshops ..........................................................................................6-87 7 CONCEPTUAL ALTERNATIVES RECOMMENDATIONS....7-99 8 FUNCTIONAL DESIGNS .............................................................8-108 8.1 Design Results.............................................................................................8-108 8.2 Construction Staging Plans..........................................................................8-108 LIST OF TABLES Table 5-1: SimTraffic Network Evaluation Results ..................................................... 5-81 Table 6-1: Alternative Preferences ............................................................................... 6-95 Table 7-1: Existing Median Break Closure Locations (Superstreet Alternative)........ 7-100 Table 7-2: Year 2030 Intersection Volumes................................................................ 7-102 Table 7-3: 3-year Intersection Crash History............................................................... 7-105 US 17 Corridor Study, Brunswick County Phase III Report October 2005 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1: US 17 Corridor Study Area........................................................................... 1-4 Figure 1-2: North Carolina Strategic Highway Corridors ............................................... 1-5 Figure 2-1: Existing Conditions Evaluation (1)............................................................. 2-10 Figure 2-2: Existing Conditions Evaluation (2)............................................................. 2-11 Figure 2-3: Existing Conditions Evaluation (3)............................................................. 2-12 Figure 2-4: Existing Conditions Evaluation (4)............................................................. 2-13 Figure 2-5: Existing Conditions Evaluation (5)............................................................. 2-14 Figure 2-6: Existing Conditions Evaluation (6)............................................................. 2-15 Figure 2-7: Existing Conditions Evaluation (7)............................................................. 2-16 Figure 2-8: Existing Conditions Evaluation (8)............................................................. 2-17 Figure 2-9: Existing Conditions Evaluation (9)............................................................. 2-18 Figure 3-1: No-Build Conditions Evaluation (1)........................................................... 3-21 Figure 3-2: No-Build Conditions Evaluation (2)........................................................... 3-22 Figure 3-3: No-Build Conditions Evaluation (3)........................................................... 3-23 Figure 3-4: No-Build Conditions Evaluation (4)........................................................... 3-24 Figure 3-5: No-Build Conditions Evaluation (5)........................................................... 3-25 Figure 3-6: No-Build Conditions Evaluation (6)........................................................... 3-26 Figure 3-7: No-Build Conditions Evaluation (7)........................................................... 3-27 Figure 3-8: No-Build Conditions Evaluation (8)........................................................... 3-28 Figure 3-9: No-Build Conditions Evaluation (9)........................................................... 3-29 Figure 4-1: Permitted Movements - Intersection Improvements Alternative................ 4-32 Figure 4-2: Intersection Improvements Alternative Evaluation (1)............................... 4-35 Figure 4-3: Intersection Improvements Alternative Evaluation (2)............................... 4-36 Figure 4-4: Intersection Improvements Alternative Evaluation (3)............................... 4-37 Figure 4-5: Intersection Improvements Alternative Evaluation (4)............................... 4-38 Figure 4-6: Intersection Improvements Alternative Evaluation (5)............................... 4-39 Figure 4-7: Intersection Improvements Alternative Evaluation (6)............................... 4-40 Figure 4-8: Intersection Improvements Alternative Evaluation (7)............................... 4-41 Figure 4-9: Intersection Improvements Alternative Evaluation (8)............................... 4-42 Figure 4-10: Intersection Improvements Alternative Evaluation (9)............................. 4-43 Figure 4-11: Permitted Movements - Superstreet Alternative....................................... 4-44 Figure 4-12: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (1)...................................................... 4-47 Figure 4-13: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (2)...................................................... 4-48 Figure 4-14: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (3)...................................................... 4-49 Figure 4-15: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (4)...................................................... 4-50 Figure 4-16: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (5)...................................................... 4-51 Figure 4-17: Superstreet Alternative Evealuation (6).................................................... 4-52 Figure 4-18: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (7)...................................................... 4-53 Figure 4-19: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (8)...................................................... 4-54 Figure 4-20: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (9)...................................................... 4-55 US 17 Corridor Study, Brunswick County Phase III Report October 2005 LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure 4-21: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (10).................................................... 4-56 Figure 4-22: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (11).................................................... 4-57 Figure 4-23: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (12).................................................... 4-58 Figure 4-24: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (13).................................................... 