DOCSLIB.ORG

A Framework for Modeling High Occupancy Toll Lanes in Florida

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

FSUTMS-Cube Framework A Framework for Modeling High Occupancy Toll Lanes in Florida Draft Final Report prepared for Florida Department of Transportation Systems Planning Office February 2010 Final report FSUTMS-Cube Framework A Framework for Modeling High Occupancy Toll Lanes in Florida Draft Final Report prepared for Florida Department of Transportation Systems Planning Office prepared by The Corradino Group, Inc. 200 S. Fifth St., Suite 300 N. Louisville, Kentucky 40202 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2457 Care Dr., Suite 101 Tallahassee, Florida 32308 December 2009 FSUTMS-Cube Framework High-Occupancy Toll Lane Models Table of Contents 1.0 Subtask-1: Literature Review and Survey of Current Practice ............................ 1-1 1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Road Pricing Definitions ...................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Types of Road Pricing ........................................................................................... 1-2 1.3.1 Toll Roads .................................................................................................. 1-2 1.3.2 Congestion Pricing ................................................................................... 1-3 1.3.3 Hot Lanes .................................................................................................. 1-3 1.3.4 Area Charges ........................................................................................... 1-3 1.3.5 Cordon Charges ....................................................................................... 1-3 1.3.6 Vehicle Use Fees ....................................................................................... 1-3 1.3.7 Parking Congestion Fees ......................................................................... 1-4 1.4 Setting Road Pricing ............................................................................................. 1-4 1.4.1 Static ........................................................................................................... 1-4 1.4.2 Variable ...................................................................................................... 1-4 1.4.3 Dynamic .................................................................................................... 1-4 1.5 Implementation Types .......................................................................................... 1-4 1.6 Travel Impacts ....................................................................................................... 1-5 1.7 Characteristics of HOT Lanes .............................................................................. 1-6 1.8 Current HOT Managed Lane Modeling Practice in the United States .......... 1-8 1.8.1 Florida Turnpike Enterprise ................................................................... 1-8 1.8.2 I-394 MnPASS Model ............................................................................... 1-8 1.8.3 SANDAG Model ...................................................................................... 1-9 1.8.4 DRCOG Model ......................................................................................... 1-9 1.8.5 NCRTPB Model ........................................................................................ 1-9 1.8.6 Portland Model ......................................................................................... 1-10 1.8.7 SACMET Model ....................................................................................... 1-10 1.8.8 Other Managed Lane Models ................................................................. 1-10 1.9 Discussion of Approach to HOT Lanes Modeling ........................................... 1-11 1.9.1 Toll Versus Free at Mode Choice ........................................................... 1-11 1.9.2 Toll Versus Free at Highway Assignment ............................................ 1-11 1.9.3 Preliminary Recommendations .............................................................. 1-12 2.0 Sub-Task 2: Develop Prototype Model .................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Overview ................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Model Structure ..................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2.1 Trip Generation Sub-model .................................................................... 2-1 2.2.2 Network ..................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2.3 Mode Choice ............................................................................................. 2-2 2.2.4 Time-of-Day ............................................................................................. 2-2 2.2.5 Toll Modeling ........................................................................................... 2-3 Florida DOT, Systems Planning Office i FSUTMS-Cube Framework High-Occupancy Toll Lane Models Table of Contents (continued) 2.2.6 High Occupancy Requirements ............................................................. 2-7 2.2.7 General Software Approach ................................................................... 2-11 3.0 Sub-Task 3: Sensitivity Analysis .............................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Lane Configuration Alternatives ........................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Demand Alternatives ............................................................................................ 3-1 3.3 Model Structure ..................................................................................................... 3-2 3.4 Results of Model Runs .......................................................................................... 3-3 3.5 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 3-4 Appendix A – List of HOT Lanes Projects Appendix B – Iterations of Estimate Toll List of References I:\Projects\3778-02\wp\FSUTM-Cube Framework Ph III Draft Final HOT Lanes.docx Florida DOT, Systems Planning Office ii FSUTMS-Cube Framework High-Occupancy Toll Lane Models List of Tables 1-1 Comparing Road Pricing Objectives .......................................................................... 1-2 1-2 Appropriate Scale of Pricing Strategies ..................................................................... 1-5 1-3 Summary of Fee Collection Options .......................................................................... 1-6 2-1 Toll Values for a Basic Freeway Segment .................................................................. 2-7 2-2 Travel Time Values for Person Trips, Southeast Florida Travel Time Values for Core Markets ........................................................................................................... 2-8 2-3 Travel Time Values for Person Trips, Southeast Florida Travel Time Values by Travel Demand Model Trip Purpose .................................................................... 2-9 2-4 Travel Time Values for Person Trips, Southeast Florida Travel Time Values by Time of Day .............................................................................................................. 2-9 2-5 Toll Value for Saved Time ........................................................................................... 2-10 2-6 Iterations Required for Convergence ......................................................................... 2-12 3-1 Lane Configuration Alternatives for the Olympus Model ...................................... 3-2 3-2 Alternatives, Demand Levels and Toll Values ......................................................... 3-4 Florida DOT, Systems Planning Office iii FSUTMS-Cube Framework High-Occupancy Toll Lane Models List of Figures 2-1 A Supply-Demand Diagram for Congestion Pricing ............................................... 2-4 2-2 Toll and V/C Relationship for a BPR Function ........................................................ 2-6 2-3 MnPass Diversion Curve ............................................................................................. 2-11 2-4 Relation between Relative Gap and Number of Iterations ..................................... 2-12 2-5 Volume Changes vs. Toll Iteration ............................................................................. 2-13 3-1 General Model Structure for All Periods ................................................................... 3-3 Florida DOT, Systems Planning Office iv FSUTMS-Cube Framework High-Occupancy Toll Lane Models 1.0 Subtask-1: Literature Review and Survey of Current Practice 1.1 Overview The Corradino Group has been charged with studying how High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes are being modeled throughout the US, and developing a framework for modeling them in the context of the Florida Standard Transportation Urban Model Structure (FSUTMS). The study will develop a prototype model using the Olympus training model. It will define data requirements, and will suggest methods and parameters. Sensitivity tests will be conducted with the prototype model so the reasonableness of the model results can be judged. In the past several years HOT lanes have garnered an increasing amount of attention in the US as congestion on freeways increases and funding becomes scarce. The 95 Express project
Recommended publications
  • Vehicular Safety and Operations Assessment of Reserved Lanes Using Microscopic Simulation

