37
NAC Meeting May 14, 2012

NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

NAC Meeting May 14, 2012

Page 2: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

This Presentation

• Roadway alternatives performance assessment/summary of results.

• Access and access management.• Cost comparison.

Page 3: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

215’

600’

900’

740’

950’

210’

175’ Legend

Lane Use

Traffic Control

Storage Length (ft.)

2008 Average Daily Traffic

2025 Average Daily Traffic

XXX’

Kolb Rd.

Valencia Rd.

N

19,406

45,462

29,543

15,935

XX,XXX

24‐hour two‐way traffic volumes, collected Wednesday, March 26, 2008.

Source: Kolb Road / Valencia Road Intersection Final Traffic  Engineering Study, prepared by Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc., June 2008, prepared for Pima County Department of Transportation.

2025 traffic volumes estimated.

69,000

35,000

85,600

59,900

XX,XXX

Existing Conditions

Page 4: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

2011 Turning Movement Volumes AM (PM) Peak-Hours

Valencia Road

Kolb

Roa

d

1,34

1 (5

89)

521

(590

)25

4(5

95)

29 (1

6)59

7 (5

60)

20 (1

34)

655 (373)501 (180)26 (41)

647 (990)227 (382)

20 (11)N

BA

ppro

ach

646

(710

)

SBA

ppro

ach

2,11

6 (1

,774

)

EBApproach894 (1,383)

WBApproach1,182 (594)

Total VehiclesAM = 4,838PM = 4,461

Source: Pima County Department of Transportation, May 5, 2011.  

Numbers shown in red font represent high volume movements at the intersection.

N

Page 5: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Level of Service (LOS)

• Grading scale used to define traffic operations.• Based on delay per vehicle (seconds/veh.)• LOS A = best• LOS D typically used as design criterion• LOS E = capacity• LOS F = worst (over capacity)

Delay (s/veh)

LOS Description

< 10 A Very low delay.  Many vehicles do not stop.

>10‐20 B Low delay, but more vehicles stop than LOS A.

>20‐35 C Moderate delay.  Number of cars stopping starts to become significant.

>35‐55 D Longer delays.  Many vehicles stop.  Not all vehicles clear every signal cycle.

>55‐80 E High delay.  Signal cycle failures are frequent.  Limit of acceptable delay.

>80 F Very high delay, unacceptable to many drivers.  Many signal cycle failures.

Page 6: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

PM Photos

Northbound

Eastbound Southbound

Page 7: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

PM 2011 Traffic

Page 8: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

AM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hr):  56.0 Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  41.8Total Stops:  3,305Stops/Vehicle: 0.68Total Vehicles: 4,821

PM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hr):  93.0Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  75.7Total Stops:  4,624Stops/Vehicle:  1.05Total Vehicles:  4,439

Existing Condition2011 Volumes

N

Note: Level of Service (LOS)Shown AM (PM)

LEVEL OF SERVICE BY MOVEMENT

E(E

)D

(E)

D(D

)

Valencia Road

Kolb Roa

dIntersection LOS

AM = DPM = E

120 sec. Cycle Length

Page 9: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

“One potential treatment to combat congestion and safety problems at intersections is the Median U‐Turn Intersection, which has been used in Michigan for many years and has been implemented successfully in Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, and Louisiana in recent years”

• Conflict points at a 4‐leg signalized intersection are reduced from 32 to 16.

• Eliminates crossing left‐turn conflict points.• Observations compared to conventional 4‐leg 

intersection:– 60 percent reduction in total crashes.– 75 percent reduction in total injuries.– 17 percent reduction in rear‐end crashes.– 96 percent reduction in angle crashes.– 61 percent reduction in sideswipe crashes.

Indirect Left‐Turns

Page 10: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

PAGI Northern Alignment 

PM 2011 Traffic

Page 11: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

A(B)

D(C)

B(A)B(B)

A(A)

A(A

)A

(A)

B(B

)

A(B

)A

(A)

B(A

)

A(B)

C(B

)

A(C)A(C) B

(A)

AM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hr):  28.4 Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  21.2Total Stops:  3,092Stops/Vehicle: 0.6Total Vehicles: 4,819

PM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hr):  28.6Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  23.3Total Stops:  3,077Stops/Vehicle:  0.7Total Vehicles:  4,422

PAGI Northern Alignment2011 Volumes

N

Note: Level of Service (LOS) Shown AM (PM)

