TAC 2003 Jughandle Final
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
SIMULATION of DIFFERENT INTERSECTION DESIGN for IMPROVING TRAFFIC FLOW with FACTORS CONSIDERING LOCATION, POPULATION and DRIVER EXPECTANCY Sourabh Kumar Singh Dr
Science, Technology and Development ISSN : 0950-0707 SIMULATION OF DIFFERENT INTERSECTION DESIGN FOR IMPROVING TRAFFIC FLOW WITH FACTORS CONSIDERING LOCATION, POPULATION AND DRIVER EXPECTANCY Sourabh Kumar Singh Dr. Anil kunte Associate Professor, Research Scholar, Associate Professor, Department of Civil Department of Civil Department of Civil Engineering Engineering, Shri JJT Engineering, Shri JJT Noida International University University University Dr. Paritosh Srivastava Abstract: In today’s economic growth the vehicular traffic is increasing day by day, which leads to failure of intersections before their time period. To increase the efficiency of these failed intersections the engineers added lanes to the existing major and minor roads, but this method do not give results which it used to deliver in the past, hence other methods were adopted. So to increase the efficiency and fulfil the criteria for successful intersection ,to cape with it several intersection are designed which are unconventional in nature like jug handle, bow tie, continuous flow intersection and median u turn which are very effective in increasing green time on highway and minor roads. The software used in this study is Auto- cad for planning and drawing purpose which can be used in sim-traffic software which will be used for simulation purpose of the traffic flow on different designs of intersections. The factors which are considered in this study are -location of town centre, population of the zone and driver expectancy. The final conclusion of this study is that continuous flow intersection provides the best results when the traffic is increased. The construction cost is least in median u turn and giving maximum result than all other intersections. -
Direction to the Rimrock Resort Hotel from the Calgary International Airport 1A Crowchild Trail
2 Beddington Trail 3 Country Hill Blvd. Trail Barlow Direction to the Rimrock Resort Hotel from the Calgary International Airport 1A Crowchild Trail Deerfoot Trail NE 201 Country Hill Blvd. Harvest Hills Blvd. 2 2A 14 St NW Mountain Avenue, P.O. Box 1110, Stoney Trail. Nosehill Dr. Shaganappi Trail Barlow Trail Barlow Banff, Alberta Canada T1L 1J2 1A Sarcee Trail Calgary John Laurier Blvd. International Crowchild Trail Nosehill Natural Airport 1 Phone: (403) 762-3356 Environment Park Fax: (403) 762-4132 Deerfoot Trail NE John Laurier Blvd. McNight Blvd 5 Trans Canada Highway 1A McNight Blvd 1 Centre St Centre 2 Trans Canada Highway 6 Sarcee Trail 4 1 1 East From Calgary Town Of Banff Deerfoot Trail SE Trans Canada Highway To Town of Banff 5 7 Banff Avenue To Town of Banff City of Calgary West To Lake Louise Mt. Norquay Road Fox Cougar Check Points ad Banff AvenueDeer Ro ain nt ou l M ne 1 Moose n Tu From the Airport, take Barlow Trail (Left Turn). Squirrel Moose Gopher Street Marten Elk 2 Turn left on Country Hills Blvd. Beaver Muskrat Otter Linx StreetWolf Wolf 3 St. Julien Turn left (South) onto Stoney Trail. Bear Caribou 4 Turn right (Westbound) onto Highway 1 (Trans Buffalo Banff Avenue Buffalo Canada Highway). 8 Bow River 5 Follow highway 1 West to Banff National Park. 9 Canada Place Casscade Gardens 6 Take the Banff, Lake Minnewanka exit and turn left at the stop sign on to Banff Avenue. Avenue Mountain 7 Follow Banff Avenue through town and across the Bow River bridge. -
Transportation Network Plan Middleton, WI
Report Transportation Network Plan City of Middleton, WI December 2006 Report for City of Middleton, Wisconsin Transportation Network Plan Prepared by: Traffic Associates LLC and STRAND ASSOCIATES, INC.® 910 West Wingra Drive Madison, WI 53715 www.strand.com December 2006 Approved by Middleton City Council November 21, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. or Following SECTION 1–INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.01 Overview.................................................................................................... 1-1 1.02 Executive Summary................................................................................... 1-3 SECTION 2–EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 2.01 Existing Transportation System................................................................. 2-1 2.02 Traffic Data Collection................................................................................ 2-14 2.03 Existing Conditions Modeling..................................................................... 2-16 SECTION 3–FUTURE CONDITIONS 3.01 Future Traffic Forecasting.......................................................................... 3-1 3.02 Future Conditions Traffic Operations Modeling ......................................... 3-4 3.03 Prioritization of Future Motor Vehicle Needs ............................................. 3-6 SECTION 4–SOLUTION TYPES 4.01 Transportation Solutions............................................................................ 4-1 4.02 Traffic Management Perspective .............................................................. -