    Vehicular Safety and Operations Assessment of Reserved Lanes Using Microscopic Simulation

    Vehicular Safety and Operations Assessment of Reserved Lanes using Microscopic Simulation Chao Li A Thesis in The Department of Building, Civil, and Environmental Engineering Presented in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Applied Science in Civil Engineering at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada Fall 2016 © Chao Li, 2016 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY School of Graduate Studies This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: Chao Li Vehicular Safety and Operations Assessment of Reserved Lanes using Entitled: Microscopic Simulation and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science (Civil Engineering) complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the final examining committee: Dr. A. M. Hanna Chair Dr. J. Y. Yu Examiner Dr. Z. Zhu Examiner Dr. C. Alecsandru Supervisor Approved by Dr. Fariborz Haghighat Chair of Department or Graduate Program Director Dr. Amir Asif Dean of Faculty Date Fall, 2016 ABSTRACT Vehicular Safety and Operations Assessment of Reserved Lanes using Microscopic Simulation Chao Li Evaluation of roadway safety via the analysis of vehicular conflicts using microscopic simulation shows increasing preference among transportation professionals, mostly due to significant advances in computational technology that allows for better efficiency when compared with other traffic safety modeling approaches. In addition, since modeling vehicular interactions via simulation is intrinsic to the methodology, one may assess various impacts of safety treatments without disrupting vehicle movements and before proceeding with real-world implementations. VISSIM, a microscopic traffic simulation model, is used in this thesis to reproduce vehicular interactions of an urban High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) arterial in Québec.
  • ROAD SAFETY: BASIC FACTS © Panos / Jacob Silberberg

