DESIGN DIVISION March 2020 Agenda Intr Introduction oduction - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

INTERST INTERSTATE A E ACCESS JUSTIFIC CCESS JUSTIFICATION ION REPORT (IAJR) REPORT (IAJR)

ENGINEERING, OPERATION AND SAFETY ANALYSIS TXDOT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (SOP)

March 2020

DESIGN DIVISION

Agenda

• Intr

Introduction

• duction
• IAJR Pr

IAJR Process

• cess
• IAJR Me

IAJR Methodology thodology

• IAJR R

IAJR Repor port

• IAJR R

IAJR Re-e

• evaluation

luation

• Quality Contr

Quality Control

• Questions/Comments?

Questions/Comments?

2

Interstate Access Overview

• Wh

Why is y is Int Interstat tate A Access Management ccess Management im impor portant? ant?

• Wh

Why is y is IAJR req IAJR required? ired?

• What is the IAJR P

What is the IAJR Policy? licy?

3

Interstate Highway System

• Backbone of the nations' surface

transportation system

• 60+ years
• Played major role in shaping

nation’s economy & development

• Led to increase in traffic demand
• Demand for access
• Interstate Highways in Texas
• >3000 miles
• > dozen of primary and

auxiliary routes

• 4 of 10 longest Interstates

Texas Interstate Highway System

4

The Interstate Highway Access Management

• Need for access
• New or modified
• Support development
• Access to other system
• Access management
• Location & Design
• Safety & Operation
• Challenges
• Points of conflict
• Balance between

access and mobility

5

Legal Authority for the Interstate Access Policy

United States Code (USC) – Title 23 Section 111 – Agreements relating to use of and access to rights-of-way – Interstate System “All agreements between the Secretary and the State transportation department for the construction of projects on the Interstate System shall contain a clause providing that the State will not add any points of access to, or exit from, the project in addition to those approved by the Secretary in the plans for such project, without the prior approval of the Secretary.” The USDO The USDOT Secre T Secretar ary has delegat y has delegated this authority t d this authority to the F the Federal Highw deral Highway Adminis dministrat trator

• r

6

FHWA Policy on Access Changes to the Interstate System “It is in the national interest to preserve and enhance the Interstate System to meet the needs of the 21st Century by assuring that it provides the highest level of service in terms of safety and mobility. Full control of access along the Interstate mainline and ramps, along with control of access on the crossroad at interchanges, is critical to providing such service.

Policy

7

FHWA Policy on Access Changes to the Interstate System Therefore, the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) decision to approve new or revised access points to the Interstate System under Title 23, United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 111, must be supported by substantiated information justifying and documenting that decision. The FHWA's decision to approve a request is dependent on the proposal satisfying and documenting the following requirements: 1.

• 1. Operational and

Operational and Saf Safety Analysis ty Analysis

• Maintain the safety and operational integrity of the Interstate System

2.

• 2. Access and

ccess and Design Design

• Connects to a public road and provides for all traffic movements
• Meet the current design standards

8

Introduction

• Provide TxDOT Guidance based on FHWA Access Guide
• Provide consistent point of reference for Districts, DES, and FHWA

(Tx Div)

• Improve probability and ease of acceptance by FHWA
• Clarify importance of Early coordination with DES and FHWA

Purpose Purpose

• Title 23, United States Code, Highway Section 111
• State will not add any point of access w/o approval of Secretary

USDOT

• Title 49, Code of Federal Regulation (CFR), Section 1.48
• Secretary delegated the authority to FHWA

Legal Legal Backg Background nd

• FHWA Policy
• October 22, 1990
• February 1998
• August 2009
• May 2017
• TxDOT Policy
• October 19, 2018 Memo*

Policy Policy Ev Evolutio ution *Pending Issuance of this SOP as current policy

9

TxDOT’s Policy for IAJRs

TxDO TxDOT’s T’s Policy f

• licy for IAJRs

r IAJRs

• Incorporat

Incorporates the tw es the two updat

• updated points in
• ints in the FHW

the FHWA Ma May y 20 2017 P Policy licy

• Ef

Effects of re cts of revised access on Saf vised access on Safety and ty and Operations Operations

