INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 635

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 635"

Transcription

1 INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 635 FROM: WEST OF GREENVILLE AVE TO: NORTH OF TOWN EAST BLVD DALLAS COUNTY CSJ: & ACCESS JUSTIFICATION IH 635 CORRIDOR EAST SECTION October 3, 2002 Texas Department Transportation Dallas District LBJ Project Office Table of Contents Introduction 1

2 Existing Roadway Network 2 Transportation and Land Use Plans 2 Regional Traffic Needs 2 Reasonable Alternatives 3 Connections and Design 4 Operational Analysis 9 Conclusion 17 Tables Table 1: Existing and Proposed Mainlane Access Locations 4 Table 2: Category 1 Added Ramps 7 Table 3: Category 2 Reconfigured Ramps 8 Table 4: Category 3 Eliminated/Revised Ramps 8 Table 5: Category 1 Ramp LOS 10 Table 6: Category 2 Ramp LOS 11 Table 7: Category 3 Ramp LOS 13 Exhibits Exhibit 1: IH 635 Corridor Layout 19 Exhibit 2: Existing East Section 21 Exhibit 3: LBJ Freeway Corridor Recommended Design Schematic 27 Exhibit 4: Proposed East Section 28

3 ACCESS JUSTIFICATION LBJ Corridor East Section Introduction The IH 635 (LBJ Freeway) corridor is located in the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area. The corridor is approximately 21 miles in length extending from Luna Road, west of IH 35E, to US 80, in the City of Mesquite. Its width extends from Beltline Road on North to Loop 12 on south. Municipalities located along this corridor include the cities of Farmers Branch, Dallas, Garland and Mesquite. The LBJ freeway corridor encompasses one of the most highly developed commercial and residential areas in North Texas. The completion of LBJ freeway in the 1970 s resulted in significant population and employment growth in the region. This growth in conjunction with the opening of DFW International Airport led to traffic demand that greatly exceeded predictions. The LBJ freeway serves a variety of trip purposes. It serves long distance trips accessing other regional facilities such as IH 35E, Dallas North Tollway, US 75, IH 30 and US 80. The residential and commercial developments within the region serve as origins and destinations for shorter and local trips. The combination of these users has resulted in significant congestion for many hours each day. Predicted development and travel demand growth for the area indicate that the problem will continue to worsen. The corridor is divided into 4 sections. The West section is from Luna Road to Park Central Boulevard. The Dallas High Five section is from Park Central Boulevard to West of Greenville Ave. The East section is from East of Greenville Ave including the Greenville Ave underpass to North of Town East Boulevard. The Mesquite section is from North of Town East Boulevard to US 80. Exhibit 1 depicts the general area. The West, East and Mesquite Sections are in the final stages of the NEPA process. The East Section design schematics and Environmental Assessments (EAs) have been approval by the FHWA for presentations at Public Hearings scheduled on October 10, The West Section design schematics has been approved. The West Section EAs has been submitted to TxDOT s Environmental Affairs Division in Austin for review and resource coordination, and further processing with FHWA. After FHWA approval of the EAs, Public Hearings will be held. In addition, the Mesquite Section Public Hearing was held on May 7, 2002 and the Mesquite Section phase I PS&E has been completed and phase II PS&E is going to start soon. The Dallas High Five is currently under construction. The Mesquite section access justification has been separately performed and approved by the FHWA and TxDOT s Design Division. This report covers the access justification for the East section 1

4 of the LBJ freeway corridor. The West section access justification will be submitted in a separate report. This report will describe the existing facility, its relation to the regional transportation and land use plan, other alternatives evaluated, and the design and operational characteristics of the proposed ramps. Existing Roadway Network The LBJ freeway generally consists of eight mainlanes except at interchanges. One-way service roads are generally two and three lanes wide and are not continuous. Right-of-way (ROW) width varies from 330 to 450 depending on the existence of service roads, interchange design and drainage requirements. Within the East section, there exists one major cross highway, IH 30. There are 16 major cross street intersections. Access situations vary from full access to no access from the LBJ freeway. There are no HOV lanes in the East section. Exhibit 2 demonstrates the detailed access situation at each cross street and the IH 30 interchange. The average daily traffic (ADT) in the year 1997 and number of lanes on the East Section of existing roadway network are also shown in the Exhibit 2. Transportation and Land Use Plans The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for this region, is responsible for preparing financially constrained regional transportation plans. A Major Investment Study (MIS) was completed for the entire corridor in The LBJ freeway has been a major factor in commercial development. In 1995, total employment for Dallas County was approximately 1.44 million. The LBJ corridor study boundaries contained nearly 80% of the total employment in Dallas County. The results of this study have been included in each the region s Mobility plan since that time. The proposed action is consistent with the area s financially constrained Metropolitan Transportation Plan, Mobility 2025 Plan Update. Regional Traffic Needs The dramatic population growth and the variety of trip purposes served within the LBJ corridor led to travel demands that far exceeded original projections for the freeway. The average daily traffic for LBJ freeway has continued to increase each year from 100,000 vehicle per day (vpd) in 1976 to 230,000 vpd in 1994 to a projected volume of 400,000 vpd in The extremely high traffic volumes result in significant congestion for many hours each day. The high travel demand for the freeway has forced traffic to spread out beyond the normal peak periods and congested conditions now exist for most of the day. For example, the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) of Texas A&M University made traffic count of one middle-inside EB IH 635 lane at west of 2

5 Greenville Avenue on April 25, 1995 (Tuesday). The 15-hour (7AM to 10 PM) traffic volumes are 22,417 vehicles with the highest hourly volume of 2,022 and lowest hourly volume of 1,200. Transportation improvements implemented on and near LBJ freeway have not been able to satisfy the ever-increasing travel demand in the area and reduce congestion on the facility. Predicted development and travel demand growth for the area indicate that the problem will continue to worsen in the foreseeable future. The current and projected travel demands clearly indicate the need for improvements. Reasonable Alternatives The following reasonable alternatives were evaluated to determine if they met the traffic demand in the corridor: programmed improvements (no-build), transportation system management (TSM), and transportation demand management (TDM). It was concluded after the evaluation that these alternatives could not meet the traffic demand. Following is a discussion of each of these alternatives. Programmed Improvements (no-build): Programmed improvements are projects that are included in the regional transportation plan, Mobility 2025 plan, and have funding programmed for their construction. The local streets that can be used as partial relief routes are Forest Lane to the south and Spring Valley to the north. These streets are currently serving at full capacities with their own congestion problems during the peak periods. The President George Bush Turnpike (PGBT) is a toll road and is more than 4 miles north of the IH 635. In addition, most of the PGBT sections that are currently functioning are located west of US 75. Without the currently proposed complete revamping, LBJ freeway cannot accommodate the future traffic demand. TSM Strategies: TSM strategies improve the flow of traffic through improvements to the transportation network and include traffic signal timing improvements, signing improvements and intersection geometry improvements. NCTCOG, TxDOT and the surrounding cities have identified and been working on various intersection improvement projects. These improvements will mostly benefit and smoothen the local/off-system traffic flow, and their impacts on the LBJ freeway mainlanes are negligible. TDM Strategies: TDM strategies reduce or manage traffic demand and include strategies such as Employer Trip Reduction (ETR) program, telecommuting, flexible work hours and ride sharing. The private corporations and public entities along the LBJ corridor have already implemented various such programs. In addition, nonwork related trips such as dropping children off at daycare or school, shopping, lunch, along with the geographic diversification of land uses create the dependency on the private automobile. The Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) lines are basically radial lines in relative to IH 635, see Exhibit 3. DART will relief radial traffic congestion, such as congestion on US 75, rather than the congestion on IH 635. It is evident that TDM 3

6 strategies alone cannot improve the congestion significantly. Connections and Design The new East section schematic calls for continuous frontage roads and ten mainlanes. In addition, 4 HOV/HOT lanes (2 in each direction) from east of Preston to Miller and 2 reversible HOV/HOT lanes from Miller to north of IH30 are proposed. As a result, some mainlane ramps have been added or deleted from the existing freeway network. The diagrammatic representation of the proposed LBJ freeway is shown in Exhibit 4. The projected average daily traffic (ADT) in the year 2020 and number of lanes on the East Section of proposed roadway network are also shown in the Exhibit 4. The proposed and existing mainlane access locations from east of Greenville Ave to north of Town East Blvd including the IH 635/IH 30 interchange are summarized in the following table in reference to the Exhibits 2 and 4. TABLE 1: Existing and Proposed Mainlane Access Locations Proposed Existing East Bound Traffic Ramp Type Ramp Type Fr EB ML to Abrams off Fr EB ML to Abrams Off (Ramp W-A) Fr Greenville to EB ML On Fr Greenville to EB ML On (Ramp G-E) Fr EB ML to Skillman Off Fr Forest of EB ML On (Ramp W-S) Fr Forest to EB ML On Fr EB ML to Skillman Off (Ramp F-E) Fr EB ML to Miller Off Fr Skillman to EB ML On (Ramp W-M) Fr EB ML to Plano Off Fr EB ML to Miller Off (Ramp W-P) Fr HOV to EB ML (Ramp HOV-E) On,HOV Ramp Fr Miller to EB ML On Table 1 Continue Fr Miller to EB ML On Fr EB ML to Plano Off (Ramp M-E) Fr EB ML to Kingsley Off Fr Plano to EB ML On (Ramp W-K) Fr Plano to EB ML On Fr EB ML to Kingsley Off (Ramp P-E) Fr EB ML to Jupiter Off Fr Jupiter to EB ML On (Ramp W-J) Fr Kingsley to EB ML On Fr EB ML to Garland Off (Ramp K-E) Fr EB ML to Garland Off Fr EB ML to NWHY Off (Ramp W-G) Fr Jupiter to EB ML On Fr NWHY to EB ML On (Ramp J-E) Fr EB ML to NWHY Off Fr EB ML to Centerville Off 4