    ROAD SAFETY: BASIC FACTS © Panos / Jacob Silberberg

    FACT SHEET #1 ROAD SAFETY: BASIC FACTS © Panos / Jacob Silberberg ROAD SAFETY AND MEDIA REPORTING Road traffic crashes are often covered in the media simply as events—not as a leading killer of people and an enormous drain on a country’s human, health and financial resources. By framing road safety as a health and development story, with data and in-depth information, journalists have the opportunity to affect the way these stories are told and potentially to help shift public behaviour and attitudes, influence policy and therefore contribute towards saving lives. WHY ARE ROAD TRAFFIC INJURIES A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE? Road traffic injuries and deaths have a terrible 1.25 million impact on individuals, communities and road traffic deaths occur every year. countries. They involve massive costs to often overburdened health care systems, occupy scarce hospital beds, consume resources and result in significant losses of productivity and prosperity, with deep social and economic repercussions. The numbers speak for themselves: this is a cause of death among public health and development crisis that is expected to worsen unless action is taken. #1those aged 15-29 years For more on: road traffic injuries Global death figures drive home the extent of this public health crisis, especially among young people. FACT SHEET #1 Road safety: Basic facts – page 1 The chance 9.3 of dying Europe 19.9 in a road Eastern Mediterranean 17.0 traffic crash 15.9 South East Asia Americas 26.6 depends on where Africa 17.3 you live INTERPRETING THE NUMBERS MAGNITUDE • Tallying the total number of deaths can, • About 1.25 million people globally die each year however, be useful for conveying the magnitude as a result of road traffic crashes—that’s over 3400 of the problem, the prevention effort required deaths a day.
  • TOLL ROAD SIGNS Section 2F.01 Scope Support: 01 Toll Highways Are Typically Limited-Access Freeway Or Expressway Facilities

    TOLL ROAD SIGNS Section 2F.01 Scope Support: 01 Toll Highways Are Typically Limited-Access Freeway Or Expressway Facilities

    2009 Edition Page 237 CHAPTER 2F. TOLL ROAD SIGNS Section 2F.01 Scope Support: 01 Toll highways are typically limited-access freeway or expressway facilities. A portion of or an entire route might be a toll highway, or a bridge, tunnel, or other crossing point might be the only toll portion of a highway. A toll highway might be a conventional road. The general signing requirements for toll roads will depend on the type of facility and access (freeway, expressway, or conventional road). The provisions of Chapters 2D and 2E will generally apply for guide signs along the toll facility that direct road users within and off the facility where exit points and geometric configurations are not dependent specifically on the collection of tolls. The aspect of tolling and the presence of toll plazas or collection points necessitate additional considerations in the typical signing needs. The notification of the collection of tolls in advance of and at entry points to the toll highway also necessitate additional modifications to the typical signing. 02 The scope of this Section applies to a route or facility on which all lanes are tolled. Chapter 2G contains provisions for the signing of managed lanes within an otherwise non-toll facility that employ tolling or pricing as an operational strategy to manage congestion levels. Standard: 03 Except where specifically provided in this Chapter, the provisions of other Chapters in Part 2 shall apply to toll roads. Section 2F.02 Sizes of Toll Road Signs Standard: 01 Except as provided in Section 2A.11, the sizes of toll road signs that have standardized designs shall be as shown in Table 2F-1.
  • State Set to Push Toll Roads

    State Set to Push Toll Roads

    State set to push toll roads FUNDING PLAN AIMS TO SPEED UP ROAD PROJECTS, TRAFFIC RELIEF By Gary Richards Mercury News Thursday, February 3, 2005 The future of highway driving in California could be a two-tiered system, in which commuters can either remain in stop-and-go traffic for free, or pay a toll to cruise on a private highway. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is expected to soon announce his support for allowing private contractors to build toll roads across California. Following the model of Highway 125 now under construction in Southern California, contractors would build toll roads in congested areas or toll lanes parallel to existing roads -- such as Highway 152 or Interstate 205 -- that would be designed and maintained by the state. The specifics are still far away, but it is yet another step in the governor's strategy to creatively finance -- and speed up -- highway construction in California without raising taxes. The governor previously noted his support for allowing solo drivers to pay their way into carpool lanes. ``We're going to make an announcement really soon where we're going to look at our whole infrastructure and transportation and we have a very creative way of financing it,'' Schwarzenegger said last week in a meeting with the Orange County Register editorial board, adding: ``We want to approach it in a very radical way and then look at all kinds of transportation.'' The governor's office had no comment Wednesday on the expected announcement, but last year his performance review team called for more toll facilities. ``I'm not surprised,'' said Randy Rentschler of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in Oakland.
  • Forgiving Roadsides Design Guide

