SR 109 Access Management Study

Technical Committee Meeting

September 9, 2014

SR 109 Access Management Study

Agenda

Welcome and Introductions

Project Management Report

Technical Report

Next Steps

Study Area

Study Goals and Objectives

Preserve and enhance the long-term safety, efficiency, economic development, and environmental resources of the SR 109 corridor

Develop an access management plan and permitting process that defines standards and policies for the location, spacing, design and operation of:

Driveways Street connections Median openings Traffic signals Interchanges

Study Outcomes

Access Management

Plan

Corridor Vision Access Categories

Recommended Improvements

Project Management Report

Project Management Report Project Schedule

Task 1: Project Management Plan

Task 2: Publ ic, Stakeholder, and Media Outreach Plan

Task 3: Technica l Review & Analys is of Historic, Existing and Future Conditions

Task 4: Document & Assess Existing Access Management Guidel ines and Practices

Task 5: Develop Access Management Resource Ki t

Task 6: Develop Corridor Specifi c Access Management Plan

Task 7: Prepare Final Documentation & Electronic Fi les

Steering Committee/Corridor Management Commitee Meetings Public Meetings

Technical Committee Meetings Major Deliverables

Jan Feb2014 2015

May Task

AprilJune SeptAugJuly MarchNov DecOct

0 0

0

Project Management Report Public Workshops – Objectives

1. Establish a vision for the corridor

2. Discuss how access management can help achieve the vision for the corridor

3. Ask corridor stakeholders to identify areas of concern – opportunities and challenges

Project Management Report Public Workshops – Agenda

A. Welcome & Introductions

B. Presentation – Setting the Context

C. Establishing Corridor Values and Priorities – Priority Pyramid

D. Locations of Concern and Opportunities – Mapping Exercise

E. Establishing a Corridor Vision

F. Adjourn

Project Management Report Public Workshops – Location/Dates/Time

- Potential locations – two meetings:

o Sumner County Administration Building

o Wilson County Courthouse

- Potential meeting dates/time – 5:30-7:00 pm:

o Wednesday and Thursday October 22 and 23

o Wednesday and Thursday October 29 and 30

o Wednesday and Thursday November 12 and 13

Project Management Report Public Workshops – Outreach

- Stakeholder database

o Elected and government officials

o Property owners along corridor

o Other major stakeholders (civic, business, and community)

- Workshop announcement

o MPO media contact list

o State, regional, and local partners – websites and social media

Technical Report: Existing Conditions and Trends

Task 3 - Existing Conditions & Trends Existing Plans & Programs – Goals & Objectives

Environmental Features & Natural Resources

Land Use and Development Patterns

Travel Demand & Transportation System Performance

Performance Measures

Existing Plans & Programs

SR 109

TDOT Long Range

Transportation Plan MPO

Regional Transportation

Plan 2035

MPO Transportation Improvement

Program 2014-2017

MPO Regional Bicycle &

Pedestrian StudyMPO Tri-County

Land Use and Transportation

Study

2035 Comprehensive Plan: Sumner

County’s Blueprint to the Future

Wilson County Gateway Land

Use Master Plan

Gallatin on the Move

2020

Lebanon Future Land

Use Plan Update

Lebanon Major Thoroughfare

Plan

Portland Future Land

Use Map

Related Goals & Objectives1. Maximize economic opportunity and economic competitiveness

by identifying strategic development areas

2. Maintain the rural character of communities by encouraging development in existing community centers

3. Preserve environmental features by protecting natural resources

4. Ensure that the highway operates as a high-speed, high volume transportation facility for the movement of people and goods by managing congestion

5. Support all transportation modes by providing access to safe and convenient pedestrian, bicycle, and transit systems

6. Establish and maintain ongoing collaborative partnerships across jurisdictions and agencies by coordinating policies and standards

Five segments and fourteen sub-segments

Organized by typical cross section and context

Objective is to analyze key variables at different scales

Analytical Framework

Segment 1

Industrial uses anchor both ends of corridor and ends of Gallatin Bypass

Office, commercial and mixed use concentrations – from Hickory Ridge Rd. to US 70/Lebanon Rd. and adjacent to Gallatin bypass

Residential/rural uses and significant environmental features north of US 70 to River and from Gallatin Bypass to Portland