4-59 Figure 4-25: Superstreet Alternative Evaluation (14).................................................... 4-60 Figure 4-26: Permitted Movements -Freeway Alternative ............................................ 4-61 Figure 4-27: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (1).......................................................... 4-64 Figure 4-28: Freeway Conditions Evaluation (2) .......................................................... 4-65 Figure 4-29: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (3).......................................................... 4-66 Figure 4-30: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (4).......................................................... 4-67 Figure 4-31: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (5).......................................................... 4-68 Figure 4-32: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (6).......................................................... 4-69 Figure 4-33: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (7).......................................................... 4-70 Figure 4-34: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (8).......................................................... 4-71 Figure 4-35: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (9).......................................................... 4-72 Figure 4-36: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (10)........................................................ 4-73 Figure 4-37: Freeway Alternative Evaluation (11).......................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GUIDELINES for TIMING and COORDINATING DIAMOND November 2000 INTERCHANGES with ADJACENT TRAFFIC SIGNALS 6
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. TX-00/4913-2 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date GUIDELINES FOR TIMING AND COORDINATING DIAMOND November 2000 INTERCHANGES WITH ADJACENT TRAFFIC SIGNALS 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Nadeem A. Chaudhary and Chi-Leung Chu Report 4913-2 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 No. 7-4913 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Research: Construction Division September 1998 – August 2000 Research and Technology Transfer Section 14. Sponsoring Agency Code P. O. Box 5080 Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Research performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation. Research Project Title: Operational Strategies for Arterial Congestion at Interchanges 16. Abstract This report contains guidelines for timing diamond interchanges and for coordinating diamond interchanges with closely spaced adjacent signals on the arterial. Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) researchers developed these guidelines during a two-year project funded by the Texas Department of Transportation. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Diamond Interchanges, Capacity Analysis, Traffic No restrictions. This document is available to the Signal Coordination, Traffic Congestion, Signalized public through NTIS: Arterials National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161 19. Security Classif.(of this report) 20. Security Classif.(of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 50 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized GUIDELINES FOR TIMING AND COORDINATING DIAMOND INTERCHANGES WITH ADJACENT TRAFFIC SIGNALS by Nadeem A.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide for HOT Lane Development FHWA
    U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration A Guide for HOT LANE DEVELOPMENT A Guide for HOT LANE DEVELOPMENT BY WITH IN PARTNERSHIP WITH U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration PRINCIPAL AUTHORS Benjamin G. Perez, AICP PB CONSULT Gian-Claudia Sciara, AICP PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF WITH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM T. Brent Baker Stephanie MacLachlin PB CONSULT PB CONSULT Kiran Bhatt Carol C. Martsolf KT ANALYTICS PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF James S. Bourgart Hameed Merchant PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF HOUSTON METRO James R. Brown John Muscatell PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Ginger Daniels John O’Laughlin TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Heather Dugan Bruce Podwal COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Charles Fuhs Robert Poole PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF REASON PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE Ira J. Hirschman David Pope PB CONSULT PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF David Kaplan Al Schaufler SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Hal Kassoff Peter Samuel PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF TOLL ROADS NEWSLETTER Kim Kawada William Stockton SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE Tim Kelly Myron Swisher HOUSTON METRO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Stephen Lockwood Sally Wegmann PB CONSULT TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Chapter 1 Hot Lane Concept And Rationale........................................................................2 1.1 HOT lanes Defined .................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Subdivision Street Standards Manual
