DOCSLIB.ORG

Transit Speed & Reliability

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transit Speed & Reliability TRANSIT SPEED & RELIABILITY 2020 ANNUAL SPOT IMPROVEMENTS END OF YEAR REPORT PUBLISHED JANUARY 2021 This page intentionally left blank. II 2020 Annual Spot Improvements End of Year Report CONTENTS INTRODUCTION �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������1 SPOT IMPROVEMENTS ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������3 1. Westlake Avenue N & Harrison Street .............................................................................................................................................................................. 4 2. 24th Avenue S & S Dearborn Street ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 3. Airport Way S & S Royal Brougham Way �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6 4. Latona Avenue NE & NE 50th Street �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7 5. NE 50th Street & 15th Avenue NE ................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 6. NE 70th Street & 50th Avenue NE ................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 7. Grandview Place E & E Garfield Street ........................................................................................................................................................................... 10 8. SW Alaska Street & California Avenue SW ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11 9. Interurban Avenue S & 52nd Avenue S .......................................................................................................................................................................... 12 10. Union Street (4th Avenue - 7th Avenue) ...................................................................................................................................................................... 13 11. 3rd Avenue & Columbia Street .................................................................................................................................................................................... 15 12. 16th Avenue SW & SW Holden Street .......................................................................................................................................................................... 16 13. N 45th Street (N Midvale Place - Stone Way N) ........................................................................................................................................................... 18 14. 3rd Avenue & Yesler Way ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 21 15. Westlake Avenue N & Mercer Street ............................................................................................................................................................................ 23 16. 2nd Avenue Extension S & S Jackson Street ................................................................................................................................................................. 24 17. 8th Avenue & Seneca Street ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 24 18. Olive Way & Boren Avenue .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 24 19. 8th Avenue S & S Kenyon Street .................................................................................................................................................................................. 24 20. Mercer Street & 1st Avenue N .................................................................................................................................................................................... 24 21. Rainier Avenue S (S Kenny Street to S Frontenac Street) ............................................................................................................................................... 24 22. 9th Avenue & Seneca Street ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 24 23. Carlyle Hall Rd N & Greenwood Ave N ........................................................................................................................................................................ 24 2020 Annual Spot Improvements End of Year Report III SHORELINE SEATTLE TUKWILA 6 1� WESTLAKE AVENUE N & MAGNUSON GREEN HARRISON STREET PARK KING COUNTY 2� 24TH AVENUE S & S LAKE DEARBORN STREET 3� AIRPORT WAY S & S ROYAL 4 5 BROUGHAM WAY 13 DISCOVERY 4� LATONA AVENUE NE & NE PARK NE 45th St 50TH STREET 5� NE 50TH STREET & 15TH AVENUE NE 99 5 6� NE 70TH STREET & 50TH AVENUE NE 520 7� GRANDVIEW PLACE E & E GARFIELD STREET LAKE 7 8� SW ALASKA STREET & UNION CALIFORNIA AVENUE SW SHOREVIEW 23 5 PARK 9� INTERURBAN AVENUE S & 20 15 52ND AVENUE S ELLIOT 99 Elliot Ave S 1 10� UNION STREET (4TH AVENUE BAY - 7TH AVENUE) 18 11� 3RD AVENUE & COLUMBIA 22 LAKE STREET 10 17 Madison Ave WASHINGTON 12� 16TH AVENUE SW & SW HOLDEN STREET 11 14 16 13� N 45TH STREET (N MIDVALE SHORELINE PLACE - STONE WAY N) 2 14� 3RD AVENUE & YESLER WAY PUGET 3 15� WESTLAKE AVENUE N & SOUND MERCER STREET 90 16� 2ND AVENUE EXTENSION S & S JACKSON STREET 17� 8TH AVENUE & SENECA 5 STREET 5 99 18� OLIVE WAY & BOREN AVENUE JEFFERSON PARK 9 19� 8TH AVENUE S & S KENYON Beacon Ave S STREET 8 FOSTER GOLF LINKS 20� MERCER STREET & 1ST Fauntleroy Way SW 99 AVENUE N BLACK RIVER 21� RAINIER AVENUE S (S KENNY SEWARD RIPARIAN STREET TO S FRONTENAC PARK FOREST AND WETLAND STREET) 21 22� 9TH AVENUE & SENECA STREET 518 23� CARLYLE HALL ROAD N & 19 12 405 GREENWOOD AVENUE N LINCOLN PARK 99 SEATTLE TUKWILA IV 2020 Annual Spot Improvements End of Year Report Spot Improvement program 2020 INTRODUCTION expenditures: $377,000. This includes Metro staff time and reimbursed city This annual report describes the spot improvements that were implemented in 2020 through costs to develop conceptual designs, partnerships with local traffic agencies. Spot improvements are low-cost capital investments develop final designs (when needed), aimed at improving bottleneck conditions and operational issues that affect bus travel times construct these improvements, as well and reliability, which results in increased attraction to public transit as a travel mode of choice. as administer the spot improvement The complexity of spot improvements can range from easier projects, such as signal timing program as a whole. adjustments, to more-complicated projects requiring design and public outreach, such as new bus-only lanes. The 23 Spot improvement projects highlighted in this report benefited: The Spot Improvements Program supports King County Metro Mobility Framework policy » 224,000 weekday riders recommendations to support investments to increase speed & reliability and to support improvements to increase safety. The spot improvement projects utilize a set of transit supportive » 125 bus routes toolboxes identified in theSpeed and Reliability Guidelines and Strategies report. Resulting in: In 2020, we worked with our south King County city partners to identify and approve a set of improvements to support the Renton, Kent, and Auburn Mobility Project (RKAAMP); delivery of » $357,000 in avoided additional these projects is anticipated in early 2021. We also began conceptual design for improvements to operating cost annually; support the North Link Connections Mobility Project (NorCon). operating dollars that would otherwise need to be spent to 2020 was a challenging year for delivering spot improvements due to the COVID-19 pandemic and maintaining schedule reliability. competition for limited city staff and financial resources. The Spot Improvement Program adapted » Improved bus operational safety by focusing on smaller and less complex projects that did not require significant city resources at 10 locations. to implement and batching together projects of similar type. We also initiated a hybrid delivery model where Metro Engineering Services, Construction Management, and on-call contractor can be used to supplement city resources. We plan to continue these adaptations into 2021. Spot improvements can range in complexity depending on the level of jurisdictional The success of each implementation was made possible with the support of cities and their coordination, public outreach, design willingness
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Impacts of Queue Jumpers and Transit Signal Priority on Bus
    IMPACTS OF QUEUE JUMPERS AND TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT by R. M. Zahid Reza A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of College of Engineering and Computer Science in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, Florida August 2012 Copyright by R. M. Zahid Reza 2012 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am heartily thankful to my supervisor Dr. Aleksandar Stevanovic for his expertise and circumspective guidance and support all through my graduate studies at the Florida Atlantic University. I also want to thank Dr. Khaled Sobhan for giving me an opportunity to pursuing higher study and Dr. Evangelos Kaisar for his helpful suggestions and comments during my research work. I would like to expand my thanks to Dr. Milan Zlatkovic, from the University of Utah whose sincere judgment and recommendations helped me to carry out the study. Finally, I would like to express my special thanks to my family whose continuous supports and encouragement was constant source of stimulus for this work. iv ABSTRACT Author: R. M. Zahid Reza Title: Impacts of Queue Jumpers and Transit Signal Priority on Bus Rapid Transit Institution: Florida Atlantic University Thesis Advisor: Dr. Aleksandar Stevanovic Degree: Master of Science Year: 2012 Exclusive bus lanes and the Transit Signal Priority are often not effective in saturated peak-traffic conditions. An alternative way of providing priority for transit can be queue jumpers, which allows buses to bypass and then cut out in front of waiting queue by getting an early green signal. Utah Transit Authority deployed Bus Rapid Transit system at Salt Lake County, Utah along W 3500 S.
