DOCSLIB.ORG

ADOT Traffic Engineering Guidelines and Processes (TGP)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ADOT Traffic Engineering Guidelines and Processes (TGP) ADOT Traffic Engineering Guidelines and Processes June 2015 Section 300 - Signs 331 DISTANCE SIGNING AND CONTROL CITY PLAN 331.1 DISTANCE SIGNING ON STATE HIGHWAYS D2 series distance signs may be installed on State Highways in accordance with the MUTCD. D2 series signs may display one, two, or three destinations along with the approximate distances from the sign to these destinations. Three destinations need not be shown on all signs. The bottom line should contain the name and distance of the control city for the route as shown in the table of destinations for that route. The control city or destination should normally remain the same throughout the length of the route until that destination is reached. However, when there are two control cities or destinations of equal significance, they may be shown on alternate signs. Only the intermediate destinations listed in the table of destinations should be displayed on D2 series signs. On non-freeways, the top line should contain the name and distance of the next intermediate destination for the route as shown in the table of destinations for that route. Where there are two intermediate destinations of equal significance, three legends may be used. In the case of a freeway in rural areas, the top line should identify the next meaningful interchange or community near or through which the freeway passes or, if there is no community, the route number or name of an intersecting highway. The middle line, if used, should be the name and distance of the next intermediate destination for the route as shown in the table of destinations for that route. The intermediate destination can be varied on successive distance signs as noted in the table of destinations. In the case of a freeway approaching or within urban areas where interchanges are so closely spaced that normal distance guide signs cannot be adequately placed, a list of sequential interchanges may be substituted for intermediate and control city destinations. These signs should display the next two or three interchanges by name or route number with distances shown to the nearest 1/4 mile. In the case of an interchange serving multiple streets, then both streets may be displayed in accordance with the sign designs listed in the ADOT Manual of Approved Signs, but no more than three street names (including the two accessible from one interchange) should be used. If two sequential interchanges both provide access to multiple streets, then four lines (two interchanges accessing two streets each) may be used. To encourage the use of rest areas instead of parking on highway shoulders, the message Rest Area and distance to the rest area may be used as an optional top or middle line of distance signs. Distances shall be shown to the nearest mile, measured to the center of the destination. If the destination does not have an easily determinable center, such as a town without a central roadway junction or a large city, the distance may be measured to 331-1 ADOT Traffic Engineering Guidelines and Processes June 2015 Section 300 - Signs an appropriate location near the center of the destination, such as the center of the central business district, a main post office, city or town hall, or similar location. To aid in determining distances to the cities outside of Arizona, section 331.1 shows distances from the Arizona State Line to destinations in neighboring states and in Mexico. The rules stated above do not apply to optional supplemental D2 series signs displaying recreational or cultural destinations and the distances to those destinations. For these signs, the destinations should be ordered by increasing distance, with no more than three destinations listed. These signs should be placed so they do not interfere with or distract from higher-priority guide, regulatory, or warning signs. These signs should use white legend and border on a brown background. Distance signing for roadways other than freeways shall have the approval of the Regional Traffic Engineer. Distance signing for freeways shall have the approval of the State Traffic Engineer. 