7 (Ramp W-NW) Fr Shiloh to EB ML On (Ramp S-E) Fr EB ML to Centerville Off (Ramp W-C) Fr NWHY to EB ML On (Ramp NW-E) East Bound Turns to South Bound Fr Centerville to SB ML On Fr Centerville to SB ML On (Ramp C-S) Fr SB ML to LaPrada Off Fr SB ML to LaPrada Off (Ramp N-LP) Fr SB ML to Oates Off Fr SB ML to Oates Off (Ramp N-O) Fr LaPrada to SB ML On Fr Oates to SB ML On (Ramp LP-S) Fr HOV to SB ML (HOV-S) On,HOV Ramp Fr Galloway to SB ML (Ramp O/G-S) On Fr SB ML to Town East (Ramp N-TE) Off Fr SB ML to Town East Off IH 635/IH 30 Interchange Access Point at IH 635 Access Point at IH 635 Fr SB ML to DC Off Fr SB ML to EB IH 30 Off (Conn N-W/E) Fr SB ML to WB IH 30 Off Fr DC to SB ML On Fr EB IH 30 to SB ML On (Conn E/W-S) Fr WB IH 30 to SB ML On Fr NB ML to DC Off FR NB ML to WB IH 30 Off (Conn S-E/W) Fr NB ML to EB IH 30 Off Fr DC to NB ML On Fr WB IH 30 to NB ML On (Conn E/W-N) Fr EB IH 30 to NB ML On Access Point at IH 30 Access Point at IH 30 Off Fr EB IH 30 to NB ML Fr EB IH 30 to SB ML Fr EB IH 30 to DC (Conn W-N/S) Off Off Table 1 Continue Fr DC to EB IH 30 On Fr NB ML to EB IH 30 On (Conn N/S-E) Fr SB ML to EB IH 30 On Fr WB IH 30 to DC Off Fr WB IH 30 to SB ML Off (Conn E-N/S) Fr WB IH 30 to NB ML Off Fr DC to WB IH 30 On Fr SB ML to WB IH 30 On (Conn N/S-W) Fr NB ML to WB IH 30 On North Bound Traffic Fr Town East to NB ML On Fr Town East to NB ML On (Ramp TE-N) Fr NB ML to Galloway Off Fr NB ML to Oates Off (Ramp S-G/O) Fr NB ML to HOV (S-HOV) Off HOV Fr NB ML to LaPrada Off (Ramp S-LP) Fr Oates to NB ML On Fr Oates to NB ML On (Ramp O-N) Fr NB ML to Centerville Off Fr LaPrada to NB ML On 5

8 (Ramp S-C) Fr LaPrada to NB ML (Ramp LP-N) On Fr NB ML to Centerville off North Bound Turns to West Bound Fr WB ML to NWHW Off Fr Centerville to WB ML On (Ramp E-NW) Fr Centerville to WB ML On Fr WB ML to NWHW Off (Ramp C-W) Fr WB ML to Shiloh Off (Ramp E-S) Fr NWHW to WB ML On Fr NWHW to WB ML On (Ramp NW-E) Fr WB ML to Jupiter Off Fr Garland to WB ML On (Ramp E-J) Fr Garland to WB ML On Fr WB ML to Jupiter Off (Ramp G-W) Fr Jupiter to WB ML On Fr Jupiter to WB ML On (Ramp J-W) Fr WB ML to Plano (Ramp E-P) Off Fr WB ML to Plano Off Fr Kingsley to WB ML On Fr Plano to WB ML On (Ramp K-W) Fr WB ML to Miller Off Fr WB ML to Miller Off (Ramp E-M) Fr Plano to WB ML On Fr Miller to WB ML On (Ramp P-W) Fr WB ML to HOV (Ramp E-HOV) Off HOV Fr Miller to WB ML On Fr WB ML to Skillman Off (Ramp M-W) Fr WB ML to Forest (Ramp E-F) Off Fr Skillman to WB ML On Fr Skillman to WB ML (Ramp S-W) Fr WB ML to Greenville (Ramp E-G) Fr Abrams to WB ML (Ramp A-W) # of EB/SB ML/Cross Street On Ramps # of EB/SB ML/Cross Street Off Ramps # of EB/SB ML/HOV Access # of IH635/IH30 Interchange Access # of NB/WB ML/Cross Street On Ramps # of NB/WB ML/Cross Street Off Ramps # of NB/WB ML/HOV Access Note: Table 1 Continue On Fr WB ML to Forest Off Off Fr WB ML to Greenville Off On Fr Abrams to WB ML On Summary

9 Ramp name convention: For off-ramp, the first letter shows from what direction (west, east, south or north) and the second letter denotes to which cross street. For example, ramp W-G indicates the EB ( from west) off ramp to Garland Road. For on-ramp, the first letter shows from which cross street and the second letter denotes to what direction. For example, ramp G-W indicates from Garland Road to west (WB mainlane). Three categories of access that are included in the proposed schematic need to be justified. Category 1: Category 1 access is for any ramps that will provide mainlane on/off access that do not exist today (including mainlane/hov access locations). Category 2: Category 2 access is for reconfigured interchanges. The proposed IH 635/IH 30 interchange in the East Section falls into this category, according to the FHWA guidance. Category 3: Category 3 access is for eliminated ramp access and reversed ramp access that will be investigated case by case to ensure that no adverse effect exists. In reference to the Exhibits 2, 4 and table 1, table 2 lists 13 ramps that are classified as Category 1 access. Table 2: Category 1 Added Ramps Proposed Ramps Type Note 1. EB W-J Off Mainlanes/FR Access 2. EB K-E On Mainlanes/FR Access Table 2 Continue 3. WB K-W On Mainlanes/FR Access 4. EB S-E On Mainlanes/FR Access 5. WB E-S Off Mainlanes/FR Access 6. SB LP-S On Mainlanes/FR Access 7. NB S-LP Off Mainlanes/FR Access 8. SB O/G-S On Mainlanes/FR Access 9. NB S-O/G Off Mainlanes/FR Access 10. EB HOV-E On Mainlanes/HOV Access 11. WB E-HOV Off Mainlanes/HOV Access 12. SB HOV-S On Mainlanes/HOV Access 13. NB S-HOV off Mainlanes/HOV Access Table 3 shows the reconfigured IH 635/IH 30 interchange connectors that are defined as Category 2 access. Table 3: Category 2 Reconfigured Ramps Direct Connectors Note 1. Conn N-W/E Exit from SB IH 635 to EB and WB IH Conn E/W-S Entrance from EB and WB IH 30 to SB IH Conn S-E/W Exit from NB IH 635 to EB and WB IH Conn E/W-N Entrance from EB and WB IH 30 to NB IH Conn W-N/S EB IH 30 Exit to NB and SB IH 635 7

10 6. Conn N/S-E Entrance from NB and SB IH 635 to EB IH Conn E-N/S WB IH 30 Exit to NB and SB IH Conn N/S-W Entrance from NB and SB IH 635 to WB IH 30 Due to the proposed continuous frontage roads, widened mainlanes, added HOV lanes and reconstruction of all cross street overpasses/underpasses, all the cross street access ramps will be revised compared to the existing conditions. Table 4 lists all eliminated access and on/off reversed ramps (Category 3 access). Table 4: Category 3 Eliminated/Revised Ramps Ramps Note 1. EB from Skillman to ML Eliminated Access 2. WB from ML to Skillman Eliminated Access 3. SB from Oates to ML Eliminated Access 4. NB from ML to Oates Eliminated Access 5a. EB W-S Pair Reversed on/off Order 5b. EB F-E (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) 6a. EB W-P 6b. EB M-E Pair Reversed on/off Order (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) 7a. EB W-K 7b. EB P-E Pair Reversed on/off Order (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) 8a. EB W-G 8b. EB J-E Pair Reversed on/off Order (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) 9a. EB W-C 9b. EB NW-E 10a. NB S-C 10b. NB LP-N 11a. WB E-NW 11b. WB C-W 12a. WB E-J 12b. WB G-W 13a. WB E-M 13b. WB P-W 14a. WB E-F 14b. WB S-W Table 4 Continue Pair Reversed on/off Order (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) Pair Reversed on/off Order (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) Pair Reversed on/off Order (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) Pair Reversed on/off Order (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) Pair Reversed on/off Order (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) Pair Reversed on/off Order (off-ramp followed by on-ramp) Operational Analysis The operational analyses of the mainlanes that are affected by the three (3) categories of access ramps have been performed in accordance with the procedures outlined in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), using Highway Capacity Software (HCS). The analysis consists of freeway analysis, weaving analysis and ramp analysis, whenever applicable. The projected year 2020 traffic volumes on IH 635 mainlanes, HOV/HOT lanes and ramps are from TxDOT Transportation Planning and Programming (TP&P) Division and shown in Exhibit 4. The average daily traffics (ADTs) have been converted to peak hourly rate by a K factor of 0.08 in order to calculate the level of service (LOS) of peak hour. 8

