I-25 / Rio Bravo Interchange

Transcription

1 I-25 / Rio Bravo Interchange TONIGHT S MEETING SCHEDULE OPEN HOUSE 6:00 PM TO 6:30 PM PRESENTATION BEGINS AT 6:30 PM Q & A FOLLOWING PRESENTATION CN A / PNA300280

2 I-25 / Rio Bravo Interchange SECOND PUBLIC MEETING APRIL 14, 2016 NMDOT CN A CN A / PNA300280

3 Presenters Mark Fahey, PE NMDOT Central Region Design, Project Development Engineer Pete Hinckley, PE AECOM, Project Manager Jeff Fredine WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff, Environmental Planner Jim Heimann, PE WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff, Traffic Engineer Patti Watson CWA Strategic Communications, Project Public Information Officer

4 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Project Location / Limits Project Status Update Project Purpose and Need Project Development Process Interchange Alternatives Evaluated Selection of Preferred Alternative What s Next / Project Schedule Project Contacts / Website Discussion / Questions / Comments

5 Project Partners NMDOT Federal Highway Administration MRCOG Bernalillo County City of Albuquerque Kirtland AFB AMAFCA

6 Vicinity Map with Nearby Ongoing Projects

7 Project Location Map

8 Project Status Update First Public Meeting held November 2014 Project on hold throughout most of 2015 awaiting area-wide update of traffic volume forecasts Phase 1-B Detailed Evaluation of Alternatives completed this winter Offset Single Point Interchange selected Environmental (NEPA) Process underway Traffic Operations Approval Process underway Preliminary Design underway

9 Project Needs I-25 bridges over Rio Bravo are aging (50 years old) and too narrow (only 4 lanes) Southbound Entrance Ramp and Northbound Exit Ramp too narrow, no shoulders, no acceleration or deceleration length Southbound Bridge too low, inadequate vertical clearance over Rio Bravo Rio Bravo between ramps inadequate shoulders

10 Project Needs (contd.) Roadway Capacity Poor Levels of Service with current traffic volumes No available capacity for traffic growth Safety Numerous crashes related to congested roadways (rear-end and angle / left turn crashes) Multi-Modal Connections No Bike or Pedestrian facilities through the Interchange

11 Project Purpose Remove the Physical Deficiencies Increase the Capacity of the Interchange Improve Safety Close gap in multi-modal transportation system

12 Project Development Process Major steps in the project development process to approve a project for final design and construction We are here Phase IA/B: Alignment Study Purpose & Need Alternatives Identification and Analysis Selection of Preferred Alternative Phase IC: NEPA Process Environmental Investigations NEPADocument: Categorical Exclusion FHWALead Agency Authorization Phase ID Prelim Design Finalize Scope of Improvements Preliminary Engineering 30% Plans Development Stakeholder and Public Information and Involvement

13 Interchange Alternatives Evaluated Three interchange alternatives presented at November 2014 Public Meeting were analyzed: Diamond Interchange Single Point Urban Interchange Offset Single Point Interchange Eastbound approach to northbound loop ramp on same level as Rio Bravo Eastbound approach to northbound loop below level of Rio Bravo and intersecting ramps

14 Diamond Interchange

15 Single Point Urban Interchange

16 Offset Single Point Interchange

17 Selection of the Preferred Alternative Recognize Current Traffic Problems Consider Future Growth Public Input Address traffic back-ups Heavy Truck Operations Improve the Merge on Northbound I-25 Need something that will work better Customize based on Physical Conditions Innovation Short Distance to University Boulevard

18 Selection of the Preferred Alternative Diamond Interchange and Single Point Urban Interchange Not Innovative Competing Traffic Movements East-to-North and South-to-East Must Accommodate all Movements Unacceptable Operations Potential for Congestion-Related Crashes Would not satisfy Project Purpose and Need as well

19 Selection of the Preferred Alternative Offset Single Point Interchange Innovative Free-flow Movements Balances Improvements for All Modes Addresses Existing and Future Needs Does Cost More

20 Selection of the Preferred Alternative Heavy Truck Operation Improved Trucks remain in right lanes / no weaving / crossing Rio Bravo Only 1 traffic signal Loop ramp grade is downhillto I-25 Number of Vehicle-Vehicle Conflicts Reduced 16 vs. 26 vs. 20 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Provided Right of Way Impacts Minimized Construction Costs Higher

21 Preferred Alternative: Offset Single Point

22 Preferred Alternative Looking SE

23 Preferred Alternative Looking East

24 Preferred Alternative Looking North

25 Preferred Alternative Looking West

26 What s Next Confirm Project Funding in place Final Design and ROW Acquisition Process in summer 2016 Third Public Meeting in summer 2016 Final Construction Documents fall 2016 Prepare Bid Documents in January 2017 Construction anticipated in 2017 thru 2018

27 Contacts NMDOT Mark Fahey, PDE Office: (505) Bernadette Bell, PIO Office: (505) / Cell: (505) [email protected] AECOM Pete Hinckley, PM Office: (505) [email protected] CWA Patti Watson, Project PIO Office: (505) / Cell: (505) [email protected]

28 Project Website Project website address: View Drive-thru Simulation

29 Comments / Questions / Answers