    Forgiving Roadsides Design Guide

    Forgiving roadsides design guide Page 2 / 117 Authors: This report was drawn up by the IRDES ERA-NET 'Safety at the Heart of Road Design' Team: Author: Francesca La Torre, UNIFI, Italy (Representing ANAS in CEDR TG Road Safety) Contributors : Matthias Helfert, AIT, Austria Lorenzo Domenichini, UNIFI, Italy Philippe Nitsche, AIT, Austria Alessandro Mercaldo, UNIFI, Italy Yann Goyat, IFSTTAR, France Helen Fagerlind, CHALMERS, Sweden Eleonora Cesolini, ANAS, Italy Jan Martinsson, CHALMERS, Sweden Raffaella Grecco, ANAS, Italy Dennis Book, CHALMERS, Sweden Federica Bianchin, ANAS, Italy Peter Saleh, AIT, Austria (Main author of Annex A) With editorial input from the following members of CEDR Technical Group Road Safety: Harry Cullen Ireland (Chair) Francesca LA TORRE Italy Forbes VIGORS Ireland (Sec) Barbara RUBINO Italy Eva EICHINGER-VILL Austria Paul MANGEN Luxembourg Didier ANTOINE Belgium-Wallonia Herman MONING Netherlands Photis MATSIS Cyprus Arild ENGEBRETSEN Norway Reigo UDE Estonia Arild RAGNOY Norway Auli FORSBERG Finland Leszek KANIA Poland Gerard VUILLEMIN France Zvonko ZAVASNIK Slovenia Stefan MATENA Germany Roberto LLAMAS Spain Christina PANAGOLIA Greece Jose M. PARDILLO Spain Tibor MOCSÁRI Hungary Lena RYDEN Sweden Audur ARNADOTTIR Iceland Christoph JAHN Switzerland Giovanni MAGARO Italy Sandra BROWN United Kingdom This document expresses solely the current view of CEDR. Readers should not regard these views as a statement of the official position of CEDR's member states. Equally this document is considered as a guide; it is not a legally binding document. Approved and amended by: CEDR's EXECUTIVE BOARD on 7 March 2013 Addressed to: CEDR's GOVERNING BOARD on 15 May 2013 Edited and published by: CEDR's Secretariat General ISBN : 979-10-93321-02-8 Forgiving roadsides design guide Page 3 / 117 Foreword CEDR Technical Group Road Safety (TGRS) is very proud to have delivered one of the most significant documents in recent years on the subject of forgiving roadsides.
  • A Guide for HOT Lane Development FHWA

    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
  • South Bay Expressway (Sr 125 Toll Road) Fact Sheet

    South Bay Expressway (Sr 125 Toll Road) Fact Sheet

    Transportation SOUTH BAY EXPRESSWAY (SR 125 TOLL ROAD) FACT SHEET The Project Lower Tolls Opened in 2007, South Bay Expressway (SBX) In December 2011, after a thorough due toll road is a ten-mile stretch of State Route diligence process and public review, SANDAG 125 (SR 125) that runs from Otay Mesa Road completed the acquisition of the lease to near State Route 905 to SR 54. The highway operate the toll road. To improve mobility provides quick and convenient travel choices in the South Bay, SANDAG implemented a between eastern Chula Vista, Downtown San business plan that reduced tolls by as much Customer Service Center Hours of Operation Diego, East County, Sorrento Valley, Interstate as 40 percent on June 30, 2012. Phone: Monday – Friday 8, State Route 94, Otay Mesa, and Mexico. Tolls now range from 50 cents to $2.75 for 8 a.m. – 5 p.m. On- and off-ramps are available at Birch Road, Walk-In: Monday – Friday FasTrak users and from $2 to $3.50 for cash/ 8 a.m. – 6 p.m. Olympic Parkway, Otay Lakes Road, East H credit card users. Previously, tolls were 85 (619) 661-7070 Street, and San Miguel Ranch Road. 1129 La Media Road cents to $3.85 for FasTrak users and $2.50 San Diego, CA 92154 Travelers who use South Bay Expressway have to $4 for cash/credit card users. FasTrak account several payment options. FasTrak customers management is available Also effective June 30, 2012, the minimum online at SBXthe125.com do not need to stop at toll booths; tolls monthly toll usage requirement was lowered are automatically deducted from a prepaid from $7 to $4.50 for FasTrak customers with account using a transponder mounted one transponder ($3.50 per FasTrak account inside the vehicle.
  • Economic Efficiency Implications of Optimal Highway Maintenance Policies for Private Versus Public Highway Owners

