Full Text
Final Report Final Report August 2009 Prepared by: Prepared for: City of Missoula 435 Ryman Street Missoula, MT 59802 (406) 552-6000 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 101 S. Capitol Blvd., Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 (208) 338-2683 Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update Russell Street/South 3rd Street Environmental Impact Statement ---PAGE BREAK--- Section 1 Executive Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update August 2009 Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2 Executive Summary The City of Missoula, Montana Department of Transportation (MDT), and FHWA completed a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Russell Street/S. 3rd Street corridors in October 2008. The EIS was initiated in 2000 to evaluate alternatives to address the current and projected safety and mobility concerns on Russell Street and the connecting east‐west corridor, S. 3rd Street As part of this DEIS, a traffic study was completed in 2005 and updated in 2007 prior to circulating the DEIS in July 2008 (Reference The traffic study evaluated six alternatives under future traffic conditions and identified future capacity and level of service deficiencies for the corridor. However, due to the recent update of the regional travel demand model, the 2008 Missoula Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP, Reference and public comments, the City, MDT, and FHWA (referred to as project team in the remainder of the report) sponsored a peer review and Traffic Analysis Update (TAU) of the alternatives which is documented herein. In March 2009, the TAU was initiated to perform a traffic operations, safety, and multimodal evaluation of Alternatives 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5‐Refined and two additional options (referred to as Option 6 and 7) identified by the project team. The analysis was performed under year 2035 traffic conditions, which is consistent with the Missoula LRTP. The study area included Russell Street between Mount Avenue/S. 14th Street and W. Broadway Street. Figure 1 illustrates the study area. Figure 2 illustrates the five alternatives and two options that were analyzed in the TAU. Table 1 summarizes the number of travel lanes and intersection control associated with the DEIS Alternatives and Options 6 and 7. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update August 2009 Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 5 Table 1 Description of Alternatives and Options DEIS Alternatives Segment/ Intersection Alt 11 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5-R Option 6 Option 7 W. Broadway W. Broadway to Wyoming 2 Wyoming Wyoming to S. 3rd S. 3rd S. 3rd to S. 5th S. 5th S. 5th to S. 6th S 6th to S. 8th 3 S. 8th to S. 11th- Knowles S. 11th-Knowles S. 11th- Knowles to S. 14th-Mount to to to to S. 14th-Mount Symbol Description Symbol Description 2 Lanes This symbol represents one travel lane in each direction and no median. TWSC This symbol represents an unsignalized intersection with two-way, stop control. 4 Lanes This symbol represents two travel lanes in each direction and no median. Signal This symbol represents an intersection with a traffic signal control. 2+ Lanes This symbol represents one travel lane in each direction with a raised or painted median. SL rbt This symbol represents an intersection with a single lane roundabout. 4+ Lanes This symbol represents two travel lanes in each direction with a raised or painted median. ML rbt This symbol represents an intersection with a multilane roundabout. 1Alternative 1 has the same cross-section, lane configurations, and traffic control as existing conditions. 2The existing bridge is a two-lane bridge. 3In Option 6, two travel lanes are provided between 7th and 8th. ---PAGE BREAK--- Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update August 2009 Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 6 The key findings and recommended design enhancements of the TAU study are provided below. FINDINGS Year 2009 Existing Conditions • Russell Street is a critical north‐south transportation corridor serving as one of five bridge crossings over the Clark Fork River within the City, and provides access to downtown and several neighborhoods. • Daily traffic volumes on the corridor range between 20,000 and 22,000 vehicles and include both local and regional trips across the bridge. • Traffic on Russell Street has seen a steady growth rate of 0.7 percent per year over the past 30‐years. Overall, traffic volumes in the study area (Russell Street, S. 3rd Street, and Wyoming Street) have seen a small change over the past 15 years but