331-2 ADOT Traffic Engineering Guidelines and Processes June 2015 Section 300 - Signs 331.2 EXTERIOR DISTANCES TO BE USED FOR MILEAGES Destinations or control cities outside Arizona should not include the state name or state abbreviation; i.e. the sign should display "Hurricane", not "Hurricane UT". Route Exterior Distance Miles I-8 California State Line to San Diego 176 I-10 California State Line to Los Angeles 228 New Mexico State Line to Lordsburg 24 New Mexico State Line to El Paso 185 I-15 Utah State Line to St. George 8 Utah State Line to Cedar City 57 Utah State Line to Salt Lake City 341 Nevada State Line to Las Vegas 80 I-40 California State Line to Needles 12 California State Line to Los Angeles 267 New Mexico State Line to Gallup 22 New Mexico State Line to Albuquerque 160 US 60 Jct I-10 to Los Angeles 259 New Mexico State Line to Socorro 139 SR 61 New Mexico State Line to Zuni 12 US 64 New Mexico State Line to Shiprock 23 New Mexico State Line to Farmington 50 331-3 ADOT Traffic Engineering Guidelines and Processes June 2015 Section 300 - Signs Route Exterior Distance Miles SR 68 Jct SR 95 to Laughlin 3 US 70 New Mexico State Line to Lordsburg 29 SR 71 Junction US 60 to Los Angeles 316 SR 78 New Mexico State Line to Mule Creek 6 SR 80 New Mexico State Line to Lordsburg 48 SR 85 Mexico Boundary to Rocky Point 66 US 89 Utah State Line to Kanab 64 US 89A Utah State Line to Kanab 3 US 93 Nevada State Line to Las Vegas 31 US 160 New Mexico State Line to Cortez, CO 37 US 163 Utah State Line to Mexican Hat 23 US 180 New Mexico State Line to Silver City 113 SR 264 New Mexico State Line to Gallup 25 SR 389 Utah State Line to Hurricane 30 331-4 ADOT Traffic Engineering Guidelines and Processes June 2015 Section 300 - Signs 331.3 TABLE OF DESTINATIONS FOR STATE HIGHWAYS Interstate 8 Westbound Eastbound Gila Bend to Yuma Yuma to Gila Bend Control City: San Diego Control City: Tucson* (*list both Phoenix and Tucson on directional signs at interchanges) A. Alternate Gila Bend & Yuma A. Alternate Gila Bend & Phoenix Jct I-10 to Gila Bend Gila Bend to Jct I-10 Control City: San Diego Control City: Tucson A. Alternate Gila Bend & Yuma A. Casa Grande Business 8 (Yuma, Gila Bend) No signs needed Interstate 10 Westbound Eastbound Phoenix to California State Line California State Line to Phoenix Control City: Los Angeles Control City: Phoenix A. Jct SR 85 A. Quartzsite B. Quartzsite B. Jct US 60 C. Blythe C. Jct SR 85 Tucson to Phoenix Phoenix to Tucson Control City: Phoenix Control City: Tucson A. Alternate Jct I-8 and Casa Grande A. Alternate Casa Grande & Jct I-8 B. Jct US 60 New Mexico State Line to Tucson Tucson to New Mexico State Line Control City: Tucson Control City: El Paso A. Willcox A. Benson B. Benson B. Willcox C. Jct SR 83 C. Jct US 191 North D. Lordsburg Business 10 (Quartzsite, Benson, Willcox, Bowie, San Simon) No signs needed Interstate 15 Southbound Northbound Utah State Line to Nevada State Line Nevada State Line to Utah State Line Control City: Las Vegas Control City: Salt Lake City A. Mesquite A. Alternate St George and Cedar City 331-5 ADOT Traffic Engineering Guidelines and Processes June 2015 Section 300 - Signs Interstate 17 Southbound Northbound Flagstaff to Jct Loop 101 Jct I-10 (MP 194) to Flagstaff Control City: Phoenix Control City: Flagstaff A. Camp Verde A. Black