DOCSLIB.ORG

Ivy Road (Us250)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ivy Road (Us250) IVY ROAD (US 250) Albemarle County, Virginia August 2018 Prepared by Prepared for Ivy Road (US 250) Albemarle County, Virginia August 2018 Prepared for Prepared by US 250 CORRIDOR STUDY | Between Three Notch’d Road and US 29 Interchange ABSTRACT STARS (Strategically Targeted Affordable Roadway Solutions) is a program within the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) aimed at critical safety and congestion hot spots throughout the Commonwealth. The study area for this STARS project is US 250 (Ivy Road) from US 29 Bypass (Monocan Trail Road) to Route 240 (Three Notch’d Road) located in Albemarle County, Virginia, to the west of Charlottesville. US 250 is a designated Corridor of Statewide Significance (CoSS) and a Mobility Enhancement Segment (MES). Ivy Road is a minor arterial that is rural on the western end and urban on the eastern. The western (i.e., rural) part of the corridor is a typical two-lane unsignalized roadway and does not experience much congestion or delay. The eastern (i.e., urban) part of the corridor includes signalized intersections and does experience congestion. Most of the corridor is not anticipated to experience significant growth in traffic volumes or a considerable deterioration in operations in future years, except for the area in vicinity of the US 250/US 29 interchange. Through operational, safety, and field analysis, the project team identified 12 hot spots on this corridor. Each hot spot faces operational and/or safety concerns. The team developed recommendations for each of the hot spot intersections and segments. These recommendations ranged from short-term to long- term implementation. Short-term improvements include optimizing signal timings, installing new signing or pavement markings, or trimming vegetation along the corridor. Long-term improvements include installing a left-turn lane, constructing a roundabout, or widening the roadway. The intersection of Ivy Road and Three Notch’d Road is a source of congestion and crashes. The geometry of this intersection is unfavorable to drivers on Three Notch’d Road. Through the High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR) program, VDOT received funding to construct a roundabout at this location. The segment between Farmington Drive and Canterbury Road / Old Garth Road experiences heavy congestion. The commuter traffic pattern makes this location an ideal candidate for a reversible lane concept. The proposed improvements for this hot spot segment include potential roadway widening and implementation of reversible travel lanes. In addition to recommending spot-specific treatments at hot spot locations, the project team applied systemic templates to the entire corridor. The type and tier of systemic template to apply was determined based on the intersection geometry and safety-related factors. All recommendations aim to improve both the operations and the safety of this corridor. US 250 CORRIDOR STUDY | Between Three Notch’d Road and US 29 Interchange TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 2 Study Area and Methodology ....................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Road Safety Assessment Workshop .............................................................................................. 5 2.2 Findings Meetings ......................................................................................................................... 5 3 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Description of Study Area ............................................................................................................. 5 3.2 Geometric Conditions ................................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Traffic Control Devices .................................................................................................................. 6 3.4 Traffic Conditions .......................................................................................................................... 7 3.5 Traffic Operations ......................................................................................................................... 7 3.6 Crash Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 8 4 Traffic Forecasting ...................................................................................................................... 13 5 Systemic Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 15 5.1 Introduction and Methodology ................................................................................................... 15 5.2 Application of Systemic Templates ............................................................................................. 15 6 Benefit-Cost Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................ 19 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 19 6.2 Cost Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 19 6.3 Benefit Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 19 7 Hot Spots ................................................................................................................................... 20 7.1 Ivy Road (US 250) at Three Notch’d Road ................................................................................... 20 7.1.1 Intersection Description and Geometric Conditions ............................................................ 20 7.1.2 Traffic Control Devices ........................................................................................................ 20 7.1.3 Traffic Conditions ................................................................................................................ 21 7.1.4 Crash Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 21 7.1.5 Roadway Safety Assessment ............................................................................................... 23 7.1.6 Preliminary Cost Estimate ................................................................................................... 32 7.1.7 Benefit Analysis ................................................................................................................... 