an increase of approximately 0.5‐percent to 1.2‐percent over the past 30 years. • The existing weekday p.m. peak hour is between 4:30 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. Between 1:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. the hourly traffic volumes on Russell Street are within approximately 10‐ percent of the weekday p.m. peak hour. The weekday a.m. peak hour link volumes on Russell Street are approximately 25‐ to 33‐percent lower than the weekday p.m. peak hour. • The average travel time on Russell Street between W. Broadway Street and S. 14th Street‐ Mount Avenue in the northbound and southbound directions of travel is approximately 5 and 6 minutes, respectively during the weekday p.m. peak hour. The average weekday p.m. peak hour travel time on this section of Russell Street is approximately 45‐60 seconds greater than the average daily travel time. • Traffic counts and field observations revealed a fair amount of non‐motorized traffic along the corridor in March 2009. • There are currently four Mountain Line bus routes (Routes 2, 8, 9, and 10) that have scheduled stops on the study corridor. Mountain Line system‐wide ridership has increased each of the past three fiscal years resulting in an annual growth rate of approximately 7.0‐ percent. • Twelve of the study intersections do not currently meet the MDT LOS threshold and eight of the study intersections do not currently meet the City LOS threshold. All of these intersections are currently unsignalized, except for the W. Broadway Street/Russell Street and S. 3rd Street/Russell Street intersections. • From the multimodal analysis, the pedestrian and transit LOS is and the bicycle LOS is for the Russell Street corridor under existing conditions. The bicycle LOS is poor due to the lack of bicycle facilities along the corridor. • The corridor crash rate over the most recent four‐year period is approximately 8.4 accidents per million vehicle miles. Intersections with the highest number of crashes on the corridor are W. Broadway Street, Wyoming Street, S. 3rd Street, S. 4th Street, and S. 14th Street‐Mount ---PAGE BREAK--- Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update August 2009 Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 7 Avenue. The W. Broadway Street and Wyoming Street intersections have higher proportions of injury crashes. • Over the past four years, 21 crashes were reported between bicyclists and automobiles and zero crashes were reported for pedestrians. Over seventy‐five percent of the bicyclist crashes occurred on the segment between S. 3rd Street and W. Broadway Street. Development of Traffic Volumes • Travel demand model traffic forecasts for the Year 2005 No Build, Year 2035 3‐Lane Russell Street, and Year 2035 5‐Lane Russell Street scenarios were obtained from MDT and Office of Planning and Grants (OPG) and used to develop forecast year 2035 traffic volumes at the study intersections. The 255 methodology was used in the development of the year 2035 weekday p.m. peak hour traffic volumes. • Two year 2035 traffic volume scenarios (3‐lane Russell Street and 5‐lane Russell Street) were developed and used in this analysis. Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and Option 6 were analyzed with the 3‐lane volume scenario. Alternatives 4 and 5‐Refined and Option 7 were analyzed with the 5‐lane volume scenario. • The forecast year 2035 weekday p.m. peak hour travel demand model volumes (3‐lane section) result in an 5‐ to 15‐percent reduction in traffic volumes along Russell Street in comparison to the model volumes with Russell Street as a five‐lane corridor. The traffic reduction is due to rerouting to adjacent parallel facilities Reserve Street and Orange Street). • The projected growth rates assuming a 5‐lane Russell Street corridor (2.3‐percent) are approximately double the historical growth rate (1.2‐percent) and the projected growth rates assuming a 3‐lane Russell Street corridor is 1.9‐percent. The overall regional growth rate is consistent under both scenarios. • A higher growth rate is anticipated to occur over the next 30 years on Russell Street than over the past 30 years due to the corridor having available capacity versus other parallel transportation facilities and redevelopment of several large vacant properties near the corridor. However, under both the 3‐lane and 5‐lane scenario, traffic volumes are expected to be diverted to other transportation facilities due to the corridor being congested and drivers experiencing longer travel times. Evaluation of Alternatives and Options • Intersection and corridor traffic operations analysis was performed using 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), and