    [Show full text]
  • Redefining Urban Food Systems to Identify Optimal Rooftop Community Garden Locations
    REDEFINING URBAN FOOD SYSTEMS TO IDENTIFY OPTIMAL ROOFTOP COMMUNITY GARDEN LOCATIONS: A SITE SUITABILITY ANALYSIS IN SEATTLE, WASHINGTON by Ana E. Stoudt A Thesis Presented to the FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE (GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY) May 2015 Copyright 2015 Ana E. Stoudt i DEDICATION I dedicate this paper to my parents, friends, and coworkers for their constant support throughout this entire process. Without them, I would not have made it here today. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am forever grateful to my advisor, Professor Warshawsky, for his encouragement and guidance throughout this experience. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................ ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. iii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ vii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... viii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................... x ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to Be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents
    DOWNTOWN ACCESS STRATEGY PHASE 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 II. Review of Existing Plans, Projects, and Programs ......................................... 2 III. Potential Construction Concerns and Opportunities .................................. 3 A. Existing Construction Planning Tools 3 B. SDOT’s Construction Hub Coordination Program 4 C. Construction Mitigation Strategies Used by Other Cities 7 D. Potential Construction Conflicts and Opportunities 10 IV. Future Transportation Network Opportunities ......................................... 12 A. North Downtown 12 B. Denny Triangle / Westlake Hub 14 C. Pioneer Square / Chinatown-ID 15 D. Downtown Core and Waterfront 16 V. Future Phases of Downtown Access Strategy ............................................. 18 A. Framework for Phase 2 (2014 through 2016) 18 B. Framework for Phase 3 (Beyond 2016) 19 - i - September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years I. INTRODUCTION Many important and long planned transportation and development projects are scheduled for con- struction in Downtown Seattle in the coming years. While these investments are essential to support economic development and job growth and to enhance Downtown’s stature as the region’s premier location to live, work, shop and play, in the short-term they present complicated challenges for con- venient and reliable access to and through Downtown. The Downtown Seattle Association (DSA) and its partners, Historic South Downtown (HSD) and the Seat- tle Department of Transportation (SDOT), seek to ensure that Downtown Seattle survives and prospers during the extraordinarily high level of construction activity that will occur in the coming years.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Transportation Optimization and Bus Priority Measures Future of MBTA Bus Operations
    Surface Transportation Optimization and Bus Priority Measures Future of MBTA Bus Operations Project Sponsored by Thursday, May 29, 2014 Executive Summary • Bus transit is a critical component of the MBTA services and will be for the foreseeable future • Corridor study demonstrated ability to increase reliability for multiple routes • Some fleet replacement and maintenance facility issues coming to a head • Opportunities exist to cost‐effectively reduce MBTA’s carbon footprint through fleet and infrastructure investments 2 Agenda • Why Bus Transportation Important • Operational Reliability through Bus Priority Measures • Alternative Propulsion for a Sustainable Future • Bringing it all together: Pilot Opportunities 3 Why is Bus Transportation Important • Large percentage of MBTA ridership (~30%) o Still Growing…11% growth in unlinked passenger trips from Jan 2007 to Mar 2012 • Environmental justice Minority Low Income English Proficiency* Bus 37% 21% 0.63% Rapid Transit 27% 13% 0.14% Commuter Rail 11% 2% 0.02% 4 Why is Bus Transportation Important • Mobility o 34% of bus users have no household vehicle • Service availability (Coverage) o % of street miles covered by transit market Bus Subway Commuter Rail Total 73% 7% 3% • Lower capital cost to implement bus improvements vs. rail • Public transportation’s role in global warming 5 Project Methodology • Researched bus priority best practices • Researched alternative propulsion systems • Fact finding mission – London, UK • Developed corridor selection criteria/methodology • Developed conceptual