33 7.1.8 Project Schedule .................................................................................................................. 33 7.2 Ivy Road (US 250) at Gillums Ridge Road .................................................................................... 34 7.2.1 Intersection Description and Geometric Conditions ............................................................ 34 7.2.2 Traffic Control Devices ........................................................................................................ 34 i US 250 CORRIDOR STUDY | Between Three Notch’d Road and US 29 Interchange 7.2.3 Traffic Conditions ................................................................................................................ 34 7.2.4 Crash Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 35 7.2.5 Roadway Safety Assessment ............................................................................................... 36 7.2.6 Preliminary Cost Estimate ................................................................................................... 41 7.2.7 Benefit Analysis ................................................................................................................... 42 7.2.8 Project Schedule .................................................................................................................. 43 7.3 Ivy Road (US 250) at Tilman Road ............................................................................................... 44 7.3.1 Intersection Description and Geometric Conditions ............................................................ 44 7.3.2 Traffic Control Devices ........................................................................................................ 44 7.3.3 Traffic Conditions ................................................................................................................ 45 7.3.4 Crash Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 46 7.3.5 Roadway Safety Assessment ............................................................................................... 47 7.3.6 Preliminary Cost Estimate ................................................................................................... 53 7.3.7 Benefit Analysis ................................................................................................................... 54 7.3.8 Project Schedule .................................................................................................................. 54 7.4 Ivy
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MN MUTCD Chapter 2H
    Chapter 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS 2B.1 Application of Regulatory Signs ..........................................................................................2B-1 2B.2 Design of Regulatory Signs ..................................................................................................2B-1 2B.3 Size of Regulatory Signs ......................................................................................................2B-1 2B.4 Right-of-Way at Intersections ...............................................................................................2B-7 2B.5 STOP Sign (R1-1) and ALL WAY Plaque (R1-3P) ...............................................................2B-8 2B.6 STOP Sign Applications .......................................................................................................2B-9 2B.7 Multi-Way Stop Applications ...............................................................................................2B-9 2B.8 YIELD Sign (R1-2) ..............................................................................................................2B-10 2B.9 YIELD Sign Applications .....................................................................................................2B-10 2B.10 STOP Sign or YIELD Sign Placement .................................................................................2B-10 2B.11 Stop Here For Pedestrians Signs (R1-5 Series) ....................................................................2B-11 2B.12 In-Street and Overhead Pedestrian
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Alternatives Development and Screening Report
    APPENDIX C Draft Evaluation of Managed-lane Concepts Draft Evaluation of Managed-lane Concepts Little Cottonwood Canyon Environmental Impact Statement S.R. 210 - Wasatch Boulevard to Alta Lead agency: Utah Department of Transportation April 3, 2020 This page is intentionally left blank. Contents 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Study Area for Managed Lanes .............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Traffic Operations ................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Roadway Context .................................................................................................................................... 3 2.0 Reversible-lane Concepts ................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1.1 Moveable Barrier ....................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.2 Reversible-lane Control Signals and Signs ............................................................................. 11 2.1.3 Other Reversible-lane Technologies ....................................................................................... 15 3.0 Peak-period Shoulder Lane Concept .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide for HOT Lane Development FHWA