• Access, Connection and

ccess, Connection and Design Design

• Retains the six

tains the six points in points in the FHW the FHWA A August 2009 gust 2009 Policy licy

• Need

Need

• Alt

Alternativ rnatives es

• Consist

Consistency w/Local and ency w/Local and Regional Plans gional Plans

• Potential future multiple Int

ntial future multiple Interchange additions hange additions

• Coor

Coordination w/ Local dination w/ Local De Development/T pment/Transpor ansportation tation

• En

Envir vironmental R nmental Revie view Status Status

10

Attachment A TxDOT’s Policy for IAJRs

11

Requirements

Which A Which Access Changes req ccess Changes require IAJRs? ire IAJRs?

• Based on FHW

Based on FHWA A Access Guide ccess Guide

• Three types of

Three types of delegation f delegation for access pr r access processing

• cessing
• FHW

FHWA Headq Headquar arters Appr rs Approval al

• FHW

FHWA Division Of Division Office ce Appr Approval al

• FHW

FHWA Coor Coordination dination

• Attachment

ttachment B-1 B-1 lists access changes req lists access changes requiring FHW iring FHWA re revie view and and action action

• Attachment

ttachment B-2 lists B-2 lists changes no changes not req t requiring FHW iring FHWA re revie view and appr and approval al

• Documentation req

Documentation requirements dependent on the pr irements dependent on the project cont

• ject context

12

Access Changes Requiring IAJRs

13

Agenda

• Intr

Introduction

• duction
• IAJR Pr

IAJR Process

• cess
• IAJR Me

IAJR Methodology thodology

• IAJR R

IAJR Repor port

• IAJR R

IAJR Re-e

• evaluation

luation

• Quality Contr

Quality Control

• Questions/Comments?

Questions/Comments?

14

IAJR Process

COORDINA COORDINATION TION

Traffic Forecast Access & Design Benefits/ Impacts

COORDINA COORDINATION TION

Traffic Analysis Safety Analysis Crash Data Exist Cond Recommendations Draft Submission

Ke Key S Stages

PR PROJECT INITIA OJECT INITIATION TION

Need and Purpose Methodology

TRANSPOR TRANSPORTATION TION ANAL ANALYSIS IS REVIEW REVIEW & & APPR APPROVAL

15

Project Development & IAJR Timeline

Planning/Corridor Studies Preliminary Engineering & Schematics Final Design and PS&E Letting & Letting & Construction Construction

IAJR IAJR

12 – 12 – 24 Months 4 Months < 3 Y < 3 Year ars < 1 Y < 1 Year ars

16

IAJR Schedule

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Methodology Data Collection Traffic Forecasting Traffic Analysis Safety Analysis Draft Report TxDOT Review FHWA Review

Months to Complete

Typical A pical Average Schedule erage Schedule

17

TxDOT IAJR Process

18

IAJR Phase:

19

IAJR Phase:

20

IAJR Phase:

21

IAJR Phase:

22

IAJR Phase:

23

IAJR Phase:

M&A Memo will be considered Final with concurrence of FHWA, DES, and District..

24

IAJR Phase:

IAJR & Schematic – Two Hard Copies Each IAJR, Schematic, Native Analysis Files – Electronic Copy 25

IAJR Phase:

IAJR – Two Hard Copies Schematic – One Hard Copy IAJR, Schematic, Native Analysis Files – Electronic Copy 26

IAJR Phase:

27

IAJR Phase:

IAJR, Schematic, Native Analysis Files – Electronic Copy 28

Documentation Relationship and Sequence

• Schematic

Schematic (Geome

(Geometric Design + tric Design + Signing La Signing Layout) ut) – Adequate detail to determine impacts – Supports capacity and operational analysis – Documents design criteria used – To be submitted to DES for review – Does not require FHWA review/approval (subject to PODI requirements)

• NEP

NEPA Document Document

– Requires a schematic – Review/Approval does not require an approved IAJR

• IAJR

IAJR

– FHWA approval requires:

• Schematic (Geometric Design + Signing Layout)
• NEPA approval (delegated to TxDOT)

– FHWA conditional acceptance if NEPA review/approval process incomplete

29

*Only one FHWA letter will be issued, either conditional

acceptance or approval

Schematic FHWA Conditional IAJR Acceptance Only*

No Yes

NEPA Approval ? FHWA IAJR Approval *

Documentation Relationship and Sequence

• PS&E

PS&E

– Must reflect the schematic – Must reflect the IAJR – Ramp location change may trigger:

• Additional analysis up to

including IAJR re- evaluation

• Possible NEPA

amendment – Other design changes that impact the schematic may trigger NEPA re-evaluation (just be aware)

30

PS&E Schematic FHWA Conditional IAJR Acceptance Only*

No Yes

NEPA Approval ? FHWA IAJR Approval *

Agenda

• Intr

Introduction

• duction
• IAJR Pr

IAJR Process

• cess
• IAJR Methodology

IAJR Methodology

• IAJR R

IAJR Repor port

• IAJR R

IAJR Re-e

• evaluation

luation

• Quality Contr

Quality Control

• Questions/Comments?

Questions/Comments?

31

Methodology – Early Coordination Meeting

• For the pur

r the purpose of de

• se of developing a

loping a technical appr chnical approach f

• ach for IAJR de

r IAJR development lopment

• Required f

ired for all pr r all projects with po

• jects with potential f

ntial for IAJR r IAJR

• District, DES, and

District, DES, and FHW FHWA should att should attend nd

• Initial de

Initial determination of rmination of pr project reasonableness

• ject reasonableness
• Attachment D

ttachment D pr provides a ides a typical mee typical meeting agenda ing agenda

• Mee

Meeting no ting notes should be document s should be documented and ed and included in included in the IAJR the IAJR

• Additional mee

dditional meetings ma ings may be y be req required f ired for major/com r major/comple lex pr x projects

• jects

32

Attachment D – IAJR Methodology

33

Methodology – Early Coordination Meeting Common Issues in IAJR Common Issues in IAJR

• Poor Need
• or Need
• No

Not considering o t considering other Alt her Alternativ rnatives es

• Insuf

Insufficient Area of Influence icient Area of Influence

• Ignoring cr

Ignoring crossr

• ssroads
• ads
• Unreasonable design v

reasonable design volume lume

• Inappr

Inappropriat

• priate traf

e traffic analysis t fic analysis tools selection

• ols selection
• Weak saf

ak safety analysis ty analysis

• Phased pr

Phased project im

• ject impleme

plementation but no tation but no int interim y rim year analysis ar analysis

• Documentation missing or pr

Documentation missing or provided t ided too much

• much
• Skimming in

Skimming in re-e re-evaluation luation

34

Methodology

• Need

Need

• Alt

Alternativ rnatives es

• Area of Influence

Area of Influence

• Analysi

Analysis Y Years ars

• Analysis P

Analysis Periods riods

• Data Collection

Data Collection

• Traf

affic F c Forecasting recasting

• Traf

affic Operational Analysis c Operational Analysis

• Saf

Safety Analysis ty Analysis

35

Methodology – Need

• Need f

Need for A r Access Modif ccess Modification cation

• Identify

Identify transpor transportation pr tation problems

• blems
• Pr

Proposed im

• posed impr

provements that address the pr ements that address the probl

• blems

ms

• Specif

Specific t ic to access change access change

• Based on e

Based on existing conditions and isting conditions and No-build conditions in No-build conditions in design y design year ar

• The need should be suppor

The need should be supported b ed by e existing data isting data

• Utilize a

Utilize available e ailable existing data isting data

• Traf

affic V fic Volume - lume - Stat tatewide T wide Traf affic Analysis and R fic Analysis and Repor porting Syst ing System em (S (STARS) RS) http://txdot.ms2soft.com/tcds/tsearch.asp?loc=Txdot&mod