Canyon City B. Jct SR 169 B. Alternate Jct SR 69 & Prescott C. Cordes Jct C. Jct SR 169 D. Black Canyon City D. Camp Verde E. Jct Loop 101 E. Sedona F. Jct I-40 Jct Loop 101 to Jct I-10 (MP 194) Control City: Tucson Sequential interchange signing Interstate 19 Southbound Northbound Tucson to Nogales International Border to Tucson Control City: Nogales Control City: Tucson A. Green Valley A. Green Valley Nogales to International Border Control City: International Border Business 19 (Nogales) No signs needed Interstate 40 Westbound Eastbound Kingman to California State Line California State Line to Kingman Control City: Los Angeles Control City: Flagstaff A. Needles A. Kingman Flagstaff to Kingman Kingman to Jct US 93 South Control City: Los Angeles Control City: Phoenix A. Williams A. Flagstaff B. Ash Fork Jct US 93 South to Flagstaff C. Seligman Control City: Flagstaff D. Alternate Kingman & Los Angeles A. Seligman B. Ash Fork C. Williams New Mexico State Line to Flagstaff Flagstaff to New Mexico State Line Control City: Flagstaff Control City: Albuquerque A. Petrified Forest National Park A. Winslow B. Holbrook B. Holbrook C. Winslow C. Petrified Forest National Park D. Gallup 331-6 ADOT Traffic Engineering Guidelines and Processes June 2015 Section 300 - Signs Business 40 (Ash Fork, Williams, Flagstaff, Winslow, Holbrook) No signs needed State Route 24 No signs needed State Route 51 No signs needed US Route 60 Westbound Eastbound Wickenburg to Jct I-10 (Brenda) Jct I-10 (Brenda) to Aguila Control City: Los Angeles Control City: Alternate Prescott and A. Aguila Wickenburg B. Wenden A. Salome C. Salome B. Wenden D. Hope C. Aguila E. Quartzsite Aguila to Wickenburg Control City: Phoenix A. Wickenburg Phoenix to Wickenburg Wickenburg to Phoenix Control City: Alternate Kingman & Las Control City: Phoenix Vegas A. Jct SR 74 A. Jct SR 74 B. Wickenburg New Mexico State Line to Phoenix Phoenix to Globe Control City: Phoenix Control City: Globe A.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Urban Waters Partnership RIO REIMAGINED WATERSHED WORK PLAN 2019 - 2020
    Urban Waters Partnership RIO REIMAGINED WATERSHED WORK PLAN 2019 - 2020 PILOT LOCATION: Salt River and Middle Gila River Watershed POINTS OF CONTACT: Melissa McCann, ASU University City Exchange – Project Director Jared Vollmer, UWFP - U.S. EPA BACKGROUND: Includes the 58 miles along both the Salt and Gila Rivers, with its headwaters from three larger watersheds: the Salt which starts west of Alpine, AZ; the Upper Gila which starts east of Baldy Mountain in New Mexico; and the San Pedro which starts in Mexico. All three watersheds eventually converge east of Phoenix and drain into the Middle Gila (Phoenix Metro area) and then to the Lower Gila River and finally the Colorado River which takes the remaining water away in a series of diversions at the US and Mexico border. SRP Water Infrastructure Facts § 8.3 million acre watershed § 8 dams – storing water in wet years to ensure reliable supplies in dry years, and generating clean renewable power § 131 miles of canals and 1,000 miles of laterals and ditches to move water to cities and agricultural water users § Salt River Watershed is 15,000 square miles FEDERAL Agencies Participating AGENCY FEDERAL / REGIONAL STATE / LOCAL DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE | USDA U.S. Forest Service Laura Moser - Cooperative Forestry, Asst. Program John Richardson - Program Manager, UCF | Mgr. for SW Region FH, AZ Dept. of Forestry + FM Micah Grondin – Program Manager, AZ Dept. of Forestry + FM Natural Resource Conservation Service | NRCS Terry D'Addio – National RC&D Program Mgr. Keisha Tatem – State Conservationist
    [Show full text]
  • EST NAME CNTY NAME Type PRIM PHONE P ADDR1 P CITY