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (Part B)
    7UDQVLW&DSDFLW\DQG4XDOLW\RI6HUYLFH0DQXDO PART 2 BUS TRANSIT CAPACITY CONTENTS 1. BUS CAPACITY BASICS ....................................................................................... 2-1 Overview..................................................................................................................... 2-1 Definitions............................................................................................................... 2-1 Types of Bus Facilities and Service ............................................................................ 2-3 Factors Influencing Bus Capacity ............................................................................... 2-5 Vehicle Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-5 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-13 Fundamental Capacity Calculations .......................................................................... 2-15 Vehicle Capacity................................................................................................... 2-15 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-22 Planning Applications ............................................................................................... 2-23 2. OPERATING ISSUES............................................................................................ 2-25 Introduction..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Framework for Transit Equity: Metrobus Service Guidelines
    Executive Committee Action Item IV-A December 10, 2020 Framework for Transit Equity: Metrobus Service Guidelines Page 36 of 105 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary MEAD Number: Resolution: Action Information 202236 Yes No TITLE: Framework for Transit Equity: Metrobus Guidelines PRESENTATION SUMMARY: Action item to request adoption of Metrobus Service Guidelines PURPOSE: Staff will recommend Board adoption of new Metrobus Service Guidelines. DESCRIPTION: This presentation will update the Board on changes to the draft Service Guidelines based on comments from Metro’s jurisdictional partners and local bus service providers. Summary results from the application of the guidelines to Metrobus Lines/Routes will be provided based on data from July 2019-February 2020. A discussion of how the results can be used to improve bus service and equity will be provided. Staff will recommend Board adoption of Metrobus Service Guidelines to inform future service plans. Contractors and Interested Parties Involved in the Service Guidelines and Annual Line Performance Work: AECOM, Foursquare Integrated Transportation Planning, and IBI Group Key Highlights: • Metrobus Service guidelines are fundamental to ensuring equitable service across the region and are one of the main building blocks for service planning, budget decisions, and conducting a network redesign. Metrobus Service guidelines have not been updated since 2000. • Improving Metrobus directly helps address longstanding inequities in the region. • Updating Metrobus service guidelines was a Bus Transformation Project recommendation and was widely supported by our jurisdictional partners. The guidelines will create a clear and formalized approach to routing, service, and budget decisions. • Feedback from jurisdictions and local bus providers is incorporated into the service guidelines.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transport Priority for Brussels: Lessons from Zurich, Eindhoven, and Dublin
    Public Transport Priority for Brussels: Lessons from Zurich, Eindhoven, and Dublin Peter G. Furth Visiting Researcher, Université Libre de Bruxelles* Report Completed Under Sponsorship of the Brussels Capital Region Program “Research in Brussels” July 19, 2005 *Permanent position: Chair, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA. Telephone +1.617.373.2447, email [email protected]. Acknowledgements Thank you to the many people who gave me time to share information about their traffic control and public transport systems: STIB: Alain Carle (Stratégie Clients), Christian Dochy (Dévelopment du Reseau), Jean-Claude Liekendael (Délegué Général à la Qualité), Louis-Hugo Sermeus and Freddy Vanneste (Définition et Gestion de l’Offre), Thierry Villers (Etudes d’Exploitation), Jean-Philippe Gerkens (Exploitation Métro). Brussels Capital Region: Michel Roorijck (A.E.D., program VICOM). Université Libre de Bruxelles: Martine Labbé (Service d’Informatique), my promoter during this research program. Zurich: Jürg Christen and Roger Gygli (City of Zurich, Dienstabteiling Verkehr DAV), A. Mathis (VBZ) Dublin: Margaret O’Mahony (Trinity University Dublin), Colin Hunt and Pat Mangan (Rep. of Ireland Department of Transport), Frank Allen and Jim Kilfeather (Railway Procurement Agency), Owen Keegan and David Traynor (Dublin City Council, Roads and Traffic Department). Peek Traffic, Amersfoort (NL): Siebe Turksma, Martin Schlief. 