I-80 Corridor System Management Plan Alameda County Transportation Commission ACTAC Meeting September 7, 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
General Update March Background As the region grows, increased travel demand on our aging Metro Highway System will continue to create additional.
Advertisements

Beltline Highway ITS – Ramp Metering Project ODOT Planners Meeting April 25, 2012.
Getting Started with Congestion Pricing A Workshop for Local Partners Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations.
Case Study 2 New York State Route 146 Corridor. This case study is about a Traffic Impact Assessment for a proposed site development in Clifton Park,
Project Prioritization - 1 Project Prioritization Using Paramics Microsimulation: A Case Study for the Alameda County Central Freeway Project Presented.
1 Corridor System Management Plan A Case Study for the Interstate 580 in Alameda County Prepared for: 2009 Paramics Annual User Group Meeting Presented.
I-880 Corridor System Management Plan ACTAC Meeting Alameda County Transportation Commission District 4 Office of System Planning Office of Traffic Operations.
CALTRANS’ TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT & OPERATIONS CTP 2040 PAC 1 Kris Kuhl Assistant Division Chief, Division of Traffic Operations 4/15/2014 CREATING.
Route 17 Corridor Study Public Workshop II – November 29, 2012 Orange / Sullivan County 1.
NEW YORK CITY TRAFFIC CONGESTION MITIGATION COMMISSION NYSDOT Comments on New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Plan Bob Zerrillo, Director, Office.
Proposition 1B and the Strategic Growth Plan Randell Iwasaki California Department of Transportation.
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS: GETTING THE MOST BANG FOR YOUR BUCK! GPA Fall Conference 2013 Garth Lynch, PE, AICP HNTB Corporation October 10, 2013.
Management and Operations In MPO Planning Christopher O’Neill.
Interchange Design Nick Hoernke, Bill Roth and Eric Sorensen.
System Management and Operations System Development and Design Growth and Development Plan Components E AST -W EST G ATEWAY.
Transportation Data Palooza Washington, DC May 9, 2013 Steve Mortensen Federal Transit Administration Data for Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Analysis,
TRB Lianyu Chu *, K S Nesamani +, Hamed Benouar* Priority Based High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes Operation * California Center for Innovative Transportation.
Archived Data User Services (ADUS). ITS Produce Data The (sensor) data are used for to help take transportation management actions –Traffic control systems.
Evaluation and Application of Active Traffic and Demand Management (ATDM) Strategies, including Managed Lanes for Urban Corridors in Ohio Naveen Juvva.
Month XX, 2004 Dr. Robert Bertini Using Archived Data to Measure Operational Benefits of ITS Investments: Ramp Meters Oregon Department of Transportation.
Less Stop More Go EXPRESS LANES Travel Choices and Strategies to Relieve Congestion Presentation to FDOT’s Annual ITS Working Group Meeting March 2008.
A Handbook That Outlines When traffic impact studies should be required What analyses should be included How the study should be reviewed and used Who.
National Road Pricing Conference June 4, 2010 Mark Burris, Texas Transportation Institute Jessie Yung, Federal Highway Administration.
Freight Bottleneck Study Update to the Intermodal, Freight, and Safety Subcommittee of the Regional Transportation Council September 12, 2002 North Central.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to Talking Freight Seminar presented by Richard Margiotta Cambridge Systematics, Inc. September 21,
1 1 Executive Board January 22, 2009 Update to the Regional Transportation Plan TRANSPORTATION 2040.
Orange County Business Council Infrastructure Committee December 14, 2010 Draft Long-Range Transportation Plan Destination 2035.
Incorporating Management and Operations and the Congestion Management Process into Metropolitan Transportation Planning FHWA/FTA Webinar June 24, 2008.
Fast Forward Full Speed Ahead Presented at the Joint ITS Georgia / Tennessee Annual Meeting September 25, 2006 by Carla W. Holmes, P.E., PTOE Georgia Department.
TSM&O FLORIDA’S STATEWIDE IMPLEMENTATION Elizabeth Birriel, PEElizabeth Birriel, PE Florida Department of TransportationFlorida Department of TransportationTranspo2012.
BPAC. “Congestion management is the application of strategies to improve transportation system performance and reliability by reducing the adverse impacts.
1 Modeling Active Traffic Management for the I-80 Integrated Corridor Mobility (ICM) Project Terry Klim, P.E. Kevin Fehon, P.E. DKS Associates D.