    EST_NAME CNTY_NAME Type PRIM_PHONE P_ADDR1 P_CITY P_STATE P_ZIP5 LicNo BAXLEY ANIMAL CONTROL, CITY OF APPLING 33 912-367-8300 282 E Parker St Baxley GA 31513 332584 CITY OF PEARSON, THE ATKINSON 33 912-422-3397 89 MAIN ST S PEARSON GA 31642 3399687 THE CITY OF WILLACOOCHEE ATKINSON 33 912-534-5991 33 Fleetwood Ave W Willacoochee GA 31650 33104158 CITY OF ALMA ANIMAL SHELTER BACON 33 912-632-8751 884 RADIO STATION RD (LANDFILL) ALMA GA 31510 333750 ANIMAL RESCUE FOUNDATION BALDWIN 33 478-454-1273 711 S WILKINSON ST MILLEDGEVILLE GA 31059 3355497 BALDWIN COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL BALDWIN 33 478-445-4791 1365 ORCHARD HILL RD MILLEDGEVILLE GA 31061 3321946 OLD CAPITAL PET CARE BALDWIN 33 478-452-9760 691 DUNLAP RD NE MILLEDGEVILLE GA 31061 3356744 BANKS COUNTY BANKS 33 706-677-6200 144 YONAH HOMER RD HOMER GA 30547 3389527 Pet Coalition of Georgia BANKS 33 678-410-4422 1147 Sims Bridge Rd Commerce GA 30530 33104765 BARROW COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL BARROW 33 770-307-3012 610 BARROW PARK DR WINDER GA 30680 3341750 LEFTOVER PETS INC. BARROW 33 706-654-3291 610 Barrow Park Dr Winder GA 30680 3394405 PUP & CAT CO BARROW 33 770-867-1622 118 W CANDLER ST WINDER GA 30680 3366580 REMEMBER ME? PET RESCUE, LLC BARROW 33 770-295-9491 1022 CYPERTS TRAIL WINDER GA 30680 33105132 BARTOW COUNTY ANIMAL SHELTER BARTOW 33 770-387-5153 50 LADDS MOUNTAIN RD SW CARTERSVILLE GA 30120 3320763 CARTERSVILLE ANIMAL CONTROL BARTOW 33 770-382-2526 195 CASSVILLE RD CARTERSVILLE GA 30120 3384548 ETOWAH VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY BARTOW 33 770-383-3338 36 LADDS MOUNTAIN RD SW CARTERSVILLE GA 30120 3373047 HUMANE LEAGUE OF LAKE LANIER BARTOW 33 404-358-4498 37 Oak Hill Ln NW Cartersville GA 30121 3394553 BEN HILL COUNTY BEN HILL 33 229-426-5100 402 E PINE ST FITZGERALD GA 31750 3380118 CITY OF FITZGERALD ANIMAL CONTROL BEN HILL 33 229-426-5000 302 E Central Ave Fitzgerald GA 31750 3380122 FITZGERALD BEN HILL HUMANE SOCIETY BEN HILL 33 229-426-5078 106 LIONS PARK RD FITZGERALD GA 31750 334018 BERRIEN CO HUMANE SOCIETY, INC.
    [Show full text]
  • Firearms Ownership and Regulation: Tackling an Old Problem with Renewed Vigor
    William & Mary Law Review Volume 20 (1978-1979) Issue 2 Article 3 December 1978 Firearms Ownership and Regulation: Tackling an Old Problem with Renewed Vigor David T. Hardy Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Repository Citation David T. Hardy, Firearms Ownership and Regulation: Tackling an Old Problem with Renewed Vigor, 20 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 235 (1978), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol20/iss2/3 Copyright c 1978 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr FIREARM OWNERSHIP AND REGULATION: TACKLING AN OLD PROBLEM WITH RENEWED VIGOR DAVID T. HARDY* During the decade 1964-1974, approximately six books,' forty-two legal articles,2 and five Congressional hearings' were devoted solely to airing arguments on the desirability of firearms regulations. De- spite what these numbers might suggest about the exhaustiveness of gun control studies, a close examination of the bulk of the pre- 1975 publications disclosed a great shortage of empirical data and comprehensive analysis. With several exceptions, assertions and * B.A., J.D., University of Arizona; Partner, Law Offices of Sando & Hardy, Tucson, Arizona. The author currently is serving as a general consultant to the Director of the Na- tional Rifle Association, Washington, D.C. 1. See C. BAKAL, THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS (1966); B. DAVIDSON, To KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (1969); C. GREENWOOD, FIREARMS CONTROL (1972); R. KUKILA, GUN CONTROL (1973); G. NEWTON & F. ZIMRING, FIREARMS AND VIOLENCE IN AMERICAN LIFE (1969); R.