• Crash data

Crash data - Crash R rash Recor cording Inf ing Information Syst rmation System (CRIS) em (CRIS)

https://cris.dot.state.tx.us/public/Query/app/public/welcome

36

Methodology – Alternatives

• Access Alt

ccess Alternativ rnatives es

• All

All reasonable build alt reasonable build alternativ rnatives should be considered es should be considered

• Reasons/justification f

asons/justification for their inclusion or e r their inclusion or exclusion clusion

• At a

a minimum, the f minimum, the follo llowing should be ing should be considered considered

• No-build Alt

No-build Alternativ rnative

• No action

No action

• Existing condition + committ

Existing condition + committed ed im impr provements ements

• Transpor

ansportation Syst tation System Management (TSM) em Management (TSM)

• HO

HOV, T Transit ansit

• Ram

Ramp me metering, demand management ring, demand management

37

Methodology – Alternatives

• Access Alt

ccess Alternativ rnatives es

• Im

Impr provements t ements to Al Alternat rnate Int e Interchang hanges es

• Existing int

Existing interchange hange capacity im capacity impr proveme ements ts

• Ram

Ramp t terminals/int rminals/intersections rsections

• Fr

Frontage r roads

• Cr

Cross r

• ss roads/local r

ads/local roadw adway ne y netw twor

• rk
• Alt

Alternativ rnatives Pr es Providing a iding a Change in Change in Access ccess

• Int

Interchange locations/configurations hange locations/configurations

• An

An alt alternativ rnative analysis memo will be e analysis memo will be included in included in the repor the report

38

Methodology – Alternatives

• Alt

Alternativ rnatives es

• Operational and

Operational and saf safety ty analysis will be based on analysis will be based on select selected ed build alt build alt

• The select

The selected build alt ed build alt best mee best meets the need and s the need and purpose purpose

• The select

The selected build alt ed build alt should result in should result in saf safety and ty and

• perations eq
• perations equal

ual to or

• r be

bett tter than the no-build alt er than the no-build alt

• A

A sensitivity analysis ma sensitivity analysis may be y be req required t ired to evaluat aluate

• perational per
• perational performance b
• rmance by v

varying traf ing traffic demand 5- fic demand 5- 15 15%

39

Methodology – Area of Influence

• Area o

ea of Influence i uence is the a e area i ea impact pacted b ed by the p e propos

• sed c

ed change ange

• Fa

Factors to to b be considered

• Are

Area type type

• Int

Interchange spacing hange spacing

• Ex

Extent of

• f congestio

congestion

• Anticipat

Anticipated traf d traffic im c impacts pacts

• Alon

Along Main g Mainla lane

• In urb

In urban ar area ea, at least one adj at least one adjacen cent int interchange in either direction hange in either direction

• In

In ru rural a ral area, d ea, depends pends u upon t

• n the i

interchange s hange spacing acing

• Along Cr

Along Crossr

• ssroad
• ad
• ½

½ mile in either direction of mile in either direction of pr proposed change

• posed change
• Cr

Crossr

• ssroa
• ad of adja

d of adjacent int intercha hange usua e usuall lly no y not incl t included ed

• A f

A figur gure sho showin ing Are g Area of Influ

• f Influence will be

e will be included in the repor included in the report

40

Methodology – Area of Influence (FHWA Guide)

Pr Project Limi

• ject Limits

ts Area of Area of Influ Influence Of Cr Of Crossr

• ssroad
• ad

41

Methodology – Analysis Years

• Existing, Opening

Existing, Opening and Design Y and Design Year ars req s required f uired for each r each pr project.

• ject.
• Existing

Existing year analysis will only ar analysis will only include e include existing conditions. isting conditions.

• Opening and Design y

Opening and Design year ars will s will include include bo both no-build and th no-build and build build conditions. conditions.

