SUBJECT: I-82 Existing Conditions I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan P

Transcription

1 720 SW Washington St. Suite 500 Portland, OR MEMORANDUM DATE: March 30, 2017 TO: FROM: Laura Slater (ODOT Project Manager) ODOT PMT Group for I-84 Region 5 Corridor Management Plan Deena Platman (DKS Associates), Project Manager Jennifer Bachman (DKS Associates), PE Ben Chaney (DKS Associates), EIT Alexis Biddle (DKS Associates), MCRP, JD SUBJECT: I-82 Existing Conditions I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan P This memorandum documents the existing conditions along an 11-mile stretch of Interstate 82 (I-82) between the I-84 interchange and the Washington State border at Umatilla, Oregon. The existing conditions memorandum includes key findings, study corridor characteristics, travel characteristics (traffic volumes and infrastructure), safety analysis including crash and incident data, and weather information. KEY FINDINGS The key existing conditions findings include: There is a significant difference in travel volumes on I-82 between summer and winter. In summer, traffic volumes increased nearly 50%. I-82 is a well-used route for heavy vehicles, accounting for 25% of the average daily traffic volumes of 18,000 vehicles. Crashes on I-82 occur three times more frequently in the southbound travel direction than the northbound direction. Southbound crashes account for 72% of all crashes while northbound crashes account for 28% of all crashes. There was one fatal crash and five severe injury (Injury A) crashes between 2010 and Of these six crashes, one fatal and four severe injury crashes occurred in the southbound direction and one severe injury crash occurred in the northbound direction. Snow and ice account for a disproportionate number of crashes relatively to the frequency of the weather conditions. Snow and icy conditions occurred less than 2% of the year but 43% of all crashes were attributed to these weather conditions. Between , there were 31 crashes attributed to snowy or icy roadways; in the northbound direction, there were 9 crashes.

2 I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, 2017 The most common causes cited for crashes on this corridor are: o Speed in 52% of the crashes o Fatigue in 43% of the crashes (see figures The most common crash types include: o Fixed object crashes 36% o Overturned vehicle or other non-collision crash 29% o Rear-end crashes 14% STUDY CORRIDOR CHARACTERISTICS The project study corridor focuses on 11 miles of I-82 between the I-84 interchange and the Washington border. The entire corridor is within ODOT Region 5, District 12. The I-82 study corridor is shown in Figure 1. Corridor Geography This segment of I-82 is characterized by straight stretches of roadway and gradual turns that travel through grassland, farmland, and low vegetation. This portion of I-82 connects Umatilla with I-84 to the south. Between mile posts one and four, I-82 follows the Umatilla River. South of Umatilla, I-82 gradually climbs in elevation from about 300 feet in Umatilla to about 600 feet near the I-84/I-82 interchange. Population Centers I-82 serves a growing region. The nearby populations centers of Umatilla and Hermiston have populations of 7,000 and 17,000, respectively. Since 2000, the population in Umatilla has grown by 41% (2015) and Hermiston has grown by 41%. 1 Interchanges and Typical Interchange Spacing There are four interchanges along the Oregon portion of I-82. At mile post one, US 730 (also called 6 th Street through Umatilla) connects with I-82. There are also interchanges at Powerline Road (mile five) and Country Road 1232 (mile ten) before the primary interchange with I-84. Interchanges are spaced about five miles. Travel Lanes The Oregon portion of I-82 has two travel lanes in each direction, separated by a grassy median. Posted Speeds In 2016, posted speeds through this segment increased to 70 mph for vehicles and 65 mph for trucks. Congestion Issues There are no recurring congestion issues through this segment of I U.S. Census Bureau, Page 2 of 30