Rural Expressway Intersection Synthesis of Practice and Crash Analysis
RURAL EXPRESSWAY INTERSECTION SYNTHESIS OF PRACTICE AND CRASH ANALYSIS Sponsored by the Iowa Department of Transportation (CTRE Project 03-157) Final Report October 2004 Disclaimer Notice The opinions, fi ndings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Iowa Department of Transportation. The sponsor(s) assume no liability for the contents or use of the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specifi cation, or regulation. The sponsor(s) do not endorse products or manufacturers. About CTRE/ISU The mission of the Center for Transportation Research and Education (CTRE) at Iowa State Uni- versity is to develop and implement innovative methods, materials, and technologies for improv- ing transportation effi ciency, safety, and reliability while improving the learning environment of students, faculty, and staff in transportation-related fi elds. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. CTRE Project 03-157 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Rural Expressway Intersection Synthesis of Practice and Crash Analysis October 2004 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. T. H. Maze, Neal R. Hawkins, and Garrett Burchett 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Center for Transportation Research and Education Iowa State University 11. Contract or Grant No. 2901 South Loop Drive, Suite 3100 Ames, IA 50010-8634 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Iowa Department of Transportation Final Report 800 Lincoln Way 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Ames, IA 50010 15. -
Community Meeting for Mary Avenue Grade Separation, Aug. 10, 2017
Caltrain Grade Separation Feasibility Study Mary Avenue Railroad Crossing Community Meeting August 10, 2017 Agenda • Meeting format review • Goals and context • Mary Avenue options Feedback • Q and A • Next steps • Adjourn 2 Caltrain Grade Separations Project Goals Improve Safety (LUTE Policy 24, 36, 40, 41, 42, 46) Enhance Reduce Ped/Bike Traffic Delay Access (LUTE Policy 32, 42) (LUTE Policy 24, 33, 36, 41) 4 Project Context 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 Average Daily Ridership Daily Average 20,000 76 trains 92 trains 114 trains (2003) (2016) +80-106 HSR (2040) Caltrain Grade Separation – VTA Program Description Sunnyvale has 2 of the 8 at grade crossings VTA criteria include cost efficiency and Complete Streets 6 Screening Alternatives Screening • Establish rail and road criteria Alternatives • Identify existing conditions • Develop cursory design of alternatives • Identify impacts and constraints Impacts • Bring results to community Variants of • Identify feasible alternatives Screening • Develop variants to minimize impacts Alternatives • Engage community for input 7 Initial Screening Alternatives 8 At-grade Railroad Crossing Grade Separated Crossing - Overpass At-grade Railroad Crossing Grade Separated Crossing - Underpass Design Criteria Roadway Railroad Grades 4.75% 1.2% max Design speed 30 - 45 mph 79 mph for shoofly (temp rail) Based on posted speed 110 mph for final condition plus 5 mph Bridge depth 5’ 6.75’ Supporting roadway Supporting railroad Vertical clearance Underpass Overpass 15.5’ over roadway 27’ over railroad Roadway -
MN MUTCD Chapter 2H
Chapter 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS 2B.1 Application of Regulatory Signs ..........................................................................................2B-1 2B.2 Design of Regulatory Signs ..................................................................................................2B-1 2B.3 Size of Regulatory Signs ......................................................................................................2B-1 2B.4 Right-of-Way at Intersections ...............................................................................................2B-7 2B.5 STOP Sign (R1-1) and ALL WAY Plaque (R1-3P) ...............................................................2B-8 2B.6 STOP Sign Applications .......................................................................................................2B-9 2B.7 Multi-Way Stop Applications ...............................................................................................2B-9 2B.8 YIELD Sign (R1-2) ..............................................................................................................2B-10 2B.9 YIELD Sign Applications .....................................................................................................2B-10 2B.10 STOP Sign or YIELD Sign Placement .................................................................................2B-10 2B.11 Stop Here For Pedestrians Signs (R1-5 Series) ....................................................................2B-11 2B.12 In-Street and Overhead Pedestrian -
Multi-Purpose Trails Plan
