Covington's US 190 Superstreet

Covington’s US 190 Superstreet Statewide Traffic Engineer’s Meeting 2019

Penny Lala Johnathan Perry Clara Foshee Cristine Gowland UPERSTREET

www.dotd.la.gov Introduction

Penny Lala

www.dotd.la.gov US 190 Background Information

Covington, St. Tammany Parish 62,726 ADT in 2017 45mph, six-lane, divided urban arterial from I-12 to US 190 Business – Median width ~ 65’ Congested corridor Large cycle lengths

3 US 190 Background Information

 Corridor can be divided into two sections: – I-12 to the Abita River Bridge • ~ 2 miles • 7 traditional signals • 6 U-turns with yield control • Dense driveway spacing • Heavy development

4 US 190 Background Information

 Corridor can be divided into two sections: – Abita River Bridge to US 190 Business • ~ 1 mile • 3 full-access, two-way stop controlled intersections (80’ – 90’ wide) • 3 U-turns with yield control • Bordered by signalized corridor to the north • Driveways more spaced out • Less development

5 Previous Capacity Improvements

 013-11-0026 – Let in January 2004 – Project Limits: I-12 to the Abita River Bridge – Widen US 190 from 4-lanes to 6-lanes – All existing full-access signals remained

6 Previous Capacity Improvements

 H.000490 – Let in July 2005 – Project Limits: the Abita River Bridge to US 190 Business – Widen US 190 from 4-lanes to 6-lanes – All existing intersection control remained the same – Project constructed a 6-lane road to a 2-lane bridge

7 US 190 Existing Issues

Queuing of northbound and southbound thru traffic Some left turns over-capacity 6-lane highway to 2-lane bridge Poor lane utilization Cannot widen US 190 without impacting many businesses Traffic predominantly enters or exits US 190 at the intersections (not a lot of cross traffic)

8 US 190 Superstreet Traffic Study

Headquarters asked for routes to be studied as a Superstreet We were aware of development coming that was going to further break the broken roadway We proposed US 190 Covington Study was initiated in 2010 Study made recommendations involving both sections of US 190 Wal-Mart Marketplace development was initiated during the study, so the study incorporated the permit requirements Study completed in 2012 by Neel-Schaffer

9 US 190 Superstreet Scope Issues

Had to define limits on where the project would stop – Should have considered the signalized corridor immediately outside the limits Study assumed the entire corridor would be done at once – Not feasible during construction – How do you phase in the improvements?

10 US 190 Superstreet Public Meeting Meeting held June 18th, 2014 – DOTD Employees, State Officials and Public in attendance Received feedback and redesigned for an upcoming development – Worked with consultant to get trip numbers and include them in analysis – Additional intersection at Greengate added • Dual lefts onto the proposed connection • Developer had to widen connection to accept the dual lefts – U-turn locations modified to accommodate

11 Plan Development

Clara W. Foshee

www.dotd.la.gov Developing The Plan What should be done first? – Should the new signals be installed and activated first, or should all of the construction work be done first? – When should the new U-Turns be built and signalized? When should the old ones be closed? How will all of these signals be turned on? – 15 intersections where configuration and phasing/timings will change – 2 signalized intersections where only the equipment will change – How will all 17 signals, spanning across 3 miles of congested highway, be activated? How do we maintain access and flow during construction? – Lane closure restrictions? How tight do we make the restrictions?

13 What Should Be Done First? EXISTING SUPERSTREET 15

2 4

5 7 26 US 190 at Frontage Rd

14 How Do We Turn All These Signals On? Corridor broken into four groups for feasibility – Based on relationship of intersections to each other • Wanted to keep U-Turns grouped with their respective origin movement – Group size varied depending on density of signals and locations

(3 signals – 0.66 miles) (3 signals – 0.24 miles) (4 signals – 0.66 miles)

(7 signals – 1.07 miles)

15 7 signals – 1.07 miles long

 2 Restricted-Access Intersections  3 U-Turn Only Intersections  2 Restricted-Access & U-Turn Intersections

Holiday Blvd

16 4 signals – 0.66 miles long

 2 Restricted-Access Intersections  2 U-Turn Only Intersections

17 3 signals – 0.66 miles long

 2 U-Turn Only Intersections  1 Restricted-Access Intersection

18 3 signals – 0.24 miles long

 3 U-Turn Only Intersections

 1 Unsignalized U-Turn Only Intersection  1 Signalized Restricted-Access Intersection  1 Signalized U-Turn Only Intersection

19 Desired Activation Order Wanted to start at North end of project and work our way South – Northern intersections provided more leeway with unexpected issues – Starting at the North end would make it easier to adjust offsets further down the corridor

(3 signals – 0.66 miles) (3 signals – 0.24 miles) (4 signals – 0.66 miles)

(7 signals – 1.07 miles)

20 How Do We Maintain Access & Flow?  Lane Closure Restrictions – Need to be very strict – Need to be in effect at all times

 One Exception – US 190 at Park Place Dr – Turn-lane closed for multiple weeks on EB approach – Cross-connectivity available – Best solution to undesirable situation