    TOWN OF MARANA Subdivision Street Standards Manual May 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER & SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE………………………………………………. 1 1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………… 1 1.2 Purpose……………………………………………………………………... 1 1.3 Applicability……………………………………………………………….. 2 2.0 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION AND REGULATIONS…………………….. 2 2.1 Functional Classification………………………………………….………... 2 2.2 Incorporated Regulations Adopted by Reference…………………………... 3 3.0 TRAFFIC STUDIES………………………………………………………………. 3 4.0 STREET LAYOUT AND GEOMETRIC DESIGN………………………………... 4 4.1 Street Layout………………………………………………………………… 4 4.2 Cul-de-sacs………………………………………………………………….. 5 4.3 Design Speed………………………………………………………………... 6 4.4 Design Vehicle…………………………………………………….………… 6 4.5 Horizontal Alignment……………………………………………………….. 7 4.6 Vertical Alignment………………………………………………………….. 7 4.7 Intersection Alignment…………………………………………….………… 8 4.8 Intersection Sight Distance…………………………………………………. 9 4.9 Residential and Commercial Drive Entrances………………………………. 10 4.10 Roadway Superelevation…………………………………………………….. 11 4.11 Roadway Drainage Crossings……………………………………………….. 11 4.12 Mountainous Terrain………………………………………………………… 11 4.13 Environmentally Sensitive Roadways………………………………………. 12 4.14 Alternative Access…………………………………………………………… 12 5.0 RIGHT OF WAY……………………………………………………………………. 13 6.0 ELEMENTS IN THE CROSS SECTION…………………………………………... 14 6.1 Travel Lanes……………………………………………………….………… 14 6.2 Curbing……………………………………………………………………… 14 6.3 Sidewalks………………………………………………………….………… 15 6.4 Shoulders………………………………………………………….………… 16 6.5 Roadside
    [Show full text]
  • Unincorporated Communities Cemeteries
    Brunswick County, North Carolina Final Report t epartmen D opment l Communities Communities 2010 by: eve D ty i Prepared September CemeteriesCemeteries ommun C & ng i Geographic Information Systems Department ann Unincorporated Unincorporated PlPl i & C i D l D Table of Contents BRUNSWICK COUNTY UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES & CEMETERIES INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 2-1 UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES WITH MAP ANTIOCH .................................................................................................................................... 2-8 ASH, PINE LEVEL, and SMITH ................................................................................................. 2-9 BATARORA .............................................................................................................................. 2-10 BELL SWAMP ........................................................................................................................... 2-11 BISHOP ...................................................................................................................................... 2-12 BIVEN* ...................................................................................................................................... 2-13 BOLIVIA .................................................................................................................................... 2-14 BONAPARTE LANDING* ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MDOT Access Management Guidebook
    ReducingTrafficCongestion andImprovingTrafficSafety inMichiganCommunities: THE ACCESSMANAGEMENT GUIDEBOOK COMMUNITYA COMMUNITYB Cover graphics and ROW graphic by John Warbach, Planning & Zoning Center, Inc. Photos by Tom Doyle, Michigan Department of Transportation. Speed Differential graphic by Michigan Department of Transportation. Road Hierarchy graphic by Rossman Martin & Associates, Inc. Reducing Traffic Congestion and Improving Traffic Safety in Michigan Communities: THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT GUIDEBOOK October, 2001 Prepared by the Planning & Zoning Center, Inc. 715 N. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48906-5206 517/886-0555 (tele), www.pzcenter.com Under contract to the Michigan Department of Transportation With the assistance of three Advisory Committees listed on the next page The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Michigan State Transportation Commission or the Michigan Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. Dedication This Guidebook is dedicated to the countless local elected officials, planning and zoning commissioners, zoning administrators, building inspectors, professional planners, and local, county and state road authority personnel who: • work tirelessly every day to make taxpayers investment in Michigan roads stretch as far as it can with the best possible result; and • who try to make land use decisions that build better communities without undermining the integrity of Michigan's road system. D:\word\access\title
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7: Transportation Mode Choice, Safety & Connections
    Chapter 7: Transportation Mode Choice, Safety & Connections Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-2 TRANSPORTATION City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan 2040 INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Transportation Chapter is to guide development, maintenance, and improvement of the community’s transportation network. This Chapter incorporates and addresses the City’s future transportation needs based on the planned future land uses, development areas, housing, parks and trail systems. The City’s transportation network is comprised of several systems including roadways, transit services, trails, railroads and aviation that all work together to move people and goods throughout, and within, the City. This Chapter identifies the existing and proposed transportation system, examines potential deficiencies, and sets investment priorities. The following Chapter plans for an integrated transportation system that addresses each of the following topics in separate sections: • Roadway System 7-1 • Transit Facilities • Bikway & Trail System • Freight & Rail • Aviation The last section of this Chapter provides a summary and implementation section which addresses each of the components of the system, if any additional action within this planning period is expected. The Implementation Plan sets the groundwork for investment and improvements to the transportation network consistent with the goals, analyses, and conclusions of this Plan. As discussed in preceding Chapters of this Comprehensive Plan, the Transportation Chapter is intended to be dynamic and responsive to the City’s planned land uses and development patterns. As the City’s conditions change and improvements occur, this Chapter should be reviewed for consistency with the Plan to ensure that the transportation systems support the City’s ultimate vision for the community through this planning period.