CITY OF COSTA MESA MULTI-PURPOSE TRAILS PLAN JUNE 2016 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Costa Mesa Multi-Purpose Trails Plan was prepared under the guidance of: Raja Sethuraman, Transportation Services Manager This plan was prepared by KTU+A Planning + Landscape Architecture: John Holloway, Principal, PLA, ASLA, LCI Joe Punsalan, Senior Associate, GISP, PTP, LCI Alison Moss, Associate Mobility Planner, AICP Beth Chamberlin, Associate Planner Juan Alberto Bonilla, Planner Diana Smith, GISP, GIS Manager Kristin Bleile, GIS Analyst This is a project for the City of Costs Mesa with funding provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Sustainability Program. The Sustainability Program is a key SCAG initiative for implementing the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (RTP/SCS), combining Compass Blueprint assistance for integrated land use and transportation planning with new Green Region Initiative assistance aimed at local sustainability and Active Transportation assistance for bicycle and pedestrian planning efforts. Sustainability Projects are intended to provide SCAG-member jurisdictions the resources to implement regional policies at the local level, focusing on voluntary efforts that will meet local needs and contribute to implementing the SCS, reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and providing the range of local and regional benefits outlined in the SCS. The preparation of this report has been financed in part through grant(s) from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) through the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) in accordance with the provisions under the Metropolitan Planning Program as set forth in Section 104(f) of Title 23 of the U.S. Code. The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. -
FOR LEASE 4320 12 Street NE Mccall Industrial, Calgary, AB
FOR LEASE 4320 12 Street NE McCall Industrial, Calgary, AB ± 18,432 SF WITH 3 DOCK DOORS / 1 LARGE SIDE DRIVE-IN Flexible Terms from 6 months to 5+ Years Negotiable REDUCED LEASE RATE PROPERTY DETAILS COMMENTS • Zoning: Industrial General (I-G) • High visibility on 12th Street NE • • Size: Office: ± 1,063 SF Double row parking in front (electrified Warehouse: ± 17,369 SF stalls) Total: ± 18,432 SF • Trench drains throughout warehouse & sump • Loading: 2 Dock (12’w x 12’h) • 1 Dock (7’w x 10’h) Two tenant building 1 Side Drive-in (18’w x 14’h) • 120 feet depth from back fence to dock • Clear Height: 17’ doors • Lighting upgraded • Power: 200 A @ 120/208 V • Roof replacement (2018) • Base Rate: $7.50 PSF $6.50 PSF • Concrete tilt-up construction • Operating Cost: $4.40 PSF (Est. 2019) • Tenant improvements negotiable • Term: 5 Years + • Close proximity to 32 Avenue NE, McKnight Blvd. NE, Deerfoot Trail NE, and quick access • Availability: Immediate to YYC Jeff Keet Paul Cunningham Jason Natale Associate Vice President Associate Vice President Associate 403-537-5771 403-714-2803 403-537-5773 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] FOR LEASE: 4320 12 Street NE Warehouse Office Dock Loading Side Drive-in Rear Yard 403-265-9966 www.devencore.com Devencore (Alberta) Ltd. | Suite 1010, 736 6th Avenue S.W., Calgary, Alberta, T2P 3T7 FOR LEASE: 4320 12 Street NE FLOOR PLAN N *Floor plan not to scale 403-265-9966 www.devencore.com Devencore (Alberta) Ltd. | Suite 1010, 736 6th Avenue S.W., Calgary, Alberta, T2P 3T7 FOR LEASE: 4320 12 Street NE SITE PLAN N 403-265-9966 www.devencore.com Devencore (Alberta) Ltd. -
PBOT Traffic Design Manual Volume 1
Traffic Design Manual Volume 1: Permanent Traffic Control and Design CITY OF PORTLAND, OREGON January 2020 Updated June 2021 0 of 135 Table of Contents Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Glossary ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 1 Permanent Traffic Control Signs ............................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Regulatory Signs ................................................................................................................................. 8 1.2 Warning Signs .................................................................................................................................. 17 1.3 Guide Signs....................................................................................................................................... 21 2 Pavement Markings ................................................................................................................................. 31 2.1 Centerlines ........................................................................................................................................ 31 2.2 Lane Widths ...................................................................................................................................... 33 2.3 Turn -
Alternative Intersections Comparative Analysis