11 For weaving analysis, there would be a small volume of traffic that would take the entrance ramp followed by the exit ramp (ramp to ramp weaving traffic). This percentage is assumed to be half the percentage of exiting traffic in the weaving area. For example, if 20% of the vehicles in the weaving area will exit the freeway, then 10% of the entrance ramp traffic would be exiting the freeway. The HCS can only analyze weaving sections with a maximum of five lanes. For six-lane weaving area (5 upstream lanes plus 1 auxiliary lane) analysis, a factor of 4/5 is applied to the mainlane volume upstream from the weaving area to proportionally project volume to a five lane weaving section. The Level of Services (LOS) for Category 1 ramps are shown in Table 5. The freeway analysis evaluates the LOS of freeway segment due to the addition of traffic volume by proposed access ramps. The ramp analysis studies the LOS of ramp-freeway junctions due to the addition of the proposed access ramps. The weaving analysis investigates the potential weaving between the proposed access ramp and adjacent ramps. Table 5: Category 1 Ramp LOS LOS Analysis Ramp Freeway Weaving Ramp Remark W-J C D C Access to 6 lane Jupiter Road. K-E D E C Without ramp K-E, traffic has to pass through the Jupiter intersection to use ramp J-E that is projected to carry an ADT of 27,600 in K-W C D B Ramp K-W is estimated to carry 4,000 ADT in Without it, traffic has to pass through the Plano intersection to use ramp P-W that is projected to carry an ADT of 9,100 in S-E C D C Ramp S-E has to be provided since there is no frontage road between Shiloh and Northwest Highway. E-S D D C Provide access to DART Parkn-Ride station. LP-S C E C Without ramp LP-S, traffic can either not access IH 30 or have to pass through two intersections (Oates and Galloway) to access IH

12 S-LP C NO Weaving C Without ramp S-LP, traffic has to pass through three intersections (IH 30, Galloway and Oates) to access LaPrada. O/G-S C D C Without ramp O/G-S, traffic has to pass through Town East Blvd intersection to access IH 635. S-G/O C D D Without ramp S-G/O, traffic has to pass through Town East Blvd intersection to access Galloway and Oates. HOV-E C No Weaving E-HOV C No Weaving C D This is the first EB HOV/ML access in the LBJ East Section. This access serves the DART Transit Center. This is the last WB HOV/ML access for the LBJ east Section. Table 5 Continue HOV-S C No Weaving C This is the end of HOV the system. S-HOV C No Weaving C This is the beginning of the HOV system. Based on the calculated freeway and ramp operational analyses, the level of service (LOS) will not be lowered in locations where the new points of access are being provided. This is because the traffic volume added by the new ramps in general is relatively small compared to the through traffic volume on the proposed five lane freeway. On the other hand, the potential weaving caused by adding the new ramps will lower the peak hour LOS to a certain degree in most cases. However, the peak hour LOS is still at an acceptable level. The benefit of adding these ramps far outweights the disadvantages of not providing these ramps. In addition, the new proposed access points all connect to public roads and provide for all traffic movements. By providing these ramps, traffic time will be saved, mobility will be improved, and the traffic burden on frontage roads and cross street intersections will be significantly relieved. Category 2 access characteristics are summarized in Table 6. These IH 635/IH 30 interchange access locations must be provided. The operational analysis shows the improvements from the proposed intersection access configuration (page 6 of Exhibit 4) over the existing interchange access locations (page 6 of Exhibit 2). 10

13 Table 6: Category 2 Ramp LOS Proposed Existing Remark Access IH Conn N-W/E a)weaving with ramp LP-S LOS=E (2020 traffic) (see Category 1 weaving analysis for ramp LP-S) b)one exit point from SB IH 635 to both EB and WB IH Conn E/W-S a)eliminate weaving with ramp N-TE b)one entrance point from both EB and WB IH 30 to SB IH 635 Ramp Analysis: LOS=C (2020 traffic) a)weaving between on ramp from Oates to SB IH 635 and off ramp from SB IH 635 to EB IH 30 LOS=C (1997 traffic) LOS=F (2020 traffic) b)two consecutive exit points 900 apart a)weaving between on ramp from WB IH 30 to SB IH 635 and off ramp from SB IH 635 to Town East Blvd LOS=C (1997 traffic) LOS=F (2020 traffic) b)two consecutive entrance points 1,300 apart SB IH 635 to Access EB & WB IH 30 Location. EB & WB IH 30 to access SB IH 635 Location. 3. Conn S-E/W a)eliminate weaving with ramp TE-N b)one exit point from NB IH 635 to both EB and WB IH 30 Ramp Analysis: LOS=C (2020 traffic) 4. Conn E/W-N a) Deleted NB off ramp to Oates, No Weaving. b)one entrance point from both EB and WB IH 30 to NB IH 635 Ramp Analysis: LOS=F (2020 traffic) 5. Conn W-N/S One exit point from EB IH 30 to both NB and SB IH 635 Ramp Analysis: LOS=D (2020 traffic) 6. Conn N/S-E One entrance point from both NB and SB IH 635 to EB IH 30 Ramp Analysis: LOS=C (2020 traffic) Table 6 Continue a)weaving between off ramp from NB IH 635 to WB IH 30 and on ramp from Town East Blvd to NB IH 635 LOS=C (1997 traffic) LOS=D (2020 traffic) b)two consecutive exit points 1,000 apart a)weaving between on ramp from EB IH 30 to NB IH 635 and off ramp from NB IH 635 to Oates LOS=E (1997 traffic) LOS=F (2020 traffic) b)two consecutive entrance points 1,200 apart Access IH30 Two consecutive exit Points 800 apart Ramp Analysis: LOS=D (1997 traffic) LOS=F (2020 traffic) Two consecutive entrance Points 1,300 apart Ramp Analysis: LOS=B (1997 traffic) LOS=C (2020 traffic) NB IH 635 to Access EB & WB IH 30 Location. EB & WB IH 30 to access NB IH 635 Location. EB IH 30 to Access NB & SB IH 635 Location. NB & SB IH 635 to Access EB IH 30 location. 7. Conn E-N/S Two consecutive exit WB IH 30 to 11

14 One exit point from WB IH 30 to both NB and SB IH 635 Ramp Analysis: LOS=C (2020 trarric) 8. Conn N/S-W One entrance point from both NB and SB IH 635 to WB IH 30 Ramp Analysis: LOS=D (2020 traffic) Points 1,100 apart Ramp Analysis: LOS=C (1997 traffic) LOS=D (2020 traffic) Two consecutive entrance Points 1,200 apart Ramp Analysis: LOS=C (1997 traffic) LOS=F (2020 traffic) Access NB & SB IH 635 Location. NB & SB IH 635 to Access WB IH 30 location. Consolidating the existing dual points access situation into the proposed single point access for the IH 635/IH 30 interchange will serve two purposes. First, the existing two closely spaced consecutive exit and entrance access locations have been eliminated. Second, the weaving between the IH 635/IH 30 interchange access connectors and adjacent ramps that exists today have all been eliminated except one (Conn N-E/W) where the weaving length has been increased and thus, a better level of service (LOS=E) will be obtained. The year 2020 peak hour LOS of connector E/W-N (#4 in Table 6) will be F for both the existing dual point and reconfigured single point access situation. This is because the projected year 2020 peak hour traffic volume exceeds the capacity (5072 vehicle per hour for NB IH 635 mainlane and 4016 vehicle per hour for Conn E/W-N). In general, the traffic at the IH 635/IH 30 interchange area will be greatly improved as the Table 6 shown. Category 3 access is summarized in Table 7. Four ramps that exist today have been eliminated in the proposed schematic. The LOS has been calculated due to weaving if these four ramps would not be deleted. For the revised on/off ramp pairs, LOS has been computed and compared for both the ramp pairs being revised and not revised. Table 7: Category 3 Ramp LOS Proposed Existing 1. Eliminate direct entrance Ramp from Skillman to EB IH635. Traffic will pass through Miller intersection to use ramp M-E. DART LRT station HOV access by-pass is provided. Eliminate weaving with the EB IH 635 exit ramp to Miller. Freeway Analysis: LOS=C, 2020 traffic data 2. Eliminate direct exit ramp From WB IH635 to Skillman. Traffic will use ramp E-M. DART LRT station HOV by-pass is provided. Weaving between on-ramp from Skillman to EB IH 635 and off- Ramp from EB IH 635 to Miller. LOS=D, 1997 traffic data LOS=F, 2020 traffic data Weaving between on-ramp from Miller to WB IH 635 and off- Ramp from WB IH 635 to Skillman. 12

