Interchange Justification Report (IJR) I-75 at Bethlehem Road Henry County

Transcription

1 Interchange Justification Report (IJR) I-75 at Bethlehem Road Henry County

2 IJR Study/Analysis Area Exit 216: SR 155 Bethlehem Road Exit 212: Bill Gardner Pkwy

3 Planning Background ARC 2040 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) 2017 New Interchange Project AR-955: Long Range (2040), $25M Henry Co Joint County/Cities Transportation Plan 2016 New Interchange Project R-72(A): Mid-Range ( ), $47M Atlanta Regional Freight Mobility Plan Update 2016 New interchange was Tier 1 recommendation needed for access and mobility within the McDonough/Henry freight cluster I-75 Interchange Feasibility Study 2015 Accepted by GDOT, documented need for new interchange

4 Project Purpose and Need Address Congestion/Growth/Safety Population Growth in Henry County: ( ): 218, ,691 = 61% Increase Employment Growth in Henry County: ( ): 68, ,413 = 46% Increase Improve Access/Economic Development Study Area Industrial Development Existing: 25M square feet Planned/Underway: 15M square feet Increasing Freight Demand ARC estimates a 56% increase in freight traffic by 2040 Driven by expansion of Port of Savannah and Panama Canal GDOT Commercial Vehicle Lane (CVL) project to support freight demand

5 Planned Area Development 6 Lambert Farms 5 King Mill* 1 Locust Grove-Clayco Phases I* & II 4 Trammel Crow Site 7 Midland Logistics* 2,3 Norfolk Southern Intermodal & Warehousing * Development under construction

6 Planned Area Development Development Name Development Type Size Daily Trips Generated Lambert Farms Warehousing/Distribution 4,817,200 sf 8,093 King Mill* Warehousing/Distribution 3,048,300 sf 5,121 Locust Grove-Clayco Phases I & II* Warehousing/Distribution 4,089,993 sf 6,886 Trammel Crow Site Warehousing/Distribution 1,190,160 sf 1,999 Midland Logistics* Warehousing/Distribution 669,732 sf 1,125 Norfolk Southern Warehousing Warehousing/Distribution 1,846,500 sf 3,102 SUBTOTAL 15,670,885 sf 26,326 Norfolk Southern Intermodal Site Intermodal Truck Terminal 60 Acres 4,914 TOTAL 31,240

7 Adjacent Transportation Improvements Project Project Type GDOT PI# / ARC # Total Cost Construction Date SR 155 from I-75 to Bill Gardner Pkwy Widening / N/A $72M 2029 SR 155 from I-75 to SR 42/US 23 Widening / HE- 113 $42M 2022 Bill Gardner Pkwy from SR 155 to I- 75 Widening /HE126 B $20M 2026 I-75 Commercial Vehicle Lanes (NB) from I-475 to SR 155 Widening $723M 2025

8 Interchange Spacing GDOT Interchange Spacing Guidelines Area Minimum Average Classification Spacing Spacing Urban 1 mile 2 miles Suburban 2 miles 4 miles Rural 2 miles 8 miles Study Area Spacing Existing: 3.44 miles With New Interchange: 2.87

9 Crash Analysis SR 155 from SR 42 to Bill Gardner Pkwy (3.4 miles) Urban Minor Arterial Year No. of Crashes Crash Rate* Statewide Average Crash Rate No of Injury Accidents Injury Accident Rate* Statewide Injury Accident Rate , , ,319 Not Available Not Available Bill Gardner Pkwy from SR 42 to SR 155 (3.84 miles) Urban Minor Arterial Year No. of Crashes Crash Rate* Statewide Average Crash Rate No of Injury Accidents Injury Accident Rate* Statewide Injury Accident Rate ,107 Not Available Not Available

10 Preferred Interchange Alternative

11 Preferred Interchange Alternative

12 Connection with GDOT CVL Project

13 Basic Freeway Segments IJR Traffic Analysis Analysis of one-way, uninterrupted freeway (interstate) segments Ramp Junctions Analysis of merge (on-ramp) and diverge (off-ramp) junctions Weave Segments Analysis of freeway segments where two or more traffic streams cross paths. Not applicable to this study. Intersections Analysis of signalized and un-signalized intersections. Particular attend given to intersection at interstate ramps.

14 Level of Service (LOS) IJR Traffic Analysis LOS is a qualitative measure used to describe traffic flow on a transportation facility (freeway, intersection, ramp junction, arterial, etc.) LOS is a letter designation on a declining scale from A to F. LOS A represents free-flow conditions and LOS F represents gridlock conditions LOS D or better considered acceptable in urban areas.