3 I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, 2017 Figure 1: Study Corridor Map Page 3 of 30

4 Average Daily Traffic I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, 2017 TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS This section describes the traffic volumes and infrastructure and technology used within the study corridor. Traffic Volumes Annual average daily traffic (AADT) is the total volume of traffic on a roadway over a year. AADT indicates the relative use of a facility or the typical traffic volume using that facility per day. Throughout the study corridor there is one permanent automatic traffic recorder (ATR) in place that provides hourly count summaries 24-hours a day, 365 days a year. ATRs can also collect vehicle classification data. Figure 2 shows the seasonal variation of AADT for all vehicles throughout the study corridor (northbound and southbound). As shown, the corridor accommodates about 18,000 per day. There is a high seasonal fluctuation in traffic volumes. During summer months (July and August) traffic volumes are almost 50 percent higher than during the winter months (December through February). Heavy vehicles constitute a signification portion of traffic using the study corridor. Nearly 25 percent of the traffic on I-82 are heavy vehicles. Table 1 summarizes traffic volumes data for the study corridor. 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 Figure 2: Automatic Traffic Recorder Seasonal Volume, (ATR ) Table 1: Traffic Volume Summary ( ) Segment Typical AADT (rounded) Typical Heavy Vehicle AADT (rounded) Typical Heavy Vehicle Percentage (rounded) I-82 (Oregon portion) 18,000 4,500 25% Page 4 of 30

5 I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, 2017 ITS Infrastructure and Technology This section describes the ITS technology in place throughout the study corridor. Figure 3 shows the location of ITS devices and detection equipment in use on the I-82 corridor. Variable Message Signs (VMSs) Variable message signs are electronic signs that ODOT can use to post information to travelers about incidents, weather conditions, detours, or other current travel conditions. ODOT operates and maintains one VMS along the study corridor for northbound traffic at the junction with I-84. Closed Circuit TV (CCTV) Cameras CCTV cameras can be used to view still images or video by ODOT personnel. The still images are linked to ODOT s TripCheck website and are refreshed about every 30 seconds. The images provide travelers with realtime road condition. ODOT operates and maintains one closed circuit TV camera on this study corridor at the I- 82/I-84 interchange. Truck Weigh Station There is one weigh station in the study corridor located off Exit 1 on the west side of I-82. This weigh station serves as Oregon s point of entry for freight. Automatic Traffic Recorder Automatic Traffic Recorders (ATR) count the number of vehicles using a roadway. Loop detectors deliver accurate counts of individual vehicles providing for a detailed understanding of traffic flow. Traffic volume data is reported in annual and monthly units. The traffic volumes discussed in the previous section use data from this ATR. Page 5 of 30

6 ITS Devices, Weigh Stations, and ATRs 3 figure Columbia River Umatilla Hermiston Legend Revised Date: 1/20/ Miles øù Northbound Variable Message Sign Weigh Station #** # Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) Closed Circuit TV Camera Study Corridor Water City Oregon Boundary

7 No. of Crashes I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, 2017 SAFETY ANALYSIS Safety is a primary concern on I-82. The project team analyzed five years ( ) of crash data to identify key safety issues. ODOT provides uniform and verified motor vehicle crash data though the Crash Analysis and Reporting Unit. Crash reports are the responsibility of individual drivers, and are only required in the event of death, bodily injury, or damage exceeding $1,500. Under these reporting requirements, low-severity crashes are generally underreported. ODOT uses the Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) as a high-level screening tool to identify segments of state highways that have safety problems. The SPIS ranking takes into consideration the frequency, severity, and rate of crashes on a roadway segment. The I-82 study corridor does not fall in the top five percentile of SPIS sites based on the 2015 Region 5 SPIS Map, which uses crashes from 2012 through This section provides a summary of key safety analysis findings and a series of figures that summarize the crashes in the study area. Summary of Crash Analysis The project team analyzed the most recent five years of crash data ( ) along the study corridor. A total of 94 crashes occurred in that period. Crash frequency in the southbound direction was significantly higher than in the northbound direction with 72% of all crashes (68) occurring in the southbound direction and 28% (26 crashes) occurring in the northbound direction. Part of this imbalance is seen in the increase in ice and snow related crashes for the southbound direction as shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5. In the southbound direction, 31 crashes occur during icy or snowy roadway conditions compared to 9 northbound crashes during similar conditions. Weather related crashes are also mapped in Figure 13 and Figure Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec DRY ICE SNO WET Figure 4: Southbound Crashes on I-82 ( ) by Month and Roadway Condition Page 7 of 30

8 No. of Crashes I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec DRY ICE SNO WET Figure 5: Northbound Crashes on I-82 ( ) by Month and Roadway Condition One fatal crash and five severe injury (Injury A) crashes were reported between 2010 and Of these six crashes, five occurred in the southbound direction (two near the I-84 interchange, one just south of Umatilla near where I-82 crosses the Umatilla River, and on near mile post 4). In the northbound direction, one severe injury crash occurred just south of the I-82 crossing of the Umatilla River. The fatal and severe injury crashes are mapped in Figure 9 and Figure 10. Fatal 1% Injury A 5% Injury B 24% PDO 54% Injury C 16% Figure 6: Crash Severity Allocation (Total of 94 Crashes, ) Page 8 of 30

