TRAFFIC SIGNAL STUDY · 7.1 Traffic Signal Optimization 88 7.2 Access Management 89 7.3 Alternative Parallel Traffic Routes 92 7.4 One-Way Side Street Pairing 93 8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

McPherson Road Mobility and Capacity Study October 2008

Final Report

Prepared for:

In Cooperation With:

Prepared by:

Firm Registration No. F-2214

September 2010 E0350601

McPherson Road Mobility and Capacity Study Laredo MPO (Laredo Urban Transportation Study)


- 2 -

We Make A Difference

McPherson Road Mobility and Capacity Study September 2010 Laredo Urban Transportation Study (LUTS)

McPherson Road Mobility and Capacity Study

Laredo, Texas TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INDEX OF FIGURES 4 INDEX OF TABLES 5 1.0 INTRODUCTION 6 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND 9 3.0 PRE-STUDY 10 3.1 Study Corridor Access Identification 10 3.2 Traffic Generator and Corridor Identification 10 3.3 Stakeholder/Public Outreach Meeting 12 4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 20 4.1 Traffic Data and Corridor Data 20 4.2 Review and Analysis of Existing Traffic Volumes 20 4.3 Traffic Congestion Impacts on Economy, Commerce, and

Environment 20

5.0 FUTURE PROJECTIONS 32 5.1 Current and Future Construction Projects 32 5.2 Expansion Plans by Significant Traffic Generators 36 5.3 Projected Traffic Volumes 41 5.3.1 2035 No-Build Scenario 41 5.3.2 2035 Build Scenario 41 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)


- 3 -



Page 6.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 46 6.1 Analysis of Traffic Conditions 47 6.2 Analysis Results – Existing Conditions 48 6.3 Corridor Improvements 54 6.3.1 Traffic Signal Improvements 54 6.3.2 Intersection Geometric Improvements 55 6.3.3 Access Management 57 6.3.4 One-Way Couplets 70 6.3.5 Parallel Relief Routes 70 6.3.6 Additional Capacity 71 6.4 Analysis Results – Proposed Improvements 74 6.5 Transit Operations 79 6.6 Costs & Benefits of Recommended Improvements 82 6.7 Implementation Plan 86 7.0 CONCLUSION 88 7.1 Traffic Signal Optimization 88 7.2 Access Management 89 7.3 Alternative Parallel Traffic Routes 92 7.4 One-Way Side Street Pairing 93 8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 96 8.1 Traffic Signal Optimization 96 8.2 Access Management 96 8.3 Alternative Traffic Routes – Intersection Improvements 96 8.4 One-Way Street Pairing 97 8.5 Implementation Plan 97 8.6 Other Recommendation 98


- 4 -



INDEX OF FIGURES Title Page Figure 3.1 Significant Traffic Generators 11 Figure 4.1 Level of Service Concept 21 Figure 4.2 Potential Neighborhood Diversion Routes 27 Figure 4.3 CO Emissions Characteristics 28 Figure 4.4 VOC and NOx Emissions Characteristics 29 Figure 5.1 Traffic Analysis Zones – McPherson Road Corridor 33 Figure 5.2 2035 MTP Projects – McPherson Road Corridor 34 Figure 5.3 Future MTP Street Construction Projects 35 Figure 5.4 Special Generators – McPherson Road Corridor 37 Figure 5.5 Population and Employment Data by TAZ – 2008 and 2035 38 Figure 5.6 Employment Change (Percent) 2008-2035 39 Figure 5.7 Employment Change (No. of Employees) 2008-2035 40 Figure 5.8 2008 – Volumes and Level of Service 43 Figure 5.9 2035 – Volumes and Level of Service (No Build) 44 Figure 5.10 2035 – Volumes and Level of Service (Build) 45 Figure 6.1 Flexible Median Delineator on McPherson Road at Andrew Lane 59 Figure 6.2 Medians Between Loop 20 and Monarch Drive 61 Figure 6.3 Medians at San Isidro Parkway 62 Figure 6.4 Medians at Sterling and Tiara Trail 63 Figure 6.5 Medians at International Boulevard 64 Figure 6.6 Medians at University/Fenwick and Jacaman 65 Figure 6.7 Medians at Calle del Norte and Gale Street 66 Figure 6.8 El Metro Transit Bus Headways 80 Figure 6.9 McPherson Road El Metro Routes 81


- 5 -



INDEX OF TABLES Title Page

Table 4.1 Mobility Data, Laredo, Texas 2000-2005 24

Table 4-2 2005 Mobility Data for Laredo and Other Regions Analyzed 25

Table 6-1 Level of Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections

48

Table 6-2 Analysis Summary for McPherson Rod – 2008 Existing Conditions 49

Table 6-3 Existing Travel Times 53

Table 6-4 Lengths of Median Turn Lanes from Table 3-13 of TxDOT Roadway Design Manual

60

Table 6-5 TxDOT Driveway Spacing Requirements 67

Table 6-6 TxDOT Commercial Driveway Design Criteria 68

Table 6-7 Potential Improvements for Intersections along McPherson Road 73

Table 6-8 Analysis Summary for McPherson Road – Proposed Improvements 74

Table 6-9 Proposed Travel Times 78

Table 6-10 Travel Time Along McPherson Road, Saunders –Loop 20 82

Table 6-11 Air Pollutants 82

Table 6-12 Cost of Police Reported Crashes 85

Table 6-13 Intersection Median Costs and Benefits 86

Table 7-1 Intersection Delay/Level of Service –Two-Way Street Operation Gale Street & Calle del Norte

94

Table 7-2 Intersection Delay/Level of Service –One-Way Street Operation Gale Street & Calle del Norte

94


- 6 -



1.0 INTRODUCTION As defined by the Laredo Urban Transportation Study (LUTS), the objective of this study is to evaluate existing and projected traffic conditions on McPherson Road between Loop 20 and US Highway 59 (Saunders Street) to develop recommendations for mobility improvements, which may include, but would not be limited to the following: Traffic Signal System Synchronization

Access Management (Reduce Conflict Points)

Alternative Parallel Traffic Routes

One-Way Side Street Pairing The corridor evaluation included traffic operations, roadway function, trip projections, crash analysis, and needs along the McPherson Road study corridor. The study includes recommendations such as capital improvements, cost-benefit ratios, an implementation plan with short and long-term strategies, cost estimates, and o rder of implementation for infrastructure improvements. The Scope of Work for the study was as follows: SCOPE OF WORK Task I: Project Management Sub-task 1.1 Conduct a project kick-off meeting to identify project goals and objectives, discuss the

proposed scope of work, review proposed project schedule, define study limits, and identify key stakeholders.

Sub-task 1.2 Coordinate tasks with sub-consultants and determine critical paths. Sub-task 1.3 Prepare monthly progress reports and invoices. Deliverable Revised scope of work and project schedule as developed by the study team and the

Technical Committee. Task II: Pre-Study Sub-task 2.1 Identify (on a map) vehicular access routes to the study area, signalized intersections, and all streets. Sub-task 2.2 Identify significant traffic generators along McPherson Road and within identified corridors

and their related access points on a GIS map. Sub-task 2.3 Conduct a stakeholder / public outreach meeting to identify public perceived corridor deficiencies. Sub-task 2.4 Submit the map to the Technical Committee to review relevance and completeness as well as to discuss objectives and methodologies of the other phases Deliverable Prepare a Phase I Technical Memorandum and submit to the Technical Committee. LUTS to provide: a. All available GIS geo database maps b. All pertinent past studies and data


- 7 -



Task III: Existing Conditions Sub-task 3.1 Obtain and/or collect traffic data (while school is in session) to include intersection

geometry, average daily traffic volume, intersection turning movements, vehicle classification, and travel time runs.

Sub-task 3.2 Review and analyze current vehicular traffic volumes and travel patterns. Sub-task 3.3 Determine the adverse impact that congestion has on area residents, the natural environment, the local economy and the movement of commerce through and within Laredo. Deliverable Prepare a Phase II Technical Memorandum and present Phases I and II to the Technical Committee. LUTS to provide: a. Any available traffic volume, turning movement, and classification data

b. Traffic signal timings for all signalized intersections along McPherson Road c. Crash data records for McPherson Road

Phase IV: Future Projections Subtask 4.1 Identify current and future street construction projects (including access management

measures) within and surrounding the study area that affect traffic patterns and intersection movements along McPherson Road (e.g., widening of McPherson Road near United High School, extension of Bartlett Ave, Springfield Ave, Shiloh Dr, etc.).

Sub-task 4.2 Identify expansion plans by significant traffic generators. Sub-task 4.3 Project future vehicular traffic volumes and identify potential locations for conflict. Sub-task 4.4 Prepare a map depicting the projected construction and land development. Deliverable Prepare a Phase III Technical Memorandum and submit to the Technical Committee. Phase V: Analysis and Recommendations Sub-task 5.1 Analyze traffic findings and compile a list of conclusions. Sub-task 5.2 Compile a list of corridor improvement alternatives such as traffic signal timing

improvements, access management measures, alternative route utilization, side-street pairings, roadway capacity improvements, and multi-modal improvements. Prepare a set of maps and tabular presentations to clearly depict and illustrate these alternatives.

Sub-task 5.3 Analyze corridor improvement alternatives to meet goals and objectives of the plan. Recommended infrastructure improvements shall include detailed cost estimates.

Sub-task 5.4 Assess transit operations along McPherson Road to include evaluation of bus bay locations, number of stops, frequency, etc. Sub-task 5.5 Estimate cost savings and quantify intangible benefits for each proposed alternative. A cost benefit ratio and feasibility analysis shall be conducted for each alternative. Sub-task 5.6 Prepare an incremental implementation plan and identify potential funding sources for the feasible alternatives. Deliverable Prepare a Phase IV Technical Memorandum and present Phases III and IV to the Technical Committee with the understanding that additional presentations may be required prior to finalization of the report.


- 8 -



Phase VI: Report Production Sub-task 6.1 Prepare a draft final document and present to the Technical Committee (Draft and Final), Policy Committee, and others as needed. Sub-task 6.2 Print 25 copies of the final draft document for distribution to the Technical Committee. A copy of the report in electronic format, including all maps and data tables, shall also be submitted to the Technical Committee in a format to be determined by the Technical Committee. Sub-task 6.3 Forty sets of the final document shall be provided on 8 ½” x 11” paper and bound. Final determination of the study area boundary will be made by the City and LUTS staff. Deliverable All data, basic sketches, charts, calculations, plans, specifications, and other documents created, or collected as part of this project shall be the exclusive property of the LUTS. The Task II (Pre-Study) portion of the study is discussed in Section 3.0. The results of the stakeholder /public outreach meeting are discussed in Section 3.0. The Task III (Existing Conditions) portion of the study is discussed in Section 4.0. The existing level of congestion along the McPherson Road corridor has been es timated to be 74 ,458 person-hours of delay per year. The annual cost due to congestion has been estimated to be $1,357,000. The work accomplished with Task IV (Future Projections) is described and discussed in Section 5.0. The future projections were derived from a study Wilbur Smith was performing concurrently with this study. The Task V (Analysis and Recommendations) portion of the study is discussed in Section 6.0. The crash analysis, cost-benefit analysis, access management criteria, and implementation plan were reported in Section 6.0. Task V included the analysis of the McPherson Road corridor incorporating traffic signal improvements, intersection geometric improvements, access management, crash analysis, one-way street pairing, and al ternative parallel traffic routes. The results of the analysis included recommendations for traffic signal optimization, turn lanes, access management through raised medians and an access management policy, and a one-way street couplet. The conclusions and recommendations of the study are discussed in Sections 7.0 and 8.0.


