Age genda da 1 Comments from July 2018 Public Meeting 2 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Photo by Liam Frederick

FORT WORTH DISTRICT

District 95 Town Hall, Southeast Connector Update

I-20, I-820 & US 287 November 8, 2018

Comments from July 2018 Public Meeting Northbound Meadowbrook Entrance Ramp Alternatives Southbound Brentwood Stair Entrance Ramp Alternatives Craig Street and Pedestrian Bridge Alternatives Project Schedule Project Contact Information Questions

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Age genda da

1

– 88 Comments Com

• mments fr

s from

• m Ju

July ly P Publ blic Me Meeting – 49 Comments – 25 Comments – 51 Comments

NB B Entran ance R Ram amp f from M m Meado adowbrook SB E SB Entran ance R Ram amp f from Br m Brentwood St Stair air Noise se W Wal all St Study dy Cr Crai aig St Street Br Bridg idge A Access ss / / Ped d Br Bridg idge

2

3

Ramp Spacin ing p per State a and N Natio tional al G Guid idelin ines

3

WHY? Y? – Provide adequate distance between ramps for safe travel movements – Provide time for acceleration and deceleration GU GUIDEL ELINES ES – State

• TxDOT, Roadway Design Manual

– National

• AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways

and Streets

• TRB, Highway Capacity Manual

EN ENTR TRANCE F E FOLLOWED B ED BY EXI EXIT

• Desirable 1,500’ from tip to tip with Aux Lane*
• Desirable 2,000’ from tip to tip without Aux Lane*
• Minimum 1,500’ from nose to nose with Aux lane*
• Minimum 2,000’ from nose to nose without Aux Lane*

Source: TxDOT Roadway Design Manual, April 2018, Figure 3-37

Tip Gore Nose * : used for reference and may be influenced by operations and traffic volumes.

4

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok

North

Proposed Removal of Northbound I-820 Entrance Ramp from Meadowbrook Dr.

Meadowbrook Dr. I-30 4

WHY? Y? – Con

• ngesti

tion a and Sa Safety – Conflicts with Exit to Brentwood Stair and I-30 Direct Connections causing heavily congested weaving movements and accidents – Distance between ramps near minimum spacing lengths described in roadway design guidelines

PROPOSED ED A ADDITIO IONA NAL ALTERNA RNATIVES ES T TO B BE EVALUATED ED – No No-Buil ild (Do Nothing) Alterna rnative – A1 A1: Removal of northbound entrance ramp from Meadowbrook Dr (as shown at Public Meeting) – A2 A2: Reconstruct northbound entrance ramp from Meadowbrook Dr and exit ramp to Brentwood Stair Rd – A3 A3: Construct braid ided r ramps ps (ramps that are bridged, one over the other) for northbound entrance from Meadowbrook Dr and exit to Brentwood Stair Rd – A4 A4: Construct northbound entrance ramp from Meadowbrook Dr and removal of the exit ramp to Brentwood Stair Rd

5

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – No

No Build ld A Alt lternative

6

North

Meadowbrook Dr. I-30

Pro ros:

• Access remains as today

Cons: ns:

• Distance between ramps near minimum

spacing lengths described in TxDOT and National Guidelines

• Heavily congested weaving movements

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – No

No Build ld A Alt lternative

7

North

Meadowbrook Dr. I-30

Pro ros:

• Access remains as today

Cons: ns:

• Distance between ramps near minimum

spacing lengths described in TxDOT and National Guidelines

• Heavily congested weaving movements

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A1

8

North

I-30

Pro ros:

• Eliminates existing mainlane weaving from

Meadowbrook entrance ramp reducing congestion and improving safety

• Design meets TxDOT and National

Guidelines for ramp spacing criteria Cons: ns:

• Traffic from Meadowbrook must pass through

a signal to access mainlanes

Meadowbrook Dr.