Strip commercial from River to Gallatin Bypass and through Portland

Parcels Property Owners

161 128

Land Development and Environmental Constraints

Segment 2 Segment 3


159 296


265 200


Segment 4 Segment 5


358 256


97 64


Crash Locations Between 2011-2013, SR 109

averaged more than 430 crashes per year

30% of the crashes resulted in injuries, including 11 fatalities

- Six of the fatalities occurred between US 70 and the Gallatin Bypass

Crashes are concentrated at or near intersections and interchanges, including:- I-40 interchange area- Long Hollow Pike- SR 25/Red River Rd.- SR 52

Crash Locations

2011 - 2013 Total Crashes

1 - 10 crashes

11 - 25 crashes

26 - 50 crashes

51 - 125 crashes

Crash Locations


1 - 10 crashes

11 - 25 crashes

26 - 50 crashes

51 - 125 crashes

Crash Locations


1 - 10 crashes

11 - 25 crashes

26 - 50 crashes

51 - 125 crashes

Crash Locations


1 - 10 crashes

11 - 25 crashes

26 - 50 crashes

51 - 125 crashes

Crash Locations


1 - 10 crashes

11 - 25 crashes

26 - 50 crashes

51 - 125 crashes

Crash Rates and Access Points Crash rates on two sub-

segments are twice as high as statewide averages:

- I-40 interchange area- Gallatin Bypass between

Nashville Pike and SR 25

Many sub-segments are at or near statewide averages – additional development will present new challenges

Total number of access points – driveways and streets – and signalized intersections strongly impacts safety

Crash Rates

Actual vs Statewide Avg Crash Rates

Less than 0.50

0.50 - 0.74

0.75 - 0.99

1.00 or greater

Crash Rates


Less than 0.50

0.50 - 0.74

0.75 - 0.99

1.00 or greater

Crash Rates


Less than 0.50

0.50 - 0.74

0.75 - 0.99

1.00 or greater

Crash Rates


Less than 0.50

0.50 - 0.74

0.75 - 0.99

1.00 or greater

Crash Rates


Less than 0.50

0.50 - 0.74

0.75 - 0.99

1.00 or greater

Access Points

!( Signalized Intersections

Access Points

1 - 3

4 - 6

7 - 12

13 - 24

Access Points


Access Points

1 - 3

4 - 6

7 - 12

13 - 24

Access Points


Access Points

1 - 3

4 - 6

7 - 12

13 - 24

Access Points


Access Points

1 - 3

4 - 6

7 - 12

13 - 24

Access Points


Access Points

1 - 3

4 - 6

7 - 12

13 - 24

Traffic Volumes & Speed Traffic volumes are projected to

more than double by 2040 on SR 109 between SR 840 and Portland

The percentage of truck traffic is forecasted to increase as much as fourfold over the next 25 years

As percent of free flow speed, average peak hour speeds are lowest:

- Between I-40 and US 70/Lebanon Road

- On the southern end of the Gallatin Bypass

- South of SR 52 in Portland

Traffic VolumesSR 109 - Segment 1

2011 Average Annual Daily TrafficLess than 10,000

10,001 - 15,000

15,501 - 20,000

Greater than 20,000

SR109 - 0.50 mile buffer

Streets

Railroad

Parcels

Water

City Limits



10,001 - 15,000

15,501 - 20,000

Greater than 20,000


Streets

Railroad

Parcels

Water

City Limits



10,001 - 15,000

15,501 - 20,000

Greater than 20,000


Streets

Railroad

Parcels

Water

City Limits



10,001 - 15,000

15,501 - 20,000

Greater than 20,000


Streets

Railroad

Parcels

Water

City Limits



10,001 - 15,000

15,501 - 20,000

Greater than 20,000


Streets

Railroad

Parcels

Water

City Limits

Mid

night

1:00

AM

2:00

AM

3:00

AM

4:00

AM

5:00

AM

6:00

AM

7:00

AM

8:00

AM

9:00

AM

10:0

0 AM

11:0

0 AM

Noon

1:00

PM

2:00

PM

3:00

PM

4:00

PM

5:00

PM

6:00

PM

7:00

PM

8:00

PM

9:00

PM

10:0

0 PM

11:0

0 PM

44.0

46.0

48.0

50.0

52.0

54.0

56.0

Northbound Southbound

Corridor Travel TimePeak period:7 AM to 8 AMSouthbound53:45 travel time42.3 miles per hour

SR 109 Travel Time Today Free flow

47 minutes, 8 seconds

Peak hour delay 6 minutes,

43 seconds

1A 1B 1C 2A 2B 2C 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 5A 5B 5C0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

4.96

0.95

3.20

5.04

4.06

2.11 2.31

1.64

2.44

5.31

4.434.08

2.06

4.55

0.00

0.84

1.32

0.15

0.22

0.01

0.54

0.29

0.37

0.21

0.081.23

0.00

1.46

Segment Travel Times (Min.)