- 9 -



2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND In the mid to late 1970’s, as Laredo began expanding east, towards the decommissioned Laredo Air Force Base, and north, towards Del Mar Boulevard, a much needed McPherson Road was constructed to provide an a lternative north-south mobility option. P rior to the construction of McPherson Road in the early-1980’s, the primary north-south corridor in Laredo was Interstate Highway 35. D uring the mid-1980’s, McPherson Road was extended north towards the new United High School to serve increasing residential developments. Since the mid-1990’s, additional north-south mobility relief has come from the Bob Bullock Loop (Loop 20) however, McPherson Road has continued to serve as a vital north-south mobility corridor for the east-central Laredo area. During this period of growth, McPherson Road has experienced significant increases in daily traffic, corridor congestion, related vehicular delay, and dr iveway density. These conditions have resulted in increased traffic flow conflicts and vehicular-related pollutants including carbon dioxide and nitrous oxides. As defined by the Laredo Urban Transportation Study (LUTS), the objective of this study is to evaluate existing and projected traffic conditions on McPherson Road between Loop 20 and US Highway 59 (Saunders Street) to develop recommendations for mobility improvements, which may include, but would not be limited to the following: Traffic Signal System Synchronization



One-Way Side Street Pairing The corridor evaluation will include traffic operations, roadway function, equipment status, and needs along the McPherson Road study corridor. The study will also develop recommendations including essential capital improvements, cost-benefit ratios, an implementation plan with short and l ong-term strategies, cost estimates, and order of implementation for infrastructure improvements.


- 10 -



3.0 PRE-STUDY In preparation of the McPherson Road corridor operations analysis, the Pre-Study task of the McPherson Road Mobility and Capacity Study focused on obtaining background information along the study corridor, specifically obtaining information such as study corridor access identification, traffic generators, and stakeholder feedback through a public outreach meeting. The subsequent sections describe the information obtained during the Pre-Study information gathering component. 3.1 Study Corridor Access Identification Corridor access was identified as the major arterials and c ollectors with access to the McPherson Road corridor. The identified arterials and collectors were also included in the traffic data collection plan to determine traffic demand and distribution to and from these roadways. Some of the major roadways accessing McPherson Road include Loop 20, San Isidro Parkway, Shiloh Drive, Del Mar Boulevard, Jacaman Road, Calle Del Norte, Hillside Road, Calton Road, and US Highway 59 (Saunders Street). 3.2 Traffic Generator and Corridor Identification Significant traffic generators, as shown on Figure 3.1, were identified and include industrial facilities, medical centers, schools, large commercial centers, bridge facilities, airports, and city parks. Also shown in Figure 3.1 are intersections with traffic signal control.


- 11 -



Figure 3.1 – Significant Traffic Generators


- 12 -



Do you live in the McPherson Corridor Area?

5, 42%7, 58%

YESNO

3.3 Stakeholder / Public Outreach Meeting The purpose for hosting a stakeholder (public outreach) meeting was to present, educate, and involve stakeholders in the McPherson Road Mobility and Capacity Study. The meeting was held on Wednesday, September 3, 2006 at the City of Laredo Public Library. I n an e ffort to accommodate as many stakeholders as possible, two sessions were held during the day, an afternoon session at 2:00 PM and an ev ening session at 6:00 PM. T he PowerPoint presentation slides are included in Appendix A. Following a br ief presentation explaining the purpose of the McPherson Road Mobility and Capacity Study, stakeholder meeting attendees were asked to complete a s urvey regarding many mobility aspects of the McPherson Road corridor, including personal usage and interests of the study corridor. The paper survey completed by the meeting attendees is included in Appendix B and response pie-chart graphs for the questions are shown below. Question No. 1


- 13 -



Is your work located on McPherson Road?

5, 42%7, 58%

YESNO

Do you own a business on McPherson Road?

3, 25%

9, 75%

YESNO

Question No. 2 Question No. 3


- 14 -



Do you use any retail business along McPherson Road?

12, 100%

0, 0%YESNO

Does traffic on McPherson Road effect the quality of your life?0, 0% 1, 8%

8, 67%

3, 25%NOT AT ALLA LITTLE SOMEWHATA LOT



- 15 -



Do you feel that McPherson needs improvements to relieve traffic congestion?

0, 0%

11, 100%

YESNO

Do you believe that constructing “Bus Pullouts” will help relieve the traffic congestion on McPherson?

1, 9%

1, 9%

4, 36%

5, 46%

NOT AT ALLA LITTLE SOMEWHATA LOT



- 16 -



Do you believe that constructing dual-left turn lanes where possible will help relieve the traffic congestion on

McPherson?1, 10%

1, 10%

3, 30%

5, 50%


Do you believe that access management will help relieve the traffic congestion on McPherson?

1, 9%

1, 9%

2, 18%

7, 64%




- 17 -



Do you believe that access management will increase safety along McPherson Road?

0, 0%

0, 0%

2, 20%

8, 80%


Do you believe that widening McPherson Road will relieve traffic congestion?

1, 9%

1, 9%

5, 46%

4, 36%




- 18 -



Do you believe that providing bicycle and more inviting pedestrian facilities will help relieve traffic congestion on

McPherson?

4, 40%

4, 40%

1, 10%

1, 10%


Do you believe that constructing Bartlett and or Springfield will help relieve traffic congestion on McPherson?

0, 0% 1, 9%

3, 27%

7, 64%




- 19 -



Do you believe that providing more accommodating public transit will help relieve on McPherson?

1, 9%

4, 37%

4, 36%

2, 18%


Question No. 18


- 20 -



4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4.1 Traffic Data and Corridor Data Traffic data was collected along the study corridor and included average daily traffic (ADT) volume data, turning movement count (TMC) data, and site photographs. Traffic volume and turning movement data is include in Appendix C.

4.2 Review and Analysis of Existing Traffic Volumes A preliminary review of the existing traffic volumes did reveal different directional distributions along the entire McPherson Road corridor during both peak periods. For example, directional distributions north of Del Mar Boulevard indicate higher travel demand in the northbound direction during the morning peak period and a in the southbound during the evening peak period. Directional distributions between Calle Del Norte and Del Mar Boulevard reveal a more equal distribution in the northbound and southbound directions during the morning and evening peak periods.

4.3 Traffic Congestion Impacts on Economy, Commerce, and Environment Traffic congestion has a direct impact on many facets of an urban area’s general performance particularly, in terms of quality of life and economic viability. The ability of an urban area’s transportation network to serve its land use determines the level of traffic congestion therefore influencing community character and the economic environment. McPherson Road is currently the only continuous north/south arterial roadway between, Saunders on the south and Bob Bullock (Loop 20) on the north between Interstate 35 to the west and Bob Bullock (Loop 20) to the east. Therefore, the level of traffic congestion on McPherson Road impacts the northwest side of Laredo. The purpose of this section is to qualify and quantify the adverse impact that congestion has on area residents, the natural environment, the local economy and the movement of commerce through and within the Laredo urbanized area. Definition of Congestion Congestion is a condition that occurs on a roadway network or corridor when travel demand increases and results in slower speeds, longer trip time (greater motorist delay) and increased queuing. The demand for travel in relation to the capacity of a particular facility to accommodate demand is typically illustrated by the Level of Service (LOS) concept.


- 21 -



The following Figure 4.1 illustrates Level of Service as a measure from LOS ‘A’, free flow traffic conditions (Excellent) to LOS ‘B’, a complete failure of the roadway to move traffic. Between ‘A’ and ‘F’ are the intermediate levels, ‘B’, ‘C’, ‘D’ and ‘E’. LOS ‘C’ is the level of traffic demand versus roadway capacity that that is deemed acceptable. Levels lower than ‘C’ indicates congested traffic conditions. Intersection congestion is similar to roadway (link) congestion and is always described in terms of unit delay. Deterministic measures of traffic flow include vehicle speed (miles per hour), vehicle volume (vehicles per hour), roadway density (vehicles per mile) and lane occupancy (percentage). These measures typically describe roadway performance in quantitative terms whereas the LOS concept is a more qualitative description based on the quantitative measures.

Figure 4.1 – Level of Service Concept Causes and Measures of Congestion There are seven basic causes for roadway congestion[1]. These can be simply described as: • Roadway bottlenecks – A recurring (and usually) geometric instance where a portion of

roadway has a lower capacity than the sections of roadway immediately upstream and downstream of the bottleneck. An intersection is often the cause of a roadway bottleneck.

• Traffic Incidents – A non-recurring instance where roadway capacity is reduced by the temporary full or partial blockage of the roadway by a vehicle crash and the subsequent response by emergency personnel. It has been estimated that up to 60% of the total daily delay incurred in the urban area is due to incidents.


- 22 -



• Inclement Weather – Non-recurring weather conditions, particularly rain, snow and fog effectively create congestion by the effects of reduced vehicle speed and greater headway between successive vehicles. For example, a roadway section that normally accommodates a maximum flow rate of 600 vehicles per hour (vph) in good weather conditions may exhibit a maximum flow rate of 450 vph in inclement weather conditions.

• Work Zones – a temporary (non-recurring), short- or long-term condition when roadway or roadside construction or maintenance activities reduce the effective capacity of the roadway or intersection.

• Poor or inappropriate traffic signal timing – Recurring conditions where the signal phasing and splits are not optimum for the traffic demands encountered. This is not to be confused with a situation where total intersection demand exceeds the intersection capacity.

• Special Events and other non-recurring – Non-recurring situations that involve reduction in the capacity of a roadway to accommodate normal traffic demands.

• Demand Exceeding Roadway Capacity – Some roadways, for a variety of reasons, exhibit periods of the day where the vehicle volume (demand) exceeds the LOS ‘C’ capacity of the roadway. This is usually a recurring condition and the result is considered “congestion” where motorist delay is incurred as compared to normal or non-congested conditions where vehicle volumes do not exceed the capacity of the roadway or intersection.

The Texas Transportation Institute of Texas A&M University researches and publishes an annual report on urban mobility[2] that tracks various measures of vehicular travel in 85 urban areas (including Laredo, Texas) to determine relative measures and trends in urban travel, particularly in terms of increasing congestion. This study identifies a number of measures of congestion which include:

Total Delay – described in person- or vehicle-hours which is the sum of the lost time due to congestion, a value relative to free-flow travel conditions. Travel Time Index – a dimensionless quantity that compares travel conditions in the peak period to travel under free-flow conditions. A TTI of 1.20 indicates a trip that takes 20 minutes during the normal off-peak will take 24 minutes in the peak period, or 20 percent longer. Delay per Traveler – described in daily-minutes or annual-hours is a measure of the individual motorist delay. Excess Fuel Consumed – Increased fuel consumption (gallons) due to travel in congested conditions rather than free-flow conditions. Congestion Cost – in annual-dollars or dollars per peak-period traveler is the cost incurred by the motorist based on a unit cost of person-travel or unit cost of truck time for the particular urban area. Laredo has been assigned values of $14.60 per hour per person and $77.10 per hour per truck.