    [Show full text]
  • US 278 Independent Review Report
    US 278 Independent Review May 2021 Contents Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 1 Coordination Efforts ................................................................................................................ 1 Oversight Committee .............................................................................................................. 1 SCDOT ................................................................................................................................... 2 Items of Review and Analysis ................................................................................................. 2 Growth Rate/Future Traffic ..................................................................................................... 2 Crash Data/ Safety ................................................................................................................. 3 Reversible Lanes .................................................................................................................... 4 Preliminary Alternatives and Matrix ........................................................................................ 5 Reasonable Alternatives and Matrix ....................................................................................... 5 Additional New Location Alternatives .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • REVISED AGENDA PUEBLO COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioners’ Chambers, Pueblo County Courthouse 215 West 10Th Street August 19, 2020 5:30 P.M
    REVISED AGENDA PUEBLO COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioners’ Chambers, Pueblo County Courthouse 215 West 10th Street August 19, 2020 5:30 P.M. NOTICE REGARDING COVID-19 (Novel Coronavirus): The Board of County Commissioners implemented temporary operational directives on June 16, 2020 to partially reopen public access to county-owned facilities. Beginning on June 22, 2020, there will be limited seats available for the public to attend Planning Commission meetings in person. Anyone interested in attending a meeting in person may do so by submitting a Meeting Request Form on Pueblo County’s web page, subject to availability of seating. The public may provide written comments prior to the meeting by emailing those comments by 5:00 p.m., on Monday, August 17, 2020, to [email protected]. The meeting will be streamed live on the County’s Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/PuebloCounty/. (The Record: The Planning Department staff memorandum and the application submitted by the applicant for each agenda item and any supplemental information distributed by staff at the meeting are automatically incorporated as part of the Record unless specific objections are raised and sustained at the public hearing. Any additional materials used by the applicant or others in support of or in opposition to a particular agenda item may, at the discretion of the person or entity using the materials, be submitted for inclusion in the Record. Such materials for which a request for inclusion in the Record is made shall, at the discretion of the administrative body, be made a part of the Record. Note: Any materials including documents and/or instruments submitted for inclusion in the Record and admitted by the administrative body must be left with the Clerk.) 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Salisbury/Wicomico Area Long-Range Transportation Plan
    Salisbury/Wicomico Area Long-Range Transportation Plan final report prepared for Salisbury/Wicomico Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Maryland Department of Transportation October 20, 2006 Salisbury/Wicomico Area Long-Range Transportation Plan Salisbury/Wicomico Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Board Members Marvin R. Long, Wicomico County, MPO Chair Rick Pollitt, City of Fruitland, MPO Vice Chair Michael P. Dunn, City of Salisbury Charles Fisher, Tri-County Council for the Lower Eastern Shore of Maryland Luther Hitchens, Town of Delmar, Maryland Mike Nixon, Maryland Department Of Transportation John F. Outten, Town of Delmar, Delaware (Non-Voting) Stevie Prettyman, Wicomico County Ralph Reeb, Delaware Department of Transportation (Non-Voting) Theodore E. Shea II, Wicomico County Barrie P. Tilghman, City of Salisbury Technical Advisory Committee John Redden, Wicomico County Department of Public Works, Chair Ray Birch, City of Salisbury Public Works, Vice Chair Dr. Kwame Arhin, Federal Highway Administration Brad Bellaccico, City of Salisbury Chamber of Commerce, Transportation Subcommittee Bob Bryant, Ocean City/Wicomico County Airport Authority Salisbury/Wicomico Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Salisbury/Wicomico Area Long-Range Transportation Plan Bob Cook, Delmarva Water Transport Advisory Committee, (Ex-Officio) James Dooley, State Highway Administration Tracey Gordy, Maryland Department of Planning Rob Hart, Shore Transit Lenny Howard, Maryland Transit Administration Dan Johnson, Federal Highway Administration
    [Show full text]
  • Access Control
    Access Control Appendix D US 54 /400 Study Area Proposed Access Management Code City of Andover, KS D1 Table of Contents Section 1: Purpose D3 Section 2: Applicability D4 Section 3: Conformance with Plans, Regulations, and Statutes D5 Section 4: Conflicts and Revisions D5 Section 5: Functional Classification for Access Management D5 Section 6: Access Control Recommendations D8 Section 7: Medians D12 Section 8: Street and Connection Spacing Requirements D13 Section 9: Auxiliary Lanes D14 Section 10: Land Development Access Guidelines D16 Section 11: Circulation and Unified Access D17 Section 12: Driveway Connection Geometry D18 Section 13: Outparcels and Shopping Center Access D22 Section 14: Redevelopment Application D23 Section 15: Traffic Impact Study Requirements D23 Section 16: Review / Exceptions Process D29 Section 17: Glossary D31 D2 Section 1: Purpose The Transportation Research Board Access Management Manual 2003 defines access management as “the systematic control of the location, spacing, design, and operations of driveways, median opening, interchanges, and street connections to a roadway.” Along the US 54/US-400 Corridor, access management techniques are recommended to plan for appropriate access located along future roadways and undeveloped areas. When properly executed, good access management techniques help preserve transportation systems by reducing the number of access points in developed or undeveloped areas while still providing “reasonable access”. Common access related issues which could degrade the street system are: • Driveways or side streets in close proximity to major intersections • Driveways or side streets spaced too close together • Lack of left-turn lanes to store turning vehicles • Deceleration of turning traffic in through lanes • Traffic signals too close together Why Access Management Is Important Access management balances traffic safety and efficiency with reasonable property access.