15 2017 Existing Conditions 2017 Existing Freeway Segments LOS C or Better Ramp Junctions LOS C or Better Intersections LOS D or Better at Interchanges

16 Future Conditions: Traffic Projections 2025 deemed appropriate Opening Year for interchange by GDOT Could open to traffic earlier than 2025 Traffic Projection Methodology Background Traffic Growth Area Development Trips Future Traffic Volumes

17 Future Conditions: Traffic Projections Background Traffic Growth SURFACE STREETS TC Station Location Description Compound Annual Growth SR 20 West of Westridge Pkwy 17,250 16,670 20,020 20,470 21,900 22,700 22, % SR 20 East of Regency Plaza Blvd 17,780 23,380 22,980 22,720 22,700 22,200 22, % SR 155 East of King Mill Rd 14,340 14,090 16,590 16,530 17,400 18,000 20, % SR 155 South of Greenwood Industrial Blvd 17, % Greenwood Industrial Pkwy South of Bethlehem Bottoms Rd - 1,090 1,070 1,090 3,640 3,790 3, % Bethlehem Rd East of I 75-1,110 1,090 1,110 1,110 1,150 1, % SR 42 North of Bethlehem Rd 8,670 8,500 11,940 11,860 14,000 15,100 14, % Bill Gardner Pkwy West of Lester Mill Rd 6,120 5,910 6,320 6,460 6,460 6,950 9, % Bill Gardner Pkwy East of Lester Mill Rd % Bill Gardner Pkwy East of Tanger Blvd % SR 42 South of Bill Gardner Pkwy % INTERSTATE 75 Weighte d Average 1.76% I-75 2 mi N of SR colwell Rd % I 75 South of SR , , , , , , , % I75 North of Bethlehem Rd 89,980 83,820 84,610 84,610 88,500 88,500 89, % Weighte d Average 0.45%

18 Future Conditions: Traffic Projections Area Development Trips Trips assigned to roadway network for: No-Build (no new interchange) Build (new interchange)

19 2025 No-Build and Build Conditions 2025 No-Build Freeway Segments LOS D or Better Ramp Junctions LOS D or Better Intersections LOS E & F at Interchanges 2025 Build Freeway Segments LOS D or Better Ramp Junctions LOS D or Better Intersections LOS D or Better at Interchanges

20 2045 No-Build and Build Conditions 2045 No-Build Freeway Segments LOS D or Better Ramp Junctions LOS D or Better Intersections LOS E & F at Interchanges 2045 Build Freeway Segments LOS D or Better Ramp Junctions LOS D or Better Intersections LOS D or Better at Interchanges

21 Environmental Screening Ecological Resources Jurisdictional Waters

22 Environmental Screening Cultural Resources History & Archaeology

23 Environmental Screening Community Resources

24 IJR Results/Conclusions Requests for new interstate access must address the two FHWA Policy Requirements: FHWA Policy #1: Operational Analysis An operational and safety analysis has concluded that the proposed change in access does not have a significant adverse impact on the safety and operation of the Interstate facility. The proposed interchange at Bethlehem Road would not have an adverse impact on the safety and operation of I-75. In fact, the proposed interchange would improve safety and operations for adjacent interchanges and surface streets.

25 IJR Results/Conclusions FHWA Policy #2: Access Connections & Design The proposed access connects to a public road only and will provide for all traffic movements. The proposed interstate access would connect to an existing public road (Bethlehem Road) and would provide for all traffic movements.

26 IJR Results/Conclusions By balancing the traffic and access needs of the study area between three interchanges rather than two, the proposed interchange at Bethlehem Road would: Provide much-needed congestion relief to the SR 155 and Bill Gardner Pkwy Improve safety and traffic operations for all users while meeting the mobility and access needs of study area business and residents Support economic development by facilitating efficient movement of freight into and out of the study area

27 We are here Schedule/Next Steps Bethlehem Road at I-75 Interchange Project Schedule Activity Prepare IJR GDOT/FHWA Review Concept Development/Report Environmental Analysis Preliminary Engineering Final Design ROW Acquisition GDOT Pre-Award Activities Construction Public Information Open House Interchange Open to Traffic

28 Project Critical Paths: Schedule/Next Steps Concept Development/Environmental Studies Preliminary/Final Engineering Meeting with ARC to get the project programmed in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)