- 23 -



Number of Rush Hours – the daily number of hours when the system might have congestion.

Congestion – A Nationwide Issue The 2007 TTI Urban Mobility Report[2] identified overall impacts (for 2005 data) nationwide (437 urban area) which are summarized as follows:

• Congestion Costs (based on wasted time and fuel) totaled $78.2 billion; a seven percent increase over 2004

• The Average Cost per Traveler was $707 in 2005, a four percent increase over 2004

• Approximately 2.9 billion gallons of fuel were wasted due to congestion in 2005. • Small urban areas (Laredo, Texas) averaged a 6-gallon per traveler wasted fuel.

Congestion – Laredo Metropolitan Area Laredo, Texas is one of 85 regions that have been included in TTI’s annual mobility report since 1982. Laredo is ranked, in population, 83rd of the 85 regions studied. Generally, transportation system performance data for Laredo mirrors this ranking relative to the other 84 regions with some exceptions. The mobility data for Laredo for the years 2000-2005 (current) is shown in the following Table 4.1. The exceptions noted are in the Travel Time Index which for 2005 was 1.09 and ranked 64th among the 85 regions studied. Additionally, the annual Cost per Peak Traveler for 2005 was $213 and ranked 76th of the 85 regions. This indicates that the relative level of congestion in terms of the travel time index is marginally greater for Laredo in relation to similar regions studied. Likewise the unit additional cost per traveler is marginally higher than similar regions analyzed in the study. In most other respects however, Laredo’s mobility statistics tracked its relative position within the 85 regions. Some comparison of Laredo to the other classifications included in the mobility study are useful and Table 4.2 presents Laredo’s performance measures relative to the four categories of region sizes and both the average for the 85 regions and all 437 urban areas studied.


- 24 -



Table 4.1 – Mobility Data, Laredo, Texas, 2000-2005


- 25 -



Urban Area Averages

Inventory Measures Laredo TX Small Medium Large Very Large85 Urban

Areas437 Urban

AreasUrban Area InformationNo. Urban Areas in Analysis 1 16 30 25 14 85 437 Population (1000s) 200 321 741 1,666 6,023 1,804 477 Rank 83 Urban Area (square miles 55 188 441 756 2,125 763 249 Popn Density (persons/ sq mile) 3,636 1,705 1,680 2,205 2,834 2,363 1,914 Peak Travelers (1000s) 109 175 403 919 3,162 966 256Freeway Daily Vehicle-Miles of Travel (1000s) 485 2,409 7,315 16,602 54,419 16,881 4,088 Lane Miles 75 211 541 1,085 2,895 1,026 279Arterial Streets Daily Vehicle-Miles of Travel (1000s) 1,780 3,567 7273 15278 51688 16245 4440 Lane Miles 360 733 1456 2882 9333 3037 890Public Transportation Annual Psgr-Miles of Travel (millions) 12 18 56 218 2692 531 118 Annual Unlinked Psgr Trips (millions) 4 4 13 46 510 103 23Cost Components Value of Time ($/hour) $14.60 $14.60 $14.60 $14.60 $14.60 $14.60 $14.60 Commercial Cost ($/hour) $77.10 $77.10 $77.10 $77.10 $77.10 $77.10 $77.10 Fuel Cost ($/gallon) $2.23 $2.32 $2.33 $2.35 $2.36 $2.34 $2.28

System PerformanceCongested Travel (% of peak VMT) 25 28 43 58 75 63 56Congested System (% of lane-miles) 30 29 40 47 54 49 45Congested Time (number of "Rush Hours" 3.2 5.0 5.9 6.7 7.7 7.0Annual Increase Needed To Maintain Constant Congestion Level: Lane-Miles 17 35 53 92 301 102 35 Transit Riders or Carpoolers (millions) 3 31 55 109 356 116 36Annual Excess Fuel Consumed Total Fuel (1000 gallons) 693 1,832 7,307 23,366 120,075 29,582 6,565 Rank 83 Fuel per Peak Traveler (gallons) 6 10 18 25 38 31 26 Rank 81Annual Delay Total Delay (1000s of person-hours 1,262 3,047 11,087 33,809 169,347 42,312 9,585 Rank 83 Delay per Peak Traveler (person-hrs) 12 17 28 37 54 44 38 Rank 76 Delay due to Incidents (percent) 53 55 55 53 53 53 54Travel Time Index 1.09 1.09 1.16 1.24 1.38 1.30 1.26 Rank 64Congestion Cost Total Cost ($ millions) $23 $56 $206 $628 $3,207 $796 $179 Rank 83 Cost per Peak Traveler ($) $213 $318 $512 $683 $1,014 $824 $707 Rank 76Note: Zeroes in the table reflect values less than 0.5SOURCE: The 2007 Urban Mobility Report, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University, September 2007

Table 4.2 – 2005 Mobility Data for Laredo and Other Regions Analyzed


- 26 -



Localized Congestion Impacts The Laredo Metropolitan Area data provided by the TTI 2007 Urban Mobility Report provides a basis to estimate the congestion impacts for the McPherson Rd. corridor. Information provided in the 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan update has been utilized as well as the 2030 update. McPherson traffic volumes for 2003 and forecasts for 2035 are included as an attachment to this section for reference. As a result of this data, generalized mobility measures of congestion have been calculated for McPherson Rd. within the limits being studied. The summary of these measures are as follows: 2005 McPherson Rd. Mobility Measures

• Lane-Miles: 23.36 • Daily Peak Travelers: 6,371 • Annual Excess Fuel Consumed (gallons): 40,887 • Annual Total Delay (person-hours) 74,458 • Annual Congestion Cost ($): $1,357,000

Commercial Vehicles: $67,850 Passenger Vehicles: $1,289,150

The constant rates of the TTI study that apply to McPherson Rd. include:

• Congested Travel (% of peak VMT) 25 • Congested Time (no. of “rush hours”) 3.2 • Excess fuel consumed per peak traveler (gallons) 6.4 • Annual delay per peak traveler (person-hours) 11.7 • Congestion Cost per peak traveler ($) $213

Impacts on Area Residents Residents of the McPherson Rd corridor generally bear a greater portion of congestion impacts than other residents of the city because it is the closest artery to gain access to the rest of the region and many of the services normally utilized by residents can be found along the corridor. Each area resident who utilizes the roadway during peak periods can be expected to bear an additional $200 per year cost of delay and excess fuel consumption. Perhaps the greatest impact to area residents is in their quality of life. Traffic congestion shapes the quality of life within an urban environment in two primary ways; overall travel time and ease of travel within the community. A significant issue as well is the results of McPherson arterial congestion that causes diversion of traffic into neighborhoods onto streets less capable of accommodating increased traffic and decreasing the feeling of neighborhood that is most often sought. Figure 4.2 illustrates potential or likely neighborhood roadways subject to diversion of McPherson Rd. traffic avoiding the effects of congestion during peak periods.


- 27 -



Figure 4.2 – Potential Neighborhood Diversion Routes


- 28 -



Impacts on the Environment Congestion, as previously mentioned, implies conditions other than free-flow conditions, typified by slower speeds, greater idling delay, more stop-start movements and greater acceleration. These effects of congestion create both air and noise impacts considered offensive to most persons. Generally, the greater the level of congestion, the greater the level of air and noise pollution emitted. The Environmental Protection Agency has indentified six pollutants to be monitored for compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Three pollutants are commonly of particular interest in terms of localized traffic congestion:

• Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) • Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) • Carbon Monoxides (CO)

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration has monitored and reported emission characteristics of mobile (on road vehicle) sources since the 1970’s. Long-term study and development of models has produced relationships between emissions and vehicle speed which are illustrated in the following Figures 4.3 and 4.4.

Figure 4.3 – CO Emissions Characteristics


- 29 -



Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. MOBILE 6.2 Model run 24 September 2003. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/aqfactbk/page15.htm

Figure 4.4 – VOC and NOx Emissions Characteristics Arterial vehicle speeds less than 30 mph generally occur in congested conditions with speeds of 35 mph or more being free-flow conditions. It is demonstrated by this graph that pollutant emissions increase with decreasing vehicle speed which is a characteristic of congested roadway stop and go conditions. Congestion Impacts on the Local Economy and Commerce Perhaps a widely quoted study conducted for the Portland, Oregon Business Alliance[3] in 2005 is most applicable to the business economic needs and future of Laredo. Portland is a major rail, marine, highway and air hub to international destinations, particularly in the Pacific region. The major conclusion of the study determined that “Increasing congestion -- even with currently planned improvements – will significantly impact the region’s ability to maintain and grow business, as well as our quality of life.” Roadway congestion has proven to hurt business’s competitiveness by incurring additional costs due to longer travel times, additional resources to avoid missed deliveries, loss of productivity, costs for increased inventories and the reduction of market areas.


- 30 -



Laredo, as a major NAFTA hub providing business commerce from and through Mexico can be significantly impacted by increasing congestion, to the detriment of business growth and even maintaining existing businesses. The Federal Highway Administration and the Texas Transportation Institute are currently working on several initiatives to improve the movement of freight across our border with Mexico. It has been noted by the private sector and reported to the FHWA[4] that other trading blocs, like the European Union, have cohesive transportation plans that maximize transportation system efficiencies thereby maximizing cost-effective trade. A conservative estimate for congestion costs of commercial vehicles on McPherson Rd. was previously shown to be approximately $67,850 per year representing more than 880 hours per year lost as a result of congestion. Summary The results of the preceding paragraphs concerning congestion as it more directly relates to the McPherson Rd. corridor can be summarized as follows:

1. McPherson Rd. (2005) has the following mobility measures that characterize the level of congestion experienced during peak periods:

• Annual Excess Fuel Consumed (gallons): 40,887 • Annual Total Delay (person-hours) 74,458 • Annual Congestion Cost ($): $1,357,000 • Commercial Vehicles: $67,850 • Passenger Vehicles: $1,289,150 • Congested Travel (% of peak VMT) 25 • Congested Time (no. of “rush hours”) 3.2 • Excess fuel consumed per peak traveler (gallons) 6.4 • Annual delay per peak traveler (person-hours) 11.7 • Congestion Cost per peak traveler ($) $213

2. Residents of the McPherson Rd. Corridor bear more of the McPherson Rd. corridor bear the greatest share of adverse congestion impacts.

3. Residential neighborhoods in the McPherson Rd. corridor are susceptible to increased

traffic on neighborhood streets by traffic diversion to avoid congestion points on McPherson Rd.

