Reversible Elevated Express Lanes. A Solution for Urban Traffic Congestion

Similar documents
Solution To Urban Congestion by Martin Stone, Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority and Jose Rodriguez, FIGG

Gandy Connector: Travel Demand. Policy Committee August 2013

State Road 54/56 Tampa Bay s Northern Loop. The Managed Lane Solution Linking I-75 to the Suncoast Parkway

Preview. Tables in your paper Mass Transit as alternative to auto California s problems in urban transportation

MOVEABLE BARRIER. Congestion Management Solutions

Preview. Second midterm Tables in your paper Mass Transit as alternative to auto California s problems in urban transportation

DRAFT. Memo. Range of the Alternatives Considered in the EIS

ROADSOADS CONGESTION HAMPTON SYSTEMYSTEM MANAGEMENT. Part II Roadway Congestion Analysis Mitigation Strategies and Evaluation

JONESBORO HIGHWAY 63 HIGHWAY 18 CONNECTOR STUDY

TAMPA BAY EXPRESS (TBX)

Mobility and Congestion

APPENDIX G: INTERSECTION NEEDS AT OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD

Highway Transitway Corridor Study

Crenshaw Transit Corridor Study. Working Group Meetings March 2009

ROUTES 55 / 42 / 676 BUS RAPID TRANSIT LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

South King County High-Capacity Transit Corridor Study

A Federal Perspective on Congestion Pricing. Wayne Berman Federal Highway Administration July 8, 2010

Corridor Advisory Group and Task Force Meeting #10. July 27, 2011

Arnold Hinojosa

El Camino Real Bus Rapid Transit Conceptual Engineering. Los Altos Council Workshop January 24, 2012

2035 Plan Post-Referendum Analysis

Creating the Future Bruce B Downs Blvd

Bay to Bay Boulevard Complete Streets Project

METHODOLOGY. Signalized Intersection Average Control Delay (sec/veh)

INFRASTRUCTURE: Using the Grid to Create a more Self-Sustaining Downtown. Studio Spring 2013

Proposed Project I 35 from Denton to Cooke County Line

Project Description Form 6V

Route 7 Corridor Study

Presentation of Staff Draft March 18, 2013 COUNTYWIDE TRANSIT CORRIDORS FUNCTIONAL MASTER PLAN

Congestion Management/ Crash Mitigation Process A Feasibility Study on Implementing HOV, Reversible Lanes and Time-of-Day Parking Strategies

EXISTING PRIORITIES FUNDED FOR CONSTRUCTION LRTP

In station areas, new pedestrian links can increase network connectivity and provide direct access to stations.

DON MILLS-EGLINTON Mobility Hub Profile

Southbend to Prima Vista. October 30, Floresta Corridor Master Plan

1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROBLEM STATEMENT PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED Study Purpose Study Need... 4

Purpose and Need. Chapter Introduction. 2.2 Project Purpose and Need Project Purpose Project Need

TRB Managed Lanes Conference May 22 24, 2012, Oakland, CA

BUS RAPID TRANSIT. A Canadian Perspective. McCormick Rankin International. John Bonsall P.Eng

Integrated Corridor Approach to Urban Transport. O.P. Agarwal World Bank Presentation at CODATU XV Addis Ababa, 25 th October 2012

CITY OF COCOA BEACH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Section VIII Mobility Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies

REGIONAL PRIORITIES Presentation to the Tampa Bay Regional Collaboration Committee September 10, 2012

Central Avenue Corridor Study FPID Number:

NEWMARKET CENTRE Mobility Hub Profile

US 1 Express Lanes Public Kick-Off Meeting

ECTS Purpose & Needs. Exhibit Home-Based Work Trips Attracted to the Penn/Jeannette Area

DON MILLS-SHEPPARD Mobility Hub Profile

Alternatives Public Workshop

Deerfield Township Hamilton Township

Bus Rapid Transit ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS. Open House

Afeasibility study to evaluate bus rapid transit service in the East-West Corridor connecting major employment and activity centers between downtown

CONNECTED VEHICLE PILOT DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM

MOBILITY WORKSHOP. Joint City Council and Transportation Commission May 5, 2014

An Incentive-Based Approach to Curbing Automobile Use in the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area

NORTH YORK CENTRE Mobility Hub Profile

Improving Mobility Without Building More Lanes

I-25 PEL: CO Springs Denver South Connection. Presentation to Castle Rock Town Council