21 Adjustments During Plan Development Holiday Blvd Geometrics Corridor Timings – Proposed dual right-turns off side-street – Study Recommended Timings: • AM: 100 second cycles • PM: 100 second cycles – Timings in Field: • AM: 190 second cycles • PM: 180 second cycles – New Timings: • AM: 95 second cycles • PM: 90 second cycles B A

22 The Final Plan

23 Implementation Issues

Johnathan Perry, P.E.

www.dotd.la.gov Issues Discovered During Preconstruction

What order would the contractor activate signals? When would detection be installed? There was confusion when ordering the total quantities for the project – TSIs were provided for two existing intersections that were not fully accounted for in the Final Plans – Only the new signal equipment quantities were added to plans for these intersections (controllers, pods, fiber, etc.) Travel time studies needed before construction started

25 Travel Time Studies

Direction Range (min.) Avg. (min.) Period Pre-Construction (4/2018) NB 7-15 10.9 AM SB 5-15 10.8 NB 12-32 17.8 PM SB v 7-19 14.4 During Construction (3/2019) NB v - - AM SB v - - NB 10.5-13.5 12.1 PM SB 10-13 11.5

26 Issues Discovered During Construction  Adjacent Signalized Corridors  Signal Issues – Timings – Controllers – Cabinet Access – Equipment Placement – Signal Head Visibility  Sequence of Construction Issues  Signage Issues  Striping Issues  Other Issues

27 Adjacent Corridor Issues

Existing signalized corridors adjacent to project – Signal system north of the bridge (3 full-access) – Signal system coordinated with superstreet (4 full-access and 2 restricted-access)

28 Signal Issues - Timings

District was responsible for adjustment of signals – Green time adjustments – Offset coordination (build as we go instead of backtracking later) District had to time the existing corridor to the north to match Superstreet timings before activation

29 Signal Issues - Controllers

Controller clocks drifting, AKA “Dirty Power” Signals did not force off at the correct time – what can we do? – Re-time the entire corridor? – Adjust the NTCIP Yield Value in all controllers? • Trial-and-Error method to get the internal Easy-Calcs to match the Force-Offs on the TSIs

30 Signal Issues – Cabinet Access

31 Signal Issue – Equipment Placement

32 Signal Issues – Head Visibility

33 Sequence of Construction Issues Signal work performed before earth work – Lead to damaged equipment

34 Signage Issues - Lack of Adequate Signage

35 Signage Issues – Conflicting Information

36 Striping Issues – Stop Bar Placement

37 Striping Issues - Lane Utilization

38 Striping Issues - Lane Utilization

 Non-Uniform Pavement – 3 different pavements on one approach  Misleading Traffic Control Devices – Cones give impression that inside lane is closed  Lack of Striping – No temporary striping to guide motorists

39 Other Issues - Environmental Impacts

40 Other Issues – Illegal Movements  Permitted Movements – Rights-In/Thrus – Lefts-In/Rights-Out  Illegal Movements – NB & SB U-Turns from Left-Turn Lanes  Observations at one intersection: – 2 Hour PM Period – 52 NB Illegal U-Turns – 14 SB Illegal U-Turns

41 Other Issues – Illegal Movements

42 Local News Review

43 Lessons Learned

Cristine Gowland, P.E.

www.dotd.la.gov Next Steps and Conclusions Signal Coordination Ongoing Public Outreach Public Opinion Measures of Success

45 Signal Coordination Current: Future (Eventually):  Coordination of both  Independent coordination of northbound and southbound northbound and southbound traffic simultaneously traffic  Not as efficient as two, one-way  Too many cabinets to split (17 facilities now versus 29 individual)  Controlling full access signal on  Need to try independent rings in north side same controller  Pattern Offsets menu allows for different offsets to be assigned to each ring

46 Ongoing Public Outreach

 MyDOTD notifications issued  Public Meeting was removed from Webpage and had to be re-added  Public Information Group created a graphic of the corridor and posted it  Numerous phone call and email questions and complaints  Troop L wanted to meet with local businesses on corridor for a “Safety Meeting”

47 Local Business Outreach - Troop L

 DOTD contacted State Police Troop L concerning enforcement of illegal U-turns  Troop wanted to perform outreach to local businesses before heavy enforcement  Troop proposed a joint effort with DOTD – The Troop would talk about safety – DOTD would speak about Superstreet

48 Local Business Outreach - Troop L

 The presentation has been given to two separate groups at Cantium and one large group at Chevron  Most people in the room where there because they wanted to be. . .  Reached 300 corridor drivers so far

49 Old Five-Phased Signal Timing

180-Second (3-Minute) Signal Cycles

50 New Two-Phased Signal Timing

90-Second (1.5-Minute) Signal Cycles

51 Why Are U-Turns Not Allowed Here?

 Potential crashes with right turners  Delays for right turners because

side street has to brake to avoid CRASH crashes  Delays for left turns because they have to slow down to make the U-turn movement CRASH  U-turns have separate, designated areas

52 Public Opinion - Facebook

53 Public Opinion - Resolution

54 Measures of Success Follow-up travel time studies planned Before/after crash analysis planned (longterm) Implementation of adjacent projects –I-12 widening to south –US 190 widening of Bogue Falaya Bridge to north Public Opinion (decline of negative feedback) One more presentation to discuss results ~ 2024?

55 Questions?