    [Show full text]
  • Downtown Carrollton Rail Station Master Plan
    Credits City Council Becky Miller, Mayor Tim Hayden John Mahalik Pat Malone Matthew Marchant Larry Williams Ron Branson Herb Weidinger Steering Committee Nancy Putnam Janet Mayberry Jack Stotz Craig Simpkins Doug Hrbacek Mark Stokes Dave Oldfield Judy Scamardo Dick Calvert Jim Abadie J Stephen Dean Staff Chris Barton, AICP Tom Hammons, PE Cesar Molina, PE Marc Guy Ravi Shaw, AICP Marcos Fernandez, PE Abbreviations: AAR Association of American Railroads CRT Commuter Rail Transit DART Dallas Area Rapid Transit DCTA Denton County Transportation Authority DFW Dallas / Fort Worth DGNO Dallas Garland Northeastern Railroad BNSF Burling Northern / Santa Fe Railroad FEIS Federal Environmental Impact Statement FTA Federal Transit Administration LRT Light Rail Transit NCTCOG North Central Texas Council of Governments SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer TIRZ Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone TRE Trinity Railway Express Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. Goals and Objectives (Guiding Principles) 3. Existing Conditions 4. Policy Context 5. Case Studies 6. Rail Freight and Passenger Operations 7. Mercer Yard 8. Plan for Passenger and Rail Service 9. Passenger Station Operations 10. Patronage Projections 11. Parking Requirements 12. Planning Framework Concept 13. Program 14. Preliminary Development Review 1. Introduction The Downtown Carrollton Rail Located at the juncture of the connecting Plano with the DFW air- phase, covered in this report, Station Master Plan is intended to Union Pacific, commonly known as port. In May of 2005, The Denton focuses on early development of achieve an integrated vision for a the “Katy”, Cotton Belt, Burlington County Transportation Authority key issues affecting other pas- transit centered community built Northern/Santa Fe (BNSF) and (DCTA) adopted a “locally pre- senger and freight operators, around a key transit hub for the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) ferred alternative” that includes essentially setting the constraints metroplex.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Understanding of State Hwy Access Management Issues
    PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS MANAGEMENT ISSUES Prepared by: Market Research Unit - M.S. 150 Minnesota Department of Transportation 395 John Ireland Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55155 Prepared for: Office of Access Management - M.S. 125 Minnesota Department of Transportation 555 Park Street St. Paul, MN 55103 Prepared with Cook Research & Consulting, Inc. assistance from: Minneapolis, MN Project M-344 JUNE 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. I. INTRODUCTION A. Background ............................................... 1 B. Study Objectives ........................................... 2 C. Methodology .............................................. 4 II. DETAILED FINDINGS ......................................... 7 A. Duluth -- U S Highway 53/State Highway 194 ..................... 7 1. Description of Study Area .................................. 7 2. General Attitudes/Behavior ................................ 7 a. Respondents' Use of Roadway ........................... 8 b. Roadway Purpose ..................................... 8 c. Traffic Flow vs. Access to Businesses ..................... 9 3. Perceived Changes in Study Area .......................... 10 a. Changes to Roadway ................................. 10 b. Changes in Land Use ................................. 11 c. Land Use/Roadway Relationship ........................ 11 4. Roadway Usefulness .................................... 11 a. How Well Does the Road Work? ........................ 11 b. Have You Changed How You Drive the Road? ............. 12 c. Safety/Risks of
    [Show full text]