MNDOT Travel Demand Modeling Committee 11 August 2009

Wade E. Kline, AICP, Executive Director - Metro COGContributor: Shawn Birst, PE, Director, Advanced Traffic Analysis Center

1

Purpose

◦ To document existing and future projected operations along the interstate corridors

◦ To determine the conditions under which the Metro Area interstate corridors (I-29 and I-94) would begin to suffer operational deficiencies, which is defined as levels-of-service of D, E, or F.

◦ To investigate and recommend approaches, alternatives, and strategies to preserve adequate levels-of-service.

2

Study Area

◦ I-94 Interstate Corridor from TH 336/CR 11 Interchange to Main Ave. Interchange in West Fargo

◦ I-29 Interstate Corridor from 19th Ave. N. Interchange to the 52nd Ave. S. Interchange in Fargo

3

Methodology

◦ Phase I will examine the existing and projected future operations of I-94 and I-29 to determine existing and anticipated system deficiencies.

Develop 2008, 2015 2025 Models

◦ Phase II will more closely explore solutions and alternatives for remediation of identified deficiencies.

4

Simulation Networks (VISSIM)◦ 2008 Base Case

17 Interchanges 23 Traffic Signals

◦ 2015 Simulation 18 Interchanges 27 Traffic Signals Traffic Volume Increase of 12% from 2008 Base Cases

Traffic Volume◦ 2008 AM and PM Peak-Hour Counts◦ F-M Regional Travel Demand Model

5

Traffic Control◦ Ramp Terminals (Yield Signs, Stop Signs, and Traffic

Signals)

Measures of Effectiveness◦ Overall Network: Volume, Travel Time, Delay Time◦ Interchange Ramps: Volume, Delay Time, Queues◦ Routes/Locations: Volume, Travel Time, Density

6

7

Calibrationo Replicate 2008 Conditions

and Future Scenarios• Car-Following

Parameters• Lane Change

Parameters

2008 Simulation Network

8

2015 Simulation Network

9

Interstate Mainline ADT

Interstate 29Freeway Mainline

Combined Mainline Traffic

2005 2015 % ChangeCR 20 - 19th Ave. N 17,847 21,908 23%

19th Ave. N - 12th Ave. N 21,880 22,472 3%12th Ave. N - Main Ave. 33,088 37,995 15%Main Ave. - 13th Ave. S 41,569 46,073 11%

13th Ave. S - I-94 58,436 61,036 4%I-94 – 32nd Ave. S 37,297 42,027 13%

32nd Ave. S – 52nd Ave. S 22,575 33,780 50%Interstate 94

Freeway MainlineCombined Mainline Traffic

2005 2015 % ChangeMain Ave. - Sheyenne St. 17,781 22,499 27%Sheyenne St. – 9th St./57th

St. - 26,266 -9th St./57th St. – 45th St. 26,512 32,905 24%

45th St. - I-29 38,650 54,282 40%I-29 – 25th St. 59,277 71,027 20%

25th St. - University Dr. 58,442 65,607 12%University Dr. – 8th St. (TH

75) 54,919 62,165 13%8th St. (TH 75) – 20th St. 35,950 45,885 28%

20th St. – 34th St. 25,003 31,773 27%34th St. - MN 336 26,389 31,853 21%

11

Simulation Output: 2008 and 2015

AM and PM Peak Periods

o Density• Mainline Sections• I-94 & I-29 Interchange

o Queue Length• Tri-Level Ramp• I-94 WB (45th St. and I-29)

2015 AM: Mainline Density

12

I-29 Freeway MainlineNorthbound (pc/mi/ln) Southbound (pc/mi/ln)

2008 AM 2015 AM 2008 AM 2015 AM

CR 20 - 19th Ave. N 4 5 8 919th Ave. N - 12th Ave. N 9 10 10 1112th Ave. N - Main Ave. 18 20 11 12Main Ave. - 13th Ave. S 24 27 13 14

13th Ave. S - I-94 23 26 10 11I-94 - 32nd Ave. S 19 22 9 10

32nd Ave. S - 52nd Ave. S 17 21 5 12

I-94 Freeway MainlineEastbound (pc/mi/ln) Westbound (pc/mi/ln)2008 AM 2015 AM 2008 AM 2015 AM

Main Ave. - Sheyenne St. 3 4 6 7Sheyenne St. - 9th St/57th

St. 1211

910

9th St/57th St. - 45th St. 19 1245th St. - I-29 27 20 24 17I-29 - 25th St. 19 21 27 31