    [Show full text]
  • South Central Neighborhoods Transit Health Impact Assessment
    SOUTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOODS TRANSIT HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT WeArePublicHealth.org This project is supported by a grant from the Health Impact Project, a collaboration of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Pew Charitable Trusts, through the Arizona Department of Health Services. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Health Impact Project, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation or The Pew Charitable Trusts. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS South Central Neighborhoods Transit Health Impact Assessment (SCNTHIA) began in August 2013 and the Final Report was issued January 2015. Many individuals and organizations provided energy and expertise. First, the authors wish to thank the numerous residents and neighbors within the SCNTHIA study area who participated in surveys, focus groups, key informant interviews and walking assessments. Their participation was critical for the project’s success. Funding was provided by a generous grant from the Health Impact Project through the Arizona Department of Health Services. Bethany Rogerson and Jerry Spegman of the Health Impact Project, a collaboration between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Pew Charitable Trusts, provided expertise, technical assistance, perspective and critical observations throughout the process. The SCNTHIA project team appreciates the opportunities afforded by the Health Impact Project and its team members. The Arizona Alliance for Livable Communities works to advance health considerations in decision- making. The authors thank the members of the AALC for their commitment and dedication to providing technical assistance and review throughout this project. The Insight Committee (Community Advisory Group) deserves special recognition. They are: Community Residents Rosie Lopez George Young; South Mountain Village Planning Committee Community Based Organizations Margot Cordova; Friendly House Lupe Dominguez; St.
    [Show full text]
  • CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE October 1, 2001
    October 1, 2001 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE 18161 of S. 1467, a bill to amend the Hmong will award a gold medal on behalf of have distinguished records of public service Veterans’ Naturalization Act of 2000 to the Congress to Reverend Doctor Mar- to the American people and the inter- extend the deadlines for application tin Luther King, Jr., posthumously, national community; and payment of fees. (2) Dr. King preached a doctrine of non- and his widow Coretta Scott King in violent civil disobedience to combat segrega- S.J. RES. 12 recognition of their contributions to tion, discrimination, and racial injustice; At the request of Mr. SMITH of New the Nation on behalf of the civil rights (3) Dr. King led the Montgomery bus boy- Hampshire, the name of the Senator movement. It is time to honor Dr. Mar- cott for 381 days to protest the arrest of Mrs. from New Hampshire (Mr. GREGG) was tin Luther King, Jr. and his widow Rosa Parks and the segregation of the bus added as a cosponsor of S.J. Res. 12, a Coretta Scott King, the first family of system of Montgomery, Alabama; joint resolution granting the consent the civil rights movement, for their (4) in 1963, Dr. King led the march on Wash- of Congress to the International Emer- distinguished records of public service ington, D.C., that was followed by his famous address, the ‘‘I Have a Dream’’ speech; gency Management Assistance Memo- to the American people and the inter- (5) through his work and reliance on non- randum of Understanding.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Port Control Divisions of Cleveland Hopkins International and Burke Lakefront Airports
    CITY OF CLEVELAND, OHIO DEPARTMENT OF PORT CONTROL DIVISIONS OF CLEVELAND HOPKINS INTERNATIONAL AND BURKE LAKEFRONT AIRPORTS REPORT ON AUDITS OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS For the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 CITY OF CLEVELAND, OHIO DEPARTMENT OF PORT CONTROL DIVISIONS OF CLEVELAND HOPKINS INTERNATIONAL AND BURKE LAKEFRONT AIRPORTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Independent Auditors’ Report .................................................................................................... 1-2 Management’s Discussion and Analysis ................................................................................... 3-16 Statements of Net Position ......................................................................................................... 18-19 Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position ............................................. 21 Statements of Cash Flows .......................................................................................................... 22-23 Notes to Financial Statements .................................................................................................... 25-42 Schedule of Airport Revenues and Operating Expenses as Defined in the Airline Use Agreements ................................................................................ 43 Report on Compliance for the Passenger Facility Charge Program; Report on Internal Control Over Compliance; and Report on Schedule of Expenditures of Passenger Facility Charges In Accordance with 14 CFR Part 158 ......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Boston Bound: a Comparison of Boston’S Legal Powers with Those of Six Other Major American Cities by Gerald E