draft methodologies 572) for roundabouts to be included in the 2010 HCM. • The safety analysis was conducted using the procedures outlined in the draft Highway Safety Manual (HSM). The urban and suburban arterials methodology was applied to the analysis of Russell Street and provides a relative comparison between the different alternatives for Russell Street, since the analysis was not calibrated to local conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update August 2009 Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 8 • For the multimodal LOS analysis, the methodology from the 3‐70 was used as a basis for evaluating multiple modes of travel, such as bicyclists, transit, and pedestrians on the Russell Street corridor. It consists of a set of recommended procedures for predicting traveler perceptions of quality of service and performance measures for urban streets. Table 2 provides a summary of the operations, safety, and multimodal analysis for the five alternatives and two options. If a performance measure is rated “Good,” for a given alternative or option it can be concluded that the analysis found it to be relatively good or superior to other alternatives/options; however, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is absolutely good or acceptable per jurisdiction standards. Likewise, if a performance measure is rated “Poor,” for a given alternative or option it can be concluded that the analysis found it to be relatively poor or inferior to other alternatives/options; however, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is absolutely poor or unacceptable per jurisdiction standards. Table 2 Performance Summary of Alternatives and Options DEIS Alternatives Options Performance Measure Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5-R Option 6 Option 7 Safety Automobile Pedestrian Major Intersections Bicycle Safety Automobile Pedestrian Bicycle Corridor Segments Transit = Good = Fair = Poor Traffic Operations • Under Alternative 1, the intersection operations are projected to operate over capacity and at a LOS E or worse under year 2035 traffic conditions for both the 3‐lane and 5‐lane volume scenario. The travel time in the southbound and northbound directions of travel is approximately 7‐½ and 6‐½ minutes (3‐lane volumes) and approximately 8‐½ and 9 minutes (5‐lane volumes), respectively, which is an increase by approximately 50‐60 percent from the existing traffic conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update August 2009 Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 9 • The intersection of W. Broadway Street and Russell Street is projected to operate at a LOS or worse and over capacity under all of the alternatives and options. Some lane enhancements can be provided at this intersection to improve the approach LOS, but not the overall intersection LOS. • The intersections of W. Broadway Street/Russell Street and S. 14th Street‐Mount Avenue/Russell Street are forecast to operate over capacity under year 2035 traffic conditions for all of the alternatives and options. It is expected that these intersections will meter the traffic able to access Russell Street during the weekday p.m. peak hour with the following results: o Russell Street may have a longer period of congestion. o Other corridors may see an increase in traffic volumes due to drivers avoiding Russell Street during the peak conditions. o Drivers may choose to use alternative modes of transportation, such as biking, transit, or walking to complete their trip, or choose to drive at other times of the day when the corridor is less congested. • The other major intersections (Wyoming Street, S. 3rd Street, S. 5th Street, and S. 11th Street‐ Knowles Street) for Alternatives 2, 3, and Option 6 are all projected to operate over capacity and at a LOS or worse under year 2035 traffic conditions. The travel time for these alternatives/options increase by several minutes over the no‐build conditions. • Alternative 4 has some intersections Broadway Street, S. 3rd Street, and S. 14th Street‐ Mount Avenue) that are projected to operate at LOS and over capacity under year 2035 traffic conditions. However, lane enhancements can be provided at all of the intersections to improve the LOS and achieve under capacity conditions Broadway Street would be at a volume‐to‐capacity ratio of 1.03). • Alternative 5‐Refined has better intersection operations than Alternatives 2, 3, and Option 6. However, the multilane roundabout at the intersection of S. 3rd Street and Russell Street continues to operate over capacity and a LOS as a roundabout. • Option 7 has better intersection operations than