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A1

9

North

I-30

Pro ros:

• Eliminates existing mainlane weaving from

Meadowbrook entrance ramp reducing congestion and improving safety

• Design meets TxDOT and National

Guidelines for ramp spacing criteria Cons: ns:

• Traffic from Meadowbrook must pass through

a signal to access mainlanes

Meadowbrook Dr.

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A2

10 I-30

Pro ros:

• Existing northbound ramps are

reconstructed to allow additional mainlanes capacity Cons: ns:

• 1345’ between entrance & exit ramps does not

meet minimum TxDOT and National Guidelines

• 865’ between exit ramp & direct connection

does not meet minimum TxDOT and National Guidelines

• Traffic from the northbound I-820 on-ramp

from Meadowbrook wanting to continue northbound on I-820 must weave over 2 lanes in a distance of 1330’

• Reduced shoulders on existing mainlanes

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A2

11 I-30

Pro ros:

• Existing northbound ramps are

reconstructed to allow additional mainlanes capacity Cons: ns:

• 1345’ between entrance & exit ramps does not

meet minimum TxDOT and National Guidelines

• 865’ between exit ramp & direct connection

does not meet minimum TxDOT and National Guidelines

• Traffic from the northbound I-820 on-ramp

from Meadowbrook wanting to continue northbound on I-820 must weave over 2 lanes in a distance of 1330’

• Reduced shoulders on existing mainlanes

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A3

12 12 I-30

Exam ample o

• f “

“Br Braid aided Ramps”

• East

stbound I I-30 30 exit t to N Nola lan Ryan Exp xpwy wy/B /Baird F Farm rm Rd Rd/ / AT&T &T W Way in Arlington

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

13 13

Pr Pros:

• All direct movements remain available

I-30

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Co Cons:

• Traffic from northbound I-820 on-ramp from

Meadowbrook wanting to continue northbound

• n I-820 must weave over 1 lane in 450’
• 1220' ramp spacing would not meet minimum

National Guidelines

• Elevated ramp near neighborhood could

increase noise levels

• Potential displacements of residents
• Reduced shoulders on mainlanes
• Normandy Road cul-de-sac
• Grades on elevated ramp greater than 4% max

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A3

14 14

Pr Pros:

• All direct movements remain available

I-30

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Co Cons:

• Traffic from northbound I-820 on-ramp from

Meadowbrook wanting to continue northbound

• n I-820 must weave over 1 lane in 450’
• 1220' ramp spacing would not meet minimum

National Guidelines

• Elevated ramp near neighborhood could

increase noise levels

• Potential displacements of residents
• Reduced shoulders on mainlanes
• Normandy Road cul-de-sac
• Grades on elevated ramp greater than 4% max

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A3

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A4

15 I-30

Pr Pros:

• Ramp spacing would meet minimum TxDOT

and National Guidelines

• Weaving and congestion levels would

improve compared to the No-Build alternative by maintaining 4 mainlanes until the John T. White exit ramp Co Cons:

• Lambeth Lane would be closed off from frontage

road (cul-de-sac)

• Remove exit ramp to Brentwood Stair (traffic must

travel through signal at Meadowbrook)

• Increase volume on the northbound exit ramp to

Meadowbrook

• Increase traffic volumes at the Meadowbrook

intersection

• Reduced shoulders on mainlanes

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A4

16 I-30

Pr Pros:

• Ramp spacing would meet minimum TxDOT

and National Guidelines

• Weaving and congestion levels would

improve compared to the No-Build alternative by maintaining 4 mainlanes until the John T. White exit ramp Co Cons:

• Lambeth Lane would be closed off from frontage

road (cul-de-sac)

• Remove exit ramp to Brentwood Stair (traffic must

travel through signal at Meadowbrook)

• Increase volume on the northbound exit ramp to

Meadowbrook

• Increase traffic volumes at the Meadowbrook

intersection

• Reduced shoulders on mainlanes

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Proposed Removal of Southbound I-820 Entrance Ramp from Brentwood Stair Rd.