    RAPPAPORT POLICY BRIEFS Institute for Greater Boston Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University December 2007 Boston Bound: A Comparison of Boston’s Legal Powers with Those of Six Other Major American Cities By Gerald E. Frug and David J. Barron, Harvard Law School Boston is an urban success story. It cities — Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Rappaport Institute Policy Briefs are short has emerged from the fi nancial crises New York City, San Francisco, and overviews of new and notable scholarly research on important issues facing the of the 1950s and 1960s to become Seattle — enjoy to shape its own region. The Institute also distributes a diverse, vital, and economically future. It is hard to understand why Rappaport Institute Policy Notes, a periodic summary of new policy-related powerful city. Anchored by an the Commonwealth should want its scholarly research about Greater Boston. outstanding array of colleges and major city—the economic driver This policy brief is based on “Boston universities, world-class health of its most populous metropolitan Bound: A Comparison of Boston’s Legal Powers with Those of Six Other care providers, leading fi nancial area—to be constrained in a way Major American Cities,” a report by Frug and Barron published by The Boston institutions, and numerous other that comparable cities in other states Foundation. The report is available assets, today’s Boston drives the are not. Like Boston, the six cities online at http://www.tbf.org/tbfgen1. asp?id=3448. metropolitan economy and is one of are large, economically infl uential the most exciting and dynamic cities actors within their states and regions, Gerald E.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Signs
    Chapter 2 Signs 2-1 General Effective signing is the primary method to provide regulatory, warning, and guidance information to transportation system users (motorized vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists). Signing that is clear, concise, and accurate supports safe behaviors and safe operation, legal, and orderly travel on public roadways and transportation facilities. Sign use must be limited and conservative since signs can lose their effectiveness when used to excess. Signs are not typically used to confirm Rules of the Road. This chapter contains information about signing on the state highway system and is intended for persons involved in traffic operations or traffic design. Specific policies and guidelines are included that clarify the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) information. Situations not addressed in this chapter or the MUTCD may need to be determined on a case-by-case basis using engineering judgment. Where a change to the current sign installation is indicated by information in this chapter, replace as the current sign’s service life is reached. For MUTCD Target Compliance Dates, see page I-4, Table I-2 for required sign replacements. State law requires the department to adopt uniform standards for traffic control devices, including signs, along public roadways. WAC 468-95 adopts the MUTCD and Washington State Modifications to the MUTCD as these standards. The MUTCD and WSDOT modifications provide guidance on the intended use and placement of regulatory, warning, guide, and motorist information signs, as well as specific information on sizes and installation. This chapter supplements the MUTCD and WSDOT modifications with specific interpretations and unique applications for signs on the state highway system.
    [Show full text]
  • Ashland Joint Venture: the Importance of Industry Supply Shocks and Vertical Market Structure
    The Economic Effects of the Marathon - Ashland Joint Venture: The Importance of Industry Supply Shocks and Vertical Market Structure. Christopher T. Taylor1 Federal Trade Commission Daniel S. Hosken Federal Trade Commission Last Revised: May 7, 2004 Abstract: This study measures the retail and wholesale price effects in Louisville, Kentucky resulting from the Marathon/Ashland (MAP) joint venture. MAP was an early transaction in the recent era of petroleum mergers and it caused sizeable changes in concentration. We find no evidence of increased retail prices resulting from MAP. Wholesale (rack) prices increased significantly approximately 15 months following the transaction. This wholesale price (rack) increase, however, was probably caused by a regional supply shock rather than the transaction. These results suggest in this case that a significant petroleum merger in a moderately concentrated market did not raise consumer prices. JEL Classification: L1, L41, L71 Keywords: Merger retrospectives, Petroleum industry, Vertical market structure 1 The authors are economists at the Federal Trade Commission. Views and opinions expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors and should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of the Federal Trade Commission, any of its individual Commissioners, or other members of the staff. Comments by Mary Coleman, Leslie Farber, Jeff Fischer, Mark Manusazak, Paul Pautler, Louis Silvia, John Simpson, Shawn Ulrick, and participants at the Industrial Organization Society Conference and excellent research assistance by Ryan Toone are appreciated. I. Introduction The U.S. petroleum industry has undergone substantial restructuring since the mid 1990's. Among the major industry events were the creation of the Shell-Texaco and Marathon-Ashland joint ventures, and the BP-Amoco, Exxon-Mobil, BP-ARCO, Chevron-Texaco, and Phillips- Conoco mergers.