    U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration A Guide for HOT LANE DEVELOPMENT A Guide for HOT LANE DEVELOPMENT BY WITH IN PARTNERSHIP WITH U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration PRINCIPAL AUTHORS Benjamin G. Perez, AICP PB CONSULT Gian-Claudia Sciara, AICP PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF WITH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM T. Brent Baker Stephanie MacLachlin PB CONSULT PB CONSULT Kiran Bhatt Carol C. Martsolf KT ANALYTICS PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF James S. Bourgart Hameed Merchant PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF HOUSTON METRO James R. Brown John Muscatell PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Ginger Daniels John O’Laughlin TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Heather Dugan Bruce Podwal COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Charles Fuhs Robert Poole PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF REASON PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE Ira J. Hirschman David Pope PB CONSULT PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF David Kaplan Al Schaufler SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Hal Kassoff Peter Samuel PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF TOLL ROADS NEWSLETTER Kim Kawada William Stockton SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE Tim Kelly Myron Swisher HOUSTON METRO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Stephen Lockwood Sally Wegmann PB CONSULT TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Chapter 1 Hot Lane Concept And Rationale........................................................................2 1.1 HOT lanes Defined .................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Freight Mobility Study, Phase II Report
    Corpus Christi – Yoakum Regional Freight Mobility Study, Phase II Report TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ES-1 SECTION 7 - ANALYSIS OF RAIL/ROADWAY INTERFACE ISSUES .....................................7-1 7.1 METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................7-1 7.1.1 Crossing Selection Criteria.............................................................................7-1 7.1.2 Rail Occupancy ..............................................................................................7-4 7.1.3 Analysis of Results .........................................................................................7-8 7.2 GRADE CROSSING COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS...................................................7-10 7.2.1 Construction Cost Estimates ........................................................................7-10 7.2.2 Benefit-Cost Analysis ...................................................................................7-26 7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................7-31 SECTION 8 - BOTTLENECK IMPROVEMENTS EVALUATION AND MODELING ..................8-1 8.1 PROJECTED TRAFFIC GROWTH ............................................................................8-1 8.1.1 2035 Train Forecasts......................................................................................8-1 8.1.2 Results............................................................................................................8-2
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut Avenue Reversible Lanes Draft Resolution April 20
    Government of the District of Columbia ADVISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION 3F Van Ness ▪ North Cleveland Park ▪ Wakefield ▪ Forest Hills 3F01 – David Cristeal, Chair 3F02 – Alexandria Appah, Vice-Chair 4401-A Connecticut Ave, N.W. 3F03 – Dipali Mehta Box 244, Washington, D.C. 20008 3F04 – Stan Wall, Treasurer [email protected] 3F05 – Claudette David www.anc3f.com 3F06 – Monika Nemeth 3F07 – Matt Buechner, Secretary ______________________________________________________________________________ RESOLUTION REGARDING Connecticut Avenue Reversible Lane Operations and Safety Study April 20, 2021 Whereas the ANC 3F Streets and Sidewalks Committee and ANC 3F adopted resolutions in March 2018 requesting a comprehensive study of the Connecticut Avenue corridor with the overall goals of enhancing pedestrian safety, walkability, and economic vitality of the affected neighborhoods, making improvements to traffic management on Connecticut Avenue and surrounding streets, and considering the creation of dedicated bicycle lanes; Whereas two other ANCs in the affected corridor, ANC 3C and ANC 3/4G, also adopted resolutions requesting a comprehensive study of these issues in 2018; Whereas the DDOT-led Connecticut Avenue Reversible Lane Operations and Safety Study (“Safety Study”) is ongoing, with the key project goals of reducing vehicle crashes, improving safety for all modes of transit, considering a Protected Bicycle Lane, and assessing the feasibility of removing the Reversible Lane Operation; Whereas the “guiding principles” of the Safety Study
    [Show full text]
  • Validity of Reversible Flow Lanes Between Kandy Road Flyover and New Kelani Bridge Roundabout Along A01 to Accommodate Peak Traffic Flows
    ENENGINEEGINEER - Vol. XXXXIV,XXXXIV, No.No. 0404,, pp.pp, [[11-16],10-15], 20112011 © TThehe IInstitutionnstitution of EEngineers,ngineers, SSriri Lanka Validity of Reversible Flow Lanes between Kandy Road Flyover and New Kelani Bridge Roundabout along A01 to Accommodate Peak Traffic Flows K. S. Weerasekera Abstract: This paper examines ways of enhancing road capacity by improving lane efficiency along Colombo-Kandy Road (A01) at Colombo city entrance by introducing reversible traffic flow lanes between Kandy road flyover at Pattiya junction and New Kelani Bridge roundabout, to cater for peak traffic flows. A traffic study was conducted between Pattiya junction and New Kelani Bridge roundabout to find out the benefits and any losses, if reversible traffic flow lanes are introduced along this stretch of road during peak traffic flows in mornings and evenings. Two options of lane assignment were considered for the heavy flow direction during peak hours. Option ( i ) by adding one extra mixed traffic lane towards the heavy flow direction while reducing a lane from the opposite direction, and option ( ii ) adding an additional lane exclusively for buses towards the heavy flow direction while reducing a lane in the opposite direction. These two options were considered for both morning and evening peak traffic flows. By using Davidson’s model the benefits or any losses in travel time was computed for the two options separately for both directional peak traffic flows. The study proved that by the introduction of reversible flow lanes along the considered section, during morning and evening peak traffic flows, the benefits obtained by far outweigh the losses due to minor reduction in road capacity in the opposite directional traffic flows.