4. Arterial street congestion tends to increase the level of vehicle pollutant emissions

concentrated along the corridor. 5. Roadway congestion will adversely affect the area’s and city’s ability to maintain and

grow business.


- 31 -



6. Business costs increase in a wide variety of ways as a result of roadway congestion. 7. Congestion could create a competitive business disadvantage with area and regions that

exhibit no or lesser degrees of congestion. Bibliography [1] Paniati, Jeffrey F, Associate Administrator of Operations, FHWA, Using Intelligent

Transportation Systems (ITS) Technology and Strategies to Better Manage Congestion, June 26, 2003, Issues and Options Symposium on Traffic Congestion.

[2] Schrank and Lomax, The 2007 Urban Mobility Report, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University, September 2007, http://mobility.tamu.edu/ums/report/

[3] “The Cost of Congestion the Economy of the Portland Region”, a study prepared for the Portland Business Alliance, Metro, Port of Portland and Oregon Department of Transportation by the Economic Development Research Group of Boston, MA, December 2005

[4] “The Impact of Congestion on Shipper’s Inventory Costs”, a report to the Federal Highway Administration by the Brookings Institution and the RAND Corporation, February 2004

http://mobility.tamu.edu/ums/report/


- 32 -



5.0 FUTURE PROJECTIONS The future projections task utilizes information collected and developed by Wilbur Smith & Associates in conjunction with another project Wilbur Smith & Associates is developing for the City of Laredo. The projections provided have been based on data supplied to Wilbur Smith & Associates by the City of Laredo with respect to: current and future roadway projects, origin-destination data, significant traffic generators, and anticipated growth. The data has been compiled and used as input to a transportation planning model, TransCAD. TransCAD is geographic information system (GIS) software used to support database management and transportation modeling activities. I t provides the modeling steps of trip generation, trip distribution, modal choice and traffic assignment based on a user defined zone structure and r oadway network. T he defined zone structure, termed Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) is given attributes of population and employment which essentially results in the generation of trips between zones. Distribution of generated trips is accomplished (simplistically) by information based on regional sample data of trip purposes, destinations, and other factors. Generated trips are then assigned to the local street network based on the distribution functions. Figure 5.1 indicates the traffic analysis zones used for the McPherson Road corridor. 5.1 Current and Future Construction Projects The current and future construction projects within the McPherson Road study corridor are listed in Figure 5.2. Figure 5.2 is a listing prepared by Wilbur Smith & Associates of the projects included in the City of Laredo major transportation projects (MTP). The projects within the McPherson Road study corridor are highlighted in yellow. Some of the projects have been completed, such as the widening of McPherson Road from four lanes to five lanes between Del Mar Boulevard and Shiloh Road. T he MTP projects within the study corridor are shown on Figure 5.3. A significant future roadway construction project that is not listed is the construction of University Boulevard between Bartlett Avenue and Loop 20. Segments of University Boulevard have been constructed between McPherson Road and Loop 20. The remainder of the roadway is to be constructed with private funds as the properties along the route of University Boulevard are developed. According to the City of Laredo Planning Department the entire roadway is anticipated to be completed within the next five years.


- 33 -



Source: Wilbur Smith & Associates Figure 5.1 Traffic Analysis Zones – McPherson Road Corridor

McPherson Road Mobility and Capacity Study

-34 –



Figure 5.2 2035 MTP Projects – McPherson Road Corridor


- 35 – We Make A Difference


Source: Wilbur Smith & Associates Figure 5.3 Future MTP Street Construction Projects




5.2 Expansion Plans by Significant Traffic Generators The special generators in the McPherson Road study corridor are shown in Figure 5.4. The special generators include the Laredo International Airport and the medical-related developments west of the airport. These special generators are not anticipated to have any significant expansions that would impact traffic patterns. H owever, the commercially developing area north of the airport and east of McPherson Road is expanding to support the entertainment facilities near the Laredo Entertainment Center and near the Texas A&M International University campus, located east of Loop 20. The properties along Loop 20, from Saunders Road north and west to McPherson Road, are anticipated to have significant increases in employment and trips between 2008 and 2035. Figure 5.5 is a table of the anticipated increases in population and employment in each of the traffic analysis zones within the McPherson Road corridor. The anticipated percentage change in employment in each of the TAZ is shown in Figure 5.6. The anticipated change in employment in each zone, by number of employees, is shown in Figure 5.7. The major increases in traffic demand are the commercial/light industrial developments anticipated in the northwest portion of the study area and along the Loop 20 corridor between International Boulevard and Jacaman Road. The developments along Loop 20 between Del Mar Boulevard and International Boulevard are primarily oriented to new residential developments, which include various commercial developments to support said residential developments. T he employee base to operate the commercial developments would be from various parts of the city.




Source: Wilbur Smith & Associates

Figure 5.4 Special Generators – McPherson Road Corridor




Figure 5.5 Population and Employment Data by TAZ – 2008 and 2035

October 2008



Source: Wilbur Smith & Associates Figure 5.6 Employment Change (Percent) 2008-2035

October 2008



Source: Wilbur Smith & Associates Figure 5.7 Employment Change (No. of Employees) 2008-2035

October 2008



5.3 Projected Traffic Volumes The travel demand model provided information on t he 2008 traffic patterns within the McPherson Road corridor and the projected traffic patterns for the year 2035. Two scenarios were analyzed for the year 2035: p rojected traffic patterns with a no -build scenario and projected traffic patterns with a build scenario. The traffic volumes shown in Figure 5.8 are the basis of the 2008 traffic patterns. 5.3.1 2035 No-Build Scenario The traffic patterns for no-build scenario reflect the anticipated traffic patterns if the major roadway improvements such as the extension of Bartlett Road and the extension of Springfield Avenue were not accomplished. The projected traffic volumes in the year 2035 without the extensions of Bartlett Road and Springfield Avenue are shown in Figure 5.9. Comparing the 2008 traffic volumes with the projected 2035 no-build traffic volumes, the traffic volumes along McPherson Road would increase from 70% to 120%. A similar increase is to be expected in population in the traffic analysis zones in vicinity of the traffic volumes increases as can be seen in Figure 5.5. 5.3.2 2035 Build Scenario The traffic patterns for the build scenario reflect the anticipated traffic patterns if the major roadway improvements such as the extension of Bartlett Road and the extension of Springfield Avenue were accomplished. The projected traffic volumes in the year 2035 with the extensions of Bartlett Road and Springfield Avenue are shown in Figure 5.10. Comparing the 2008 traffic volumes with the projected 2035 build traffic volumes, the traffic volumes along McPherson Road would still increase from 70% to 120%. In comparing the 2035 no-build projected traffic volumes and the 2035 build projected traffic volumes, the traffic on McPherson Road would increase in certain segments, such as south of Del Mar Road. The traffic on Del Mar Road between McPherson Road and Bartlett Road would also increase significantly. The traffic volumes on Interstate Highway 35 and on Loop 20 are projected to decrease with the 2035 build scenario as compared to the 2035 no-build scenario.

October 2008



Additional new routes within the McPherson Road corridor have had the effect on the construction of the model “trip tables” that create new assignments based on selection of a path that offers the minimum travel time between origins and destinations. The effect has been to “balance” the capacity-demand relationships on all roadways within the corridor. Therefore, an over-capacity situation by traffic demand IH 35 has been balanced by the distribution of trips to routes (such as McPherson Road.) that offer even an insignificant lesser travel time between origin and destination. Because the modeling process is iterative, parallel routes such as Bartlett Avenue absorb traffic from McPherson Road, which offers an opportunity to absorb IH 35 ( for example) traffic that has a l ess desirable travel time due to a high demand-to-capacity ratio. The net effect is usually positive (less total travel time) but a more detailed analysis of the regional model outputs would be required to determine the relative ramifications of the resulting Build traffic assignment.

October 2008



Source: Wilbur Smith & Associates Figure 5.8 2008 – Volumes and Level of Service

October 2008



Source: Wilbur Smith & Associates Figure 5.9 2035 – Volumes and Level of Service (No Build)

October 2008



Source: Wilbur Smith & Associates Figure 5.10 2035 – Volumes and Level of Service (Build)

October 2008



6.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Over the last three decades, McPherson Road has experienced significant increases in daily traffic, corridor congestion, related vehicular delay, and increased driveway density. These conditions have resulted in increased traffic flow conflicts and v ehicular-related pollutants including carbon dioxide and nitrous oxides. As stated by the Laredo Urban Transportation Study (LUTS), the objective of this study is to evaluate existing and projected traffic conditions on M cPherson Road between Loop 20 and US Highway 59 (Saunders Street) to develop recommendations for mobility improvements, which may include, but are not limited to the following: Traffic Signal Improvements

Intersection Geometric Improvements


One-Way Street Pairing


Additional Capacity Traffic Volume and Turning Movement Data Traffic data was collected along the study corridor and included average daily traffic (ADT) volume data, turning movement count (TMC) data, and site photographs. Traffic volume and turning movement data is included in Appendix C of this report. At the time the traffic data was initially collected in September 2008, the intersection of McPherson and Shiloh was under construction. The peak period turning movements were recounted at the intersection in September 2009.

October 2008



6.1 Analysis of Traffic Conditions

The Synchro (version 7.0) traffic simulation software application was used for the analysis specifically due to the number of signalized intersections along the corridor. Synchro is a macroscopic analysis and optimization program with traffic simulation and 3D viewing applications. Synchro implements the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) 2003 method for determining intersection capacity. This method compares the current volume to the intersections ultimate capacity. S ynchro also implements the methods of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) and pr ovides an eas y-to-use solution for single intersection capacity analysis and timing optimization. The traffic simulation analysis process involves the development of a base model (network with existing conditions), calibration of the base model (validation of traffic conditions), and alternative comparisons to the base model (traffic analysis). Development of the base model involves the creation of a system network, also referred to as the link-node network. The network development includes: link-node assignment, traffic control, traffic signalization, roadway geometry, lane assignment, traffic volumes, and turning movements. The calibration of the base model involves the validation of the traffic model’s roadway and traffic conditions to the actual (existing) roadway conditions. The analysis typically focuses on the morning (7:00 to 8:00 AM) and evening (5:00 to 6:00 PM) peak periods. The alternative improvement analysis includes a comparison of the proposed improvements with the existing conditions. The analysis results of the projected traffic conditions are discussed in Section 6.3

October 2008



Table 6-1. Level-of-Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections

Level-of-Service (LOS)

Control Delay (seconds/vehicle)

Description Signalized

Intersections Unsignalized Intersections

A ≤10.0 ≤10.0 Very low vehicle delay, free traffic flow, good signal progression

B 10.1 to 20.0 10.1 to 15.0 Good signal progression, more vehicle stops and higher delay than LOS A

C 20.1 to 35.0 15.1 to 25.0 Stable traffic flow, fair signal progression, significant number of vehicle stops

D 35.1 to 55.0 25.1 to 35.0 Noticeable traffic congestion, longer delays and unfavorable signal progression

E 55.1 to 80.0 35.1 to 50.0 Limit of acceptable vehicle delay, unstable traffic flow, poor signal progression

F > 80.0 > 50.0 Unacceptable delay, extremely unstable flow, heavy congestion, traffic exceeds capacity

Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000. 6.2 Analysis Results – Existing Conditions The peak hour turning movements were used to determine the level-of-service (LOS) for each signalized intersection along McPherson Road between Loop 20 and Saunders Street (US 59). As indicated in Table 6-1, LOS can be expressed as the average control delay (seconds per vehicle) or by a letter. T he letter designation would be similar to a s chool grade with “A” being “excellent” to “C” being “passing” to “F” being “failing”. Table 6-2 is an enumeration of the LOS on each approach to each signalized intersection and a LOS for the intersection as a whole.