15 Eliminate weaving with the entrance ramp from Miller to WB IH 635. Freeway Analysis: LOS=C, 2020 traffic data 3. Eliminate direct entrance Ramp from Oates to SB IH 635 By providing new ramp LP-S, This ramp has to be removed. The function of this ramp is Provided by the new ramp O/G-S. Freeway Analysis: LOS=C, 2020 traffic data LOS=D, 1997 traffic data LOS=F, 2020 traffic data Weaving between on-ramp from Oates to SB IH 635 and off-ramp From SB IH 635 to EB IH 30. LOS=E, 1997 traffic data LOS=F, 2020 traffic data 4. Eliminate direct exit ramp From NB IH 635 to Oates By providing new ramp S-LP, This ramp has to be removed. The function of this ramp is Provided by the new ramp S-G/O. Freeway Analysis: LOS=C, 2020 traffic data 5a & 5b. reversed ramps EB off-ramp to Skillman followed by EB on-ramp from Forest. Created weaving between EB onramp from Greenville (G-E) and EB off-ramp to Skillman (W-S). LOS=D, 2020 traffic data 6a & 6b. Reversed ramps EB off-ramp to Plano followed by EB on-ramp from Miller. Eliminate weaving between these Two ramps. Prevent traffic from HOV-E ramp across 5 lanes to exit to Plano. Freeway Analysis: LOS=C, 2020 traffic data 7a & 7b. Reversed ramps EB off-ramp to Kingsley followed by EB on-ramp from Plano. Eliminate weaving between these Two ramps. Freeway Analysis: LOS=C, 2020 traffic data 8a & 8b. Reversed ramps EB off-ramp to Garland followed Table 7 Continue Weaving between on-ramp from EB IH30 to NB IH 635 and off-ramp From NB IH 30 to Oates. LOS=F, 1997 traffic data LOS=F, 2020 traffic data EB on-ramp from Forest followed by EB off-ramp to Skillman. Freeway Analysis: LOS=D, 2020 traffic data EB on-ramp from Miller followed by EB off-ramp to Plano. Weaving between ramps M-E and W-P. LOS=D, 1997 traffic data LOS=D, 2020 traffic data EB on-ramp from Plano followed by EB off-ramp to Kingsley. Weaving between ramps P-E and W-K. LOS=D, 1997 traffic data LOS=E, 2020 traffic data EB on-ramp from Jupiter followed by EB off-ramp to 13

16 by EB on-ramp from Jupiter. Created weaving between new EB on-ramp from Kingsley (K-E) and EB off-ramp to Garland (W-G). (LOS=E, see Category 1 weaving analysis for ramp K-E). Garland. Freeway Analysis: LOS=D, 2020 traffic data 9a & 9b. Reversed ramps EB off-ramp to Centerville followed by EB on-ramp from Northwest Highway. Created weaving between new EB on-ramp from Shiloh (S-E) and EB off-ramp to Centerville (W- C) (LOS=D, see Category 1 weaving analysis for ramp S-E). 10a & 10b. Reversed ramps NB off-ramp to Centerville followed by NB on-ramp from LaPrada. Created weaving between NB onramp from Oates (O-N) and NB off-ramp to Centerville (S-C). LOS=D, 2020 traffic data Created weaving between NB onramp from LaPrada (LP-N) and WB off-ramp to NWHW (E-NW). LOS=D, 2020 traffic data 11a & 11b. Reversed ramps WB off-ramp to NWHW followed by WB on-ramp from Centerville. Table 7 Continue EB on-ramp from Northwest Highway followed by EB off-ramp to Centerville. Freeway Analysis: LOS=D, 2020 traffic data NB on-ramp from LaPrada followed by NB off-ramp to Centerville. Freeway Analysis: LOS=D, 2020 traffic data WB on-ramp from Centerville followed by WB off-ramp to NWHW. Created weaving between EB onramp from Centerville (C-W) and new EB Off-ramp to Shiloh (E-S) (LOS=D, see Category 1 weaving analysis for ramp E-S). 12a & 12b. Reversed ramps WB off-ramp to Jupiter followed by WB on-ramp from Garland. Created weaving between WB onramp from NWHW (NW-W) and WB off-ramp to Jupiter (E-J) LOS=D, 2020 traffic data 13a & 13b. Reversed ramps Freeway Analysis: LOS=C, 2020 traffic data WB on-ramp from Garland followed by WB off-ramp to Jupiter. Freeway Analysis: LOS=D, 2020 traffic data WB on-ramp from plano followed 14

17 WB off-ramp to Miller followed by WB on-ramp from Plano. Created weaving between WB onramp from Kingsley (K-W) and WB off-ramp to Miller (E-M) (LOS=D, see Category 1 weaving analysis for ramp K-W). by WB off-ramp to Miller. Weaving between WB on-ramp from Plano and WB off-ramp to Miller. LOS=C, 1997 traffic data LOS=D, 2020 traffic data 14a & 14b. Reversed ramps WB off-ramp to Forest followed by WB on-ramp from Skillman. Table 7 Continue WB on-ramp from Skillman followed by WB off-ramp to Forest. Created weaving between WB onramp from Miller (M-W) and WB off-ramp to Forest (E-F). LOS=D, 2020 traffic data Create weaving between WB onramp from Skillman (S-W) and WB off-ramp to Greenville (E-G). LOS=E, 2020 traffic data Freeway Analysis: LOS=D, 2020 traffic data When the four existing access ramps get eliminated, so do the weaving problems. The future (year 2020) level of service will be C in the freeway sections. On the other hand, the year 2020 LOS at these four ramp locations for the future traffic condition will be F, if the four ramps do not get eliminated. There are ten pairs (20 ramps) of mainlane on/off ramp configurations that have been revised from an existing Diamond type to the proposed X type design, i.e., revising the existing on ramp followed by off ramp configuration to the proposed off ramp followed by on ramp configuration. For example, the existing EB mainlane between Forest Lane and Skillman Street showed the on ramp from Forest Lane followed by the off ramp to Skillman Street (see page 2 of Exhibit 2). The proposed design calls for the off ramp to Skillman Street followed by the on ramp from Forest Lane (see page 2 of Exhibit 4). The general design concepts to support the reconfigurations are listed below. 1. To eliminate weaving between pairs of ramps, if any. 2. The traffic on the proposed X type off ramp will have a higher speed (e.g., 55 MPH, since it is farther away from the destined intersection) than that on the existing Diamond type off ramp (e.g., 35 MPH, since it is closer to the destined intersection). Therefore, the proposed X type design will remove traffic from the mainlane to the frontage road more efficiently than the existing Diamond type design. In addition, the proposed X type design will provide better queuing at the intersection signal, preventing traffic from queuing onto the exit ramp during peak traffic conditions. 3. Although the existing Diamond design does not cause weaving at some locations (the weaving length is greater than the 15

18 theoretical threshold of 2,500 feet), many of the DFW metropolitan drivers are aggressive and delay their lane changing maneuver to the last couple hundred feet and thus, cause weaving. 4. The proposed X type design forces the local traffic to stay on the frontage road longer (entering the mainlane further downstream) and removes traffic from the mainlane to frontage road earlier than that of the existing Diamond type design, and thus, improve the mainlane traffic flow. 5. For the five-lane mainlane portions of the LBJ East Section, the weaving created by the proposed X type design for upstream and downstream ramps is limited to the outside two lanes. By removing traffic from the mainlane to frontage road earlier and injecting traffic from frontage road to mainlane later, the inside three mainlanes will have a better LOS. The only concern for the proposed X type design is that it will create weaving at a few locations when the two adjacent cross streets are relatively close and thus, the ramps to/from these two cross streets are relatively close. For example, when the existing scheme of the EB on-ramp from Jupiter Road followed by the EB off-ramp to Garland Road (see page 4 of Exhibit 2) has been revised to the EB off-ramp to Garland Road (ramp W-G) followed by EB on-ramp from Jupiter Road (ramp J-E), see page 4 of Exhibit 4, the potential weaving between these two ramps has been eliminated. However, it creates weaving between EB on-ramp from Kingsley Road (ramp K-E) and ramp W-G, see page 3 and 4 of Exhibit 4. The ramp K-E is now a new access ramp and is analyzed and justified as a Category 1 ramp. Conclusion The proposed new ramp access points (Category 1 Access) provide direct connections between major local cross streets and the IH 635 mainlanes. In most cases the mainlane LOS will not be lowered by adding these ramps. On the other hand without these ramps, vehicles will have to use the next or previous ramps to get to and leave from the cross streets. This will increase the congestion at these intersections that already exists today. For the reconfigured IH 635/IH 30 interchange (Category 2 Access), the existing 16 dual-point on and off access connectors have been revised to an 8 single-point on and off access connectors. The LOS has been significantly improved at the interchange area. Four existing ramps have been eliminated in the proposed schematic. This eliminates four future LOS=F weaving sections for the LBJ freeway. Ten pairs of ramps (twenty ramps) have been reversed. They have been converted from the existing Diamond configuration to proposed X configuration. It will eliminate the potential weaving between the pair of ramps, in addition to other advantages discussed in the Operational Analysis section for Category 3 access. The LOS will generally remain the same. The proposed new access ramps and revised access points meet the current standards for Federal-aid projects on the Interstate 16

19 System as required in the revision of the FHWA policy statement issued in the Federal Register on February 11, In conclusion, the analysis supports the justification for the proposed access revisions to the IH 635 mainlanes and HOV/HOT lanes. 17