North

WHY? Y? – Con

• ngesti

tion a and Sa Safety – Conflicts with I-30 Direct Connections and Exit Ramp to Meadowbrook Dr causing heavily congested weaving movements – Distance between ramps near minimum spacing lengths described in roadway design guidelines

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair

Meadowbrook Dr. Craig St. 17

PROPOSED ED A ADDITIO IONA NAL ALTERNA RNATIVES ES T TO B BE EVALUATED ED – No No-Buil ild (Do Nothing) Alterna rnative – B1: Removal of southbound entrance ramp from Brentwood Stair Rd (as shown at Public Meeting) – B2: Construct braided r d ramps (ramps that are bridged, one over the other) for southbound entrance ramp from Brentwood Stair Rd and exit ramp to Meadowbrook Dr – B3: Removal of southbound entrance ramp from Brentwood Stair Rd but construct southbound bypass f front ntage r road l d lane under Meadowbrook Dr to access southbound I-820 entrance ramp – B4: Reconstruct southbound entrance ramp from Brentwood Stair Rd and exit ramp to Meadowbrook Dr

18

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair

19 I-30

Pro ros:

• Access remains as today

Cons: ns:

• Distance between ramps near minimum

spacing lengths described in TxDOT and National Guidelines

• Heavily congested weaving movements

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – No

No Build ld A Alt lternative

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

20 I-30

Pro ros:

• Access remains as today

Cons: ns:

• Distance between ramps near minimum

spacing lengths described in TxDOT and National Guidelines

• Heavily congested weaving movements

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – No

No Build ld A Alt lternative

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

21

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B1

Co Cons:

• Traffic from Brentwood Stair must pass through a

signal to enter mainlanes

• Distance between proposed southbound

Meadowbrook exit and existing I-30 connections is less than the distance between the existing southbound Meadowbrook exit and I-30 connections

I-30

Pr Pros:

• Eliminates existing mainlane weave from

Brentwood Stair entrance ramp reducing congestion and improving safety

• Meets TxDOT and National Guidelines for

ramp spacing criteria

• Relocated exit ramp to Meadowbrook

provides for additional storage or queueing of vehicles from intersection

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

22

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B1

Co Cons:

• Traffic from Brentwood Stair must pass through a

signal to enter mainlanes

• Distance between proposed southbound

Meadowbrook exit and existing I-30 connections is less than the distance between the existing southbound Meadowbrook exit and I-30 connections

I-30

Pr Pros:

• Eliminates existing mainlane weave from

Brentwood Stair entrance ramp reducing congestion and improving safety

• Meets TxDOT and National Guidelines for

ramp spacing criteria

• Relocated exit ramp to Meadowbrook

provides for additional storage or queueing of vehicles from intersection

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

23

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B2

I-30

Exam ample o

• f “

“Br Braid aided Ramps”

• East

stbound I I-30 30 exit t to N Nola lan Ryan Exp xpwy wy/B /Baird F Farm rm Rd Rd/ / AT&T &T W Way in Arlington

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

24

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B2

Pr Pros:

• All direct movements remain available

I-30

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Co Cons:

• Additional potential displacements
• Heavy traffic volumes weaving between I-30 direct

connectors & exit to Meadowbrook

• 1550' ramp spacing does not meet minimum

National Guidelines

• Elevated ramp could cause increased noise
• Existing driveway along frontage road (providing

access to property #918) is removed—access maintained via Brentwood Stair

• Grade on elevated ramp greater than 4% maximum

that should be used by TxDOT guidelines

25

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B2

Pr Pros:

• All direct movements remain available

I-30

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Co Cons:

• Additional potential displacements
• Heavy traffic volumes weaving between I-30 direct

connectors & exit to Meadowbrook

• 1550' ramp spacing does not meet minimum

National Guidelines

• Elevated ramp could cause increased noise
• Existing driveway along frontage road (providing

access to property #918) is removed—access maintained via Brentwood Stair

• Grade on elevated ramp greater than 4%

maximum that should be used by TxDOT guidelines

26

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B3

I-30

Exam ample o

• f “

“By Bypas ass F Frontag tage Road L Lane ne”