Alternative Intersections Comparative Analysis Morgan State University The Pennsylvania State University University of Maryland University of Virginia Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University West Virginia University The Pennsylvania State University The Thomas D. Larson Pennsylvania Transportation Institute Transportation Research Building University Park, PA 16802-4710 Phone: 814-865-1891 Fax: 814-863-3707 www.mautc.psu.edu OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTIONS By: John Sangster and Hesham Rakha Mid-Atlantic University Transportation Center Final Report Department of Civil and Environment Engineering Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University July 23, 2015 1 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. VT-2012-03 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Operational Analysis of Alternative Intersections July 21, 2015 6. Performing Organization Code Virginia Tech 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. John Sangster and Hesham Rakha 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Virginia Tech Transportation Institute 3500 Transportation Research Plaza 11. Contract or Grant No. Blacksburg, VA 24061 DTRT12-G-UTC03 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report US Department of Transportation Final Report Research & Innovative Technology Admin UTC Program, RDT-30 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract Alternative intersections and interchanges, such as the diverging diamond interchange (DDI), the restricted crossing u-turn (RCUT), and the displaced left-turn intersection (DLT), have the potential to both improve safety and reduce delay. However, partially due to lingering questions about analysis methods and service measures for these designs, their rate of implementation remains low. -
Geometric Design Strategic Research TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2006 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OFFICERS
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH Number E-C110 January 2007 Geometric Design Strategic Research TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2006 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OFFICERS Chair: Michael D. Meyer, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Vice Chair: Linda S. Watson, Executive Director, LYNX–Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, Orlando Division Chair for NRC Oversight: C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2006 TECHNICAL ACTIVITIES COUNCIL Chair: Neil J. Pedersen, State Highway Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Technical Activities Director: Mark R. Norman, Transportation Research Board Christopher P. L. Barkan, Associate Professor and Director, Railroad Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Rail Group Chair Shelly R. Brown, Principal, Shelly Brown Associates, Seattle, Washington, Legal Resources Group Chair Christina S. Casgar, Office of the Secretary of Transportation, Office of Intermodalism, Washington, D.C., Freight Systems Group Chair James M. Crites, Executive Vice President, Operations, Dallas–Fort Worth International Airport, Texas, Aviation Group Chair Arlene L. Dietz, C&A Dietz, LLC, Salem, Oregon, Marine Group Chair Robert C. Johns, Director, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Policy and Organization Group Chair Patricia V. McLaughlin, Principal, Moore Iacofano Golstman, Inc., Pasadena, California, Public Transportation Group Chair Marcy S. Schwartz, Senior Vice President, CH2M HILL, Portland, Oregon, Planning and Environment Group Chair Leland D. Smithson, AASHTO SICOP Coordinator, Iowa Department of Transportation, Ames, Operations and Maintenance Group Chair L. David Suits, Executive Director, North American Geosynthetics Society, Albany, New York, Design and Construction Group Chair Barry M. -
Sarcee Trail and Richmond Road Interchange Functional Planning Study
Item # 7.9 Transportation Report to ISC: UNRESTRICTED SPC on Transportation & Transit TT2018-0079 2018 February 08 Page 1 of 6 Sarcee Trail and Richmond Road Interchange Functional Planning Study EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report outlines the recommendations of the Sarcee Trail and Richmond Road Interchange Functional Planning Study completed by ISL Engineering and Land Services Ltd. A summary of the study that identifies the recommended interchange plan and the public engagement program undertaken as part of this study is included in Attachment 1. The recommendations from the study, if approved, will inform the next corporate capital infrastructure investment plan prioritization process (formerly Investing in Mobility), with anticipation that the interchange will be included as a candidate project for funding. As the Southwest Calgary Ring Road (SWCRR) is scheduled to open by Fall 2021, an approved and updated plan will allow administration to evaluate the option to design and construct the interchange in coordination with the SWCRR project, should the project be funded in the next capital infrastructure investment plan. ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION: That the SPC on Transportation and Transit recommends that Council: 1. Approve the Executive Summary for the Sarcee Trail and Richmond Road Interchange Functional Planning Study including the recommended interchange plan as summarized on Exhibits ES-5 and ES-6 of Attachment 1; and 2. Direct Administration to include the recommended interchange plan as summarized on Exhibits ES-5 and ES-6 of Attachment 1 as a candidate project for evaluation within the next update of the Transportation Infrastructure Investment Plan (TIIP) prioritization process. RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPC ON TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT, DATED 2018 FEBRUARY 08: That the Administration Recommendations contained in Report TT2017-0079 be approved.