20 .../East/Exhibit 2.dgn 9/10/2004 9:42:39 AM

21 .../East/Exhibit 2.dgn 9/10/2004 9:46:07 AM

22 .../East/Exhibit 2.dgn 9/10/2004 9:50:16 AM

23 .../East/Exhibit 2.dgn 9/10/2004 9:53:05 AM

24 .../East/Exhibit 2.dgn 9/10/2004 9:55:20 AM

25 .../East/Exhibit 2.dgn 9/10/2004 9:57:22 AM

26 LBJ Freeway Corridor Recommended Design Schematic LUNA RD I.H. 635 I.H.35E Luna HOV/ Toll (HOT) Access Locations IH 35E Webb Chapel DNT BELT LINE ROAD Midway LOOP 12 WEST Section I.H. 35E Preston US 75 CBD FR PGBT U.S. 75 TI Blvd. Skillman GARLAND ROAD Legend Mainlane EAST Section I.H.30 LBJ FREEWAY 8 Mainlanes +4/6 HOV/ Toll Lanes 10 Mainlanes + 4 HOV/Toll Lanes 10 Mainlanes + 2 Rev. HOV/Toll 10 Mainlanes DART Light Rail - Construction DART Light Rail - Planning HOV Lanes - Planning Garland S.H. 78 BELT LINE La Prada IH 30 N NTS I.H. 30 Mesquite Section U.S. 80 Oct. 10, 2002

27 .../East/Exhibit 4.dgn 9/10/2004 1:49:31 PM

28 .../East/Exhibit 4.dgn 9/10/2004 1:51:40 PM

29 .../East/Exhibit 4.dgn 9/10/2004 1:53:28 PM

30 .../East/Exhibit 4.dgn 9/10/2004 1:55:22 PM

31 .../East/Exhibit 4.dgn 9/10/2004 1:57:37 PM

32 .../East/Exhibit 4.dgn 9/10/2004 1:59:36 PM

IH 635 (LBJ Freeway) Corridor Study Implementation Approach. Initial meeting held in June Updated August 2002.

IH 635 (LBJ Freeway) Corridor Study Implementation Approach. Initial meeting held in June Updated August 2002. DNT IH 635 (LBJ Freeway) Corridor Study Initial meeting held in June 2001 Updated August 2002 How to move from three planning sections LBJ Corridor Study Study Sections I.H. 35E President George Bush Turnpike

More information

DRAFT. Draft Carbon Monoxide (CO) Traffic Air Quality Analysis

DRAFT. Draft Carbon Monoxide (CO) Traffic Air Quality Analysis Draft Carbon Monoxide (CO) Traffic Air Quality Analysis North Houston Highway Improvement Project From US 59/I-69 at Spur 527 To I-45 at Beltway 8 North Harris County TxDOT Houston District CSJ: 0912-00-146

More information

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Background of Existing Facility 3. Proposed Work 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Background of Existing Facility 3. Proposed Work 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE Background of Existing Facility 3 Proposed Work 4 Objective of this Report 4 Required Data 4 Pavement Design Procedure 5 Other Data Requirements 7 Pavement Structures 8 Pavement

More information

I 95 EXPRESS LANES SOUTHERN TERMINUS EXTENSION TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AND SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

I 95 EXPRESS LANES SOUTHERN TERMINUS EXTENSION TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AND SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT I 95 EXPRESS LANES SOUTHERN TERMINUS EXTENSION TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AND SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT February 2016 INTERSTATE 95 EXPRESS LANES SOUTHERN TERMINUS EXTENSION PROJECT Commonwealth of Virginia Virginia

More information

Blacklands Corridor Feasibility Study

Blacklands Corridor Feasibility Study Blacklands Corridor Feasibility Study Public Meeting May 13, 2014 The Atrium at the Granville Arts Center 300 N. Fifth Street, Garland, Texas 1 Overview Welcome and Public Involvement Efforts Amanda Wilson

More information

IH 30/IH 35E Reconstruction Project Pegasus Final Technical Memorandum - Evaluation of Conceptual Alternatives Task 7.5

IH 30/IH 35E Reconstruction Project Pegasus Final Technical Memorandum - Evaluation of Conceptual Alternatives Task 7.5 MEMO TO: Timothy Nesbitt, P.E. DATE: August 26, 2002 FROM: SUBJECT: Sandy Wesch-Schulze, P.E., AICP IH 30/IH 35E Reconstruction Project Pegasus Final Technical Memorandum - Evaluation of Conceptual Alternatives

More information

IH 820 Corridor Improvement Study Randol Mill Road To North SH 121 Interchange. Public Meeting. Thursday April 4, 2013

IH 820 Corridor Improvement Study Randol Mill Road To North SH 121 Interchange. Public Meeting. Thursday April 4, 2013 IH 820 Corridor Improvement Study Randol Mill Road To North SH 121 Interchange Public Meeting Thursday April 4, 2013 1 Project Contacts: TxDOT-Fort Worth District John R. Tillinghast, P.E. IH 820 Project

More information

APPENDIX A Drainage Design Report for Farmers and Cooks Branches APPENDIX B Drainage Design Report for Jackson and Audelia Branches

APPENDIX A Drainage Design Report for Farmers and Cooks Branches APPENDIX B Drainage Design Report for Jackson and Audelia Branches Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION...1-1 1.1 PURPOSE...1-1 1.2 PROJECT LIMITS...1-1 1.3 SCOPE...1-2 CHAPTER 2 - DATA COLLECTION...2-1 2.1 AS-BUILT PLANS...2-1 2.2 EXISTING UTILITIES...2-1 2.3 SURVEY...2-1

More information

Route 7 Connector Ramp MODIF IE D I N T ER C H A N G E M OD IFICATIO N R E PO RT TRA N S F O R M I : I N S ID E THE BE LTWAY

Route 7 Connector Ramp MODIF IE D I N T ER C H A N G E M OD IFICATIO N R E PO RT TRA N S F O R M I : I N S ID E THE BE LTWAY STATE PROJECT NUMBER: 0066-96A-493,P101, C501, B686; UPC: 110629 FEDERAL PROJECT NUMBER: NHPP-066-1(356) FAIRFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA TRA N S F O R M I - 6 6 : I N S ID E THE BE LTWAY Route 7 Connector Ramp

More information

DRAFT. SR-60 7 th Avenue Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) I-605 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) I-605/SR-60 EA# 3101U0

DRAFT. SR-60 7 th Avenue Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) I-605 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) I-605/SR-60 EA# 3101U0 SR-60 7 th Avenue Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) I-605/SR-60 EA# 3101U0 October 9, 2017 Contents 1 Purpose of ICE Memo... 1 2 Background... 1 3 Existing Interchange Deficiencies... 1 4 Context Sensitive

More information

The transportation needs described demonstrate that improvements are needed to meet the anticipated demands of travelers in the corridor and region.

The transportation needs described demonstrate that improvements are needed to meet the anticipated demands of travelers in the corridor and region. traveling to jobs in the corridor and in downtown Dallas, and residents from elsewhere in the region traveling to jobs in the corridor (reverse commute). Improve Accessibility and Increase Economic Development

More information

Technical Briefing Report

Technical Briefing Report Technical Briefing Report March 2007 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROCESS (CMP) The Congestion Management Process (CMP) seeks a management solution to a growing traffic problem by targeting resources to operational

More information

Military Highway Interchange

Military Highway Interchange III. Military Highway Interchange Deficiencies Design Challenges Proposed Alternatives III.1.2 Volumes & Operations Figure III.2: Existing Volumes displays the existing volumes for the Military Highway

More information

MOBILITY AND ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

MOBILITY AND ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 6 MOBILITY AND ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS BACK OF SECTION DIVIDER 6.0 Mobility and Alternatives Analysis Travel demand analysis provides a framework for the identification of transportation facilities and services

More information

North Central Texas Council of Governments. Workshop TxDOT Dallas

North Central Texas Council of Governments. Workshop TxDOT Dallas Workshop TxDOT Dallas July 10, 2015 1 CMP Workshop Overview Overview of the CMP CMP and Documentation Project Implementation Form CMP Corridor Analysis Fact Sheet CMP Roadway Deficiency Form Project Examples

More information

TRANSPORTATION PROJECT REPORT DRAFT CONCEPTUAL ACCESS MODIFICATION PROPOSAL OCTOBER 2002

TRANSPORTATION PROJECT REPORT DRAFT CONCEPTUAL ACCESS MODIFICATION PROPOSAL OCTOBER 2002 TRANSPORTATION INTERSTATE 87 INTERCHANGE 11A TOWN OF MALTA SARATOGA COUNTY, NY DRAFT CONCEPTUAL ACCESS MODIFICATION PROPOSAL OCTOBER 2002 PROJECT REPORT NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION JOSEPH

More information

I-35/80 Operations Study: Douglas Avenue to NW 86 th Street FOR

I-35/80 Operations Study: Douglas Avenue to NW 86 th Street FOR : Douglas Avenue to NW 86 th Street FOR Iowa Department of Transportation City of Urbandale City of Grimes February 7, 2013 FINAL Prepared by: HR Green, Inc. HR Green Project Number: 40110031 TABLE OF

More information

FOR INTERSTATE 81 AND ROUTE 37 INTERCHANGE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA MILEPOST 310

FOR INTERSTATE 81 AND ROUTE 37 INTERCHANGE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA MILEPOST 310 INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION REPORT FOR INTERSTATE 81 AND ROUTE 37 INTERCHANGE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA MILEPOST 310 PREPARED BY: VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STAUNTON DISTRICT DECEMBER 13, 2006