1 Introduction Priority for public transport is an objective of Brussels and other large cities. It is the key to breaking the vicious cycle of congestion that threatens to bring cities to gridlock. In that cycle, increasing private traffic makes public transport become slower and less reliable, especially because while motorists are free to seek less congested routes, public transport lines cannot simply change their path, and therefore suffer the worst congestion.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Speed and Reliability Guidelines and Strategies
    TRANSIT SPEED & RELIABILITY GUIDELINES & STRATEGIES AUGUST 2021 II KING COUNTY METRO SPEED AND RELIABILITY GUIDELINES AND STRATEGIES AUGUST 2021 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................1 5. CASE STUDIES ............................................................................ 99 2. OVERVIEW OF SPEED AND RELIABILITY ���������������������������������������3 5.1 RENTON, KENT, AUBURN AREA MOBILITY PROJECT ............... 100 2.1 WHAT ARE SPEED AND RELIABILITY? ........................................4 5.1.1 FORMING PARTNERSHIP .........................................................100 2.2 TYPES OF PROJECTS ..................................................................8 5.1.2 TOOLS IMPLEMENTED ............................................................101 2.3 BENEFITS OF SPEED AND RELIABILITY IMPROVEMENTS ...........12 5.1.3 LESSONS LEARNED ................................................................103 2.3.1 MEASURED BENEFITS .............................................................. 12 5.2 98TH AVENUE NE AND FORBES CREEK DRIVE QUEUE JUMP . 104 2.3.2 ACHIEVE REGIONAL AND LOCAL GOALS .................................. 14 5.2.1 FORMING PARTNERSHIP ........................................................104 2.3.3 SCALABLE SOLUTIONS ............................................................. 17 5.2.2 TOOLS IMPLEMENTED ............................................................106 2.3.4 BENEFITS TO OTHER MODES .................................................... 17
    [Show full text]
  • 2.86-Acres | 124395 Sf
    2.86-acres | 124,395 sf REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS: unique development opportunity premier seattle land site located in south lake union INVESTMENT CONTACTS: Lori Hill Rob Hielscher Bob Hunt Managing Director Managing Director Managing Director Capital Markets International Capital Public Institutions +1 206 971 7006 +1 415 395 4948 +1 206 607 1754 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 601 Union Street, Suite 2800, Seattle, WA 98101 +1 206 607 1700 jll.com/seattle TABLE OF CONTENTS Section I The Offering 4 Introduction Investment Highlights Site Summary Objectives and Requirements Transaction Guidelines Section II Project Overview & Development Potential 17 South Lake Union Map and Legend Project Overview Zoning Zoning Map seattle Development Considerations Development Potential Section III RFP Process and Requirements 34 Solicitation Schedule Instructions and Contacts RFP Requirements Evaluation Process Post Selection Process Disclosures Section IV Market Characteristics 50 Market Overview Market Comparables Neighborhood Summary Regional Economy Section V Appendices 74 NORTH See page 75-76 for List of Appendix Documents Copyright ©2018 Jones Lang LaSalle. All rights reserved. Although information has been obtained from sources deemed reliable, Owner, Jones Lang LaSalle, and/or their representatives, brokers or agents make no guarantees as to the accuracy of the information contained herein, and offer the property without express or implied warranties of any kind. The property may be withdrawn without notice. If the recipient of this information has signed a confidentiality agreement regarding this matter, this information is subject to the terms of that agreement. Section I THE OFFERING 4 | Mercer Mega Block | Request for Proposals 520 REPLACE MERCER STREET LAKE UNION DEXTER AVE N ROY STREET ROY 99 NORTH Last large undeveloped site in South Lake Union | Mercer Mega Block | Request for Proposals 5 THE OFFERING INTRODUCTION MERCER MEGA BLOCK JLL is pleased to present the Mercer Mega Block, a 2.86-acre site acquisition opportunity.