• Existing Y

Existing Year ar

• Should be

Should be star start of IAJR Analysis or t of IAJR Analysis or

• Pref

Preferably within 1 t erably within 1 to 3 y 3 year ars s fr from

• m IAJR

IAJR appr approval al

• Design Y

Design Year ar

• Minimum 20 y

Minimum 20 year ars s af after r appr approval of f al of final nal plans plans

• Pref

Preferably erably, Opening + 20 y , Opening + 20 year ars

• Opening Y

Opening Year ar

• Fir

First y t year ar at at which pr which project is

• ject is open
• pened t

ed to traf traffic fic

• For Phase construction

r Phase construction, openin , opening g year of f ar of first phase t phase

• Int

Interim Y rim Year ar

• Opening

Opening year of dif ar of different phases erent phases

• when design y

when design year ar sho shows f s failure ilure

42

Methodology – Analysis Periods

• 30

30th

th highest hourly

highest hourly v volume (design hour v lume (design hour volume) minimum lume) minimum

• AM

AM and and PM PM peak hour ma peak hour may be req y be required ired

• Existing 2

Existing 24-hr v

• hr volumes should be e

lumes should be evaluat aluated t ed to v verify rify

• Peak periods v

ak periods versus peak hour us peak hours

• Design H

Hour o

• r K-

K-fa factor

• Pe

Peak h hour s selection

• For o

r over ersaturat saturated conditions ed conditions

• Multi-hour peak period ma

Multi-hour peak period may be needed y be needed

• 24-hr v
• hr volume pr

lume prof

• file shall be e

ile shall be evaluat aluated

43

Methodology –Data Collection

• Data Collection

Data Collection

• Roadw

adway Geome y Geometry, T , Traf affic Contr fic Control

• Tr

Traffic C Count, Tr Travel T Time, e etc

• Crash Data

Crash Data

• Summar

Summary of data collection

• f data collection
• Tr

Traffic C Count

• Weekda

eekday min. y min. 48-hr 48-hr

• Classification count

Classification count

• Week

eekend (if req end (if required) ired)

• Where Micr

Where Microsimulation is

• simulation is used, on

used, one w e week ek or more f

• r more for calibration

r calibration

• Actual traf

tual traffic c counts within counts within 1 t 1 to 3 yr 3 yrs of IAJR appr f IAJR approval al

44

Traffic Forecasting

• Traf

affic f forecasting is com recasting is comple lex and req x and requires under ires understand tanding of g of

• Land use

Land use

• Demographics

Demographics

• Pr

Project location

• ject location
• TxDO

TxDOT T T Transpor ansportation Planning & tation Planning & Pr Programming

• gramming D

Division ( (TP&P) p prov

• vides g

guidance a and appr approval req al requirements irements

• TP&P-

TP&P-Traf raffic Analysis Section (TPP- ic Analysis Section (TPP-T) SOP T) SOP

• Three

Three appr approaches t

• aches to de

develop traf lop traffic f forecasts recasts

• Piv

Pivot/T t/Trend Line/Gr end Line/Growth Method wth Method

• Based on

Based on hist historic gr

• ric growth

th

• Travel Demand Model (TDM)

el Demand Model (TDM)

• Utilizing MPO

Utilizing MPO TDM TDM

• Com

Comparing TDM output aring TDM output with traf with traffic counts, land use counts, land use

• Hybrid Appr

Hybrid Approach

• ach
• Combination of TDM and Gr

Combination of TDM and Growth F th Fact ctor

• r
• Star

Start with TDM and adjust with gr t with TDM and adjust with growth f th fact ctor

• r

45

Traffic Forecasting Approval TP&P pr TP&P provides three options f ides three options for appr r approval al

• Option

Option A: TPP- A: TPP-T De T Development lopment

• TPP-

TPP-T de T develops and signs & seals lops and signs & seals

• Option B:

Option B: District and District and TPP- TPP-T T Joint De Joint Development lopment

• District/Consultant de

District/Consultant develop lop

• TPP re

TPP revie views s and signs and signs & seals & seals

• Option C:

Option C: District De District Development lopment

• District/Consultants de

District/Consultants develop lop

• District re

District revie views and s and signs & signs & seals seals

A A traf traffic pr c projections/f

• jections/forecast memo is req
• recast memo is required

ired

46

Traffic Operational Analysis

Scope and Scope and Appr Approach depend on

• ach depend on
• Area T

Area Type pe

• Urban/Suburban/R

ban/Suburban/Rural ural

• Traf

affic conditions fic conditions

• Cong

Congest ested/un-cong ed/un-congest sted ed

• Com

Comple lexity xity of Pr

• f Project/Analysis T
• ject/Analysis Tools
• ols
• Isolat

Isolated /Syst ed /System int m interchange hange

• Selection of

Selection of Analysis T Analysis Tools

• ols
• Measures

Measures of Ef

• f Effect

ctiv iveness eness (MOEs) (MOEs)

• Cost Ef

Cost Effectiv ctiveness eness

• FHW

FHWA T Traf affic Analysis T fic Analysis Toolbo

• olbox

47

Traffic Operational Analysis

An Analysis T alysis Tools –

• ls – TxDO

xDOT suppo supports the f s the follo llowin ing

• High

Highway Cap Capaci city Man ty Manual (HCM) based (HCM) based (HCS and Synch (HCS and Synchro)

• )
• For Isolat

r Isolated and Under ed and Under-saturat saturated traf d traffic

• HCS f

HCS for free r freeway f y facilities cilities

• Synchr

Synchro f

• for int

r intersections rsections

• Micr

Microsimulation (VISSIM/CORSIM)

• simulation (VISSIM/CORSIM)
• Urban

ban free freeway withi y within busin business district of ss district of me metr tro are

• area
• Congestion e

Congestion extended f nded for multi-hour r multi-hour

• Com

Comple lex w x weaving or Syst ing or System Int em Interchange hange

• No

Non-traditional i n-traditional interchange/int hange/intersection ection

• A calibra

A calibratio ion memo will be req memo will be require ired

• Measu

Measures of es of Ef Effectiv ctiveness (MOEs) ess (MOEs)

• LOS,

S, Travel Time, el Time, Speed, Dela Speed, Delay, Queue Length Queue Length

48

Traffic Operational Analysis

Analysis T Analysis Tools

• ols
• HCM based (HCS, Sync

HCM based (HCS, Synchr hro)

• )
• Quick &

Quick & Reliable liable

• Good f

Good for Isolat r Isolated locations ed locations

• Limitations

Limitations

• Micr

Microsimulation (CORSIM, VISSIM)

• simulation (CORSIM, VISSIM)
• Good f

Good for longer congestion r longer congestion

• Good f

Good for syst r system ef em effect ct

• Good f

Good for presentation r presentation

• Data req

Data requirement irement

• Time consu

Time consuming

49

Traffic Operational Analysis

SCOPE SCOPE DATA CO COLLECTION LLECTION BASE BASE MOD MODEL VERIFICA IFICATION ION CAL CALIBRA BRATION ION AL ALTERNATIVE ANAL ANALYSIS DOCU DOCUME MENTATIO ION

Tr Traffic M Modeling P Process

50

Traffic Operational Analysis

• Analysis must be done f

Analysis must be done for

• Each scenario

Each scenario

• All analysis

All analysis periods periods

• Each study area segment

Each study area segment

• Analysis should Identify

Analysis should Identify

• Segments /int

Segments /inter ersections with unacceptable MOEs sections with unacceptable MOEs

• Reasons f

asons for f r failing iling

• Potential mitigating measures

ntial mitigating measures

• Needed im

Needed impr provements within the study area ements within the study area

• The ef

The effect of f ct of failure on ilure on Int Interstat tate Operation Operation

51

Safety Analysis

Scope and Methodology Scope and Methodology

• Pr

Project type and Location

• ject type and Location
• Com

Comple lexity xity

• Crash Hist

Crash Histor

• ry
• Need and

Need and Purpose Purpose

• Saf

Safety ty Analysis Study Area Analysis Study Area

• Option A

Option A (Pref (Preferred) rred)

• Hist

Historical Crash Analysis and

• rical Crash Analysis and HSM Predictiv

HSM Predictive Me e Method thod

• Option B

Option B

• Hist

Historical Crash Analysis and

• rical Crash Analysis and CMF Ev

CMF Evaluation aluation

52

Safety Analysis

Hist Historical Crash Analysis

• rical Crash Analysis
• Lat

Latest 3 est 3 to 5 5 year ars (De s (Determined during Coor ermined during Coordination Mee dination Meeting) ting)