More information

Ramp Reversal Research. Roy Parikh, P.E. TxDOT Fort Worth District

Ramp Reversal Research. Roy Parikh, P.E. TxDOT Fort Worth District 2007 WINTER TEXITE MEETING FEBRUARY 3,2007 Ramp Reversal Research Roy Parikh, P.E. TxDOT Fort Worth District Research Project 0-5105 RMC 4 Traffic Operations Project title Development of Guidelines for

More information

Vicinity Map. Interstate 605 (I-605) and State Route 91 (SR-91) in Los Angeles County

Vicinity Map. Interstate 605 (I-605) and State Route 91 (SR-91) in Los Angeles County 07 - LA - 605 - PM 2.87/PM 6.36 07 - LA - 91 - PM 14.10/PM 19.81 Vicinity Map N On Routes Interstate 605 (I-605) and State Route 91 (SR-91) in Los Angeles County I-605 between Excelsior Dr UC (PM 6.36)

More information

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and SECTION 4(f) EVALUATIONS for HIGHLAND LAKES PARK and USACE PROPERTY

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and SECTION 4(f) EVALUATIONS for HIGHLAND LAKES PARK and USACE PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and SECTION 4(f) EVALUATIONS for HIGHLAND LAKES PARK and USACE PROPERTY IH 35E: FROM PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE TO FM 2181 CSJs: 0196-02-068, 0196-01-096, 0196-02-073, 0196-02-114,

More information

6.0 CONGESTION HOT SPOT PROBLEM AND IMPROVEMENT TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL ANALYSIS

6.0 CONGESTION HOT SPOT PROBLEM AND IMPROVEMENT TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL ANALYSIS 6.0 CONGESTION HOT SPOT PROBLEM AND IMPROVEMENT TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL ANALYSIS 6.1 MODEL RUN SUMMARY NOTEBOOK The Model Run Summary Notebook (under separate cover) provides documentation of the multiple

More information

Conclusions & Lessons Learned

Conclusions & Lessons Learned What is a DDI Recommended Practices Traffic Operations Analysis Geometric Design FHWA Review Conclusions & Lessons Learned It s not about you, it s about the public Developed by Access Utah County

More information

Developing a Successful ICM Project. Christopher Poe, Ph.D., P.E. Assistant Director Texas A&M Transportation Institute

Developing a Successful ICM Project. Christopher Poe, Ph.D., P.E. Assistant Director Texas A&M Transportation Institute Developing a Successful ICM Project Christopher Poe, Ph.D., P.E. Assistant Director Texas A&M Transportation Institute What is ICM? What is ICM? The integrated management of freeway, arterial, transit,

More information

500 Interchange Design

500 Interchange Design 500 Interchange Design Table of Contents 501 Interchange Design... 5-1 July 2015 501.1 General... 5-1 501.2 Interchange Type... 5-1 501.2.1 General... 5-1 502 Interchange Design Considerations... 5-2 502.1

More information

DECEMBER P R O G R E S S R E P O R T

DECEMBER P R O G R E S S R E P O R T DECEMBER 201 2 P R O G R E S S R E P O R T The My 35 Plan is a dynamic document and will continue to be re-evaluated and updated by the Committee as needed. The My 35 Plan contains the ideas and recommendations

More information

Mobility 2025 Update: The Metropolitan Transportation Plan

Mobility 2025 Update: The Metropolitan Transportation Plan Mobility 2025 Update: The Metropolitan Transportation Plan May, 2001 North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department MOBILITY 2025 UPDATE FINANCIAL SUMMARY Metropolitan Transportation

More information

WELCOME. Public Meeting for I-35 / I-44 Interchange. October 6, 2015

WELCOME. Public Meeting for I-35 / I-44 Interchange. October 6, 2015 WELCOME Public Meeting for I-35 / I-44 Interchange October 6, 2015 TEAM INTRODUCTIONS PURPOSE OF THIS MEETING is to present the alternative alignments for the I-35/I-44 and I-35/NE 63rd Street Interchanges

More information

The Metropolitan Transportation Plan for North Central Texas. Regional Transportation Council Chad McKeown, AICP January 14, 2016

The Metropolitan Transportation Plan for North Central Texas. Regional Transportation Council Chad McKeown, AICP January 14, 2016 The Metropolitan Transportation Plan for North Central Texas Regional Transportation Council Chad McKeown, AICP January 14, 2016 Mobility 2040 Guiding Principles Conduct comprehensive corridor evaluations

More information

Informational Brochure. Proposed Interchange. Interstate Route 295 (I-295) AT Greenville Avenue (State Route 5) Town of Johnston, Rhode Island

Informational Brochure. Proposed Interchange. Interstate Route 295 (I-295) AT Greenville Avenue (State Route 5) Town of Johnston, Rhode Island Informational Brochure Proposed Interchange OF Interstate Route 295 (I-295) AT Greenville Avenue (State Route 5) Town of Johnston, Rhode Island October 5, 2016 Department of Transportation Two Capitol

More information

Loop 289 Corridor Study Phase I

Loop 289 Corridor Study Phase I 2008 Loop 289 Corridor Study Phase I Hongchao Liu, Pavan Evuri, and Hao Xu Multidisciplinary Research in Transportation Texas Tech University August 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES... III LIST OF

More information

SECTION II CONTROLLED ACCESS FACILITIES

SECTION II CONTROLLED ACCESS FACILITIES SECTION II CONTROLLED ACCESS FACILITIES SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION A critical component of the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) Metropolitan Transportation System is the regional freeway and tollway systems, which are

More information

1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED

1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED This chapter documents the need for transit improvements in the Northwest Corridor and the purposes that the proposed action (Build Alternative) is intended to serve. An overview of

More information

Operational Analysis of Dulles Toll Road Ramps to Tysons. Board Transportation Committee Meeting September 17, 2013

Operational Analysis of Dulles Toll Road Ramps to Tysons. Board Transportation Committee Meeting September 17, 2013 Operational Analysis of Dulles Toll Road Ramps to Tysons Board Transportation Committee Meeting September 17, 2013 Seyed Nabavi Fairfax County Department of Transportation 1 Agenda Overview & Assumptions

More information

Woodburn Interchange Project Transportation Technical Report

Woodburn Interchange Project Transportation Technical Report Final Report Woodburn Interchange Project Transportation Technical Report Prepared for Oregon Department of Transportation April 212 Prepared by DKS Associates Contents Methodologies... 4 Volume Development...

More information

PROCEDURES FOR NEW OR REVISED FREEWAY ACCESS IN ARKANSAS

PROCEDURES FOR NEW OR REVISED FREEWAY ACCESS IN ARKANSAS PROCEDURES FOR NEW OR REVISED FREEWAY ACCESS IN ARKANSAS June 2011 PROCEDURES FOR NEW OR REVISED FREEWAY ACCESS IN ARKANSAS June 2011 Prepared by: Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department

More information

US 75 Integrated Corridor Management System Using Technology and Partnership to Maximize Transportation System Capacity

US 75 Integrated Corridor Management System Using Technology and Partnership to Maximize Transportation System Capacity US 75 Integrated Corridor Management System Using Technology and Partnership to Maximize Transportation System Capacity Ahmad Sadegh, Ph.D. Schneider Electric US 75 Corridor Networks Freeway with continuous

More information

INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION REPORT

INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION REPORT INTERSTATE 75 AND STATE ROAD 884 (COLONIAL BOULEVARD) INTERCHANGE LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION REPORT Prepared for: Florida Department of Transportation District One May 2017 Interchange

More information

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35W FROM STATE HIGHWAY 114 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 820

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35W FROM STATE HIGHWAY 114 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 820 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35W FROM STATE HIGHWAY 114 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 820 CITIES OF FORT WORTH AND HASLET TARRANT AND DENTON COUNTIES, TEXAS CSJ Nos. 0014-16-252 0014-16-255 0081-12-041

More information

APPROVAL TO SUBMIT COMMENTS ON I-45 AND MORE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

APPROVAL TO SUBMIT COMMENTS ON I-45 AND MORE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TAC Agenda Item 09 Mailout 7/12/17 APPROVAL TO SUBMIT COMMENTS ON I-45 AND MORE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Background The Texas Department of Transportation, in cooperation with the Federal Highway

More information

LOCATION AND DESIGN DIVISION

LOCATION AND DESIGN DIVISION VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LOCATION AND DESIGN DIVISION INSTRUCTIONAL AND INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM GENERAL SUBJECT: Interstate, NHS Non-Interstate and Non-NHS (IJR / IMR Guidance) SPECIFIC SUBJECT:

More information

KAW CONNECTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

KAW CONNECTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary Page E-1 Introduction KAW CONNECTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) and the Kansas Turnpike Authority (KTA) have both recognized the need to plan for the

More information

CSJ#: , , , , ,

CSJ#: , , , , , Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...1 I. NEED AND PURPOSE FOR PROPOSED PROJECT...5 II. DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING FACILITIES...7 A. Existing Facilities...7 B. Existing Land Use...13 III. DESCRIPTION

More information

Future Build Alternative Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service Analysis

