49
US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY EXISTING and FUTURE CONDITIONS Grand Forks, ND February 2019

US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY

EXISTING and FUTURE CONDITIONS

Grand Forks, NDFebruary 2019

Page 2: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

AGENDA

• Study Goals• Steering Committee Issues and Concerns

• Existing Conditions• Future Conditions• Environmental Conditions• Alternatives Brainstorming

Page 3: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Known Issues and Conflicts;Intersection skew makes turning movements for trucks difficult. Mill spur railroad crossing creates traffic blockages and queueing issues. Opportunities for improved pedestrian, bicycle and transit conditions. 

Study Area Pg. 1

What are the key issues andconcerns to 

you?

Page 4: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Existing Conditions

Page 5: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Typical Sections Pg. 2

Page 6: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Right‐Of‐Way

US2/Gateway Drive : 70 feetUS 81/Washington Street : 20 feet on east side, 60 feet of west side

Pg. 3

Page 7: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Infrastructure

Pg. 4

Page 8: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Access M

anagem

ent

Pg. 5

Unsignalized drivewaysIncrease crash rate by 2%Reduces corridor travel speed by 0.25 MPH 

Desired Access Spacing 660 feet8 access/mile

Existing Access Spacing33 accesses66 access/mile (8x Standard)

Page 9: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Safety12 crashes between 1975‐1994No crashes since 1994

Crossing Exposure90,600500,000 threshold for grade separation

Crash Prediction0.028 crashes per year (FRA)5th highest rate in City7th highest rate in County

Mill Spur Crossing

Page 10: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Train Activity

4 to 5 trains per dayConsistent Between City and FRA Data10 MPH average, 20 MPH maxNDSM to add unit trains

Rail Delay Estimates89 Hours/Day2,670 Hours/Month32,396 Hours/YearMeet FHWA Grade Separation Guidance

Pg. 6,7

44

54

6

4 4SU

NDAY

MONDAY

TUESD

AY

WEDNESD

AY

THURSD

AY

FRID

AY

SATURDAY

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

16.00%

18.00%

20.00%

1AM

2AM

3AM

4AM

5AM

6AM

7AM

8AM

9AM

10AM

11AM

12AM

1PM

2PM

3PM

4PM

5PM

6PM

7PM

8PM

9PM

10PM

11PM

12PM

Vehicular Distribution (%) Train Distribution (%)

Page 11: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Average train blockage is 2:31Brain damage in four to six minutes when heart stopsAltru Hospital provides emergency service to East Grand Forks and surrounding area

Emergency Responders Pg. 8

Page 12: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Average train blockage is 2:31Fires can double every 60 secondsGoal to reach every address within four minutes

Emergency Responders Pg. 8

Page 13: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Pedestrian Amenities Pg. 9,10

Only controlled crossing at 3rdStreet underpassADA conflicts at crosswalks, utilities and drivewaysMinimal to no buffer

Page 14: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Connections3rd Street and Red River Greenway to the eastColumbia Road to the west

No traffic control to cross US 2/Washington StreetUnderpass at 3rd Street

Bicycle Amenities Pg. 10

Page 15: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

CAT Route 2Hourly service

Stops5th Street/10th AveHugo’s on 20th StHome of Economy when scheduled in advance

Requires vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle system efficiency

Transit Amenities Pg. 10

Page 16: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Traffic Volum

es

Pg. 12

Page 17: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Traffic Variation

Monthly Variation Yearly Variation

2013 2015 2018

AADT Trucks

Page 18: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Daily Volume Profile

Page 19: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Truck TrafficLevel One Freight System with international connectionsSkewed intersections1,200‐1,500 trucks per day

Trucks per day > 1,500 during sugar beet harvest seasonNDSM processes/ships 5M pounds of products daily

Pg. 11

Page 20: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Intersection Existing Traffic Control 

Warrants Met (Hours Met/Required) 

1A  1B  2  3 20th Street  Signal  0/8  0/8  0/4  0/1 US 81/ Washington Street  Signal  8/8  8/8  4/4  1/1 Mill Road/5th Street  Signal  0/8  8/8  4/4  1/1 4th Street  Thru/Stop  0/8  0/8  0/4  0/1 3rd Street/11th Ave  Signal  0/8  1/8  1/4  0/1 Warrant 1a: Minimum Vehicular Volume  Warrant 3: Peak Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant 1b: Interruption of Continuous Traffic  Warrant 9: Intersection Near a Grade 