9 I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, 2017 Figure 7 through Figure 20 identify the locations of crash hot spots along the corridor. Each figure shows crashes for one direction of traffic (northbound or southbound) for seven categories. Graphs to the right of each figure provide more detailed crash information including the top three crash types and causes (remaining types and causes are grouped in the other category). Each focus area is list below as well as a summary of key findings: Total crashes (Figure 7 and Figure 8) o o o Crashes occur almost three times more often on southbound I-82 (68 crashes) than northbound I-82 (26 crashes). Crash frequency on northbound I-82 increased slightly at the northern and southern termini of the I-82 corridor. Crashes in the southbound direction are evenly distributed with some hot spot activity near the US 730 interchange in Umatilla. Fatal and injury A crashes (Figure 9 and Figure 10) o o o Southbound I-82 had one fatal head-on crash occur near mile post 4. The conditions at the time of the crash were dry but dark (at 1 a.m.). Southbound I-82 had four severe injury crashes; two were located near the I-84 interchange, and two occurred just south of where I-82 crosses the Umatilla River. Northbound I-82 had one severe injury crash occur just south of where I-82 crosses the Umatilla River (similar to the southbound location). Run off the road crashes (Figure 11 and Figure 12) o o There are three crash hot spots on northbound I-82: near the I-84 interchange, near the curve where I-82 crosses the Umatilla River by mile post 2, and at the Washington State border In the southbound direction the run off the road crashes are fairly evenly dispersed along the corridor, with hot spots near the I-84 interchange and by the US 730 interchange in Umatilla. Weather related crashes (Figure 13 and Figure 14) o Weather related crashes account for 48% of all crashes. Note that weather related crashes in these figures include snowy, icy, or wet roadway conditions. Weather related crashes limited to snowy and icy roadway conditions (not wet) account for 43% of all crashes. o Weather related crashes are over three times as frequent in the southbound direction compared to northbound. o In the southbound direction, weather related crashes are evenly dispersed along the corridor, with a crash hot spot at the US 730 interchange. o In the northbound direction, the weather-related crashes are mostly focused at the north and south ends of the corridor. Fatigue related crashes (Figure 15 and Figure 16) and Speed related crashes (Figure 17 and Figure 18) o Results for these two crash types are similar. Page 9 of 30

10 I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, 2017 o o Northbound hot spots include the I-84 interchange area and by the bridge at the Columbia River. Southbound hot spots are similar to northbound and include more dispersion between those hot spot areas. Heavy vehicle related crashes (Figure 19 and Figure 20) o o In the northbound direction, there were only two heavy vehicle related crashes. One at the Columbia River and one just south of where I-82 crosses the Umatilla River. In the southbound direction, there were 16 heavy vehicle related crashes. The interchange at Powerline Road was a hot spot, as well as the US 730 interchange area and near the I-84 interchange. Page 10 of 30

11 Figure 7: All Crashes Northbound (Total = 26) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

12 Figure 8: All Crashes Southbound (Total = 68) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

13 Figure 9: Fatal and Injury A Crashes Northbound (Total = 1) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

14 Figure 10: Fatal and Injury A Crashes Southbound (Total = 5) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

15 Figure 11: Run Off The Road Crashes Northbound (Total = 20) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

16 Figure 12: Run Off The Road Crashes Southbound (Total = 41) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

17 Figure 13: Weather Related Crashes Northbound (Total = 10) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

18 Figure 14: Weather Related Crashes Southbound (Total = 35) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

19 Figure 15: Fatigue-Related Crashes Northbound (Total = 5) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

20 Figure 16: Fatigue-Related Crashes Southbound (Total = 35) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

21 Figure 17: Speed-Related Crashes Northbound (Total = 14) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

22 Figure 18: Speed-Related Crashes Southbound (Total = 34) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

23 Figure 19: Heavy Vehicle Crashes Northbound (Total = 3) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

24 Figure 20: Heavy Vehicle Crashes Southbound (Total =16) Fatal and Injury A Crashes result in the death or debilitating injury of a participant Injury B and Injury C Crashes result in the evident or possible injury of a participant Property Damage Only Crashes result in damages over $1,500, but no participant injuries. Crash Type Crash Cause Crashes by Milepoint Number of Crashes Milepoint