• Nor

Northbo bound U US 75 at Leg Legacy D Dr in in Pl Plano ano

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

27

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B3

Co Cons:

• Ramp spacing between Meadowbrook exit and

frontage road bypass undesirable

• Weaving between exit ramp and frontage road

bypass

• Properties #516 and #517 do not meet

recommended access control at exit ramp criteria Pr Pros:

• Traffic southbound from Brentwood Stair

bypass Meadowbrook signal

• 2000’ ramp spacing meets minimum TxDOT

and National Guidelines

• Relocated exit ramp to Meadowbrook

provides for additional storage or queueing

• f vehicles from intersection

I-30

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

28

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B3

Co Cons:

• Ramp spacing between Meadowbrook exit and

frontage road bypass undesirable

• Weaving between exit ramp and frontage road

bypass

• Properties #516 and #517 do not meet

recommended access control at exit ramp criteria Pr Pros:

• Traffic southbound from Brentwood Stair

bypass Meadowbrook signal

• 2000’ ramp spacing meets minimum TxDOT

and National Guidelines

• Relocated exit ramp to Meadowbrook

provides for additional storage or queueing

• f vehicles from intersection

I-30

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

29

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B4

Co Cons:

• Heavy weaving traffic causes high congestion
• 1500' ramp spacing does not meet National

Guidelines

• Less space from Meadowbrook to exit ramp for

vehicle storage from signal

• Requires channelization to prevent access to

properties #507 and #508-A from the Meadowbrook exit ramp

• Existing driveway along frontage road providing

access to property #918 is removed—access maintained via Brentwood Stair Road

I-30

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Pr Pros:

• Southbound ramps would be reconstructed

to allow additional mainlane capacity

30

Sout

• uthbou
• und E

Ent ntrance R Ramp f from Brent ntwoo

• od Stair – Altern

rnat ativ ive B B4

Co Cons:

• Heavy weaving traffic causes high congestion
• 1500' ramp spacing does not meet National

Guidelines

• Less space from Meadowbrook to exit ramp for

vehicle storage from signal

• Requires channelization to prevent access to

properties #507 and #508-A from the Meadowbrook exit ramp

• Existing driveway along frontage road providing

access to property #918 is removed—access maintained via Brentwood Stair Road

I-30

North

Meadowbrook Dr.

Pr Pros:

• Southbound ramps would be reconstructed

to allow additional mainlane capacity

– Existing Craig Street bridge has narrow sidewalks

Craig aig Street B Brid idge A Access / / Pedestr trian ian B Brid idge

31 Image from Google.com street view Looking West on Craig Street

– Proposed Craig Street bridge would be wider with shared use lanes (cars and bikes) and wide sidewalks

Craig aig Street B Brid idge A Access / / Pedestr trian ian B Brid idge

Proposed Craig St. Bridge: 1 shared use lane in each direction with Wide Sidewalks / Paths (see typical section below)

32

Proposed Craig Street

Craig St.

– Existing pedestrian bridge to be removed because of vertical clearance/height conflicts – Potential conflicts with overhead/high mast power lines – Potential pedestrian bridge meeting American with Disability Act (ADA) requirements expected to be very long and high over roadway

Craig aig Street B Brid idge A Access / / Pedestr trian ian B Brid idge

Image from Google.com street view Looking South on I-820 33 Power lines Pedestrian Bridge

Existing Pedestrian Bridge to be removed

North

Craig aig S Street t Brid idge A Access / Pedestrian ian B Brid idge – Altern rnative P Presen sented a ed at P Public Meet eting

Proposed Craig St. Bridge

Meadowbrook Dr.

• E. Lancaster Ave.

Craig St. 34

Cons: ns:

• Removal of existing Pedestrian

Bridge Pro ros:

• Wider Craig St Bridge with wide sidewalks

and shared use lanes for bikes

• Cross over frontage roads and mainlanes
• Loop connections would have sidewalks

Existing Pedestrian Bridge to be removed

North

Craig aig S Street t Brid idge A Access / Pedestrian ian B Brid idge – Altern rnative P Presen sented a ed at P Public Meet eting

Proposed Craig St. Bridge

Meadowbrook Dr.