Free Flow Time Delay

Driveway connections and speed

Less connections = more speed

1A 1B 1C 2A 2B 2C 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 5A 5B 5C0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1222

74 7964

56

4 102

3447

139

69

90

Existing Connections on SR 109

Current practice

One parcel = one connection (or more)

1A 1B 1C 2A 2B 2C 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 5A 5B 5C0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1222

74 7964

56

4 102

3447

139

69

90

118

36

76

94

77

25

17 18

129

80

29

11

96

Connections on SR 109 at Buildout

Existing Access Points New Access Points

Speed guidelines

Speed (mph) Minimum Connection

Spacing

20 120

25 200

30 330

35 470

40 630

45 870

TRB Access Management Manual

1A 1B 1C 2A 2B 2C 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 5A 5B 5C0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,0003,270

420 420

560 560

300

5,600

1,580

11,830

1,510

910

180 160

440

300

160210

260 250210

4,910

950

1,190

320 340

150 140

220

Connection Spacing

ExistingBuildout

4,900

3,270 5,600 11,800

1A 1B 1C 2A 2B 2C 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 5A 5B 5C0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Posted Speed

Existing Posted Speed Future Posted Speed

1A 1B 1C 2A 2B 2C 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 5A 5B 5C0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Free Flow Travel Time (min.)

Free Flow Time Future Free Flow

SR 109 Travel Times

Today 47 minutes, 8 seconds

At Buildout One hour, 12 minutes, 34 seconds

25+ minute increase

SR 109 Travel Times

At buildout

Today

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

47 minutes, 8 seconds

One hour, 12 minutes, 34 seconds

25+ minute increase

Key Findings Land Development & Environmental Constraints

- Four general land development patterns: industrial, commercial/mixed use, strip commercial, and residential/rural

Safety

- High number of crashes throughout corridor, but concentrated at or near intersections and interchanges

- Total number of access points and signalized intersections strongly impacts safety

Travel Demand

- Traffic volumes projected to more than double and the percentage of truck traffic to increase fourfold over the next 25 years – projected 25+ minute increase

Proposed Performance Measures Safety

- Crash potential Mobility

- Average travel time Access

- Connection spacing Economic Development

- Market area- Time required to process permits

Environmental Impacts- Air pollution- Water quantity/Water quality

Technical Report: Existing Access Management Guidelines & Practices

Driveway Permitting on SR 109

Statute directs Commissioner to adopt Rules

Current Rules are dated 2003, but have changed little for several decades

The Rules are substantially inadequate for major arterials considering modern access design practice

TDOT does not appear to have the ability to adopt stricter permitting criteria for specific corridors such as SR 109

TDOT driveway Rules need updating to current accepted practice

Access Permitting Process

Permit coordination is maintained between TDOT and local agencies, but vary in method

Local agencies are generally pleased with TDOT coordination process

TDOT driveway Rules approve driveway access but local agencies control requests

TDOT has authorized new driveways during projects without consulting locals

Insufficient Criteria in Current RulesShort

driveway spacing

Allows multiple driveways per

parcel

Normally all movement

driveways allowed

Low speed driveway design with short radii

Left/right turn lanes rarely

required

Under designed turn lanes, too short for arterial speeds and traffic density

Does not incorporate

modern research

identifying access as the single most significant

roadway design element

impacting safety and

capacity along a roadway

Three Levels of Access Control

(Controlled-Access facilities, TCA 54-16-101.)

Facilities with Full Access Control (Interstate)

- Full access control, interchanges only limits

Facilities with Limited Access Control (to SR25)

- Access allowed at public roads and streets only

- No driveways permitted access to the mainlineFacilities with Partial Access Control (SR25 to Portland) > Minimum control

- Public roads and streets

- One 50-foot opening per private tract, unless. .

- Existing driveways per tract replaced in-kind

Rules say good things but don’t have decision

criteria to achieve them“Where feasible within the frontage limits, any driveway shall be located so as to afford maximum sight distance

along the highway…”

“Driveways shall be so located that vehicles entering or leaving the establishment will not interfere with the free movement of traffic or create a hazard on the highway..”