    [Show full text]
  • THE ROAD ZIPPER SYSTEM® Moving People
    THE ROAD ZIPPER SYSTEM® Moving People. Safer. Faster. Smarter . Better BEN FRANKLIN BRIDGE: PHILADELPHIA, PA BEFORE: The Ben Franklin Bridge between AFTER: Now, The Road Zipper System balances Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Camden, New Jersey, traffic flow and creates positive protection which has needed more lanes during peak periods. There was no eliminated crossover fatalities. protection from oncoming traffic, resulting in fatalities from head-on collisions. INSTALLATIONS ACROSS THE WORLD, WHY INCLUDING Sydney, Australia LINDSAY? Philadelphia, PA Washington, DC ™ Lindsay Transportation Solutions is dedicated New York, NY to quality construction, modern manufacturing techniques, a commitment to continuous Auckland, New Zealand THE LINDSAY TRANSPORTATION improvement, and an understanding of Boston, MA ADVANTAGE customer needs. Safe San Juan, Puerto Rico Rugged Cost-effective Our flagship products are the Reactive Tension San Diego, CA Trusted Barrier and The Road Zipper Machine – together Reliable Dallas, TX known as The Road Zipper System®. Honolulu, HI Road authorities and contractors around the world have been taking advantage of this low-cost, reusable solution to maximize budgets, reduce congestion, improve safety and increase traffic throughput since 1984. Moving People. Safer. Faster. Smarter . Better CONGESTION TRENDS: 1982-2011 500% 443.3% 400% 392.8% 396.7% 300% 200% 100% 6.6% 34.6% 0% POPULATION TOTAL DELAY FUEL WASTED TOTAL COST LANE MILES (BILLIONS OF HOURS) (BILLIONS OF GALLONS) (BILLIONS OF DOLLARS) OF ROAD DOUBLE DIGIT GROWTH MINIMAL INCREASE In the United States alone, there has been double-digit growth in every transportation metric, while the lane miles of new roads have only marginally increased. Lindsay’s Road Zipper System is one of the most cost-effective and safe options for overcoming these challenges, now and in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Considerations for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lane Conversions Guidebook
    Office of Operations 21st Century Operations Using 21st Century Technology Considerations for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lane Conversions Guidebook U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration June 2007 Considerations for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes Conversions Guidebook Prepared for the HOV Pooled-Fund Study and the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Prepared by HNTB Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. 8283 Greensboro Drive McLean, VA 22102 Under contract to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) June 2007 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or the use thereof. The contents of this Report reflect the views of the contractor, who is responsible for the accu- racy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Department of Transportation. This Report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers named herein. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the objective of this document. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA-HOP-08-034 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Consideration for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) to High Occupancy Toll June 2007 (HOT) Lanes Study 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Martin Sas, HNTB. Susan Carlson, HNTB Eugene Kim, Ph.D., Booz Allen Hamilton Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Cybersecurity: the “Must-Have” for Smart Systems
    CYBERSECURITY: For Safe and Secure Mobility Editorial Cybersecurity: the “must-have” for smart systems Eddy Thesee Vice President, Cybersecurity Products & Solutions,Alstom In many respects, a computer system bears a remarkable likeness to living organisms. Like them, it grows, develops, and explores new territory. Above all, it seamlessly interlocks with its surrounding ecosystem, which for its part is constantly changing, and it sees new species regularly appear. There is a lot more to a railway system than its computer system. Computer systems, however, are acquiring more and more importance within the networks, in the control centres or the drivers’ cabins, as well as track equipment and traveller information systems. This increasingly prominent role offers a fantastic opportunity for creating value, as digitisation brings added intelligence to railway networks, in terms both of their development and operational needs and of their maintenance requirements. This added element of intelligent systems is nevertheless accompanied by an added element of fragility, if the overall security of the digital systems used is not taken seriously, and adequately matched by the safety and security culture that is typical of the railway world. Because computer systems are “living” systems, this demands of those playing their various roles in the railway universe permanent vigilance, combined with a solid ability to anticipate and adapt. The leading players in the transport world have, during the last few years, entered the era of cybersecurity. In the railway world, attacks are still rare. As the networks modernise, however, exposure increases apace. The challenge is thus clear: cybersecurity must be placed at the very heart of our culture of excellence and security.