• To identify or conf

identify or confirm saf irm safety ty pr problems

• blems
• Analysis should include

Analysis should include

• Crash F

Crash Freq equency b uency by f facility type f cility type for each y r each year ar

• Crash Se

Crash Severity rity b by f facility type f cility type for each y r each year ar

• Crash rat

Crash rates (t s (to be

• be com

compared with Stat ared with Statewide A ide Average) erage)

• Primar

Primary contributing f y contributing fact ctor

• rs
• Manner of collision f

Manner of collision for each y r each year b ar by time of da time of day

• Crash Diagram/High A

Crash Diagram/High Accident Location ccident Location

• Heat maps/Bar Char

Heat maps/Bar Charts/GIS s/GIS

53

Safety Analysis

Predictiv Predictive Crash Analysis Crash Analysis

• Predictiv

Predictive or Quantitati

• r Quantitative

ve a analysis s should b be based on based on

• Highw

Highway Saf Safety ty Man Manual (HSM) (HSM)

• Saf

Safety P ty Performance Eq

• rmance Equa

uations (SPFs) tions (SPFs)

• Crash Modif

Crash Modification F cation Fact ctors (CMFs)

• rs (CMFs)
• Analysis will be done f

Analysis will be done for no-build and build r no-build and build conditions of conditions of design y design year ar

• To

Tools

• For Urban In

r Urban Interchange - hange - ISA SATe/IHSDM /IHSDM

• Fo

For U Urban c corridor -

• IHSDM
• For Su

r Suburban/R burban/Rural a ural area – ea – Highw hway Sa Safety ty Sof Software (HSS)/IHSDM re (HSS)/IHSDM

54

Safety Analysis

Saf Safety Analysis Study Area ty Analysis Study Area

• Area im

Area impact pacted b ed by the pr the proposed pr

• posed project
• ject
• Traf

affic analysis study area fic analysis study area is is a a good star good starting point ting point

• Depends upon

Depends upon the saf the safety im ty impacts of the pr pacts of the proposed pr

• posed project
• ject
• Along Mainlane

Along Mainlane

• Minimum One adjacent int

Minimum One adjacent interchange hange on either side

• n either side of pr
• f proposed change
• posed change
• Along Cr

Along Crossr

• ssroad
• ad
• One-half mile fr

One-half mile from the ram

• m the ramp terminal

rminal

• Sam

Sample Area le Area of Influence

• f Influence

55

Design Consideration

Pr Proposed Design should:

• posed Design should:
• Mee

Meet or

• r exceed current design standar

ceed current design standards

• No

Not include par t include partial int tial interchange hange

• Only include access t

Only include access to public public road ad Design Ex Design Exception (if req ception (if required) ired)

• Should be no

Should be noted in ed in the IAJR the IAJR

• Request should be

uest should be submitt submitted separat ed separately ly IAJR will IAJR will include include

• Design schematics

Design schematics i/c i/c signing la signing layout ut

• DSR sho

DSR showing design ing design crit criteria eria

56

Agenda

• Intr

Introduction

• duction
• IAJR Pr

IAJR Process

• cess
• IAJR Me

IAJR Methodology thodology

• IAJR R

IAJR Repor port

• IAJR R

IAJR Re-e

• evaluation

luation

• Quality Contr

Quality Control

• Questions/Comments?

Questions/Comments?

57

IAJR Report

58

Agenda

• Intr

Introduction

• duction
• IAJR Pr

IAJR Process

• cess
• IAJR Me

IAJR Methodology thodology

• IAJR R

IAJR Repor port

• IAJR R

IAJR Re-e

• evaluation

luation

• Quality Contr

Quality Control

• Questions/Comments?

Questions/Comments?