25 I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, 2017 Incident Data Analysis ODOT records the types of incident events that impact freeway operations. Incidents may or may not close lanes or shoulders, and often can have a significant impact on freeway capacity. Research shows that closing a single lane of a two-lane highway reduces the available capacity by 65 percent. Even closing a shoulder reduces capacity by as much as 19 percent. Table 2 shows the percentage of capacity lost when lanes are closed. Table 2: Freeway Capacity Changes Number of Highway Lanes Percent Facility Capacity Lost by Blockage Type Shoulder 1 Lane 2 Lanes 3 Lanes 2 Lanes 19% 65% 100% N/A 3 Lanes 17% 51% 83% 100% 4 Lanes 15% 42% 75% 87% Source: Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual, A review of ODOT incident data over a five-year period (2011 through 2015) found that 24 percent of the 918 recorded incidents affected one or more travel lanes on the mainline interstate. An additional 3% percent of incidents affected the shoulder area. For 68 percent of incidents recorded, it is unknown if or to what extent lanes may have been affected. Incidents with unknown lane impact are often non-hazardous incidents (such as litter or a driving complaint) where ODOT does not respond to the scene. Aside from bridge or road construction and maintenance, the incident types that most frequently affected a travel lane were: crashes, hazardous debris, animals struck or on roadway, and disabled or abandoned vehicles. Table 3 shows more information on the frequency and duration of these incidents, while Figure 21 through Figure 24 show the locations where these incidents most frequently occur. In all the incident figures a hot spot is identified at the US 730 interchange area, with an even distribution of incidents along the remainder of the corridor. Table 3: I-84 Frequent Incident Types Affecting Travel Lanes ( ) Incident Type Number of Incidents Average Roadway Clearance Duration 2 (min) Total Lane Closure Time (days) Crash (non-fatal) Crash (fatal) Abandoned or Disabled Vehicles Hazardous Debris Animal Struck or On Roadway Clearance duration is the amount of time between the first recordable awareness of the incident by a responder agency to the time that all lanes are available for traffic flow. Page 25 of 30

26 Incidents Due to Crashes 21 figure Columbia River Umatilla Hermiston Legend High Density Miles Low Density Study Corridor Water City Oregon Boundary

27 Incidents Due to Hazardous Debris 22 figure Columbia River Umatilla Hermiston Legend High Density Miles Low Density Study Corridor Water City Oregon Boundary

28 Incidents Due to Abandoned or Disabled Vehicles 23 figure Columbia River Umatilla Hermiston Legend High Density Miles Low Density Study Corridor Water City Oregon Boundary

29 Incidents Due to Animals 24 figure Columbia River Umatilla Hermiston Legend High Density Miles Low Density Study Corridor Water City Oregon Boundary

30 I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan I-82 Existing Conditions Memorandum March 30, 2017 WEATHER INFORMATION ODOT provides weather information to travelers through their TripCheck traveler information system. Historical weather trends and patterns help inform planning and safety analysis. In the Existing Conditions Memorandum for I-84 3, annual precipitation trends, as reported by the North Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), are shown for all northeast Oregon. The I-82 segment historically accumulates less than ten inches of rain a year. ODOT requires road and weather reporting from reporting stations along the state highway system between November 1st and April 1st (i.e. winter season). These mandatory reporting stations are in areas that typically experience severe weather conditions. Maintenance crews provide reports five times per day or more often when conditions vary significantly. Along this segment, road weather conditions were reported for the Hermiston area. The project team reviewed five years ( ) of road weather condition data. Along the I-82 corridor, on average snow occurred six days per year and freezing rain occurred three days a year. Reviewing both the weather and crash data, there is a disproportionate number of crashes during icy conditions compared to the average number of days with icy conditions. This finding implies that when ice is present along this roadway segment, the chance of a crash increases significantly. Although ice and snow are not frequent, the impact when they are present is significant. Weather and road conditions are summarized in Table 4. Table 4: Weather and Road Conditions Summary ( Data) Condition Average Days/Year Minimum Days/Year Maximum Days/Year Weather Condition Freezing Rain Snow Flurries Snowing Hard and Continuously Road Condition Snow Black Ice Spots of Ice Existing Conditions Memorandum: I-84 Boardman to Ontario Corridor Management Plan. Prepared by DKS Associates for ODOT. September 20, Figure 27. Page 30 of 30