• E. Lancaster Ave.

Craig St. 35

Cons: ns:

• Removal of existing Pedestrian

Bridge Pro ros:

• Wider Craig St Bridge with wide sidewalks

and shared use lanes for bikes

• Cross over frontage roads and mainlanes
• Loop connections would have sidewalks

Existing Pedestrian Bridge to be removed

Craig aig S Street t Brid idge A Access / Pedestrian ian B Brid idge – Altern rnativ ative P Pedestr trian ian B Brid idge Concept

Proposed Pedestrian Bridge

36

Pro ros:

• Pedestrian bridge reconstructed
• Cross over frontage roads

Co Cons:

• Oncor transmission lines must

be relocated much higher to avoid new pedestrian bridge

• Cravens Road access revised

(cul-de-sac)

• Additional right-of-way needed
• “Switch-back” ramps required to

meet ADA grades adds to travel length

Existing Pedestrian Bridge to be removed

Craig aig S Street t Brid idge A Access / Pedestrian ian B Brid idge – Altern rnativ ative P Pedestr trian ian B Brid idge Concept

Proposed Pedestrian Bridge

37

Pro ros:

• Pedestrian bridge reconstructed
• Cross over frontage roads

Co Cons:

• Oncor transmission lines must

be relocated much higher to avoid new pedestrian bridge

• Cravens Road access revised

(cul-de-sac)

• Additional right-of-way needed
• “Switch-back” ramps required to

meet ADA grades adds to travel length

Pr Project ct Sche Schedule ule

38

Futu ture P Public H Hea earing On-Ca Call P Present ntatio ions

Publi Public c In Input ut Co Cont ntinue ues

Town wn H Hall Me Meetings Me Meeting wi with P h Prope

• perty O

Own wners Wor

• rkshop

shops

39

Tha Thank nk You u for Attend nding!

Pr Proje

• ject C

t Cont

• ntac

act I t Inf nformat

• rmation

ion

www www.t .txd xdot.gov v Se Search ch f for: “ “So Southeast Co Connector” 817 17-37 370-680 6807 SoutheastCon

• nnector@
• r@txdot.g

.gov Curtis Loftis, P.E. TxDOT Project Manager Southeast Connector TxDOT Fort Worth District 2501 S.W. Loop 820 Fort Worth, TX 76133 Naser Abusaad, P.E., AICP Consultant Project Manager Southeast Connector Civil Associates, Inc. 9330 LBJ Frwy., Ste. 1150 Dallas, TX 75243

40

Que Questions ns

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A5

42

North

Meadowbrook Dr. I-30

• E. Lancaster Ave.

Craig St.

Exam ample o

• f “

“By Bypas ass F Frontag tage Road L Lane ne”

• Nor

Northbo bound U US 75 at Leg Legacy D Dr in in Pl Plano ano

Northbou

• und E

Ent ntranc nce R Ramp f from

• m M

Meadowbrook

• ok – Altern

rnative A e A5

43

Pros:

• s:
• Traffic exiting northbound Meadowbrook ramp

could bypass Meadowbrook signal to Brentwood Stair

• Meets desirable ramp spacing between

northbound Meadowbrook exit and frontage roads bypass Con

• ns:

s:

• Ramp spacing between frontage road bypass &

Meadowbrook entrance (800’) is undesirable

• Ramp spacing between Meadowbrook entrance and

direct connector (1300’) does not meet National Guidelines

• Traffic from northbound I-820 on-ramp from

Meadowbrook wanting to continue northbound on I- 820 must weave over 1 lane in a distance of 500'

• Access from Normandy Road to frontage road to be

removed (cul-de-sac)

• Reduced shoulders on mainlanes

North

Meadowbrook Dr. I-30

• E. Lancaster Ave.

Craig St.