Analysis Scenarios Sample Clauses

Analysis Scenarios. The Business-as-usual (BAU) scenario corresponded to 2035 population and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) projection in MTC’s 2035 long-range transportation plan. This scenario assumed that certain level of improvement to passenger vehicles carbon emission rates would result by 2035 from incrementally improved fuel economy. The Low-carbon driving (LCD) scenario assumed the same VMT as the BAU scenario. Carbon emissions by automobiles and light trucks (i.e., light-duty vehicles) were assumed to be lower than in other scenarios owing to increased adoption of LCD fleets, including gas-electric hybrid vehicles and light-duty diesel, biofuel, and electric plug-in vehicles. Two active transportation scenarios (short trip and carbon and physical activity goal) assumed the same total travel distances by all modes as the BAU scenario while assuming increased shares in active transportation. The short trip (ST) scenario assumed a shift of 50% of BAU miles traveled in automobiles for less than 1.5 miles to walking and 50% of BAU miles traveled in automobiles for 1.5 to 5 miles to bicycling. The 2000 Bay Area Travel Survey identified that 24% of car trips in the area were less than 1.5 miles and 33.8% were between 1.5 and 5 miles. The carbon/physical activity goal (C/PAG) scenario optimized both physical activity participation and vehicular CO2 emission reductions by setting the time for participation in walking and bicycling to the median commute times identified in the journey to work data of the American Community Survey for the San Francisco Bay area (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). To estimate CO2 emissions for all scenarios, the amount of CO2 emissions for a 2010 baseline scenario corresponding to MTC’s 2035 long-range transportation plan was first estimated using MTC’s travel demand model (Brazil and Xxxxxx, 2009). To determine CO2 emission reductions for the BAU and LCD scenarios, percent reductions of CO2 emissions estimated by Xxxxxx (2010) for low-carbon vehicles were applied to the baseline CO2 emissions based on the shares of low-carbon vehicles assumed in the BAU and LCD scenarios. For the active transport scenarios, estimation of CO2 emissions was based on the reduced annual vehicle miles resulting from increases in active transport miles assumed for the scenarios. For each active transport scenario, only VMT of light-duty vehicles (i.e., passenger cars and light trucks) were changed, holding constant for VMT for all other vehicle classes and estimates for nonmo...
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Analysis Scenarios. To estimate the health impacts of increasing amount of walking and bicycling for transportation in the region, NAMPO created three analysis scenarios (conservative, moderate, and aggressive), each with progressively higher average active transportation (walking and bicycling) participation, while holding total miles traveled by all modes constant (see Table 13). It’s noted that the miles of walking and bicycling of the aggressive scenario correspond to the minimum physical activity recommendation (i.e., at least 150 minutes per week of moderate- intensity aerobic physical activity) in the 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines of US Department of Health and Human Services (2008). A fourth scenario, injury-neutral, was created to determine the reduction in vehicle miles that would be needed to offset additional injuries and fatalities incurred by increasing the average weekly walking and bicycling per person by 1 mile each.
Sample 1Sample 2
Analysis Scenarios. Three unadopted future alternatives (i.e.,S1, S2, and S3) documented in SACOG’s 2016 MTP/SCS were evaluated for the planning horizon year of 2036. The scenarios vary by the amount of investment in facilities for automobile vs. alternative transportation (i.e., public transit and active transportation) and by development densities for residential units and employment. For the MTP/SCS plan adopted in 2016, evaluation for future impacts was performed for year 2020, 2027, and 2036 to see how health benefits are expected to progress over the years. A detailed comparison of the alternatives and the adopted plan is shown in Table 15. Table 15 SACOG 2016 MTP/SCS Alternatives and Adopted 2016 Plan
Sample 1Sample 2
Analysis Scenarios. Once the Nashville ITHIM model was calibrated, three scenarios (i.e., conservative, moderate, and aggressive) were developed, each with progressively higher average active transportation (walking and bicycling) participation, while holding total miles traveled by all modes constant. Data from MTTHS showed that residents in the greater Nashville area engaged in an average of 0.7 mile per week of active transportation by walking and 0.3 mile by xxxxxxxxx (Xxxxxx and Xxxxxxxxx, 2017). In the conservative scenario, average distance of walking for transportation was increased to 1.7 miles per capita per week and 1.0 mile for biking. In the moderate scenario, average walking distance was increased to 3.7 miles and bicycling 1.5 miles per capita miles per week, which were translated to roughly 10 additional minutes or walking or biking per day based on average walking and cycling speeds. The aggressive scenario was constructed such that miles of walking or bicycling correspond to the minimum physical activity recommendation (i.e., at least 150 minutes per week of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity) in the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (USDHH, 2018), which translated to 5.7 miles of walking or 3.0 miles of cycling per capita per week. Figure 11 shows the comparison of walking and biking distances and minutes by scenarios. Source: Xxxxxx (2015); AT: Active Transportation Figure 11 Active transportation participation by scenarios.
