Congestion Management & Safety Plan Phase III

Transcription

1 Congestion Management & Safety Pan Phase III CTS Presentation May 23, 2011

2 CMSP Phase III Background Previous work Current project Where do we go from here?

3 2009 Congestion Report

4 Linkage between Safety and Congestion Congestion and safety are inextricaby inked As traffic fow becomes unstabe, not ony resuts in ower person/vehice throughput & onger trave times, but aso more crashes I-94 WB near TH 65

5 Right-sizing Projects Every project has a point of diminishing returns Each additiona doar invested resuts in ess return than another investment Exampes: TH 100, TH 169/I-494, etc.

6 The Time Vaue of Resources A ower cost improvement sooner can generate more user benefits than a higher cost improvement ater

7 CMSP Phase I Reviewed and identified existing congestion ocations Consuted oca experts to deveop project soutions High-eve panning cost estimates were deveoped

8 CMPS Phase I Project Status Identified 186 projects Recommended 19 projects for impementation Tota cost of approximatey $60M 1-2 year impementation period Recommended CMPS Phase I Demonstration Projects

9 CMSP Phase II Key Study Products: System Probem Statement Congestion Management Strategies, Toos, and Appication Framework Project-Specific Before and After Studies Congestion Management Case Studies Fexibe Design and Managed Corridor Workshop Summaries Executive Summary

10 CMSP Phase II System Probem Statement

11 Congestion Management & Safety Pan Phase II TH 100 St. Louis Park

12 Congestion Management & Safety Pan Phase II TH 100 St. Louis Park Added one ane in each direction from Excesior Bvd to Cedar Lake Rd Two mies in ength Project cost - $7.1 miion Significanty reduced crashes Decreased ten mies of congestion 13:1 trave time b/c ratio

13 Congestion Management & Safety Pan Phase II TH 100 St. Louis Park Morning Peak Period (6-9 AM) Before (2005) After (2006) Afternoon Peak Period (3-7 PM) Before (2005) After (2006)

14 Metro District Highway Investment Pan

15 CMSP Characteristics 1. Soutions attempt to improve mobiity and/or safety 2. Soutions utiize existing pavement and ROW to the fuest extent possibe 3. Soutions support future pans or visions 4. Soutions have shorter impementation timeframes 5. Soutions take advantage of other funded projects/ everage capabiities 6. Soutions are typicay be ess than one mie in ength 7. Soutions seek to improve transit advantages 8. Soutions are intended to tune system rather than expand system

16 CMSP Phase III Project Identification Process 1. Review of Previous Work 2. Loca Agency Work Sessions 3. Primary Screening 4. Secondary Screening, Projects 5. Fina Categorization of, Projects

17 CMSP Phase III Project Identification Process 1. Review Previous Work Review Phase I study Review Phase II System Probem Statement and congestion ocations Confirm type of soution Assess management strategies

18 CMSP Phase III Project Identification Process 2. Loca Agency Work Sessions Obtain feedback on System Probem Statement Identify non-freeway congestion and safety probems Prioritize probem ocations Seek input on potentia soutions Resuted in approximatey 400 probem areas

19 CMSP Phase III Project Identification Process 3. Primary Screening Magnitude of Benefits Safety Mobiity Panning Leve Construction Costs (ROW needed?) Synergies with other Projects/Modes Ease of Impementation/Constructabiity Precusion of other investments Loca Support

20 CMSP Phase III Project Identification Process 4. Secondary Screening, Projects More Detaied Benefits More Detaied Costs Demonstrate Positive Benefit/Cost Reassess Synergies with other Programmed Projects Review Ease of Impementation Loca Support 5. Fina Categorization of Projects! Project Ranked Using High/Medium/Low Categories

21 CMSP Phase III THANK YOU Todd Poum, P.E., PTOE SRF Consuting Group