Future Build Alternative Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service Analysis 4.2.10 Future Build Alternative Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service Analysis For the five Build Alternatives, study intersections within one mile of potential station locations were analyzed, as it

More information

Maximize Transportation System Capacity

Maximize Transportation System Capacity US 75 Integrated Corridor Management System Using Technology and Partnership to Using Technology and Partnership to Maximize Transportation System Capacity What is ICM? The integrated management of freeway,

More information

500 Interchange Design

500 Interchange Design 500 Interchange Design Table of Contents 501 Interchange Design... 1 501.1 General... 1 501.2 Interchange Type... 1 501.2.1 General... 1 502 Interchange Design Considerations... 2 502.1 Determination of

More information

I-10 CONNECT. Public Meeting #1

I-10 CONNECT. Public Meeting #1 I-10 CONNECT Public Meeting #1 The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried-out by TxDOT

More information

RTC Position on Pavement Condition Targets

RTC Position on Pavement Condition Targets RTC Position on Pavement Condition Targets NCTCOG Supports TxDOT Statewide 2022 Good Pavement Condition Targets for National Highway System Facilities NCTCOG Supports TxDOT Statewide 2022 Poor Pavement

More information

Traffic Analysis. Appendix I

Traffic Analysis. Appendix I FHWA #T-A000(18) / NHDOT #13742 Bow Concord Improvements Appendix I Traffic Analysis The traffic analysis for the project was conducted using the Bow-Concord Traffic Microsimulation Model prepared specifically

More information

The Folded Interchange: An Unconventional Design for the Reconstruction of Cloverleaf Interchanges

The Folded Interchange: An Unconventional Design for the Reconstruction of Cloverleaf Interchanges The Folded Interchange: An Unconventional Design for the Reconstruction of Cloverleaf Interchanges I. ABSTRACT Keith A. Riniker, PE, PTOE This paper presents the Folded Interchange design and compares

More information

Blacklands Corridor Feasibility Study. Public Meeting March 20, 2014 Fletcher Warren Civic Center Greenville, TX

Blacklands Corridor Feasibility Study. Public Meeting March 20, 2014 Fletcher Warren Civic Center Greenville, TX Blacklands Corridor Feasibility Study Public Meeting March 20, 2014 Fletcher Warren Civic Center Greenville, TX 1 Overview Welcome, Overview, and Progress to Date Michael Morris Growth and Traffic Martin

More information

PUBLIC HEARING LOOP 9

PUBLIC HEARING LOOP 9 PUBLIC HEARING LOOP 9 From Interstate (I)-35E to I-45 Dallas and Ellis Counties, Texas CSJ: Loop 2964-10-005 9: I-35E to I-45 Tuesday, June 20, 20, 2017 2017 Public Hearing Introductions ELECTED & PUBLIC

More information

Goleta Ramp Metering Study

Goleta Ramp Metering Study DRAFT Technical Memorandum Goleta Ramp Metering Study Subtasks 2.1 and 2.2: Data Collection and Existing Baseline Analysis June 5, 2017 DRAFT Technical Memorandum Goleta Ramp Metering Study Subtasks 2.1

More information

APPENDIX A TIER 1 ANALYSIS

APPENDIX A TIER 1 ANALYSIS SPN H.004100 FEASIBILITY STUDY APPENDIX A TIER 1 ANALYSIS 040-012-042AH Appendices Lead Sheets PROVIDENCE STATE PROJECT. H.004100 The following worksheets analyze various project alternatives at various

More information

: value pricing. application of the 10 criteria for the long-term consideration of 5.1 THE UNIVERSE OF FACILITIES IN THE DALLAS- FORT WORTH REGION

: value pricing. application of the 10 criteria for the long-term consideration of 5.1 THE UNIVERSE OF FACILITIES IN THE DALLAS- FORT WORTH REGION Re g i o n a l Va l u e P r i c i n g C o r r i d o r E v a l u at i o n a n d Fe a s i b i l i t y S t u d y N o r t h C e n t r a l T e x a s C o u n c i l o f G o v e r n m e n t s 5 application of

More information

DRAFT PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT

DRAFT PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT DRAFT PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Project July 2010 Version 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED... 2 1.1 Project Overview... 2 1.2 Goals and Objectives... 3 1.3 Relevant

More information

PLANNING FOR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IN CARROLLTON

PLANNING FOR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IN CARROLLTON PLANNING FOR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IN CARROLLTON Townscape Inc Angelou Economic Advisors Newman Jackson Bieberstein Parsons Transportation Group Bridgefarmer & Associates Carrollton Renaissance

More information

I-69 Angelina and Nacogdoches Counties Scoping Study Executive Summary

I-69 Angelina and Nacogdoches Counties Scoping Study Executive Summary I-69 Angelina and Nacogdoches Counties Scoping Study Executive Summary November 2013 The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is working to find the most appropriate means to develop the Interstate

More information

I-35 Capital Area Improvement Program (Mobility35) Corridor Implementation Plan SH 45SE to Posey Road Hays County, Texas

I-35 Capital Area Improvement Program (Mobility35) Corridor Implementation Plan SH 45SE to Posey Road Hays County, Texas I-35 Capital Area Improvement Program (Mobility35) Corridor Implementation Plan SH 45SE to Posey Road Hays County, Texas Updated: July 2015 Table of Contents List of Figures... v List of Tables... v 1.0

More information

Jim Alexander Director of Design and Engineering, Southwest Light Rail Transit Project

Jim Alexander Director of Design and Engineering, Southwest Light Rail Transit Project Memorandum Date: January 15, 2014 To: CC: From: Subject: Jim Alexander Director of Design and Engineering, Southwest Light Rail Transit Project Paul Danielson, P.E. Project Manager, Southwest Light Rail

More information

On behalf of the Carolina Crossroads project team we thank you for taking the time to attend this meeting.

On behalf of the Carolina Crossroads project team we thank you for taking the time to attend this meeting. On behalf of the Carolina Crossroads project team we thank you for taking the time to attend this meeting. Located in the heart of South Carolina, the I-20/26/126 Corridor is the crossroads of the state

More information

FINAL PROJECT PRIORITIZATION PLAN FOR THE NM 599 CORRIDOR

FINAL PROJECT PRIORITIZATION PLAN FOR THE NM 599 CORRIDOR FINAL PROJECT PRIORITIZATION PLAN FOR THE NM 599 CORRIDOR PROJECT NO. WIP-599-1(102) CONTROL NO. D5SF2 APRIL 2010 Prepared for: New Mexico Department of Transportation Northern Design Bureau P.O. Box 1149

More information

Environmental Consequences and Mitigation

Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences and Mitigation 4.1 Introduction This chapter provides a detailed description of the impacts (and indirect impacts where applicable) associated with the alternatives

More information

CHAPTER 2 - TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 2 - TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 2 - TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL DEVELOPMENT 2.1 EXISTING TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL In order to accurately project future year traffic volumes within this regional study area, it was first necessary to construct

More information

GUIDE FOR THE PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES

GUIDE FOR THE PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES GUIDE FOR THE PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES Adopted by Town Council on November 25, 2008 Prepared By: HNTB Engineering Department Planning Department TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION... 1 II.

More information

connections 2040 the waco metropolitan transportation plan amendment 1

connections 2040 the waco metropolitan transportation plan amendment 1 connections 2040 the waco metropolitan transportation plan amendment 1 developed by the waco metropolitan planning organization in cooperation with the following agencies: Adopted June 23, 2016 amendment

More information

The Metropolitan Transportation Plan. Public Meetings January 2016

The Metropolitan Transportation Plan. Public Meetings January 2016 The Metropolitan Transportation Plan for North Central Texas Public Meetings January 2016 Presentation Agenda Mobility 2040 Draft Recommendations 2016 Transportation Conformity RTC Policy Bundle Concept

More information

PROJECT STUDY REPORT. Cal Poly Pomona Senior Project

PROJECT STUDY REPORT. Cal Poly Pomona Senior Project 06/2014 PROJECT STUDY REPORT (Cal Poly Pomona Senior Project) For Conceptual Approval of an Interchange Improvement And Cooperative Agreement with The City of Lake Elsinore for completion of Project Approval

More information

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35W FROM INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 820 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 30 CITY OF FORT WORTH TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35W FROM INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 820 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 30 CITY OF FORT WORTH TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35W FROM INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 820 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 30 CITY OF FORT WORTH TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS CSJ Nos. 0014-16-179 0014-16-268 PREPARED BY: UNITED STATES

More information

SECTION III - REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM. The Regional Arterial System is a subcomponent of a broader regional thoroughfare system.