October 2008



Table 6-2. Analysis Summary for McPherson Road – 2008 Existing

Conditions

AM Peak PM Peak

Control Delay LOS

Control Delay LOS

NB McPherson Rd 44.9 D 38.5 D SB McPherson Rd 28.7 C 45.0 C EB Loop 20 EB 296.2 F 212.0 F

WB Loop 20 EB 281.4 F 59.2 E

Average Control Delay 198.94 F 103.11 F

McPherson Rd and San Isidro Pkwy Intersection 23.2 C 16.4 B

31.6 C 38.7 D

McPherson Rd and Loop 20 24.4 C 29.8 C

WB San Isidro Pkwy 26.2 C 21.6 C

Average Control Delay 26.29 C 27.56 C

McPherson Rd and Tiara Trail NB McPherson Rd 6.9 A 20 C SB McPherson Rd 17.6 B 32.6 C EB Tiara Trail 18.6 B 13.1 B

WB Tiara Trial 33.6 C 32.1 C

Average Control Delay 14.31 B 25.78 C

McPherson Rd and Shiloh Dr NB McPherson Rd 37.9 D 25.4 C SB McPherson Rd 34.2 C 47.1 D EB Shiloh Dr 44.9 D 29.7 C

WB Shiloh Dr 40.5 D 77.9 E

Average Control Delay 37.88 D 39.56 D

McPherson Rd and United HS NB McPherson Rd 5.9 A 10.7 B SB McPherson Rd 7 A 4.4 A - - - -

WB United HS 35.2 D 85.2 F


October 2008




Conditions (Continued)

Intersection AM Peak PM Peak

Control Delay LOS

Control Delay LOS

McPherson Rd and International NB McPherson Rd 29.9 C 41.0 D SB McPherson Rd 37.5 D 15.5 B EB International Blvd 46.1 D 41.8 D

WB International Blvd 55.0 D 55.4 E


McPherson Rd and Country Club NB McPherson Rd 4.5 A 23.5 C SB McPherson Rd 14.2 B 18.4 B EB Country Club Blvd 22.5 C 20.4 C

WB Country Club Blvd 50.6 D 32.8 C


McPherson Rd and Del Mar Blvd NB McPherson Rd 30.0 C 462.9 F SB McPherson Rd 56.1 E 80.5 F EB Del Mar Blvd 44.0 D 30.7 C

WB Del Mar Blvd 43.2 D 75.5 E

Average Control Delay 43.26 D 213.46 F

McPherson Rd and Fenwick Dr NB McPherson Rd 15.2 B 19.3 B SB McPherson Rd 24.3 C 21.3 C EB Fenwick Dr 67.3 E 56.7 E

WB Fenwick Dr 34.6 C 83.2 F


McPherson Rd and Jacaman Rd NB McPherson Rd 6.9 A 15.5 B

SB McPherson Rd 28.8 C 24.4 C

- - - -

WB Jacaman Rd 52.7 D 58.7 E


October 2008





Intersection AM Peak PM Peak

Control Delay LOS

Control Delay LOS

McPherson Rd and Calle Del Norte NB McPherson Rd 7.8 A 14.2 B SB McPherson Rd 21.3 C 29.1 C EB Calle Del Norte 43.3 D 49.9 D

- - - -


McPherson Rd and Gale St NB McPherson Rd 21.9 C 78.9 E SB McPherson Rd 37.8 D 25.0 C EB Gale St 117.2 F 95.4 F

WB Gale St 135.8 F 311.3 F

Average Control Delay 51.09 D 90.07 F

McPherson Rd and Hillside Rd NB McPherson Rd 27.8 C 41.3 D SB McPherson Rd 19.6 B 19.3 B EB Hillside Rd 49.1 D 48.3 D

WB Hillside Rd 64.6 E 67.9 E

Average Control Delay 32.49 C 37.02 D

McPherson Rd and Calton Rd NB McPherson Rd 57.8 E 31.3 C SB McPherson Rd 67.8 E 140.7 F EB Calton Rd 52.1 D 32.4 C

WB Calton Rd 52.6 D 33.6 C

Average Control Delay 59.86 E 81.21 F

McPherson Rd and Taylor St NB McPherson Rd 14.3 B 26.7 C SB McPherson Rd 35.0 C 35.5 D EB Taylor St 51.6 D 42.2 D

WB Taylor St 24.0 C 24.0 C


October 2008





Intersection

Control Delay LOS AM Peak PM Peak

Control Delay LOS

Control Delay LOS

McPherson Rd and Bustamante St

NB McPherson Rd 15.2 B 15.1 B

SB McPherson Rd 5.8 A 35.7 D

EB Bustamante St 55.3 E 52.1 D

WB Bustamante St 24.7 C 23.9 C


McPherson Rd and Saunders St

NB McPherson Rd 47.1 D 38.7 D

SB McPherson Rd 21.3 C 19 B

EB Saunders St 30.5 C 32.5 C

WB Saunders St 55.2 E 132 F

Average Control Delay 39.04 D 68.47 E

October 2008



Another measure of effectiveness of a roadway is determined by the travel time along the roadway. T ravel time can be expressed by time (in minutes) or by speed (in miles per hour). Table 6-3 is an enumeration of the travel times along McPherson Road between segments and along the entire length of the roadway from Loop 20 to Saunders Street. T he travel times are indicated by direction, northbound and southbound.

Table 6-3. Existing Travel Times

McPherson Rd Mobility Study

Travel Time and Speed Table

Northbound Southbound Existing Travel Time Splits Existing Travel Time Splits Minutes Speed (mph) Minutes Speed (mph)

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM

US 59 (Saunders Rd) to Hillside Rd 3.6 3.6 16.3 16.7 3.7 4.4 16.0 13.4

Hillside Rd to Calle del Norte 1.7 2.8 28.2 17.7 2.1 1.8 23.4 27.6

Calle Del Norte to Del Mar Blvd 3.4 7.8 24.2 10.6 3.9 3.4 21.3 24.7

Del Mar Blvd to Shiloh Dr 3.5 3.4 22.7 22.9 4.1 4.8 19.4 16.5

Shiloh Dr to Loop 20 (Bob Bullock) 3.5 3.0 22.8 26.6 3.9 3.0 20.3 26.6

Average Speed 22.2 17.0 Average Speed 19.8 20.2

October 2008



6.3 Corridor Improvements A preliminary list of alternative corridor improvements has been developed for consideration by the study team. The six alternative corridor improvements Include: 6.3.1. Traffic Signal Improvements

a. Phasing (e.g., Arlington phasing, Lead-Lead, Protected Lead-Lag, etc.) and Timing (e.g., splits and cycle times) Alternatives

b. Coordination between signals (e.g., Selected sections of the corridor)

6.3.2. Intersection Geometric Improvements a. Additional lanes (e.g. right turn lanes) b. Dual-turn lanes at major intersections (e.g., dual left-turns at high demand

intersections)

6.3.3. Access Management a. Raised medians at high driveway density locations (e.g., near intersections) b. Directional medians at High Trip Generator Locations (e.g. medical facilities south

of Del Mar) 6.3.4. One-way Couplets 6.3.5. Parallel Relief Routes

a. Bartlett Road extension b. Springfield Road extension (e.g., North of Del Mar Blvd)

6.3.6. Additional Capacity

6.3.1 Traffic Signal Improvements The most immediate improvement for the traffic flows along the McPherson corridor would be to improve the traffic signal timings and establish coordination among the signals to provide progressive movements along the roadway. T he City of Laredo Traffic Operations personnel have been implementing improvements to the traffic signal timings as appropriate. A s traffic patterns change, the timings and off-sets of the traffic signals along the roadway may also need to change. The level-of-service analysis of the intersections along McPherson Road with the proposed improvements reflect optimized traffic signal timings and appropriate off-sets in the traffic signal cycling between traffic signals

October 2008



to maximize the “green” time belt along the arterial roadway to provide optimum progression through the traffic signal system. 6.3.2 Intersection Geometric Improvements A major intersection geometric improvement along McPherson Road has been completed: widening of McPherson road to a continuous five-lane cross-section from Del Mar Boulevard to Shiloh Drive. Other intersection improvements which could be implemented within the existing geometric boundaries of the intersections would include additional turn lanes, alternative lane assignments, and dual turn lanes. Based on the observed traffic movements at the signalized intersections, two intersections are good candidates for additional turn lanes and two intersections are good candidates for alternative lane assignments and dual turn lane operation: o McPherson Road at Shiloh Drive. A large volume of traffic southbound on

McPherson Road turns west on Shiloh Drive. Providing a separate right turn lane for the southbound McPherson Road traffic would remove the right turn traffic from the through movements and increase the capacity of the intersection.

o International Boulevard at McPherson Road. A large volume of traffic

eastbound on International Boulevard turns south on McPherson Road. Providing a separate right turn lane for the eastbound International Boulevard traffic would remove the right turn traffic from the through movements and increase the capacity of the intersection. The City of Laredo has already recognized this opportunity to improve the operation of the intersection and has started construction of the eastbound right turn lane.

o University Boulevard at McPherson Road. Currently the westbound

University Boulevard approach to McPherson consists of a designated right turn lane, a through lane (to Fenwick Drive), and a designated left turn lane. When Bartlett Road is extended north to University Boulevard and U niversity Boulevard is extended east to complete the connection between McPherson Road and Loop 20, the westbound directional movements on University Boulevard would be expected to have a s ignificant percentage of the westbound traffic turning right onto McPherson Boulevard. A dual right turn

October 2008



operation would facilitate the right turn demand. To facilitate the dual right turn movement, the westbound through movements would need to be able to continue west on Fenwick Drive. The westbound receiving lane on Fenwick is offset from the westbound through lane on University Boulevard. Fenwick Drive would need to be widened along the north side almost 19 feet for a depth of approximately 250 feet west of McPherson Road to provide a w estbound receiving lane to align with the westbound though approach lane on University Boulevard.

o Jacaman Road. Currently Jacaman Road at McPherson Road has four lanes,

two westbound approach lanes and two eastbound departure lanes. Jacaman Road tees into McPherson Road; however, there is a private drive on the west side of McPherson Road that aligns with the westbound approach lanes of Jacaman Road. The intersection has two immediate concerns:

1. The private drive is intended to be operated as one-way westbound with no t raffic entering the intersection. The developments served by the private drive are also served by an i nterior drive that intersects McPherson Road approximately 300 feet south of Jacaman Road. The private drive is presently controlled by a stop sign for eastbound traffic. It is recommended that the driveway be signed as one-way westbound, away from McPherson Road and DO NOT ENTER signs be posted for traffic entering the driveway from the bank, just west of the intersection with McPherson Road.