    Economic Efficiency Implications of Optimal Highway Maintenance Policies for Private Versus Public Highway Owners

    22 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1116 Economic Efficiency Implications of Optimal Highway Maintenance Policies for Private Versus Public Highway Owners DAVID GELTNER AND RoHIT RAMASWAMY The Idea of transport Infrastructure privatization has been infrastructure privatization. Key questions in this regard are (a) receiving Increased attention recently from researchers and Would private infrastructure owners charge an economically policy makers. In both Britain and the United States, as well as efficient price to the users of the infrastructure? and (b) Would in some developing countries such as India, the idea or high­ private infrastructure suppliers provide efficient levels of quan­ way ownership privatization Is being seriously considered and tity and quality of product or service over the long run? In some cases Is being implemented. Most research to date has focused on the technical or financial feaslblllty of highway This paper focuses on a specific aspect of the second ques­ privatization or of using tolls to finance roads. This paper ls tion. In particular, a hypothetical privately owned toll highway motivated, rather, by the question of the economic efficiency of is considered. The profit-maximizing highway pavement highway ownership privatization. The paper focuses on in­ quality maintenance policy for this highway is compared with depth analysis In an effort to quantify what may be the main the socially optimal or economically efficient policy. Meth­ issue In the question or the economic efficiency or privately odologically, this paper contains an extension and application owned highways-the problem of suboptimal highway physi­ of other work previously presented to the TRB (1, 2). cal quality, which could result over the long run from highway 111aintenance policies that seek to maximize immediate private profit rather than overall economic welfare.
  • Arlington County Pavement Marking Specifications

    Arlington County Pavement Marking Specifications

    DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ARLINGTON COUNTY PAVEMENT MARKING SPECIFICATIONS MAY 2017 T-1.1 PAVEMENT MARKINGS Table of Contents 1. General ................................................................................................................................................ 2 2. Design Criteria ...................................................................................................................................... 3 3. Marking Plan Preparation ..................................................................................................................... 4 Exhibits ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 MK – 1 Typical Crosswalk ......................................................................................................................... 5 MK – 1a Typical Crosswalk Details .............................................................................................................. 6 MK – 2 Typical Cross Section ..................................................................................................................... 7 MK – 3 Typical Speed Hump Markings ...................................................................................................... 8 MK – 4 Typical Speed Table ...................................................................................................................... 9 MK – 4a Typical Speed Hump Details .......................................................................................................
  • High Occupancy Toll Lanes in the Houston Area DESCRIPTION

    High Occupancy Toll Lanes in the Houston Area DESCRIPTION

    High Occupancy Toll Lanes in the Houston Area DESCRIPTION Communities in the United States use high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes as a way to maximize the capacity of existing high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. The attached paper describes the concepts and benefits of HOT lanes. ISSUES The Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (METRO) has approached the department with a request to operate HOT lanes on portions of five existing HOV lanes in the Houston/Harris County area. REFERENCES See attached description and background information. DESIRED ACTIONS The Commission will be asked to act on a proposed Minute Order authorizing the operation of HOT lanes on approximately 83 miles of existing HOV lanes in Harris County at the January 27th meeting. OTHER None. High Occupancy Toll Lanes in the Houston Area Under agreement with the department, the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (METRO) currently operates six high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes in the Houston area. These traditional HOV lanes expand the ability of these highways to move more people through the corridor by providing dedicated lanes to carpools, vanpools, and transit vehicles. Currently, the HOV lanes in Houston require a minimum of two or three passengers1 before a vehicle is eligible to use the lane. METRO has approached the department with a request that METRO be allowed to begin operating five of the HOV facilities as high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes: I-45 North Freeway: From downtown Houston to north of FM 1960 (19.9 miles); I-45 Gulf Freeway: From downtown Houston to Dixie Farm Road (15.5 miles); US 59 Eastex Freeway: From downtown Houston to Loop 494 (20.2 miles); US 59 Southwest Freeway: From downtown Houston to West Airport Boulevard (14.3 miles); and US 290 Northwest Freeway: From Northwest Transit Center to south of FM 1960 (13.5 miles).
  • Rules of Harris County, Texas