Alternatives 2, 3, 5‐Refined, and Option 6. However, the reduced through‐lane capacity between S. 6th Street and S. Lawrence Street in conjunction with the over‐capacity conditions and queue spillback at S. 3rd Street and S. 14th Street‐Mount Avenue results in vehicle queues and congested operations on the southern section of the corridor. • Alternative 4 and Option 7 are projected to generally operate acceptably on the corridor between S. 3rd Street and W. Broadway Street. Due to overcapacity conditions for the northbound left‐turn lane at S. 3rd Street/Russell Street intersection and the southbound left‐ turn lane at S. 14th Street‐Mount Avenue/Russell Street intersection, the alternative and option are anticipated to experience vehicle queues and congested operations over the peak hour. With the consistent two travel lanes in each direction under Alternative 4, it is expected that this alternative would result in a shorter duration of congested conditions than Option 7. However, as noted, both Alternative 4 and Option 7 are projected to both ---PAGE BREAK--- Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update August 2009 Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 10 breakdown operationally due to the projected traffic volumes and capacity deficiencies at the intersections of S. 3rd Street/Russell Street and S. 14th Street‐Mount Avenue/Russell Street. Safety • All of the alternatives and options provide a safety improvement over the no‐build conditions. • Alternatives 2 and 3 provide the greatest safety improvements over the no‐build conditions (Alternative 1) 3‐lane volume scenario (65‐67 percent). Alternative 5‐Refined provides the greatest safety improvements over the no‐build conditions (Alternative 1) 5‐lane volume scenario (63 percent). • Key factors that improve safety along Russell Street include the implementation of raised medians that reduce the overall number of turning movement conflicts, the addition of left‐ turn lanes where left‐turns are allowed, and the implementation of roundabouts at intersections. These three factors generally differentiate the alternatives. Multimodal Level of Service • Alternative 4 and Option 7 achieve the overall highest bicycle LOS for the corridor with a LOS E. • All of the alternatives and options perform better than the existing and no‐build conditions for the pedestrian LOS at a LOS C. Option 6 operates worse than Alternatives 2 through 5‐ Refined due to the lack of boulevard treatment at the southern section of the corridor, between S. 7th Street and S. 11th Street. Option 7 operates worse than Alternative 4 due to the higher traffic volumes in the adjacent travel lane next to the sidewalk for pedestrians in the southern section of the corridor, between S. 6th Street and Lawrence Street. • The transit LOS is projected at a LOS C for all of the alternatives and option. Lifespan Analysis A lifespan analysis was performed for each alternative and option to identify the timeline that each alternative and option is projected to operate at an acceptable level of service and under capacity traffic conditions. The analysis provides a general understanding of the traffic volume reduction drivers reroute to other facilities, people shift from auto trips to walking, biking, and transit trips, or change their commute/trips to a different time of the day) that would need to occur to provide acceptable traffic operations under that alternative or option in the year 2035. Table 3 summarizes the lifespan analysis for each alternative and option. ---PAGE BREAK--- Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update August 2009 Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 11 Table 3 Lifespan Analysis Summary Year 2035 Traffic Demand Shift1 Alternative / Option Critical Intersection Level Of Service1 Last Year of Acceptable Operations PM Peak Link2 Daily Link2 Percent Change Alternative 2 S. 11th Street – Knowles Street 20103 -1,000 -12,500 -36% Alternative 3 S. 11th Street – Knowles Street 20103 -1,000 -12,500 -36% Alternative 4 W. Broadway Street 2023 -600 -8,000 -20% Alternative 5-R S. 3rd Street 2012 -1,200 -15,000 -39% Option 6 Wyoming Street, S. 3rd Street, & S. 5th Street 2009 -1,000 -13,000 -38% Option 7 W. Broadway Street 2023 -600 -8,000 -20% 1The thresholds used in the analysis to determine acceptable traffic operations include: LOS D or better; volume-to-capacity ratio of 1.0 or less at traffic signals; and volume-to-capacity ratio of 0.85 or less at roundabouts. 2Alternatives 2 and 3, and Option 6 are based on the 3-lane traffic volume scenario. Alternatives 4, 5-Refined, and Option 7 are based on the 5-lane traffic volume scenario. 