- Criteria and values are from the late 1950s, or minimum

- Diagrams and control dimensions are from the late 1950s and do not address modern volumes & safety criteria

Common Access Problems on SR 109

Strip development

with no secondary

access roadsTwo-way-left

turn lanes versus raised

medians

Residential properties with driveways on

arterial

Spacing of driveways too close to each other and to intersections

Design not adequate for

current & future arterial volume

and speeds

Far more driveways than necessary to

give reasonable access

No plans for adequate traffic signal spacing

What is Not Working…

For the stated performance goals of SR-109, the current process and access decision criteria are not working well

Permit Rules, local ordinances and planning processes are not sufficient to protect the roadway against increasing traffic demands and travel distances

Frontage businesses with direct and left turn access is not compatible with regional arterial operation

In the developed areas with abutting businesses, SR-109 is operating a wide commercial “collector”, not a regional arterial

When modern access principles are applied to a specific corridor…. Crashes reduced by 30 to 60 percent Capacity increased by 20 to 40 percent

66Demosthenes

Decreasing crash rates by adding medians….

Florida DOT

Speed Variation is a Major Factor

Critical Elements in Arterial Performance

Use raised medians to limit left turns

Uniform and well spaced intersections

All access design elements reducing speed differential to 10 mph or less (radii, turn-lane)

Treat SR 109 as an arterial - not a wide commercial collector

Design Criteria Needs Modernizing

- TDOT left turn lane warrant: about 50 veh/hr (using old AASHTO guidance), no firm number - Recent research warrant guidance: recommends 5 veh/hr

- Current left turn bay design: taper + storage = about 250 ft.- Modern left turn bay design: taper + deceleration + storage = 365 ft. at 35mph, 710 ft. at 55mph (10 mph differential)

- Current Access Spacing: Rule has 25 to 30 feet- Modern Access Spacing: 250 ft. at 35mph, 475 ft. at 55mph

Best Practice - Administrative

Model ordinances and resolutions (local)

Zoning overlays for SR-109 corridor

Adding criteria to existing zoning language to address arterials and access to secondary's

Adding criteria to site planning requirements, i.e., access spacing, left turns accommodation, denial of direct access at critical locations

Adopt access management plan using intergovernmental agreements

Access Management Resource Kit

Will present

and discuss

the benefits of improving

the managem

ent of access on an arterial corridor

Will also discuss

the complications and

challenges to

applying access

techniques

Presentation of the practices, policies,

techniques and

implementation

strategies

Modern Access Management

is successful because…1

• It limits conflict frequency on the roadway

2 • It reduces the velocity of conflicts

3

• It reduces the frequency of uncontrolled left turn conflicts which create the greatest likelihood of fatalities and severe injuries

4• It improves business mobility by getting goods, services and customers to businesses more efficiently (just not always most conveniently on a property-by-property basis)

I-40 north for 0.5 mile to Hickory Ridge

• 117 crashes, 50 injuries in 3 years• 59 at intersections, 9 turn angles, 32 rear end• Between 60 and 80% access related• Only 4 single vehicle crashes out of 117

From South Park Circle, for 0.8 mile north to the Gallatin Bypass Intersection

90 crashes, 65 injuries, 1 fatal (ped) Over 70% access related 70 were rear end crashes (35 at intersections)

Bypass Section Crashes in 3 years 308 crashes reported, with 315 injuries, 4 fatalities About 156 access related crashes 51% access related on controlled-access road 123 rear end crashes

Portland: Hardison North to Freedle

134 crashes with 110 injuries (55 serious) Only 7 single vehicle crashes About 77% access related

Best Practices (modern criteria)

No driveway without necessity

Raised median always if frequent access

Spacing - Min 225 ft. at 35mph, 450 ft. at 55mph

Turn lane length 35mph = 410 ft., 55mph = 700 ft.

Uniform and well spaced intersections

Consider roundabouts rather than traffic signals

Shared driveways to reduce numbers

All new subdivisions with internal circulation

Left turn warrant 10 veh/hr or less

Driveway Test for Arterial Access

The property owner must find the location with the least level of public hazard while still achieving the test of reasonable access (does not rise to the level of substantial impairment)

Then design the access to mitigate impacts

The challenge for local agencies is to prevent subdivision of land that creates even more parcels requiring direct access over time

Documents

SR 109 Access Management Study