LEVEL OF SERVICE BY MOVEMENT

Kolb Roa

d

90 sec. Cycle Length

Page 12: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

AM PM

Delay Per Veh

icle  (Sec/Ve

h)

Delay Per Vehicle Comparison By Alternative ‐2011 Volumes

Existing Condition PAGI North

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

AM PM

Stop

s Per Veh

icle

Stops Per Vehicle Comparison By Alternative ‐2011 Volumes

Existing Condition PAGI North

0102030405060708090

100

AM PM

Total D

elay (H

r)

Total Delay Comparison By Alternative ‐2011 Volumes

Existing Condition PAGI North

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,5005,000

AM PM

Total Stops

Total Stops Comparison By Alternative ‐2011 Volumes

Existing Condition PAGI North

LOS D

LOS E

LOS C LOS C

Page 13: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Design Year 2025 Traffic VolumesDesign Volumes AM (PM) Peak-Hours

Valencia Road

Kolb

Roa

d

640

(750

)87

0 (8

80)

690

(1,0

10)

30 (5

0)84

0 (8

60)

280

(860

)

1,060 (940)2,720 (1,580)680 (510)

710 (930)1,300 (2,930)

50 (40)N

BA

ppro

ach

1,15

0 (1

,770

)

SBA

ppro

ach

2,20

0 (2

,640

)

EBApproach

2,060 (3,900)

WBApproach

4,460 (3,030)

Design Year Total Vehicles

AM = 9,870PM = 11,340

N

2011Total Vehicles

AM = 4,838PM = 4,461

Source: Pima Association of Governments, 2011.  

Numbers shown in red font represent high volume movements at the intersection.

Page 14: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Performance Criteria

• Provide LOS D or better for all major traffic movements using design volumes (year 2025).

• Compare alternative concepts based on LOS, delay, and vehicle stops.

Page 15: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Northern Alignment

• Previous studies could not identify an alternative that met performance criteria for design traffic volumes.

• High cost of previous alternatives was a major issue.• The proposed concept satisfies performance criteria at an affordable cost.– Parkway At Grade Intersection (PAGI)

• At‐grade (not grade separated)• Based on Indirect Left‐Turn Concept, with additional access roads (ramps).

• Safer and more effective than conventional intersections.

Page 16: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX
Page 17: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

PAGI Northern Alignment 

PM 2025 Design Traffic

Page 18: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

B(C)

C(D)

C(B)B(B)

D(D)

B(B

)A

(A)

D(D

)

C(C

)B

(C)

B(A

)

AM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hr):  98.1 Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  36.0Total Stops:  8,048Stops/Vehicle: 0.8Total Vehicles: 9,813

PM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hr):  141.5Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  45.2Total Stops:  11,158Stops/Vehicle:  1.0Total Vehicles:  11,271

A(A)

C(C

)

A(B)C(C) C

(D)

PAGI w/3 Ramps2025 Design Volumes

N

Note: Level of Service (LOS) Shown AM (PM)

LEVEL OF SERVICE BY MOVEMENT

Kolb Roa

d

120 sec. Cycle Length

Page 19: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Southern Alignment

• Concept diverts traffic to new southern alignment, and splits demand between two main intersections.

• As much as 52 percent of 2025 traffic would be diverted south.

• Several concepts tested for new southern intersection.

Page 20: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Conventional Intersection DesignSouthern Alignment

PM 2025 Design Traffic

Page 21: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

AM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hrs):  221.4 Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  80.4Total Stops:  13,774Stops/Vehicle: 1.4Total Vehicles: 9,917

PM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hrs):  453.0Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  144.2Total Stops:  22,831Stops/Vehicle:  2.0Total Vehicles:  11,308

Conventional Intersection DesignSouthern Alignment2025 Design Volumes

N

Note: Level of Service (LOS)Shown AM (PM)

** Minimal volume assumed forthis movement in this alternative

LEVEL OF SERVICE BY MOVEMENT

E(F

)F(

F)C

(F)

** B(C

)B

(B) Kolb Roa

d

Page 22: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

290’

Continuous Flow Intersection(CFI)

Page 23: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX
Page 24: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

CFI Southern AlignmentPM 2025 Design Traffic

Page 25: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

AM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hrs):  159.7 Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  57.8Total Stops:  10,821Stops/Vehicle: 1.1Total Vehicles: 9,943