59

IAJR Re-evaluation

• Three primar

Three primary conditions when IAJR R y conditions when IAJR Re-e

• evaluation is req

luation is required: ired:

• Change in

Change in appr approved IAJR ed IAJR design concepts design concepts

• Signif

Significant changes in icant changes in conditions conditions

• Time Lapse bef

Time Lapse before construction re construction

• Change in

Change in appr approved IAJR ed IAJR design concepts design concepts

• Due t

Due to NEP NEPA/en /envir ironmental

• nmental im

impacts pacts

• Pr

Proposed design will be com

• posed design will be compared with no-build

ared with no-build

• During f

During final nal design design

• Pr

Proposed design will be com

• posed design will be compared with appr

ared with approved IAJR/No-build ed IAJR/No-build

• Due t

Due to Design-Build Design-Build ATC

• Pr

Proposed design will be com

• posed design will be compared with appr

ared with approved IAJR ed IAJR

60

IAJR Re-evaluation

• Signif

Significant changes in icant changes in conditions conditions

• Tr

Traffic

• Land Use

Land Use

• En

Envir vironment nment

• Pr

Project is justif

• ject is justified

ied under the under the ne new conditions w conditions

• Time Lapse bef

Time Lapse before construction re construction

• If

If the construction doesn’t star the construction doesn’t start within 3 t within 3 year ars af s after IAJR r IAJR acceptance acceptance

• Updat

date traf traffic & fic & saf safety ty data and data and analysis as analysis as req required ired

61

IAJR Re-evaluation

• Early Coor

Early Coordination with DES, FHW dination with DES, FHWA, ENV & , ENV & TP&P TP&P

• To de

determine the scope of re-e rmine the scope of re-evaluation luation

• Ef

Effect of ct of re-e re-evaluation on luation on NEP NEPA

• Le

Level of analysis req l of analysis required ired

• Scope of re-e

Scope of re-evaluation luation

• Saf

Safety

• Operation

Operation

• Design crit

Design criteria eria

• Appr

Approved design concept becomes benchmark ed design concept becomes benchmark

• Pr

Proposed design should operat

• posed design should operate be

e bett tter or er or at at a a minimum same minimum same

62

Agenda

• Intr

Introduction

• duction
• IAJR Pr

IAJR Process

• cess
• IAJR Me

IAJR Methodology thodology

• IAJR R

IAJR Repor port

• IAJR R

IAJR Re-e

• evaluation

luation

• Quality Contr

Quality Control

• Questions/Comments?

Questions/Comments?

63

IAJR Quality Control (QC)

• QC is

QC is a Critic a Critical P Part of

• f
• Te

Technical A Analysis a and

• IAJR R

IAJR Repor port

• Detailed Re

Review s should b be d done p prior to to s submittal

• District is

District is respon responsible f sible for QC re r QC revie view

• DES will per

DES will perform Quality Assurance (QA)

• rm Quality Assurance (QA)
• Tight schedu

Tight schedule should no le should not af t affect the q ct the quality of ality of analysis and repor analysis and report

• Draf

Draft T t Tech Memo should be pr ch Memo should be provided t ided to DES f DES for adv r advance re nce revie view

• Methodology

Methodology

• Alt

Alternativ ive An e Analysis R is Repor port

• Traf

affic F c Forecasting recasting

• Model Calibration

Model Calibration

64

IAJR Quality Control (QC)

• Revie

view S Schedule hedule

• Int

Interim R rim Revie views– s– DES: 1 DES: 1 to 2 2 weeks eks

• Draf

Draft IAJR – t IAJR – DES: 3 t DES: 3 to 4 w 4 weeks eks

• FHW

FHWA TX Division: 30 da TX Division: 30 days ys

• FHW

FHWA HQ (if applicable): HQ (if applicable): 60 da 60 days ys

• These

These do no do not include re t include revisions visions

• Additional time will be req

dditional time will be required f ired for subseq r subsequent re uent revie views

65

IAJR QC Checklist

66

Khalid Jamil, P.E. (512)486-5171 Khalid.jamil@txdot.gov Sharlotte Teague, P.E. (512)416-2673 sharlotte.teague@txdot.gov

67