3For Alternatives 2 and 3, S.11th Street – Knowles Street intersection does not meet LOS and volume-to-capacity standards in the year 2011. If a roundabout traffic control was not included at this intersection, these two alternatives would operate acceptably until the year 2019. RECOMMENDED DESIGN ENHANCEMENTS The following list provides a summary of intersection and roadway enhancements to improve the multimodal operations and safety of the corridor that could be considered as part of the preferred alternative in the FEIS. • The pedestrian LOS and safety could be enhanced at the signalized intersections with the following treatments. o Stamped Concrete in Crosswalk: Provides drivers a visual cue to be aware of pedestrians. o Leading or Lagging Pedestrian Interval: Start the pedestrian phase a few seconds before the vehicle phase or end the pedestrian phase a few seconds after the vehicle phase to provide additional buffer between the vehicle and pedestrian phases. o Pedestrian Countdown Signals: Provides additional guidance to pedestrians on the amount of time that is available to cross the intersection before a vehicle phase begins. o Pedestrian Island Refuge: Provides pedestrians with a refuge while crossing a larger‐ sized intersection. • The bicycle LOS and safety could be enhanced at the signalized intersections and along the corridor with the following treatments. o Bike Box: A 14‐foot deep reservoir in front of vehicle stop bar used for locations with shared through‐right turn lanes to improve awareness for motorists and bicyclists. ---PAGE BREAK--- Russell Street Traffic Analysis Update August 2009 Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 12 o Inductive Loop Bicycle Detection: When a bicyclist pulls onto the bicycle stencil, inductance on loop changes and detects the presence of a bicycle and assists with reducing delay to bicyclists. o Colored/Outlined Bike Lanes: Coloring/outlining of bike lane enhances vehicular and bicycle awareness on the street. • The transit LOS could be enhanced along the corridor with the following treatments. o Increase the service frequency of buses move from 30‐minute headways to 15‐ minute headways) on the existing routes for the northern section of the corridor. o Provide transit service to the southern section of the corridor. o Provide an accessible path between the stop area and the sidewalk. • The automobile LOS and safety could be enhanced at the signalized intersections and along the corridor with the following treatments. o Develop coordinated signal timing plans for the signalized intersections based on the posted speed for the corridor. o W. Broadway Street/Russell Street ‐ Extend the storage length for the northbound and westbound left‐turn lanes to approximately 500 feet and add a 2nd eastbound right‐turn lane. The addition of a second eastbound right‐turn lane provides an additional three years of acceptable operations and a 5‐percent (+230 p.m. peak hour vehicles) increase in total entering volume served at this intersection. o S. 3rd Street/Russell Street – Extend the storage length for the eastbound and southbound left‐turn lanes to approximately 500 feet and 150 feet, respectively. Either, extend the storage length for the northbound left‐turn lane to S. 5th Street or add a second northbound left‐turn lane. The addition of a northbound left‐turn lane provides an additional eight years of acceptable operations and a 20‐percent (+840 p.m. peak hour vehicles) increase in total entering volume served at this intersection. o S. 11th Street‐Knowles Street/Russell Street – Monitor the traffic volumes at this intersection for potential future signalization as it serves as the only east‐west crossing of the railroad for the neighborhood between S. 6th Street and S. 14th Street‐ Mount Avenue. (Note: The signal should be evaluated in conjunction with the existing railroad crossings on Russell Street and on S.11th Street‐Knowles.) • S. 14th Street‐Mount Avenue/Russell Street – Extend the storage length for the southbound left‐turn lane up to Lawrence Street or add a second southbound left‐turn lane. Add a northbound right‐turn lane. Extend the storage or add a second left‐turn lane for the westbound and eastbound left‐turn lanes. The addition of a southbound left‐turn and northbound right‐turn lanes provide an additional five years of acceptable operations and an 11‐percent (+440 p.m. peak hour vehicles) increase in total entering volume served at this intersection. Many of these enhancements could be considered at any of the alternatives or options evaluated as part of the TAU. Additional details of the study methodology, findings, and recommendations are provided within this report.