    Rules of Harris County, Texas

    RULES OF HARRIS COUNTY, INCLUDING THE HARRIS COUNTY TOLL ROAD AUTHORITY, A DIVISION OF HARRIS COUNTY, AND THE HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES WITHIN HARRIS COUNTY AND THE HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RIGHTS-OF-WAY JOHN R. BLOUNT, P.E. HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEER GARY K. TRIETSCH, P.E. HCTRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RUSSELL A. POPPE, P.E. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT Formatted: Normal, Left, Border: Top: (No border), Bottom: (No border), Left: (No border), Right: (No border) Formatted: Font: (Default) Courier New, Not Bold, Not Expanded by / Condensed by 1 AS AMENDED: EFFECTIVE: 2 I N D E X SECTION 1 AUTHORITY SECTION 2 JURISDICTION SECTION 3 PURPOSE SECTION 4 CONSTRUCTION OF RULES SECTION 5 DEFINITIONS SECTION 6 RIGHT-OF-ENTRY TO COUNTY OR HCFCD ROW SECTION 7 CONSTRUCTION DRAWING SUBMITTALS SECTION 8 TRAFFIC CONTROL SECTION 9 SEALING OF CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS SECTION 10 CERTIFICATES, FEES AND BONDS SECTION 11 EMERGENCY REPAIRS SECTION 12 INTERFERENCE WITH USE OF THE ROW SECTION 13 TRENCHING SECTION 14 USE OF THE ROADWAY SECTION 15 NOTIFICATION PRIOR TO WORK SECTION 16 UTILITIES SECTION 17 UTILITY POLES SECTION 18 PERMANENT UTILITIES SECTION 19 HIGH PRESSURE PIPELINES SECTION 20 EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL SECTION 21 PAVING SECTION 22 MONUMENTS SECTION 23 SOIL BORING AND MONITORING WELL REQUIREMENTS SECTION 24 DAMAGE TO HARRIS COUNTY OR HCFCD ROW SECTION 25 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SECTION 26 LIABILITY SECTION 27 VARIANCES SECTION 28 CONSTRUCTION PER DRAWINGS SECTION 29 INSPECTIONS SECTION 30
  • City of Cuero Council Meeting Agenda October 28, 2014

    City of Cuero Council Meeting Agenda October 28, 2014

    CITY OF CUERO COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA OCTOBER 28, 2014 Notice is here by given for a meeting of the City Council of the City of Cuero to be held on October 28, 2014 at 5:45 P.M.located at City Hall Council Chambers, 212 E. Main Street, Cuero, Texas 77954, for the purpose of considering the following agenda items. The City Council of the City of Cuero will meet, consider, deliberate and may take action on all agenda items. 1. Call To Order And Announce A Quorum Is Present 2. Invocation Led by James K.Crain, III 3. Pledge Of Allegiance to the American Flag and the Texas Flag Led by W.T. "Tony" Allen. Documents: US and Texas Pledge.pdf 4. Ordinances - Emergency Reading 4.1. Discuss/Consider And Possible Action On Ordinance No. 2014 -48, Amending Title V, Chapter 52, Sewers, Section 52.60 (A) And Declaring An Emergency. Documents: Amend Sewer Charges for 52 60(a) 2014.pdf 4.2. Discuss/Consider And Possible Action On Ordinance No. 2014 -49, Warranty Deed On Property Owned By Lancaster Industries, Inc. Located At 514 W. Sarah Authorizing The Mayors Execution Of All Documents Associated With The Property And Declaing An Emergency. Documents: ORDINANCE 2014 -49 Lancaster Deed.pdf, Lancaster-City of Cuero.pdf 5. Resolutions 5.1. Discuss/Consider And Possible Action On Awarding The Bid For Annual Fuel For The City Of Cuero Documents: Copy of Fuel Bid Tabulaton for Bid Invitations for Fuel.pdf, RESOLUTION NO 2014 -25 Fuel Bid Approval.pdf 5.2. Discuss/Consider And Possible Action To Award Bid For For U.S.