Sample 1Sample 2
Analysis Scenarios. This study evaluated the health outcomes of the adopted SACOG’s 2016 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy for three future years (i.e., 2020, 2027, and 2036). Additionally, three alternative scenarios (i.e., S1, S2, and S3) were also evaluated for health impacts for year 2036. The three scenarios vary in percent increase (i.e., as compared to the 2012 baseline) of land use and transportation investments (Table 29). S2 is the scenario preferred by SACOG. Results of all scenarios are presented as changes with respect to the 2012 baseline conditions. Table 29 Description of the Analysis Scenario for Disaggregated ITHIM Implementation for SACOG MTC/SCS Source: Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx, Xx, Igbinedion, and London (2017)
Sample 1Sample 2
Analysis Scenarios. (7)(10) Whether or not truck or heavy vehicle distributions need to be considered separately;
Sample 1Sample 2
Analysis Scenarios. The analysis shall have a timeframe adequate to address all phases of the proposed development. Intersections shall be analyzed using the four scenarios in Table 5.8.6.B.3.g: Analysis Scenario Requirements, and shall include queue analysis: Table 5.8.6.B.3.g: Analysis Scenario Requirements Type of Scenario [1] Existing Annual Growth [2] Approved Developments Proposed Development Necessary Improvements Existing X No-Build X X X Build X X X X Build Improved [3] X X X X X Notes: [1] For a phased proposed development analysis, the build and build improved conditions shall be assessed, and the traffic associated with each previous phase shall be included in the analysis of each successive phase of the proposed development. [2] The Annual Growth rate will be determined in the Memorandum of Understanding (see Section 5.8.6.B.3.c). [3] This scenario may be eliminated if improvements are not necessary to satisfy any queuing problems or the LOS criteria in Section 5.8.6.B.4.j(2), Recommendations. (Ord. No. 2016-001, 05/10/2016)
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Analysis Scenarios. Consistent with the County’s TIA guidelines, intersection analysis will be provided for the following analysis scenarios: • Existing (2019) Conditions • Existing plus Project Conditions • Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project (E+A+P) Conditions • Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project Plus Cumulative (E+A+P+C) Conditions As the Project is consistent with the County’s General Plan Land Use and Zoning, a build-out analysis is not required per the County’s TIA guidelines. All study area intersections will be analyzed using the Synchro (Version 10) software using the HCM 6th Edition methodology. In addition, the traffic impact analysis will include Basic Freeway Segment, Ramp Junction (Merge/Diverge), and off-ramp queuing analyses at I-215 Freeway interchange at Xxxxxx Xxxx Boulevard consistent with Caltrans requirements. SPECIAL ISSUES The following special issues will be addressed in the traffic study: • Provide a queuing analysis for the Project driveways and site adjacent intersections to determine necessary storage lengths.
Sample 1
Analysis Scenarios. Consistent with Engineering Bulletin #06-13, the following analysis scenarios are proposed for this traffic study: • Existing (2014) Conditions • Existing plus Project Conditions • Opening Year Cumulative (2015) without Project Conditions • Opening Year Cumulative (2015) with Project Conditions In accordance with Engineering Bulletin #06-13, improvements fully funded by the City of La Quinta’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) will be assumed to be in place for Existing plus Project conditions. Improvements fully funded by the City’s CIP, the Development Impact Fee Program (DIF) and the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program (TUMF) are assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative (2015) conditions. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) CRITERIA Per Engineering Bulletin #06-13, the following LOS criteria will be utilized for study area intersections: Intersection Type LOS Criteria Signalized Intersection LOS “D” or better All-way Stop Controlled Intersection LOS “D” or better for all critical movements Cross-Street Stop Controlled Intersection LOS “E” or better for the side street The City of La Quinta has established LOS “D” as the minimum level of service for its street segments. PREFERRED ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY The study area intersections will be analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 methodology. The parameters provided in Attachment 2 of Engineering Bulletin #06-13 will be utilized for the purposes of this analysis, unless directed otherwise.
Sample 1