Scottsdale Road/Rural Road Alternatives Analysis (AA) Study. Arizona ITE/IMSA Spring Conference March 7, 2012

Transit-Driven Complete Streets

DUNDAS WEST-BLOOR Mobility Hub Profile

2015 Urban Mobility Scorecard. Scott Weber, Transportation Planner & Analyst James Winters, Regional Planner & Policy Analyst

Key Findings & Corridor Highlights

North Carolina Transportation Issues

Tulsa Metropolitan Area LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Managed Lanes. Steve Schilke, P.E. Major Projects Unit Head District 1. Illinois Traffic Engineering and Safety Conference October 2016

Chapter 3 BUS IMPROVEMENT CONCEPTS

SMART 1 Public Meeting #1. February 24, 2016

Managed Lanes 2017: What They Are and How They Work. Robert W. Poole, Jr. Director of Transportation Policy Reason Foundation

Measuring the Distribution and Costs of Congestion. Tim Lomax Texas Transportation Institute

FI N A N C I A L RESOURCER S REVIEW AND UPDATE M I A M I-DADE LO N G R A N G E TRANSPORT T ATION PLAN UPDATE TO THE YE

Let s Make I-40 Better Action Team. Friday, March 29, 2019 Hosted by RTP Foundation

FROM HIGHWAYS TO BOULEVARDS: STREET TRANSFORMATIONS FOR PUBLIC LIFE BONAVENTURE PROJECT

I-35W Solutions Alliance Project Update July 13, 2017

Operational Comparison of Transit Signal Priority Strategies

ITS-NY ANNUAL MEETING Bus Rapid Transit in New York City: Bus Lane Operations on One-Way Arterial Streets

Ujari Mohite. Vijay Mahal and Vincent Sanders. Revised Ridership Forecasts for the Uptown DBL project. Date: August 17, 2015 INTRODUCTION/SUMMARY:

Dumbarton Transportation Corridor Study. San Francisco Bay ITE November 2016

Downtown BRT Corridor Alternatives Review: 1 st, 2 nd, 3 rd and 4 th Avenue. Bus Rapid and Conventional Transit Planning and Design Services

6/14/2013. Welcome. to the US 75 Corridor Study. Public Meeting. US 75 Corridor Study Area

APPENDIXB. Traffic Operations Technical Memorandum

Bus Rapid Transit Plans

Feasibility Study for Intermodal Facility in Anchorage, Alaska

WHAT IFS: Over the course of

For Immediate Release September 14, 2015 Contact: Sue Chrzan Tampa Hillsborough Expressway Authority ext.

Konstantin Glukhenkiy Economic Affairs Officer

Overview. Illinois Bike Summit IDOT Complete Streets Policy Presentation. What is a Complete Street? And why build them? And why build them?

Transportation Knowledge

Metropolitan Council Transportation Committee

Figure 1: Vicinity Map of the Study Area

BEAR CREEK PARK AND RIDE

VIRGINIA RAILWAY EXPRESS

MOUNTAIN HOUSE SPECIFIC PLAN I 9.1 INTRODUCTION ASSUMPTIONS TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PHASING 9.

Palm Beach MPO Complete Streets Policy

Introduction. Project Need

Title. Metropolitan Council Transportation Committee December 12, Brad Larson Metro District MnDOT

State of the System Report. Agenda. Trends Summary. Corridor Analysis. Safety Analysis

Model Applications for Oakland Park Boulevard Transit Corridor Study

David Jickling, Public Transportation Director Regional Transportation Commission, Washoe County

Pensacola Beach. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Special Meeting

Development of Arlington County s Marked Crosswalk Guidelines. Jon Lawler, P.E. Design Engineer Arlington County, VA

Base Information. 1. Project Title SH7/East Arapahoe Multi-Use Path and Transit Stop Improvements. 2. Project Start/End points or Geographic Area

Transcription:

Lee Roy Selmon Crosstown Expressway Reversible Elevated Express Lanes A Solution for Urban Traffic Congestion Martin Stone, Ph.D., AICP Director of Planning Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority

Pensacola Tallahassee Jacksonville Orlando Tampa Miami

Pensacola Tallahassee Jacksonville Orlando Tampa Miami

1975 Open to Downtown

1975 Open to Downtown 1986 Open to I-75

1987 Tampa Interstate Study (EIS) Masterplan I-275 & I-4: Add 1 Lane Crosstown: Add 1 lane

1987 Tampa Interstate Study (EIS) Masterplan I-275 & I-4: Add 1 Lane Crosstown: Add 1 lane and connect to I-4

1988 1995 Traffic growth significantly exceeded 20-yr projections 1987 Tampa Interstate Study (EIS) Masterplan I-275 & I-4: Add 1 Lane Crosstown: Add 1 lane and connect to I-4

