I-25 / Rio Bravo Interchange



Similar documents
Comment #1: Provide an interchange at Route 7 and Farm Market Road/White Gate Road. This was studied in the late 1990 s.

Roadway Cost Per Centerline Mile Revised June 2014

FHWA Minnesota Division Guidance for the Preparation of a FHWA INTERSTATE ACCESS REQUEST

FHWA Colorado Division Control of Access to the Interstate and its Right-of-Way February 2005

Multi-Modal Corridor Degree of Complexity: High Cost/Benefit: High

1. REPORT CONTEXT Description of the development (include all of the following that are known at the time of the application):

Transportation Management Plan Template

Road Signs Recognition Quiz

7.2 Warrants and Planning Considerations

Disputed Red Light Accidents: A Primer on Signal Control. Jon B. Landerville, MSME, PE Edward C. Fatzinger, MSME, PE Philip S.

Maryland Invests $845 Million in New Highway and Bridge Projects

SR-18 Corridor Improvements in Wood County

Seagull Intersection Layout. Island Point Road - A Case Study. Authors: John Harper, Wal Smart, Michael de Roos

The partnership has selected three intersections where enforcement, education, and engineering initiatives are being implemented to improve safety:

CHAPTERTWO. Alternatives 2.1 ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

3 Tappan Zee Bridge Rehabilitation Options

AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

9988 REDWOOD AVENUE PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. April 24, 2015

CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CONCEPTS

6: LANE POSITIONS, TURNING, & PASSING

Stop The stop sign, a red octagon with white lettering, means come to a full stop and be sure the way is clear before proceeding.

Executive Summary. Transportation Needs CHAPTER. Existing Conditions

SIGHT DISTANCE. Presented by Nazir Lalani P.E. Traffex Engineers Inc. WHY IS SIGHT DISTANCE SO IMPORTANT?

MEMORANDUM. Robert Nichols, Acting Corridor Design Manager Northgate Link Extension

Public Involvement Meeting Handout

APPENDIX F. Access Management Design Standards for Entrances and Intersections

Median Bus Lane Design in Vancouver, BC: The #98 B-Line

APPENDIX J TRAFFIC STUDY

STATE HIGHWAY 360. PUBLIC HEARING Thursday, October 17, 2013 FROM: E. SUBLETT ROAD/ W. CAMP WISDOM ROAD TO: US 287

Evaluation of the Shared-Use Arrow

SCOTTSDALE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REPORT

CHAPTER 2 TRAFFIC SIGNS AND HIGHWAY MARKINGS

ROAD SIGNS IN JAPAN PARKING SIGNS. No Parking or Stopping Anytime SIZE & WEIGHT LIMIT SIGNS SPEED LIMIT SIGNS

Appendix 1 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)

How To Improve Safety

Surface Transportation Program (STP)

The Preservation of Local Truck Routes: A Primary Connection between Commerce and the Regional Freight Network

INDOT Long Range Plan

Design and Implementation of Slot Left-Turn Lanes on the Manitoba Highway Network

WSDOT s Approach to Seismic Retrofit of Highway Structures

The financial plan was prepared in conjunction with the Technical Working Group. Refer to Table 3-1: Funding and Implementation Plan.

Improving Access in Florida International University Biscayne Bay Campus Executive Summary

APPLICATION LAFAYETTE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (MPO) SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP) FUNDS TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP)

11 p.m. to. Tuesday, June. will remain open. 14. closed

100 Design Controls and Exceptions

Alternatives to the Circ Project Prioritization Methodology Prepared for Circ Task Force July 28, 2011

Downtown Tampa Transportation Vision

CHAPTER 500 TRAFFIC INTERCHANGES

Effect on structures. Uniform settlement - no concerns. Angular distortion - causes damage due to tensile strain

Tier 1 Strategies. WV Route 14 Corridor Management Plan

Downtown Louisville Two-Way Street Study

Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Highway Division Ten Park Plaza, Boston, MA A Guide on Traffic Analysis Tools

EXHIBIT A Accessible Truck Routes Map

Texas Virtual Driver Education Course Syllabus

Light Rail Transit in Phoenix

Accident Analysis of Sheridan Road between Isabella Street and South Boulevard

Appendix A Alternative Contracting General Engineering Consultant RFP. Appendix A

Six Points Interchange Reconfiguration Class Environmental Assessment Study

Highway 138 Corridor Solutions Study Roseburg, Oregon. Technical Memorandum #4: Concept Development and Screening DRAFT

Bike Accident Summary. Table 1 shows the number of bicycle accidents in Fort Collins from January 1, June 30, 2009.

Monitoring Program Results and Next Steps

3.1 Historical Considerations

EPA Technical Assistance for Sustainable Communities Building Blocks

Guelph Driving School. 246 WOOLWICH ST. Unit C Guelph, Ontario N1H 3V9. Office: Cell: info@guelphdrivingschool.

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (RTSIMS) Phase II UPWP Project: Task Order SA09-1 Goal

HIGHWAY DESIGN REPORT. Appendix 4. Proposed Design Principles for City Passings

METHODS FOR ESTABLISHING SAFE SPEEDS ON CURVES

MassDOT s Work Zone Transportation Management Procedures. By: Neil Boudreau, MassDOT and Michael Sutton, P.E., VHB

I-25/ARAPAHOE INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Delineation. Section 4 Longitudinal markings

Belmont Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project

PEDESTRIAN PLANNING AND DESIGN MARK BRUSSEL

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCEDURES MANUAL

KYTC, District 2 Chief District Engineer KYTC, District 2 Planning Supervisor & LPA Coordinator. KYTC, Central Office Planning

Informational Workshop Public Meeting Kanawha Falls Bridge Project

WYDOT Quick Facts TRAFFIC SIGNALS

Transportation Policy and Design Strategies. Freight Intensive. Level of Freight Presence

DRAFT Policy to Guide Discretion on Proposed Relaxations to Minimum Parking Requirements in Commercial Districts City-Wide 2014 June 05

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Florida Class E Knowledge Exam Road Rules Practice Questions

Appendix A In-Car Lessons

Transcription:

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 A300280 / PNA300280

I-25 / Rio Bravo Interchange SECOND PUBLIC MEETING APRIL 14, 2016 NMDOT CN A300280 CN A300280 / PNA300280

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

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

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

Vicinity Map with Nearby Ongoing Projects

Project Location Map

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

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

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

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

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

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

Diamond Interchange

Single Point Urban Interchange

Offset Single Point Interchange

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

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

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

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

Preferred Alternative: Offset Single Point

Preferred Alternative Looking SE

Preferred Alternative Looking East

Preferred Alternative Looking North

Preferred Alternative Looking West

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

Contacts NMDOT Mark Fahey, PDE Office: (505) 798-6717 E-mail: mark.fahey@state.nm.us Bernadette Bell, PIO Office: (505) 798-6645 / Cell: (505) 220-4153 E-mail: bernadette.bell@state.nm.us AECOM Pete Hinckley, PM Office: (505) 855-7409 E-mail: peter.hinckley@aecom.com CWA Patti Watson, Project PIO Office: (505) 245-3134 / Cell: (505) 269-9691 E-mail: pattiw@cwastrategic.com

Project Website Project website address: http://www.i25riobravo.com View Drive-thru Simulation

Comments / Questions / Answers