REAL-TIME SYSTEM MANAGEMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM. Routes of Significance Memphis

Transcription

1 REAL-TIME SYSTEM MANAGEMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM Routes of Significance Memphis

2 Introduction - RTSMIP In August 2005 federal legislation was enacted that required a Real-Time System Management Information Program (RTSMIP) to provide, in all states, the capability to monitor, in real-time, the traffic and travel conditions of the major highways, and to share that information in order to: improve the security of the surface transportation system address congestion problems support improved response to weather events and surface transportation incidents facilitate national and regional highway traveler information To facilitate the collection of this information, 23 CFR 511 was developed. This section requires each state to establish and operate a RTSMIP as part of its Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) capable of gathering and making available the data for traffic and travel conditions.

3 Introduction - RTSMIP The RTSMIP defines requirements for four types of traveler information: Construction Activities: All lane closures, excluding short-term or intermittent closures or activity that does not close a lane. Roadway or Lane Blocking Incident: All unplanned incidents that block a lane. Roadway Weather Observations: Adverse or hazardous driving conditions and lane closures or restrictions due to environmental conditions. Travel Time Information: only for limited access roads within specified metropolitan areas. Each of these categories includes requirements for information latency, accuracy, and availability. Information on construction, incidents, and road weather is to be provided on all Interstates statewide and select roads within urban or metropolitan areas, termed Routes of Significance (RoS).

4 RTSMIP Compliance Dates The deadline for fulfillment of RTSMIP requirements on all Interstate roadway segments was November 8, An FHWA/TDOT team reviewed all of TDOT s current policies, technology systems, and personnel/equipment levels that applied to capabilities under the RTSMIP FHWA determined that TDOT is in compliance with the current program requirements The deadline for fulfilled RTSMIP requirements on non- Interstate metropolitan RoS is November 8, 2016.

5 RoS Identification Process The Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) surveyed stakeholders, including the Nashville and Memphis Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), to compile a list of possible routes for a significance determination. Eleven (11) routes were evaluated in the Memphis metropolitan area, which were then broken into 21 segments of like characteristics The lists were made up of routes that parallel interstates and/or are major arterials and collectors. After the initial meetings and data collection efforts, TDOT worked with the MPOs to identify factors to rank the list of routes. These preliminary factors included: 1) Volume 2) Volume to Capacity Ratio 3) Crash Rate 4) Economic Activity 5) Congestion Mitigation Plan 6) Diversionary Route Designation 7) Interstate Access Points 8) Heavy Vehicle Percent of Total Volume

6 Memphis Initial RoS - Shelby

7 Memphis Initial RoS - Fayette

8 Scoring Process After further assessment, it was decided that some factors had the potential to double count some criteria that was included in other factors. Their inclusion was ultimately dropped. The final list of factors that were used to rank the list of routes were: 1) Volume 2) Volume to Capacity Ratio 3) Crash Rate 4) Heavy Vehicle Percent of Total Volume Point values were assigned to the selected factors and applied to the route lists. Relevant data was collected on each route segment using the Tennessee Roadway Information Management System (TRIMS) database. A maximum of 56 points was made available through the four categories and a route that earned at least 25 points was deemed a Route of Significance.

9 Scoring Details Volume/Capacity Points Ratio < > Volume Points (thousands) < > % Heavy Vehicles Points of Total Volume > Crash Rate Points < >

10 Final Scoring

11 Memphis Final RoS

12 Memphis Final RoS Route County Beginning Log Mile Ending Log Mile Termini SR 3 Shelby From Mississippi State Line to SR 23 (Union Ave.) SR 4 Shelby From Mississippi State Line to I-240 SR 15 Shelby From SR 14 (Austin Peay Hwy.) to I-40 SR 23 Shelby From SR 3 (Bellevue Blvd.) to I-240 SR 57 Shelby From SR 14 (Jackson Ave.) to Houston Levee Rd. SR 177 Shelby From SR 57 (Poplar Ave.) to SR 1