PM Performance StatisticsTotal Delay (hrs):  224.3Delay/Vehicle (s/veh):  71.6Total Stops:  14,212Stops/Vehicle:  1.3Total Vehicles:  11,278

CFISouthern Alignment2025 Design Volumes

N

LEVEL OF SERVICE BY MOVEMENT

*(*)

B(B

)A

(A)

Kolb Roa

d

Note: Level of Service (LOS)Shown AM (PM)

** Minimal volume assumed forthis movement in this alternative

C(A

)D

(D)

A(A

)B(B)

C(D)

Page 26: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0

100.0110.0120.0130.0140.0150.0

AM PM

Delay Per Veh

icle  (Sec/Ve

h)

Delay Per Vehicle Comparison By Alternative 2025 Design Volumes

PAGI North CFI South Conventional South

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

AM PM

Stop

s Per Veh

icle

Stops Per Vehicle Comparison By Alternative 2025 Design Volumes

PAGI North CFI South Conventional South

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

AM PM

Total D

elay (H

r)

Total Delay Comparison By Alternative 2025 Design Volumes

PAGI North CFI South Conventional South

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,00018,00020,00022,00024,000

AM PM

Total Stops

Total Stops Comparison By Alternative 2025 Design Volumes

PAGI North CFI South Conventional South

LOS DLOS D

LOS ELOS E

LOS F

LOS F

Page 27: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Delay Ratio

Total Delay Comparison (AM + PM) By Alternative ‐ 2025 Design Volumes

PAGI North CFI South Conventional South

60% Higher

281% Higher

Page 28: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Access • Northern alignment PAGI

– Driveway friendly:  Allows extensive use of right‐in right‐out access.– Median openings allow access to properties on opposite side of street.– Provides a safer, more effective access approach.– Maintains or improves existing access.– Some access restrictions do exist

• Southern alignment CFI– Generally maintains existing access on northern alignment.– Also allows extensive use of right‐in right‐out access on southern 

alignment.– Median openings for U‐turns would provide cross‐street access.– Access restrictions do exist.

Page 29: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Existing AccessS. M

ann Av.

S. M

cCulloch

Dr.

E. Southpoint Rd.

Valencia Rd.

Kolb Rd.

Page 30: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Potentially relocate McCulloch Dr.

Potential Development Access Locations for Consideration.

5‐14‐2012

Restricted access through merge length.

Northern Alignment

Page 31: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Southern Alignment w/CFI

Potential Development Access Locations for Consideration.

5‐14‐2012

Restricted access through merge length (1,100 – 1,200 ft.)

Page 32: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Cost Comparison of Alternatives

• Estimated Cost of Construction • Other costs associated with project• Signing, Striping, Signals, Traffic Control, etc.• Right‐of‐way Acquisition = 9‐10 acres• Design and Survey• Construction Administration = 8% of construction costs• 20% Project Cost Contingency

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Delay Ratio

Total Delay Comparison (AM + PM) By Alternative ‐ 2025 Design Volumes

PAGI North CFI South Conventional South

Page 33: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Cost Comparison of Alternatives

Construction EstimateDrainage = $980,000Earthwork = $685,000Roadway = $5,220,000Other = $9,115,000Total Project Cost = $16.0 M

Northern Alignment – PAGI

Page 34: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Construction EstimateDrainage = $1,970,000 (+101%)Earthwork = $1,240,000 (+81%)Roadway = $7,540,000 (+44%)Other = $11,650,000 (+28%)  Total Project Cost = $22.4 M (+40%)

Southern Alignment ‐Conventional Intersection

Cost Comparison of Alternatives

Page 35: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

Construction EstimateDrainage = $2,180,000 (+122%)Earthwork = $1,240,000 (+81%)Roadway = $7,960,000 (+52%)Other = $12,320,000 (+35%)Total Project Cost = $23.7 M (+48%)

Southern Alignment ‐Continuous Flow Intersection

Cost Comparison of Alternatives

Page 36: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Delay Ratio

Total Delay Comparison (AM + PM) By Alternative ‐ 2025 Design Volumes

PAGI North CFI South Conventional South

$16.0 M $23.7 M $22.4 M

Cost Comparison of Alternatives

60% Higher

281% Higher

Page 37: NAC Meeting 5-14-12...215’ 600’ 740’ 900’ 950’ 210’ 175’ Legend Lane Use Traffic Control Storage Length (ft.) 2008 AverageXX,XXX Daily Traffic 2025 Average DailyXX,XXX

The End