    [Show full text]
  • 16Th Street Draft Alternatives
    DRAFT ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON ALTERNATIVE 3 ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 IMPROVEMENT Mixed Service and Service Focus Infrastructure Focus Infrastructure PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS Bus Stop Removal/Consolidation: - 4 southbound locations (Newton, Lamont, V Streets and Riggs Place) - 5 northbound locations (L , Q , V, Lamont and Newton Streets) Far-Side Bus Stop Expansion: 2 southbound locations (Harvard and M Streets) BASELINE Relocate southbound Spring Place bus stop north to Spring Road to IMPROVEMENTS improve pedestrian safety Upgrade bus stops to WMATA zone lengths Full length, extended peak period Full length, both peak direction: Bus Lanes directions - 7:00 am - 10:00 am southbound 7:00 am - 10:00 pm - 4:00 pm - 7:30 pm northbound Lane shift: - 2 lanes southbound and 1 lane Lane configuration changes between U and O Streets due to bus lanes Addition of center reversible lane northbound 7:00 - 10:00 am - 2 lanes northbound and 1 lane ADDITIONAL southbound 4:00 - 7:30 pm IMPROVEMENTS Queue Jump Lanes Intersection Reconfiguration at Harvard/Columbia/Mount Pleasant TRANSIT SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS (Any proposed service changes would require a future public involvement process led by WMATA) Headway-based service S2 Route patterns reduced to two in each direction S1 and S2 service eliminated along 14th Street between Northern Bus Garage and 16th Street BASELINE Running and recovery time added to schedule IMPROVEMENTS Fleet mix upgraded with low-floor and articulated buses Off-Board Fare Payment All buses, all stops SmarTrip Card top off only S9 buses
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Methodologies for Bus Rapid Transit Corridors: Recommended Guidance September 2019
    Traffic Methodologies for Bus Rapid Transit Corridors: Recommended Guidance September 2019 Report prepared for FDOT Contract Number: C9N85 Task Work Order 34: Traffic Methodologies for Bus Rapid Transit Corridors Recommended Guidance September 2019 Prepared By: CDM Smith 101 Southhall Lane, Suite 200 Maitland, FL 32751 Prepared for: Gabrielle Mathews Chris A. Wiglesworth Florida Department of Transportation, Transit Office 605 Suwannee Street, MS 26 Tallahassee, FL 32399 Phone: (850) 414-4532 Email: [email protected].Ň.us TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Topic Overview ................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of This Guidance .................................................................................................................... 2 Report Organization ........................................................................................................................... 3 Understanding the Process and Key Concepts ........................................................................................ 5 The Transit Project Planning Process and Stages of Traffic Analysis ................................................... 5 Traffic Analysis During Programming and Alternatives Screening (TCAR Process).......................... 5 Traffic Analysis During Project Development and
    [Show full text]
  • SR 520, I-5 to Medina
    I-5 to Medina: Bridge Replacement and HOV Project | Supplemental Draft EIS Chapter 5—Freeway Volumes and Operations What is in this chapter? This chapter presents the transportation team’s findings for the SDEIS freeway analysis. It describes freeway traffic volumes and operations on the SR 520 freeway mainline and ramps during morning (a.m.) and afternoon (p.m.) peak (highest use) Freeway traffic volume refers to how many periods. The chapter also discusses the results of the freeway vehicles and/or people use or would like to traffic volume forecasts and operations analysis of the No Build use a freeway. Alternative and Build (6-Lane) Alternative options. Freeway traffic operation refers to how traffic is moving or flowing, and is discussed in terms of speeds, travel times, and What is traffic currently like on congestion. SR 520? The existing configuration of SR 520 does not meet current WSDOT design guidelines, which affects the freeway’s capacity to provide reliable and safe travel for buses and carpools (HOV) and general-purpose traffic. Roadway capacity in the SR 520 Reliability is defined by how travel times corridor is constrained by: vary over time. On any given day, unusual circumstances such as crashes can dramatically change the performance of the Narrow shoulders and lanes on the corridor and across the roadway, affecting both travel speeds and bridge throughput volumes. Commuters who take congested highways to and from work are well aware of this. When asked about their Short acceleration lane lengths at the SR 520/Montlake commute, they will say "it takes me 45 interchange and Lake Washington Boulevard on-ramps minutes on a good day, but an hour and 15 minutes on a bad day." Poor sight distance at roadway curves, resulting in slower Unreliable traffic conditions affect how and when people choose to travel.
    [Show full text]