13 Crittenden County, Arkansas RoS

14 Crittenden County, Arkansas RoS Route County Termini Hwy 64 Crittenden From Hwy 70 to Cross County Line Hwy 70 Crittenden From I-55 to St. Francis County Line Hwy 77 Crittenden From Hwy 70 to I-55 Hwy 118 Crittenden From Hwy 70 to Hwy 64

15 What s Next? TDOT is finalizing a report for FHWA to demonstrate compliance with 23 CFR 511. The report will address: How TDOT has worked with the applicable Nashville and Memphis metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to designate Routes of Significance Routes of Significance designation methodology List of Routes of Significance Information dissemination strategy

16 QUESTIONS?

17 BUS STOP GUIDELINES ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL COMMITTEE, MEMPHIS MPO NOVEMBER 3, 2016 Bus Stop Guidelines

18 PURPOSE & NEED Provide relevant information in one reference guide Make it easier for planners and engineers to incorporate bus stops in designs Assist the Greater Memphis region in prioritizing infrastructure investment Reduce missed opportunities for improvement Bus Stop Guidelines 2

19 VALUE OF BUS STOP GUIDELINES DESIGN Transit needs are taken into account early in design of roadway projects Investments can more easily be made by private developers Prioritizing transit agency investments as stand-alone projects Cost estimates for improvements Branding Unify branding Standardize designs Bus Stop Guidelines 3

20 VALUE OF BUS STOP GUIDELINES ADA/Ped/Bike Satisfy ADA and other requirements Improve accessibility for those with disabilities Integrate transit with pedestrians and bicyclists Service Improve amenities Enhance customer experience Attract transit ridership bus stops are front door of transit system Operations Stop spacing Location Length Bus Stop Guidelines 4

21 WORK PLAN Memphis MPO led project Strong collaboration with MATA Started in April 2016 Completion by end 2016 Nelson\Nygaard as lead consultant HDR ACOT Associates Project Team Bus Stop Guidelines 5

22 TASKS Document review Complete Peer Review- Complete Classifying bus stops- Complete Find Examples- Complete Outreach Stakeholder Meetings Public Survey ETC & TPB Draft Manual- December 2016 Final Manual- Early 2017 Bus Stop Guidelines 6

23 OUTLINE OF FINAL GUIDE Chapter 1- Introduction Purpose and Need Overview of Remaining Chapters Review of Existing Documents Stakeholder Input Chapter 2 - Stop Siting/Footprint Choosing Locations Far-side, Near-side, Mid-block High or Low Boarding Volume Stop Spacing Special Cases Chapter 3 - Additional Preliminary Design Info Stops after Bus Turns Opportunities for Bus Lanes Transit Signal Priority Bus Turnouts Curb Extensions Superstop Locations Chapter 4 - Bus Stop Elements Shelters/Benches Trash Receptacles Signs/Maps/Info Lighting Bike Parking and Repair Fare Machines Art Pavement Markings Protective Bollards Chapter 5 - Other Related Topics System Branding Mitigation during Construction Role of Abutters Path of Travel Conditions Connectivity Parking Enforcement Public Involvement Placemaking Chapter 6 - Prioritizing Investments Funding and Costs Stop Inventory Evaluation System Ridership Key Corridors Conditions Demographics Transit Service Chapter 7 - Ongoing Procedures Living Document Info Maintenance Physical Maintenance Coordination with Roadway and Development Projects Appendices Bus Stop Guidelines 7

24 QUESTIONS? Contact Information: Greg Strangeways, Nelson\Nygaard Melissa Kim, Nelson\Nygaard MATA John Lancaster, MATA Scarlet Ponder, MATA MPO Kwasi Agyakwa, Memphis MPO Mitchell Lloyd, Memphis MPO Bus Stop Guidelines 8