Crossing Warrant 2: Four‐Hour Vehicular Volume 

Existing Traffic Control AnalysisTraffic Control Warrants based on MUTCDRemoval of unwarranted signals reduces

All crashes by 24%Injury crashes by 54%Right angle crashes by 24%Rear end crashes by 29%

Pg. 13

Page 21: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Traffic Ope

ratio

ns

Page 22: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Existing Traffic Ope

ratio

ns

Pg. 15

Queueing Between Washington Street and N 5th Street/Mill Road

Page 23: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Existing Train Event O

peratio

ns

Pg. 16

0.00%2.00%4.00%6.00%8.00%

10.00%12.00%14.00%16.00%18.00%20.00%

1 AM

2 AM

3 AM

4 AM

5 AM

6 AM

7 AM

8 AM

9 AM

10 AM

11 AM

12 AM

1 PM

2 PM

3 PM

4 PM

5 PM

6 PM

7 PM

8 PM

9 PM

10 PM

11 PM

12 PM

Vehicular Distribution (%) Train Distribution (%)

One 2:31 train event causes 4 hours of delay under current traffic conditions

Page 24: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Travel Tim

e and Re

liability

Pg. 18

30

29

51

31

34

66

30

60

0 50 100 150

Morning Eastbound

Morning Westbound

Evening Eastbound

Evening Westbound

Train Event (10 Min) Eastbound

Train Event (10 Min)Westbound

Train Event (1 hour) Eastbound

Train Event (1 hour) Westbound

Travel Time (Seconds)

Free Flow

AdditionalTravel Time

0 0

122

9696102

92

108

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Eastbo

und With

Train

Westbou

ndWith

 Train

Eastbo

und No

Train

Westbou

nd No

Train

Travel Tim

e (Secon

ds)

Evening Midday

Page 25: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Crash History

28 Crashes/Year78% Intersection Crashes

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Intersection Rear End AM or PM PeakHours

Following TooClosely

Injury Angle Failed To Yield Truck Left Turn Sideswipe Speed

52% Rear‐End Crashes38% Peak Hour Crashes

Pg. 20,19

Page 26: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

20th Street Intersection

12 crashes in last five years33% rear end crashes on east approach25% westbound left‐turn crashes (Protected/Permitted)

Left Turn25%

Angle8%

Rear End50%

Sideswipe0%

Other17%

Left Turn Angle Rear End Sideswipe Other

Unwarranted signal control increasesAll crashes by 24%Injury crashes by 53%Right angle crashes by 24%Rear end crashes by 29%

Page 27: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

20th Street to Washington Street

17 crashes in last five yearsAbove critical crash rate41% during AM/PM peak hoursLong queues and dense access spacingsQueues block sight lines

Left Turn23%

Angle18%

Rear End35%

Other24%

Left Turn Angle Rear End

Sideswipe Other

Pg. 21

Page 28: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

US 81/Washington Street Intersection

45 crashes in last five years60% rear end crashes

30% during AM or PM peak hour30% between 11 AM to 1 PM

Angle18%

Rear End60%

Sideswipe18%

Other4%

Left Turn Angle Rear End Sideswipe Other

8 crashes involving trucks0 Crashes involving Pedestrians or BikesLong queues and dense access spacings30% rear end crashes during peak hours

Page 29: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Mill Road/5th Street Intersection

41 crashes in last five yearsAbove critical crash rate

50% rear end crashes65% During AM or PM peak hours52% occurred on east approach

Angle32%

Rear End56%

Other12%

Left Turn Angle Rear End Sideswipe Other

Page 30: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Future Conditions

Page 31: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Traffic Forecasts

MPO Travel Demand ModelNo train increases projected

2030 Traffic Forecasts Pg. 22

Page 32: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Traffic Forecasts

MPO Travel Demand ModelNo train increases projected

2045 Traffic Forecasts Pg. 23

Page 33: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Future Traffic Co

ntrol A

nalysis

Intersection Existing Traffic Control 

Warrants Met (Hours Met/Required) 