    [Show full text]
  • M-1 EXHIBIT M Stadium Pad Infrastructure and Stadium Related
    EXHIBIT M Stadium Pad Infrastructure and Stadium Related Infrastructure Stadium Pad Infrastructure o Stadium Pad Demolition of existing buildings on Stadium Pad Grading of Pad area and Ring Road within +/- 0.2 Feet of approved grading plans o Inner Ring Road Utilities, including Auxiliary Water Supply System (AWSS), Low Pressure Water ( LPW), Recycled Water (RW), Sanitary Sewer (SS), Storm Drain (SD) and all dry utilities installed as part of the Joint Trench (JT), installed in roadway capable of being activated 12 months before completion of new stadium. This also includes the laterals or services from each of these utilities serving the Stadium Parcel. Roadway Portland Cement Concrete (PCC), Curb and Gutter Asphalt Concrete (AC) wearing surface to be installed by stadium contractor upon completion of the new Stadium to prevent damage. o Interim Construction Access Corridor on Crisp Road from Griffith to Fisher Minimum of 2 lanes of weatherproof roadway o Interim Construction Access Corridor from Innes to Galvez to Robinson to Fisher to Crisp Minimum of 2 lanes of weatherproof roadway Stadium Related Infrastructure o Stadium Parking Lot/Dual-Use Fields Grading Surface Turf Drive Isles/Roadways Parking Structure Interim Parking Facilities as defined in the Transportation Plan Utilities Operational AWSS, LPW, RW, SS and SD Transportation Management System (TMS), as defined in the Transportation Plan. This core and shell of the Transportation Management Center shall be included within the New Stadium constructed by or on behalf of the 49ers, and the fixtures and LEGAL_US_W # 66181446.1 M-1 improvements within the core and shell of the Transportation Management Center shall be constructed by Developer as set forth in the Infrastructure Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Corpus Christi and Yoakum Districts
    Corpus Christi – Yoakum Regional Freight Mobility Study, Phase II Report TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ES-1 SECTION 7 - ANALYSIS OF RAIL/ROADWAY INTERFACE ISSUES .....................................7-1 7.1 METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................7-1 7.1.1 Crossing Selection Criteria.............................................................................7-1 7.1.2 Rail Occupancy ..............................................................................................7-4 7.1.3 Analysis of Results .........................................................................................7-8 7.2 GRADE CROSSING COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS...................................................7-10 7.2.1 Construction Cost Estimates ........................................................................7-10 7.2.2 Benefit-Cost Analysis ...................................................................................7-26 7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................7-31 SECTION 8 - BOTTLENECK IMPROVEMENTS EVALUATION AND MODELING ..................8-1 8.1 PROJECTED TRAFFIC GROWTH ............................................................................8-1 8.1.1 2035 Train Forecasts......................................................................................8-1 8.1.2 Results............................................................................................................8-2
    [Show full text]
  • I-70 Reversible Lane Georgetown to Floyd Hill
    I-70 Reversible Lane Georgetown to Floyd Hill TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 Problem Statement ................................................................................................................... 1 What is the problem facing I-70? ............................................................................................. 1 Why look at a Reversible Lane? .............................................................................................. 2 Reversible Lane Facts & Assumptions ................................................................................... 2 What is a Reversible Lane? ..................................................................................................... 2 Where could a Reversible Lane be implemented? ................................................................... 2 Who could use a Reversible Lane? ......................................................................................... 3 What is the expected growth of traffic volumes in the corridor? ............................................... 4 If implemented, what travel time savings could be realized? .................................................... 4 What impact would a Reversible Lane have on westbound I-70? ............................................ 4 How long would the Reversible Lane project be useful? .......................................................... 5 Implementation
    [Show full text]