2. The four lanes on Jacaman Road could be rechannelized to provide

one (1) departure lane and three (3) approach lanes to McPherson Road. The center approach lane could be marked for left and right turns, providing dual left turn movements and dual right turn movements from Jacaman Road to McPherson Road. T he observed traffic movements on Jacaman Road were split nearly equal between left and right turn movements onto McPherson Road during peak traffic periods. This dual turn operation would allow for more green time for McPherson Road traffic, increasing the capacity of the intersection.

October 2008



6.3.3 Access Management Access management generally involves the placement and design of driveways along a r oadway. A large preponderance of driveways and i ntersecting streets along a major street, such as McPherson Road, results in decreased efficiency of the roadway. T he decrease efficiency is caused by traffic slowing along the arterial street to turn into the driveways or intersecting streets and by traffic entering the arterial street accelerating to merge with the through traffic on the arterial street. In addition, traffic turning onto and turning off the arterial street is frequently in conflict with the through traffic movements resulting in immediate delays and occasionally in crashes which cause serious delays in traffic movements. One of the best measures of the need to provide access management is crash data along the roadway to determine where conflicts have occurred. However, the crash data only provides documentation of the reported crashes. U nreported crashes and “near-hits” are not documented. R ecently copies of the reported crashes along the McPherson Road corridor were provided for analysis. For the years 2008, 2009, and the first quarter of 2010, there were 889 crashes reported along the McPherson Road corridor between Saunders (US Highway 59) and Loop 20 (not including crashes within the Loop 20/McPherson Road interchange. Typically, 25% to 30% of the reported crashes along a roadway are off-road. The reported crashes along McPherson Road are no exception, with 253 o f the 889 reported crashes occurring off-road. While operational improvements along McPherson Road could have little impact on the off-road crash occurrences, the off-road crashes impact the operation of the roadway, as motorists tend to be distracted by emergency vehicles responding to the off-road crashes. The type and approximate location of the reported crashes that occurred within the roadway are indicated in Appendix D, which consists of aerial photos of segments of McPherson Road. The major type of reported crash is the rear-end crash. Read-end crashes are expected to occur on approaches to signalized intersections. C ongestion and resulting long queues on intersection approaches are the major contributing factors to the rear-end crashes. Motorists tend to queue too closely to each other and start forward when the traffic signal changes before the motorist in front of them has started. Some motorists approach the queue too fast and are unable to

October 2008



stop in time to prevent hitting the vehicle stopped in the queue or slowing for the queue. T he relative length of the queue can be s een by how far from the intersection the rear-end collisions occur. Another type of rear-end crash that is common to intersections with right turn lanes and/or islands are the right turn crashes. The lead motorist is frequently hit by the following motorist who impatiently proceeds forward before the lead motorist has made his/her right turn movement. This type of crash occurs most frequently at major intersections, such as evidenced at the intersection of McPherson Road and Del Mar. The corrective measure for rear-end crashes at intersections would be t o reduce the queues and provide better progression through the intersections. The mid-block crashes, right angle and rear-end crashes, are susceptible to correction with access management. The recommended raised medians on the approaches to the signalized intersection would alleviate the source of many of the reported crashes of vehicles attempting to turn left into or from driveways near the intersection. The number of crashes that could have been prevented by a raised median at the intersections along McPherson Road would be: At least 6 approaching Calton; At least 6 approaching Hillside; At least 8 approaching Gale; At least 8 approaching Jacaman; At least 18 approaching Del Mar; At least 13 approaching International; At least 4 approaching Shiloh; and At least 2 approaching Sterling. The reported crashes that occurred away from the signalized intersections do not indicate a significant pattern that would suggest extending a r aised median beyond the vicinity of the signalized intersections. U pon reading the narrative accounts of the non-intersection related crashes, a c learly defined access management policy dealing with the spacing and design of driveways could have prevented a s ignificant number of driveways. T he reduced number of reported crashes north of Shiloh, along the more recently portions of McPherson Road indicates that the City has been exercising good judgment on the approval of access along McPherson Road in more recent times.

October 2008



One of the best means of access management along a thoroughfare is the use of raised medians. The raised median does not prevent access but limits the access to right turn movements only, preventing left turns onto or from a driveway or an intersection street. The City of Laredo is currently using flexible curb delineators to control access along McPherson Road near Andrew Lane, as shown in Figure 6.1. The use of the flexible curb delineators is common in the Laredo District by TxDOT.

Figure 6.1 Flexible median delineators on McPherson Road at Andrews Lane The use of a concrete raised median is more distinctive for the use of access management in conveying the intent that left turns are not to be made. The City of Laredo has installed a raised median on one of the approaches at the intersection of Del Mar Boulevard and McPherson Road to prevent left turn movements near the intersection. In lieu of providing a raised median along the entire length of McPherson Road, raised medians are recommended to be constructed on the approaches of most of the intersections along the corridor. T he length of each median would be determined based on the design speed of the approaching traffic. The left turn

October 2008



storage length would be 150 feet on all medianed approaches. The deceleration, or transition, length of each median would be as per Table 3-13 of the TxDOT Roadway Design Manual. Table 6-4 below enumerates the deceleration lengths and taper lengths (which are included in the deceleration lengths) for the applicable design speeds along McPherson Road and the signalized cross streets.

Table 6-4 Lengths of Median Turn Lanes from Table 3-13 of TxDOT Roadway

Design Manual Deceleration (Transition) Length of Median Turn Lanes

Design Speed (MPH) Taper Length (ft) Deceleration Length (ft)

30 50 160 35 50 215 40 50 275 45 100 345

The posted speed limits along McPherson Road are as follows:

o Loop 20 to Shiloh 45 MPH o Shiloh to Del Mar 30 MPH o Del Mar to Hillside 40 MPH o Hillside to Saunders 30 MPH

These speed limits are subject to change. H owever, the design speed can be determined for each roadway segment. For the design of the median lengths, the following design speeds are recommended:

o Loop 20 to Shiloh 45 MPH o Shiloh to Del Mar 35 MPH o Del Mar to Hillside 40 MPH o Hillside to Saunders 35 MPH

The design speed for the cross streets would be 35 MPH, with exception of Shiloh (40 MPH), Del Mar (40 MPH), Hillside (30 MPH), and Bustamente (30 MPH). Special treatment is recommended at those intersections with unique concerns: Loop 20. The median on McPherson Road at Loop 20 is recommended to be extended south to Monarch Drive, with a left turn opening for southbound traffic to turn into the shopping center located in the southeast quadrant of Loop 20 and McPherson Road. The opening at Monarch Drive would be to accommodate a future traffic

October 2008



signal on M cPherson Road at Monarch Drive. [See Figure 6.2] The distance between the eastbound frontage road of Loop 20 and Monarch Drive is approximately ¼ mile, the appropriate spacing between traffic signals to provide progressive movements along the thoroughfare.

Figure 6.2 Median between Loop 20 and Monarch Drive

October 2008



San Isidro Parkway. The existing medians on San Isidro Parkway are recommended to be modified to extend the left turn lanes on both San Isidro approaches. The median with the westbound left turn lane would be widened to provide a left turn along the entire length from McPherson Road to the existing median opening serving a convenience store and a bank . E ast of the median opening, the left turn lane continues and tapers back to the typical cross section of San Isidro.

Figure 6.3 Medians at San Isidro Parkway

October 2008



Sterling/Tiara Trail. The southbound left turn lane median would have a transition length of only 275 feet instead of 345 feet, as prescribed for an approach speed of 45 MPH. The shorter transition length would accommodate access to Cantera Court, a short cul-de-sac street serving apartment and office developments.

Figure 6.4 Medians at Sterling and Tiara Trail

International Boulevard. As previously discussed in Section 6.2.2, a right turn lane is recommended for the eastbound International Boulevard approach to McPherson Road. Two driveways are located near the intersection that could create potential problems with left turns into and out of the driveways. A 150-foot long raised median is recommended.

October 2008



Figure 6.5 Medians at International Boulevard Fenwick/University / Jacaman Road. In addition to the improvements previously discussed in Section 6.2.2, a continuous median is recommended to be constructed along McPherson Road between Fenwick/University and Jacaman Road. The distance between the two intersections is not sufficient to provide the desired 275 feet of transition for each approach. P ending a future determination to possibly prohibit southbound left turns at Jacaman Road, the transition lengths for the northbound approach to Fenwick and the southbound approach to Jacaman Road could each be 228-230 feet respectively.

October 2008



Figure 6.6 Medians at University/Fenwick and Jacaman

October 2008



Calle del Norte / Gale Street. The recommendation to create a o ne-way couplet of Calle del Norte and Gale Street is discussed in Section 6.2.4. I n consideration of creating the one-way couplet, with Gale Street being one-way westbound and Calle del Norte being one-way eastbound, northbound left turns would only be allowed at Gale Street. A continuous median is recommended to be constructed along McPherson Road between Calle del Norte and Gale Street. Gale Street east of McPherson Road would remain two-way in operation.

Figure 6.7 Medians at Calle del Norte and Gale Schematic diagrams of the intersections with the proposed improvement are included in Appendix E.

October 2008



A stated access management policy would provide the City with a means to better manage future access requests along McPherson Road and other thoroughfares within the City. ACCESS MANAGEMENT POLICY The basic components of an Access Management Policy would include: Driveway spacing, in relation to other driveways and streets; Driveway throat width; Driveway return radii; Driveway throat depth; and Traffic signal spacing. The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) updated their Access Management Manual in December 2009. The current TxDOT manual addresses the first four of the above components. Table 6.5 enumerates the TxDOT criteria for the separation of driveways from roadway intersections and from other driveways along an arterial street.

Table 6.5 TxDOT Driveway Spacing Requirements* Minimum Spacing Requirements

Posted Speed (MPH) Distance (ft) ≤ 30 200 35 250 40 305 45 360

≥ 50 425 * From Table 2-2 of TxDOT Access Management Manual, December 2009

Appendix C of the TxDOT Roadway Design Manual discusses and enumerates the design criteria for commercial driveways. (The TxDOT driveway design guidelines are attached in Appendix F.) Table 6.6 enumerates the TxDOT design criteria for the commercial driveway throat widths and radii.