25th St. - University Dr. 20 23 28 31University Dr. - TH 75 17 19 29 33

TH 75 - 20th St. 16 18 32 3620th St. - 34th St. 11 13 25 2934th St. - MN 336 4 6 15 17

2015 Simulation: Output for Interstate 94Output for Interstate 94

13

2015 AM Mainline Density

2015 AM: I-29 and I-94 Interchange Density

14

2015 AM: Queue Length

15

Simulation Scenario

Tri-Level Merge I-94 WB (I-29 to 45th St)

Avg. (ft) Max. (ft) Stops Avg. (ft) Max. (ft) Stops

2008 AM 0 98 1 0 31 12015 AM 1 179 3 0 0 0

2008 AM

2015 AM

2015 AM: I-94 (25th St to I-29) Congestion

16

2008 AM

2015 AM

2015 PM: Mainline Density

17

I-29 Freeway MainlineNorthbound Northbound (pc/mi/ln)(pc/mi/ln)

Southbound (pc/mi/ln)Southbound (pc/mi/ln)

2008 PM 2015 PM 2008 PM 2015 PM

CR 20 - 19th Ave. N 9 11 6 719th Ave. N - 12th Ave. N 11 9 9 812th Ave. N - Main Ave. 14 13 17 16Main Ave. - 13th Ave. S 15 15 27 22

13th Ave. S - I-94 14 16 19 22I-94 - 32nd Ave. S 13 15 10 11

32nd Ave. S - 52nd Ave. S 9 13 10 17

I-94 Freeway MainlineEastbound (pc/mi/ln) Westbound (pc/mi/ln)2008 PM 2015 PM 2008 PM 2015 PM

Main Ave. - Sheyenne St. 5 5 2 3Sheyenne St. - 9th St/57th

St. 89

107

9th St/57th St. - 45th St. 12 1345th St. - I-29 25 17 26 17I-29 - 25th St. 26 29 22 23

25th St. - University Dr. 24 29 21 22University Dr. - TH 75 26 32 20 22

TH 75 - 20th St. 24 27 19 2220th St. - 34th St. 19 16 15 1234th St. - MN 336 10 11 7 7

2015 Simulation: Output for Interstate 94Output for Interstate 94

18

2015 PM Mainline Density

2015 PM: I-29 & I-94 Interchange Density

19

2015 PM: Queue LengthQueue Length

20

2008 PM

2015 PM

Simulation Scenario

Tri-Level Merge I-94 WB (I-29 to 45th St)

Avg. (ft) Max. (ft) Stops Avg. (ft) Max. (ft) Stops

2008 PM 184 2,027 454 19 439 492015 PM 2,415 5,568 3,336 0 0 0

2015 PM: I-94 and 8th St Congestion

21

2008 PM

2015 PM

2015 Simulation: Peak Hour Improvements

22

◦ I-94 & Sheyenne St. North Ramp (AM & PM) Traffic control and 9th St./57th St. interchange

◦ I-94 & Sheyenne St. South Ramp (AM): SB left-turn movement improved. NB approach incurs more delay due to signal installation. Traffic control and 9th St./57th St. interchange

◦ I-94 & 45th St. North & South Ramps (PM) Traffic control and geometry, as well as the 9th St./57th

St. interchange

◦ I-94 (45th St. – I-29) (PM) Auxiliary lanes (EB and WB)

2015 PM: Hot Spots

23

◦ 2015 AM Simulation I-94 EB (25th St. to 20th St.) – LOS D-E

◦ 2015 PM Simulation Tri-level Ramp/SE Ramp merge area I-94 & 8th St. EB off-ramp I-94 WB (I-29 to 8th St.) – LOS D

2025 Simulation ◦ Finalizing Network Geometry◦ Results/Output Available in August◦ Serve as an Input Into Phase II

24

1. Issues Identified

2. Developed of Vision Statement, Goals and Objectives to guide the operations of the Interstate system

3. Developed 2008 (base) micro-simulation model of the Interstate system operations

4. Developed 2015 micro-simulation model output on Interstate system operations

5. Developing 2025 year micro-simulation model output on Interstate system operations

6. Prepare of a prioritized list of operational needs on the Interstate system based on #4, and #5.

25

Phase I - Status

1. Analyze subarea specific operational needs

2. Test and evaluate alternatives that protect existing investment in the Interstate system

3. Evaluate variations of previous projects or improvements

4. Test the impact of major arterial improvements on the interstate system operations

5. Develop and evaluate transportation/demand management strategies

6. Test alternatives such as transit system improvements, park and rides, comprehensive ITS deployment etc.

26

Phase II - Intent

Questions?

27