Multimodal Corridor System Management – Incorporating Analysis of Transit, Demand Management Programs and Operational Strategies Presented by Bill Loudon,
Dixie Regional ITS Architecture Project Summary July 31, 2006.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to FHWA “Talking Freight” Seminar Series presented by Lance Neumann Cambridge Systematics, Inc. August.
1 Joan Sollenberger, Chief Office of Strategic Development Division of Traffic Operations, CA Dept. of Transportation (Caltrans)
Moving People Overview. Key Themes Road Hierarchy/Classification Strategic freight corridors Strategic public transport corridors Review and implementation.
MARYLAND FREIGHT SUMMIT Freight in the Mid-Atlantic Region Jeffrey F. Paniati Associate Administrator for Operations Federal Highway Administration September.
California Department of Transportation Transportation Management Systems (TMS) and their role in addressing congestion Discussion Materials Lake Arrowhead.
Dallas ICM Pioneer Site Stage 1 Lessons Learned Webinar July 24, 2008.
DRAFT What If… The Washington Region Grew Differently? Public Forum on Alternative Transportation and Land-Use Scenarios National Capital Region.
Transportation and Transit Committee 4 December 2002 Albion Road Corridor Study.
Freeway Congestion In The Washington Region Presentation to National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board February 15, 2006 Item # 9.
Bharath Paladugu TRPC Clyde Scott Independent Consultant
Traffic Flow Parameters Surface Street Application.
1 Presented to the Transportation Planning Board October 15, 2008 Item 9 Metrobus Priority Corridor Network.
Weighing the Scenarios: The Costs and Benefits of Future Transit Service Produced for MTDB by The Mission Group © 2000 by The Mission Group. 1 Dave Schumacher.
I-95 Access Study Fredericksburg Area Project Status Update February 12, 2010.
Review of the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) 2007 Urban Mobility Report By Ronald F. Kirby Daivamani Sivasailam TPB Technical Committee October 5,
System Management and Operations System Development and Design Growth and Development Plan Components E AST -W EST G ATEWAY.
THE EL MONTE HOV / BUSWAY: A Policy Driven Experiment in Congestion Management Frank Quon Division of Operations Deputy District Director HOV LANES IN.
County of Fairfax, Virginia Department of Transportation Fairfax County Parkway Corridor Study Board of Supervisors Transportation Committee December 1,
Managed Lanes and Bus Rapid Transit: Emerging New Financing Opportunities ENGINEERS PLANNERS ECONOMISTS Wilbur Smith Associates Ed Regan Senior Vice President.
Travel Reliability – Reliable traffic flow is more important than reducing congestion – traffic congestion is often a sign of an area’s economic vitality.
Review of the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) 2007 Urban Mobility Report By Ronald F. Kirby Presentation to Transportation Planning Board October.
Transportation System Management & Intelligent Transportation Systems May 5, 2009 Steve Heminger Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
December 17, 2010 Developing Transit Performance Measures for Integrated Multi-Modal Corridor Management.
IH-10 Managed Lanes Project: A “Public-Public” Partnership ENGINEERS PLANNERS ECONOMISTS Wilbur Smith Associates Presented at the Value Pricing Conference.
Summary of the WILMAPCO Congestion Management Process Prepared for T3 Webinar September 18, 2007.
1 National Governors Association Roundtable Presentation April 2, 2001 Dr. Christine Johnson Director, ITS Joint Program Office Program Manager, FHWA Operations.
Multimodal Integrated Corridor Management. More Than CSMPs.
Corridor Management Planning in California Jeff X. Ban CCIT, UC-Berkeley Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)
Intelligent and Non-Intelligent Transportation Systems 32 Foundations of Technology Standard 18 Students will develop an understanding of and be able to.
Status Report on the Regional Value Pricing Study Ronald F. Kirby, Director of Transportation Planning November 15, 2006 Item 11.
Lessons Learned from Intersection Improvements on U.S. Highway 280 PMI Central Alabama Chapter Darrell B. Skipper, P.E.
SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE MEASURES, RANKING AND PRIORITIZATION CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PLANS INCORPORATION INTO STIP & TIP STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR.
2040 LONG RANGE PLAN UPDATE Congestion Management Process Plan (CMPP) Major Update February 24, 2016.
Integrating Transit and Highway Solutions In High Volume Corridors
The I-465 West Leg Reconstruction Project
San Mateo Countywide Transportation Plan update
Presentation transcript:

I-80 Corridor System Management Plan Alameda County Transportation Commission ACTAC Meeting September 7, 2010

I-80 CSMP Overview CMIA Requirements  CSMP requirement is noted in the Baseline Agreements of all projects receiving CMIA funding.  CMIA funding has been allocated for various elements of Active Traffic Management three on I-80.  The purpose of a CSMP is to ensure there are corridor-wide strategies in place to preserve the mobility gains of the CMIA projects. In that sense the CSMP is an accountability measure to ensure CMIA funds are well-spent.  An overarching objective of the CSMP has been for ACTC, CCTA, Caltrans, MTC and other key corridor stakeholders to engage in a constructive forum for corridor-based transportation planning.

I-80 ICM Project Vision To enhance the current Transportation Management System along the I-80 Corridor by using State of the Practice solution to build an integrated, balanced, responsive and equitable system that will monitor and maintain optimum traffic flow along the network to improve the safety and mobility for all users. The I-80 ICM will create a balanced network with an emphasis on system reliability and efficiency through a multi-modal solution

Project Goals Improve travel time reliability Create balance between the freeway and local system Create an equitable and environmentally sound system Create a system that is integrated, responsive & efficient Encourage the use of transit and HOV; and improve transit access and priority Emphasis on incident management Improve institution cooperation

Study Corridor I-80 Integrated Corridor Mobility (ICM) Project

I-80 CSMP Presentation  Existing Conditions  Near-Term-(2015) Conditions and Improvement Strategies  Intermediate-Term Improvements and Strategies 5-10 years (Beyond 2015)  Long-Term Conditions and Improvement Strategies years (2035)

Improvement Timeframe Plan Near TermIntermediate TermLong Term Time Frame0 to 5 years5 to 10 years10 to 25 years Type of projects Secured funding or limited shortfall Has environmental clearance Been vetted with stakeholders Unsecured funding or large shortfall Needs environmental clearance or design Not fully vetted with stakeholders Unidentified funding source or needs major funding Planning stage Not vetted with stakeholders Proposed projects I-80 ICM Project, Traffic Light Synchronization Project (TLSP); adopt land use policies and strategies to reduce demand and increase transit mode share I-580 East to I-80 West Ramp Metering; Minor to moderate geometric improvements, Improved connectors from I- 580 WB/I-880 NB to I-80 EB, signalization of interchange intersections, increase in public transit service Major public transit expansion, additional roadway capacity where possible, revised goods movement strategies, large-scale ITS improvements

Existing Conditions Highway Travel Characteristics  117,000 to 288,000 vehicle per day; 1.8% to 5.4% are trucks  Morning peak is westbound and evening peak is eastbound  HOV 3+ vehicles represent 20% of auto trips the AM, and 15% in the PM  Accident rate in Berkeley/Emeryville segment is almost double the statewide average Transit Service  Transit split: 10 % to 20 % (2006 American Community Survey).  Average weekday ridership within corridor:  BART – 54,000 (at 9 stations within study corridor)  AC Transit – 25,000  WestCAT – 4,000

Near-Term (2015) Conditions

Near-Term (2015) Baseline Conditions  Freeway demand increases 13%  Transit Ridership increases by 17%  Corridor VMT increases by approximately 12% while the VHT increases by approximately 20%  Freeway vehicle hours of delay projected to increase by 50% for WB in the AM, and 100% for EB in the PM  Existing bottlenecks will still be present but with longer queues and longer time to clear