October 2008



Table 6.6 TxDOT Commercial Driveway Design Criteria*

Designs for Two-Way Commercial Driveways Condition Radius (ft) Throat Width (ft)

One entry lane and one exit lane, fewer than 4 large vehicles per hour 25 28

One entry lane and one exit lane, 4 or more single unit vehicles(3) per hour 30 30

One entry lane and two exit lanes, without divider 25 40

One entry lane and two exit lanes, with divider(4) 25 44(1) – 50(2)

Two entry lane and two exit lanes, with divider(4) 25 56(1) – 62(2)

(1) 4-foot wide divider (minimum width), face of curb to face of curb (2) 10-foot wide divider, face of curb to face of curb (3) Driveway designs for larger vehicles will be considered on a case by case basis (4) Maximum width of divider between one-way driveways recommended 15 feet

* From Table C-2 of TxDOT Roadway Design Manual, Revised May 2010 The driveway return radii for commercial driveways should be l arge enough to allow most vehicles to negotiate a r ight turn movement from the street into the driveway without having to slow to below 10 m iles per hour or having to swing wide into the opposing side of the driveway to make the maneuver. If implemented, the TxDOT design criteria could significantly reduce the number of rear-end accidents on the street due to right turn movements. Driveway Throat Depth. Another source of rear-end crashes involving right turn movements would be the situation when a motorist has to stop on the public roadway to wait for another vehicle in the driveway to clear. A key problem of entering vehicles being delayed from clearing the driveway is when there is inadequate distance from the street to the first conflicting maneuver from the driveway, such as cross traffic from the parking area paralleling the street. The TxDOT Roadway Design Manual (Appendix C) states that commercial driveways should have a minimum throat depth length of 50 feet and preferably 75 feet.

October 2008



Traffic Signal Spacing. In an urban area, progression along an arterial street can best be accomplished with traffic signals spaced ¼ mile apart. Platooning, or grouping, of vehicles between traffic signals can be accomplished when the traffic signals are spaced ¼ mile apart. The vehicles in the platoon all travel at approximately the same speed between signals, allowing for predictable arrival times between signals. C loser than ¼ mile, the queues at intersections can disrupt the platooning. Further than ¼ mile apart, the platoons of vehicles break up as vehicles tend to spread apart, traveling at various speeds. While the City has control on when and where traffic signals are to be installed on the public streets, private developments occasionally request traffic signals at driveways. T he signalized driveways can be o f benefit to the mobility of the arterial street if the location of the signal would benefit the platooning of traffic along the arterial street. The burden of proof should be on the requestor of the traffic signal at a private driveway to show that the placement and operation of the traffic signal would not adversely impact the progression of traffic along the public roadway. T his burden of proof would be especially important at locations that would result in traffic signal spacing less than ¼ mile apart.

October 2008



6.3.4 One-Way Couplets In order to relieve congestion along McPherson Road due to turning traffic demands from cross streets located relatively close to each other, the creation of one-way couplets was considered. T he only pair of cross streets which were considered to be good candidates for a one-way couplet was Calle del Norte and Gale Street, west of McPherson Road. Calle del Norte extends west of McPherson to Interstate Highway 35, going around the north side of the Mall del Norte, and provides direct access to the Mall del Norte, a significant retail center. Gale Street extends east from Springfield Avenue, across McPherson Road, and connects to Hillside Road and Calton Road via Thomas Avenue. Calle del Norte serves as a collector street between Interstate Highway 35 and McPherson Road. West of McPherson Road Gale Street serves as a collector street as far as West Drive. From West Drive to Springfield Avenue, Gale Street also serves as direct access to single family homes fronting the street. Calle del Norte and Gale Street could serve as a o ne-way couplet between McPherson Road and West Drive. G ale Street would be designated one-way westbound and Calle del Norte would be designated one-way eastbound. Figure 6.2.7 illustrates the one-way configuration. 6.3.5 Parallel Relief Routes Within the study corridor, between Interstate Highway 35 and Loop 20, there are two parallel relief routes to be considered: Bartlett Avenue and Springfield. Bartlett Avenue, located between McPherson Road and Loop 20, is proposed to be extended north from Gale Street to Jacaman Road and continue north to Del Mar Boulevard. Bartlett Avenue currently extends south of Gale Street to south of US Highway 83 as a major north-south street. Bartlett Avenue is identified as a major collector street on the Laredo 2006 Long Range Thoroughfare Plan. When completed, Bartlett Avenue would be a parallel route to McPherson Road from Saunders Road to Del Mar Boulevard. Springfield Avenue, located between McPherson Road and Interstate Highway 35, is proposed to be extended north from Del Mar Boulevard to San Isidro Parkway. Springfield Avenue currently extends south from Del Mar Boulevard to

October 2008



US Highway 83 as a major north-south street. Springfield Avenue is identified as a minor arterial street on the Laredo 2006 Long Range Thoroughfare Plan. When completed, Springfield Avenue would be a parallel route to McPherson Road from Saunders Road to San Isidro Parkway. 6.3.6 Additional Capacity 6.2.6.1 Additional capacity at an intersection can be accomplished by some of the alternative corridor improvement previously discussed, such as: o improving traffic signal operation through the phasing and/or timing to provide

more green time to the major traffic movements; o providing dual turn lanes (dual right turn for the westbound University

Boulevard approach at McPherson Road and dual left turn for the westbound Jacaman Road approach at McPherson Road );

o raised medians on signalized intersection approaches, resulting in extending left turn lane capacities;

o one-way couplet resulting in reduced number of turning movements and fewer phases at a s ignalized intersection, increasing the green time on the major movements

6.2.6.2 Additional capacity can also be ob tained by adding lanes, such as right turn lanes and left turn lanes. The directional traffic movements observed along the McPherson Road corridor suggest that right turn lanes be added at two intersections, McPherson Road and Shiloh Drive and at McPherson Road and International, as discussed in Section 6.2.2. 6.2.6.3 Increasing the length of the left turn lane can also increase the capacity of the intersection. I ntersection approaches that have left turn lanes too short to accommodate the left turn demand are frequently subjected to decreased capacity as the left turn traffic queued back from the intersection extends beyond the left turn lane and blocks the through traffic movements. Adding the raised medians along McPherson Road will result in lengthening the left turn storage on many of the approaches. A specific intersection with deficient left turn storage lanes is the intersection of McPherson Road and San Isidro Parkway. o The left turn storage lanes on the San Isidro Parkway approaches are too short

to accommodate the current left turn demands. The existing center medians on

October 2008



the San Isidro approaches are recommended to be modified to lengthen the left turn storage lanes to provide at least 150 feet of storage with transitions of 215 feet. The median for the westbound approach would be modified to extend the left turn storage along the entire length of the section of median near McPherson Road. The median currently has a m edian opening to accommodate a driveway from a convenience store in the southeast quadrant of the intersection and a driveway from a bank in the northeast quadrant of the intersection. T he westbound left turn lane provided for the median opening would also be used by the left turn traffic queued to enter McPherson Road.

6.2.6.4 Restricting left turns at intersections would increase capacity of the intersection by providing additional green time to the through movements. When Bartlett Road is extended north to University Boulevard, there would be an opportunity to restrict southbound left turns on McPherson Road at Jacaman Road and direct those left turns to University Boulevard. This would result in additional green time for the through movements on McPherson Road. Table 6-7 indicates the improvements to be considered for each signalized intersection along the McPherson Road corridor. The improvement columns refer to the previously enumerated alternative corridor improvements:

1a – Traffic Signal Improvements – Phasing 1b – Traffic Signal Improvements – Coordination between signals 2a – Intersection Geometric Improvements – Additional lanes 2b – Intersection Geometric Improvements – Dual turn lanes 3a – Access Management – Raised medians near intersections 4 - One-Way Couplets 6 – Additional Capacity

October 2008



Table 6-7. Potential Improvements for Intersections along McPherson Road

McPherson Road Intersections Improvement

1a 1b 2a 2b 3a 4 6

Loop 20 Eastbound Frontage

San Isidro Parkway

Tiara Trail / Sterling Loop

Shiloh Drive

United High School

International Boulevard

Country Club Drive

Del Mar Boulevard

University Boulevard

Jacaman Road

Calle Del Norte

Gale Street

Hillside Road

Calton Road

Taylor Street

Bustamante Street

Saunders Street (US Hwy 59)

October 2008



6.4 Analysis Results – Proposed Improvements The proposed improvements discussed above were included in the traffic simulation models for the McPherson Road corridor. Table 6-8 is an enumeration of the LOS on each approach to each signalized intersection and a LOS for the intersection as a w hole, in the same format as Table 6-2 of the Existing Conditions. On almost every approach there would be a s ignificant improvement in the Level-Of-Service. T he average delays would be s ignificantly reduced. Table 6-9 reflects what the anticipated travel times would be along the corridor. For convenience of comparison, Table 6-3 is reprinted below Table 6-9 to the travel times with the existing conditions.

Table 6-8. Analysis Summary for McPherson Road – Proposed Improvements

Intersection


Control Delay LOS

Control Delay LOS

McPherson Rd and Loop 20 EB NB McPherson Rd 34.7 C 24.2 C SB McPherson Rd 37.2 D 43.7 D EB Loop 20 EB 42.1 D 28.1 C

WB Loop 20 EB 51.3 D 47.2 D


McPherson Rd and San Isidro Pkwy NB McPherson Rd 18.5 C 12.6 B SB McPherson Rd 38.2 C 33.5 C EB San Isidro Pkwy 24.4 C 29.8 C

WB San Isidro Pkwy 17.1 C 21.6 C


McPherson Rd and Tiara Trail NB McPherson Rd 18.1 B 12.7 B SB McPherson Rd 10.1 B 14.7 C EB Tiara Trail 18.6 B 13.1 B

WB Tiara Trial 33.6 C 32.1 C

Average Control Delay 14.83 B 13.96 B

October 2008



Table 6-8. Analysis Summary for McPherson Road – Proposed Improvements (Continued)

Intersection


Control Delay LOS

Control Delay LOS

McPherson Rd and Shiloh Dr NB McPherson Rd 15.2 B 19.7 B SB McPherson Rd 17.2 B 33.6 C EB Shiloh Dr 48.3 D 27.2 C

WB Shiloh Dr 56.1 E 48.4 D


McPherson Rd and United HS NB McPherson Rd 7.1 A 6.2 A SB McPherson Rd 9 A 2.2 A

WB United HS 35.2 D 85.2 F


McPherson Rd and International NB McPherson Rd 22.6 C 18.1 B SB McPherson Rd 23.7 C 26.3 C EB International Blvd 25.1 C 24.2 C

WB International Blvd 38.3 D 35 C


McPherson Rd and Country Club NB McPherson Rd 4.5 A 24 C SB McPherson Rd 27 C 20.7 B EB Country Club Blvd 22.5 C 19 B

WB Country Club Blvd 50.6 D 29.7 C


McPherson Rd and Del Mar Blvd NB McPherson Rd 29.4 C 63.5 E SB McPherson Rd 62.6 E 48 D EB Del Mar Blvd 44 D 43.8 D

WB Del Mar Blvd 43.2 D 70.3 E

Average Control Delay 44.82 D 58.87 E

October 2008




Intersection


Control Delay LOS

Control Delay LOS

McPherson Rd and Fenwick Dr NB McPherson Rd 5.4 A 9.2 A SB McPherson Rd 6 A 23.1 C EB Fenwick Dr 31.1 C 19.3 B