Related to Analysis Scenarios

  • CONSEQUENCES OF POSITIVE TEST RESULTS For post-Accident or reasonable suspicion, a Covered Employee shall be immediately removed from performing his or her job or, in the alternative, may be temporarily reassigned to work that is not safety-sensitive if such work is available. The Covered Employee shall be subject to disciplinary action, and shall meet with the SAPC, as set forth in Exhibit A, and section 10 below, if the Covered Employee:

  • TRUNK FORECASTING 58.1. CLEC shall provide forecasts for traffic utilization over trunk groups. Orders for trunks that exceed forecasted quantities for forecasted locations will be accommodated as facilities and/or equipment are available. Embarq shall make all reasonable efforts and cooperate in good faith to develop alternative solutions to accommodate orders when facilities are not available. Company forecast information must be provided by CLEC to Embarq twice a year. The initial trunk forecast meeting should take place soon after the first implementation meeting. A forecast should be provided at or prior to the first implementation meeting. The semi-annual forecasts shall project trunk gain/loss on a monthly basis for the forecast period, and shall include:

  • Disturbance Analysis Data Exchange The Parties will cooperate with one another and the NYISO in the analysis of disturbances to either the Large Generating Facility or the New York State Transmission System by gathering and providing access to any information relating to any disturbance, including information from disturbance recording equipment, protective relay targets, breaker operations and sequence of events records, and any disturbance information required by Good Utility Practice.

  • Protocols Each party hereby agrees that the inclusion of additional protocols may be required to make this Agreement specific. All such protocols shall be negotiated, determined and agreed upon by both parties hereto.

  • Screening 3.13.1 Refuse containers located outside the building shall be fully screened from adjacent properties and from streets by means of opaque fencing or masonry walls with suitable landscaping.

  • First sampling In the first sampling four lamps are selected at random. The first sample of two is marked A, the second sample of two is marked B.

  • Drug Test Results 1. All records pertaining to department-required drug tests shall remain confidential, and shall not be provided to other employers or agencies without the written permission of the person whose records are sought. However, medical, administrative, and immediate supervisory personnel may have access to relevant portions of the records as necessary to insure the acceptable performance of the officer's job duties.

  • Treatment Program Testing The Employer may request or require an employee to undergo drug and alcohol testing if the employee has been referred by the employer for chemical dependency treatment or evaluation or is participating in a chemical dependency treatment program under an employee benefit plan, in which case the employee may be requested or required to undergo drug or alcohol testing without prior notice during the evaluation or treatment period and for a period of up to two years following completion of any prescribed chemical dependency treatment program.

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order.

  • Random Testing Notwithstanding any provisions of the Collective Agreement or any special agreements appended thereto, section 4.6 of the Canadian Model will not be applied by agreement. If applied to a worker dispatched by the Union, it will be applied or deemed to be applied unilaterally by the Employer. The Union retains the right to grieve the legality of any imposition of random testing in accordance with the Grievance Procedure set out in this Collective Agreement.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.