    [Show full text]
  • Tupelo, MS Control City Request.Pdf
    Justifications for Tupelo, Mississippi as a Control City on I-22 Tupelo, with a population of 35,827, is currently the State’s 7th largest city and the 2nd largest city in the State north of the I-20 corridor. Tupelo is the largest city on the US 78/I-22 corridor between Birmingham & Memphis and is already being used as a control city on US 78 (which runs concurrently with I-22). Tupelo is the hub of several nationally significant highways and routes including US 45, US 78, US 278/SR 6 & the Natchez Trace Parkway Tupelo is being used as a control city on the Natchez Trace Parkway. From the earliest Indian settlement, the Tupelo area was linked to the outside world via the now-historic Natchez Trace. Traveled by Native Americans over 8,000 years ago, the Trace was established by the Chickasaw Indians as a route of commerce with the Natchez Indians to the south. The Trace was also traveled by the British in the 18th century and increased in importance as settlers poured into the frontier. Tupelo is the headquarters of this 444 mile long National Park that stretches from Natchez to Nashville. In Tupelo, guests can explore the Natchez Trace Parkway Visitor Center and discover the parkway’s history and inhabitants. Tupelo has a $46 million tourism and hospitality industry and offers over 1,900 hotel rooms and over 150 restaurants. Tupelo is world renowned as the birthplace and childhood home of Elvis Presley which draws 100,000 annual visitors to the historical home and the adjacent museum and memorial chapel.
    [Show full text]
  • Txdot's Freeway Signing Handbook
    Freeway Signing Handbook October 2008 © by Texas Department of Transportation (512) 302-2453 all rights reserved Manual Notice 2008-1 From: Carlos A Lopez, P.E. Manual: Freeway Signing Handbook Effective Date: October 01, 2008 Purpose The purpose of this revision was to change information on the proper placement of number panels on Exit Gore Signs in Chapter 3, Section 2 of the manual and to revise and replace graphics in Chapter 5 of the manual to show the proper placement of these signs. Contents Text in Chapter 3, Section 2 of the manual was changed as follows: Original Text: "The Exit Number panel (for Advance Guide, Exit Direction, and Exit Gore signs) must be aligned to the side of the exit. The Number panel must be aligned to the right edge for a right-side exit and the left edge for a left-side exit." New Text: "The Exit Number panel (for Advance Guide and Exit Direction signs) must be aligned to the side of the exit. The Number panel must be aligned to the right edge for a right- side exit and the left edge for a left-side exit. The Exit Number panel for Exit Gore signs must be centered to the parent sign." Graphic files contained in Chapter 5 ofthe manual were changed to show proper placement of Exit Number panels in relation to Exit Gore signs. Contact Address questions concerning information contained in this manual notice to Michael Chacon, Traffic Operations Division (TRF), 512-416-3120. Archives Past manual notices are available in a pdf archive.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    INTRODUCTION Government corruption is common in many new democracies in the developing and post-Soviet worlds and is not unknown in older, established democracies, including the United States. Government corruption is blamed for slowing economic growth and exacerbating inequality by inflating taxes and extra- legal exactions, distorting private markets, and preventing governments from providing public goods efficiently and in sufficient quantity.1 Corruption in democracies is often embedded in patronage based political institutions — large, hierarchical political parties, organized in many cases along ethnic or clan lines, in which political support is bought with material rewards such as access to government jobs and services. Today such political institutions exist in polities as diverse as the national governments of India, Japan, Mexico, and Italy and the city governments of Istanbul and Moscow, and are still active in sub- national U.S. governments, including the “outer boroughs” of New York City: Queens, Brooklyn and the Bronx (Newfield and Barrett 1988). A patronage based political party, in American parlance a “political machine,” is apparently able to insulate corrupt elected officials from voter ire by buying votes — granting favors to and making individual deals with a winning coalition of voters. Understanding the structure and impact of government corruption in democracies depends on understanding the political machine. American city government at the turn of the twentieth century provides an unparalleled opportunity to study how the ability to buy votes relaxes the constraints that voters otherwise impose on their government. At the beginning of the twentieth century, city governments in many, but not all, cities in the U.S.
    [Show full text]