1A  1B  2  3 20th Street  Signal  0/8  1/8  0/4  0/1 US 81/ Washington Street  Signal  8/8  8/8  4/4  1/1 Mill Road/5th Street  Signal  8/8  8/8  4/4  1/1 4th Street  Thru/Stop  0/8  0/8  0/4  0/1 3rd Street/11th Ave  Signal  0/8  1/8  1/4  1/1 Warrant 1a: Minimum Vehicular Volume  Warrant 3: Peak Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant 1b: Interruption of Continuous Traffic  Warrant 9: Intersection Near a Grade 

Crossing Warrant 2: Four‐Hour Vehicular Volume 

Intersection Existing Traffic Control 

Warrants Met (Hours Met/Required) 

1A  1B  2  3 20th Street  Signal  0/8  6/8  0/4  0/1 US 81/ Washington Street  Signal  8/8  8/8  4/4  1/1 Mill Road/5th Street  Signal  8/8  8/8  4/4  1/1 4th Street  Thru/Stop  0/8  0/8  0/4  0/1 3rd Street/11th Ave  Signal  0/8  1/8  1/4  1/1 Warrant 1a: Minimum Vehicular Volume  Warrant 3: Peak Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant 1b: Interruption of Continuous Traffic  Warrant 9: Intersection Near a Grade 

Crossing Warrant 2: Four‐Hour Vehicular Volume 

YEAR 2030 YEAR 2045Pg. 24,25

Page 34: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

2045

 Traffic Ope

ratio

ns

Pg. 30

Heavy Queuing on Several Approaches

Page 35: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

2030

 and

 2045 Train Events Ope

ratio

ns

Pg. 27

One 2:31 train event causes 7 hours of delay under current traffic conditions

Page 36: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

2045

 Travel Tim

e and Re

liability

Pg. 32

0 0

250

129129

178

126

151

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Eastbo

und

With

 Train

Westbou

ndWith

 Train

Eastbo

und No

Train

Westbou

nd No

Train

Travel Tim

e (Secon

ds)

Evening Midday

50

63

174

61

65

128

61

91

0 50 100 150 200 250

Morning Eastbound

Morning Westbound

Evening Eastbound

Evening Westbound

Train Event (10 Min) Eastbound

Train Event (10 Min) Westbound

Train Event (1 hour) Eastbound

Train Event (1 hour) Westbound

Free Flow

Additional Travel Time

Page 37: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

2045

 Train Event Ope

ratio

ns

One train event: 4 hours of vehicle delay today7 hours by 2045

Future unit trains

Page 38: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

2045 Queuing Issues

PM Peak Train Event

Page 39: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Funding Availability

>$150,000,000 in Unfunded Grand Forks Projects42nd Street and DeMersAvenue (~$25‐30M)Gateway Drive/US 2 and Glasston (~$28M)

Page 40: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Environmental Conditions

Page 41: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

CapacityCorridor travel timeIntersection delays and queueingTravel time reliability

Social Demands and Economic Development

NDSM unit trainsCritical truck movement

Roadway DeficienciesAt‐grade rail crossing8X recommended access spacings

Modal InterrelationshipsGaps in pedestrian and bicycle facilities

SafetyIntersection and link crash ratesEMS response timeRail crossing exposure

Purpose and Need Statement

Page 42: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Unlikely ImpactsFloodplainsSurface WaterSection 6F

Affected Environment

Land Use

Page 43: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Potential ImpactsHazardous Waste SitesSocial and Economic ImpactsNoise

Affected Environment

Pedestrians and BicyclistsEnvironmental JusticeHistoric and Archaeological Preservation

Section 4f

Page 44: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Potential Positive ImpactsSocial and Economic ImpactsPedestrians and BicyclistsEnvironmental Justice

Affected Environment

Page 45: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Alternative Brainstorming

Page 46: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

At‐Grade Improvements

2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study

Page 47: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Rerouting Skewed Movements

Grand Forks‐East Grand Forks Freight Rail Access Study

Page 48: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Reroute the Mill Spur

2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study

Page 49: US 2/US 81 SKEWED INTERSECTION STUDY · Future unit trains. ... 2016 Glasston Subdivision Railroad Crossings Mitigation Study 2010 Grand Forks Mill Spur Feasibility Study. Grade Separated

Grade Separated Crossing

Grand Forks‐East Grand Forks Freight Rail Access Study