1.Freeway Management 2.Arterial Management 3.Transit Management 4.Traveler Information 5.Commercial Vehicle Operations 6.Traffic Surveillance and Monitoring 7.Incident Management

Near-Term (2015) Congestion Mitigation Strategies  I-80 Eastbound HOV Lane Extension – SR 4 to Carquinez Bridge  I-80 ICM Project: Freeway Management – adaptive ramp metering, variable advisory speed signs, lane use signs Arterial Management - coordinated traffic signal systems, TMC for local jurisdictions Transit Management - ramp meter HOV preferential lanes, TSP, transit traveler information at BART stations Traveler Information – 511 enhancement, CMS, HAR Traffic Surveillance and Monitoring - CCTV cameras, vehicle detection system Incident Management-Vehicle detection, incident response plan

Near-Term (2015) I-80 ICM Project  Findings Significant reduction in overall delay during both AM and PM peak – up to 9% Mainline delay reduction – up to 28% Slight increase in delay on San Pablo – 2% Typical meter delay is 30 seconds Ramp meter delay for many trips is offset by mainline speed improvement Insignificant diversion anticipated due to ramp metering

Intermediate-Term Improvements 5-10 Years (Beyond 2015) After I-80 ICM Project Implementation

Intermediate-Term 5-10 years Strategies 1.I-580 Connector Metering (AM Peak Period) 2.I-80/I-580/I-880 Split Restriping (4 lanes) 3.Capital Improvements

Intermediate-Term Improvements (5-10 years) Scenario 1: EB I-580 Connector Metering  Scenario 2015 AM Peak Period, metering all Westbound “Local” On- Ramps plus Eastbound I-580 Connector  Findings Reduce Delay to WB I-80, greatest from Central to the Maze Shift Delay from I-80 WB to I-580 EB Reduce Delay at Local On-Ramps on I-80 Significant queuing expected on I-580 EB – 4 to 5 miles  Recommendation Additional study – different design, expand ICM network

Intermediate-Term Improvements (5-10 years) Scenario 2: WB I-80 Re-Striping  Scenario Re-stripe WB I-80 approach to I-580/I-880 split to provide 2 lanes each for I-580 and I-880  Findings Increase delay during both AM and PM peak periods – 3 to 11% Reduce Traffic Flow/Throughput Increase Weaving  Recommendation Further study - refine/modify design to eliminate negative impact

Intermediate-Term Improvements (5-10 years) Scenario 3: Capital Improvements  Scenario Ramp Modifications, Interchange Modifications, Auxiliary Lanes, Mainline Modifications, Arterial Improvements  Findings Reduce overall delay during both AM and PM peak – up to 14% Reduce ramp delay during both AM and PM peak Reduce arterial delay during PM peak  Recommendation Conduct more detailed analysis of various capital improvements projects proposed in this scenario for 2015 Beyond; obtain funding and implement these projects concurrently with the I-80 ICM project by 2015.

Long-Term (2035) -Term years Conditions

Long-Term Years (2035) Baseline Conditions  Freeway demand increases by approximately 50% Transit Ridership increases by 60%  Corridor VMT increases by approximately 35% while VHT increases by over 90%  I-80 corridor is expected to operate under extreme congested conditions - more severe congestion associated with existing bottlenecks, new bottlenecks also emerge

Long-Term Years (2035) Strategies  System Management Improvements  Transit Improvements/Enhancements  Demand Management  Goods Movement Policies  Freeway and Arterial Geometric Improvements

Long-Term Years (2035) Demand Reduction Scenarios Summary Findings  Uneven trip reduction between freeway (less) and arterial (more)  With 10% auto trip reduction: Freeway delay decreases by 26% Freeway mainline demand still up to 60% greater than Existing Congestion levels will be significantly worse than Existing Compared to 2035 No Build, transit ridership will increase %65 in the corridor in response to auto trip reduction which will require significant additional transit capacity Finding/Conclusion: Analyzing and implementing additional improvements/strategies is Strongly recommended.

Questions?