SECTION III - REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM. The Regional Arterial System is a subcomponent of a broader regional thoroughfare system. SECTION III - REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION The Regional Arterial System is a subcomponent of a broader regional thoroughfare system. The NCTCOG Regional Thoroughfare Plan (RTP) recognizes

More information

CO TAQA Technical Report

CO TAQA Technical Report CO TAQA Technical Report I-35E/US 67 Project Dallas District I-35E from US 67 to I-30 and US 67 from I-20 to I-35E CSJ: 0442-02-088, 0196-03-269, 0261-03-030 Dallas County, Texas Prepared by: HNTB Corporation

More information

III. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS F. TRAFFIC

III. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS F. TRAFFIC III. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS F. TRAFFIC This section summarizes the traffic impact analysis prepared by Kaku Associates in May, 2002. Detailed calculation worksheets are contained in Appendix D to

More information

NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT. NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT 2015 Addendum Phase IV

NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT. NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT 2015 Addendum Phase IV Noise Technical Report 2015 Addendum NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT 2015 Addendum PREPARED FOR: Federal Highway Administration and Georgia Department of Transportation PREPARED BY: Parsons Brinckerhoff Project

More information

Travel Demand Modeling At NCTCOG

Travel Demand Modeling At NCTCOG Travel Demand Modeling At NCTCOG Arash Mirzaei North Central Texas Council Of Governments For University of Texas at Arlington ITE Student Chapter March 9, 2005 Agenda Background DFW Regional Model Structure

More information

Transportation Model Report

Transportation Model Report 1. Introduction The traffic impacts of the future developments in the IL130/High Cross Road corridor for different scenarios were analyzed using a Travel Demand Model (TDM). A four step modeling process

More information

M D 355 [FR E D E R IC K R O A D] OVER

M D 355 [FR E D E R IC K R O A D] OVER M D 355 [FR E D E R IC K R O A D] OVER LITTLE BENNETT CREEK MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC ALTERNATIVE ANA LYSIS Prepared by: INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to present the results of traffic analyses

More information

BCEO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES

BCEO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES BCEO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES February 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..... i TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY STRUCTURE... 1 WHEN IS A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY NEEDED?..... 1 STUDY AREA, SITE PLAN & HORIZON

More information

CHAPTER 8 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT

CHAPTER 8 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER 8 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Section 8.01 Purpose: The purpose of this Chapter (element) is to establish the desired and projected transportation system within Niceville and to plan for future motorized

More information

8.0 Chapter 8 Alternatives Analysis

8.0 Chapter 8 Alternatives Analysis 8.0 Chapter 8 Alternatives Analysis The primary purpose for using CORSIM in the context of this manual is to guide the design process and program delivery. To this point in the manual, you have been given

More information

CHAPTER 4 GRADE SEPARATIONS AND INTERCHANGES

CHAPTER 4 GRADE SEPARATIONS AND INTERCHANGES CHAPTER 4 GRADE SEPARATIONS AND INTERCHANGES 4.0 INTRODUCTION The ability to accommodate high volumes of intersecting traffic safely and efficiently through the arrangement of one or more interconnecting

More information

Federal Highway Administration FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Interstate Highway 45 and Loop 197 Direct Connector Galveston County, Texas

Federal Highway Administration FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Interstate Highway 45 and Loop 197 Direct Connector Galveston County, Texas Federal Highway Administration FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Interstate Highway 45 and Loop 197 Direct Connector Galveston County, Texas Introduction The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has determined,

More information

DDI s Can Move More Than Cars. Alex Ariniello. Presentation for the ITE Western District Annual Meeting. July, 2016 in Albuquerque, New Mexico

DDI s Can Move More Than Cars. Alex Ariniello. Presentation for the ITE Western District Annual Meeting. July, 2016 in Albuquerque, New Mexico DDI s Can Move More Than Cars Alex Ariniello Presentation for the ITE Western District Annual Meeting July, 2016 in Albuquerque, New Mexico In January, 2016, a Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) opened

More information

THE PROJECT. Executive Summary. City of Industry. City of Diamond Bar. 57/60 Confluence.

THE PROJECT. Executive Summary. City of Industry. City of Diamond Bar. 57/60 Confluence. THE PROJECT A freeway segment ranked 6th worst in the Nation, with levels of congestion, pollution and accidents that are simply unacceptable and which have Statewide and National implications. Executive

More information

Project Title: Using Truck GPS Data for Freight Performance Analysis in the Twin Cities Metro Area Prepared by: Chen-Fu Liao (PI) Task Due: 12/31/2013

Project Title: Using Truck GPS Data for Freight Performance Analysis in the Twin Cities Metro Area Prepared by: Chen-Fu Liao (PI) Task Due: 12/31/2013 Project Title: Using Truck GPS Data for Freight Performance Analysis in the Twin Cities Metro Area Prepared by: Chen-Fu Liao (PI) Task Due: 12/31/2013 TASK #5: IDENTIFY FREIGHT NODE, FREIGHT SIGNIFICANT

More information

Community Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2. June 22, 2006

Community Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2. June 22, 2006 Community Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2 June 22, 2006 Introductions The Study Team KDOT Wichita Partners Consultants CAC members Overview Today s Agenda Opinion Survey Study Status Starting Concept

More information

UPTOWN TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

UPTOWN TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS UPTOWN TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS This memorandum summarizes the results of the traffic analysis conducted to evaluate the traffic operations of the intersections along Post Oak Boulevard within Uptown Houston

More information

APPENDIX H: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL VALIDATION AND ANALYSIS

APPENDIX H: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL VALIDATION AND ANALYSIS APPENDIX H: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL VALIDATION AND ANALYSIS Travel demand models (TDM) simulate current travel conditions and forecast future travel patterns and conditions based on planned system improvements

More information

WELCOME IL 47. Community Advisory Group Meeting #5 Waubonsee Community College Wednesday, May 31, 2017

WELCOME IL 47. Community Advisory Group Meeting #5 Waubonsee Community College Wednesday, May 31, 2017 WELCOME IL 47 Community Advisory Group Meeting #5 Waubonsee Community College Wednesday, May 31, 2017 MEETING PURPOSE MEETING AGENDA 1. Welcome/Introduction 2. Review Previous Public Involvement 3. Process/Schedule

More information

Bow Concord I-93 Improvements City of Concord Transportation Policy Advisory Committee

Bow Concord I-93 Improvements City of Concord Transportation Policy Advisory Committee Bow Concord I-93 Improvements City of Concord Transportation Policy Advisory Committee December 15, 2016 Agenda Project History / Project Development Process Traffic Modeling Alternatives Development o

More information

MEMORANDUM: INITIAL CONCEPTS SUMMARY

MEMORANDUM: INITIAL CONCEPTS SUMMARY MEMORANDUM: INITIAL CONCEPTS SUMMARY INTRODUCTION This memo presents a summary of initial concepts that have been identified as development of the project study has progressed, along with a recommendations

More information

Congestion Management Process in the US A Federal Requirement

Congestion Management Process in the US A Federal Requirement Congestion Management Process in the US A Federal Requirement ITS Argentina November 6, 2013 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Outline of Seminar Discussion of Congestion

More information

10.2 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT

10.2 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT 10.0 TRANSPORTATION 10.1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Irving Thoroughfare Plan, as a component of the Comprehensive Plan, is to accommodate the existing and future roadway transportation needs of the

More information

Overall project. The $288 million Phase 2 DesignBuild project starts construction. this spring, with completion by December 31, 2016

Overall project. The $288 million Phase 2 DesignBuild project starts construction. this spring, with completion by December 31, 2016 Overall project Johnson County Gateway Interchange Project Improvements 87th Street The $288 million Phase 2 DesignBuild project starts construction this spring, with completion by December 31, 2016 Phase

More information

Appendix A: Project Planning and Development A-1 White Paper on Transit and the Tappan Zee Hudson River Crossing Project

Appendix A: Project Planning and Development A-1 White Paper on Transit and the Tappan Zee Hudson River Crossing Project Appendix A: Project Planning and Development A-1 White Paper on Transit and the Tappan Zee Hudson River Crossing Project Purpose of White Paper White Paper on Transit and the Tappan Zee Hudson River Crossing

More information

Section 11: Transportation Strategies Toolbox

Section 11: Transportation Strategies Toolbox Section 11: Transportation Strategies Toolbox A transportation strategies toolbox was developed to provide a systematic approach to identify potential strategies that address corridor transportation needs.

More information

VIII. LAND USE ISSUES

VIII. LAND USE ISSUES VIII. LAND USE ISSUES The & Route 57 Land Use and Circulation Study (Land Use Study, Figure 6) was completed for the Town of Clay in November 1999 (Clough, Harbour & Associates). This study investigated

More information

DEVELOPMENT, ANALYSIS, AND DESIGN OF A NEW PARKWAY AT GRADE INTERSECTION (PAGI)

DEVELOPMENT, ANALYSIS, AND DESIGN OF A NEW PARKWAY AT GRADE INTERSECTION (PAGI) 2013 ITE Western District Annual Meeting COCEPT DEVELOPMET, AALYSIS, AD DESIG OF A EW PARKWAY AT GRADE ITERSECTIO (PAGI) Lead Author: James M. Witkowski, PhD Supporting Author: Darrell Truitt, PE The Pima

More information

DART LRT Rail Operating Facility Phase I Site Selection Study

DART LRT Rail Operating Facility Phase I Site Selection Study DART LRT Rail Operating Facility Phase I Site Selection Study DRAFT Executive Summary May 2002 DART General Planning Consultant ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose of Report The purpose of this Northwest Rail

More information

TRANSFORM66: OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY

TRANSFORM66: OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY TRANSFORM66: OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY Concession Fee Project Eligibility *Required Entry PARTI GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 Applicant Information Please indicate the jurisdiction or agency that is submitting this

More information

I-10 KENDALL EXTENSION. Open House

I-10 KENDALL EXTENSION. Open House I-10 KENDALL EXTENSION Open House The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried-out by TxDOT

More information