1988 1995 Traffic growth significantly exceeded 20-yr projections Brandon suburb grew to over 200,000 Would be 4 th largest Fla city

1988 1995 Traffic growth significantly exceeded 20-yr projections Crosstown WB traffic service decreased from LOS B to LOS F during AM Peak by 1995

East Crosstown Traffic Characteristics 50,000 ADT 75/25 D split 15% Peak Hour 98% Repeaters Crosstown WB traffic service decreased from LOS B to LOS F during AM Peak by 1995

East Crosstown Traffic Characteristics Connecting I-4 to Expressway would result in LOS F for both roads within <10 years Crosstown WB traffic service decreased from LOS B to LOS F during AM Peak by 1995

Problems 1. Severe AM/PM Peak Traffic Congestion - Long-term Need for 10 Lanes

Problems 1. Severe AM/PM Peak Traffic Congestion - Long-term Need for 10 Lanes 2. Physical Considerations - Narrow ROW - Constrained

Problems 1. Severe AM/PM Peak Traffic Congestion - Long-term Need for 10 Lanes 2. Physical Considerations - Narrow ROW - Constrained 3. Fixed Rail Not Feasible - Population (Approx 1,000,000) - Land Use & Density Not Suitable - No Complimentary Infrastructure - Ridership NOT Large Enough to Positively Affect Traffic Congestion - No Local Capital or O&M Subsidies - BRT a More Flexible Transit Solution

I-4/Crosstown Solution 1. Scrapped original expansion to 6 lanes

I-4/Crosstown Solution 1. Scrapped original expansion to 6 lanes 2. Developed 3 reversible express lanes - Divert at least 50% of commuter traffic from existing lanes to express lanes - Use excess capacity on existing lanes to handle traffic from I-4 connection

I-4/Crosstown Solution 1. Scrapped original expansion to 6 lanes 2. Developed 3 reversible express lanes - Divert at least 50% of commuter traffic from existing lanes to express lanes - Use excess capacity on existing lanes to handle traffic from I-4 connection 3. Build most of project as a concrete segmental bridge in the median 6 lanes on 6 feet to save valuable ROW for future transportation needs

Selmon Crosstown Expressway Typical Section Existing 4 Lanes

Selmon Crosstown Expressway Typical Section Existing 4 Lanes with 3 Express Lanes

Selmon Crosstown Expressway Typical Section Expand to 6 Lanes with 3 Express Lanes

Selmon Crosstown Expressway Typical Section Add Transit with 3 Express Lanes

Project Costs & Benefits Total Project Cost = $300 Million - Planning & Env Studies = $2M - Design = $4M - Bridge Section (6 miles) = $144M - Downtown gateway (1 mile) = $20M - At-Grade Section (3 miles) = $40M - All ITS Controls & TMC = $17M - ROW (ponds) = $5M - ROW (downtown gateway) = $28M

Project Costs & Benefits Transportation Benefits - Total Traffic = 115,000 ADT - East End Traffic = 75,000 ADT - LOS F in AM & PM Peak - AM Peak Trip Time = 30-40 Minutes

Project Costs & Benefits Transportation Benefits - Total Traffic = 115,000 ADT - East End Traffic = 75,000 ADT - LOS F in AM & PM Peak - AM Peak Trip Time = 30-40 Minutes With Reversible Express Lanes - 150% Increase in Capacity - Divert 10,000 Trips from Local Roads - LOS B-C for East End of Expressway - AM Peak Trip time = 10 Minutes - Four New Express Bus Routes

Typical New Projects Planning & Production Schedule ACTIVITIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Preliminary Planning MPO LRTP Process Environmental Study Design ROW Aquisition Construction

Typical Elevated New Projects Lanes Planning & Production Schedule ACTIVITIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Preliminary Planning MPO LRTP Process Environmental Study Design ROW Aquisition Construction

Lee Roy Selmon Crosstown Expressway Reversible Elevated Express Lanes A Solution for Urban Traffic Congestion Martin Stone, Ph.D., AICP Director of Planning Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority

Intelligent Transportation System Reversible Express Lane Operations