WB Fenwick Dr 30.3 C 44.4 D

Average Control Delay 7.63 A 17.07 B

McPherson Rd and Jacaman Rd NB McPherson Rd 14.2 B 19.9 B

SB McPherson Rd 11.5 B 10.8 B

- - - -

WB Jacaman Rd 35.9 D 41.3 D


McPherson Rd and Calle Del Norte NB McPherson Rd 5.3 A 11.6 B SB McPherson Rd 15.1 B 21.6 C EB Calle Del Norte 38.5 D 37.3 D


McPherson Rd and Gale St NB McPherson Rd 37.4 D 15.8 B SB McPherson Rd 20.6 C 11.5 B EB Gale St 45 D 59.2 E

WB Gale St 44.8 D 81.9 F


McPherson Rd and Hillside Rd NB McPherson Rd 25.9 C 26 C SB McPherson Rd 21.1 B 16.9 B EB Hillside Rd 25.4 C 32.7 C

WB Hillside Rd 28.3 C 39.6 D


October 2008




Intersection


Control Delay LOS

Control Delay LOS

McPherson Rd and Calton Rd NB McPherson Rd 29.9 C 30.9 C SB McPherson Rd 27.9 C 28.5 C EB Calton Rd 43.1 D 32.8 C

WB Calton Rd 32.3 C 30 C


McPherson Rd and Taylor St NB McPherson Rd 16.3 B 8.7 A SB McPherson Rd 17.3 B 33.6 C EB Taylor St 29.4 C 42.9 D

WB Taylor St 15 B 24.8 C


McPherson Rd and Bustamante St NB McPherson Rd 23.7 C 12.4 B SB McPherson Rd 10 B 3.5 A EB Bustamante St 33.9 C 44.5 D

WB Bustamante St 16.7 B 21.5 C


McPherson Rd and Saunders St NB McPherson Rd 47.1 D 65 E SB McPherson Rd 21.3 C 30.5 C EB Saunders St 31.3 C 25.6 C

WB Saunders St 43.1 D 36.6 D


October 2008



Table 6-9 Proposed Travel Times



Northbound Southbound Proposed Travel Time Splits Proposed Travel Time Splits Minutes Speed (mph) Minutes Speed (mph)

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM US 59 (Saunders Rd)

to Hillside Rd 3.1 3.0 19.0 19.5 3.1 2.9 19.2 20.2 Hillside Rd to Calle del

Norte 1.8 1.3 28.1 36.6 1.7 1.6 29.0 30.5 Calle Del Norte to Del

Mar Blvd 3.1 5.3 26.9 15.6 2.7 3.3 30.3 25.2 Del Mar Blvd to Shiloh

Dr 2.7 3.2 29.5 24.5 4.3 2.6 18.4 29.7 Shiloh Dr to Loop 20

(Bob Bullock) 3.6 3.3 22.2 24.1 3.7 1.8 21.5 44.8 Average Speed 24.6 21.6 Average Speed 22.3 28.5

Table 6-3. Existing Travel Times










Average Speed 22.2 17.0 Average Speed 19.8 20.2

October 2008



6.5 Transit Operations The McPherson Road Corridor is served by four routes of the El Metro Transit System: Route 3, Route 5, Route 12A, and Route 12B. Route 3 extends along the entire length of the study corridor. The corridor is also served by Route 2B (along Hillside Road and Calton Road) and Route 16 (along Del Mar Boulevard). Routes 2B and 16 are generally east-west routes. Based on an interview with Eduardo Bernal, Planning & Marketing Manager, and Alberto Pacheco, Facilities Administrator, with the El Metro Transit System, El Metro has no plans in the foreseeable future to change any of the routing or stops on these transit routes. However, El Metro does re-examine their routes every six months for possible adjustments. The only improvement El Metro has within the corridor is a new bus terminal to be located on 23 acres near Bartlett Road and Jacaman Road. The new center is anticipated to be on-line in 2-3 years. Copies of the schedules for Routes 3, 5, 12A, and 12B are included in the Appendix. The headways of the buses on each of the El Metro routes are shown in Figure 6.8 below. Figure 6.9 is a portion of the El Metro Transit Map, showing the routes in vicinity of the McPherson Road study corridor.

October 2008



Figure 6.8 El Metro Transit Bus Headways

October 2008



Figure 6.9 McPherson Road El Metro Routes

October 2008



6.6 Costs & Benefits of Recommended Improvements Perhaps the greatest benefit to the mobility along the McPherson Road corridor would be the traffic signal improvements of phasing and coordination between signals. City personnel have been maintaining the traffic signal operations along McPherson Road, as well as the signals throughout the City. Periodically traffic patterns change which impact the efficiency of the existing traffic signal timings, phasing, and offset between traffic signals. This study has indicated that the traffic signal system along the McPherson Road corridor could be improved. The cost of the improvements would be the time spent upgrading the signal timings by the City personnel during regular work hours; time that would otherwise be spent on other City traffic matters. The benefit of the improved progression along McPherson Road can be measured in terms of reduced travel time and r educed volumes of air pollutants (nitrogen oxides [NOX], volatile organic compounds [VOC], and c arbon monoxide [CO]). Table 6-10 shows the anticipated improvement in travel time from Saunders to Loop 20 by directions and during the morning and evening peaks hours. Table 6-11 shows the anticipated improvements in the air pollutants during the two peak periods.

Table 6-10. Travel Time along McPherson Road, Saunders - Loop 20 Travel Time, in minutes per vehicle

Northbound Saunders to Loop 20

Southbound Loop 20 to Saunders

Existing AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak

15.7 min 20.6 min 17.7 min 17.4 min

Proposed AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak

14.3 min 16.1 min 15.5 min 11.9 min

Table 6-11. Air Pollutants Air Pollutants, measured in grams emitted per hour

NOX VOC CO AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak

Existing 15,962 20,969 19,027 24,990 82,086 107,810 Proposed 16,043 15,690 16,302 18,687 70,386 80,633

October 2008



Based on the findings of the Wilbur Smith study, the extension of Bartlett Avenue would benefit the north-south movement of traffic in east Laredo; however, the traffic expected to be relocated from McPherson Road to Bartlett Avenue would be replaced by traffic relocated from the Interstate Highway 35 c orridor to the McPherson Road corridor. Similarly, the completion of the Springfield Avenue to International Boulevard and to Shiloh Drive and eventually to San Isidro Parkway would benefit the north-south movements east of Interstate Highway 35; however, based on the Wilbur Smith study projections, Interstate Highway 35 and Loop 20 would be t he benefactors of the Bartlett Avenue and S pringfield A venue improvements. The extension of University Boulevard to connect with Loop 20 would be expected to relieve the traffic congestion on McPherson Road at Jacaman Road. The University Boulevard extension was not modeled in the Wilbur Smith study. The University Boulevard improvements would be provided as the properties along the University Boulevard alignment are developed. The recommended improvements along the McPherson Road corridor would be an additional lane on McPherson Road at Shiloh Drive, an a dditional lane on International Boulevard, an ad ditional lane on F enwick Drive (University Boulevard), and creating a one-way couplet with Gale Street and Calle del Norte. McPherson at Shiloh – provide a southbound right turn lane. The approximate

cost of providing a r ight turn lane on McPherson Road on t he southbound approach to Shiloh would be $60,000.

International Boulevard at McPherson – provide an eastbound right turn lane.

The City has recently implemented this improvement. Fenwick Drive – widen to provide an additional westbound lane. T o

accommodate a d ual right turn movement from University Boulevard onto McPherson Road, Fenwick Drive, opposite University Boulevard would need to be widened to a de pth of approximately 250 feet to eliminate the offset between Fenwick Drive and U niversity Boulevard at McPherson Road. The approximate cost of the widening of Fenwick would be $55,000.

Designating Gale Street to be one-way westbound and Calle del Norte to be

one-way eastbound between McPherson Road and West Drive would allow for more “green time” to McPherson Road through movements and relieve

October 2008



congestion between the two east-west roadways. The one-way couplet could be created and made operational with signage and channelization, no major capital roadway improvements would be n ecessary. H owever, to facilitate access to the residential developments east of West Drive, a semi-cul-de-sac could be provided at a cost of approximately $30,000.

The benefits of these improvements would be to improve traffic movements along McPherson Road, providing more “green time” to the through movements along McPherson Road. The improvements at the intersection of University Boulevard/Fenwick Drive and McPherson Road may exacerbate a concern on Fenwick Drive relative to through traffic on Fenwick between Del Mar Boulevard and M cPherson Road. The intersection of Fenwick Drive and Del Mar Boulevard is also signalized. As the traffic at Del Mar Boulevard and McPherson Road becomes more congested, the use of Fenwick Drive as a c ut-through becomes an increasingly favorable alternative route through the residential neighborhood. M cPherson Drive and Manor Drive have a potentially similar concern as the intersection of McPherson Drive and Del Mar Boulevard is also signalized. Consideration should be given to making modifications along Fenwick Drive and along McPherson Drive to make these residential streets discontinuous between Del Mar Boulevard and McPherson Road.

October 2008



Access Management Improvements – Medians: The recommended raised medians at key intersections would improve safety along the McPherson Road corridor. Table 6.13 lists the approximate cost of the raised medians at each intersection. The benefit of the medians could be measured by the crashes that would have been prevented. Table 6-12 shows the comprehensive costs of police-reported crashes according to the Federal Highway Administration, in an article published by the FHWA in October 1994, “Motor Vehicle Accident Costs”.

Table 6-12. Cost of Police-Reported Crashes Cost of Police-Reported Crashes, by Severity

Severity Description Cost per Injury K Fatal $2,600,000 A Incapacitating $180,000 B Evident $36,000 C Possible (Minor) $19,000

PDO Property Damage Only $2,000 The comprehensive cost of a police-reported crash with possible or minor injuries was $19,000 per injury (in 1994 dollars) and the comprehensive cost of a police-reported “property damage only” crash was $2,000 (in 1994 dollars). [Based on information from InflationData.com, the 1994 dollars have been inflated 48% from 1994 to 2010.] The 2010 cost of a crash with minor injuries would be $28,120 and the “property damage only” crash would be $2, 960. A pproximately 25% of the crashes reported along the McPherson Road corridor involved personal injuries. Assuming an average of two minor injuries per crash in 25% of the police-reported crashes, the average comprehensive cost per crash would be $16,295. Table 6-13 lists the number of crashes along McPherson Road that could have been prevented with the medians and the “benefit” of the medians based on the costs that would have been saved for the past two years. Note that the median costs include the medians on the side streets; however, the crashes presented only identified those along McPherson Road.

October 2008



Table 6-13 Intersection Median Costs and Benefits

Costs and Benefits of Intersection Medians

Intersection/Segment Median Cost Median Cost (McPherson)

Crashes (2 years)

Direct Benefit (2 years)

Saunders $37,000 $37,000 0 0 Bustamente $112,500 $79,000 0 0 Calton $74,500 $74,500 6 $97,770 Hillside $154,500 $77,500 6 $97,770 Gale-Calle del Norte $204,000+ $123,500 8 $130,360 Jacaman-University $226,500 $153,000 8 $130,360 Del Mar $129,500* $43,500* 18 $293,310 International $130,000 $74,500 13 $211,835 Shiloh $175,500 $88,600 4 $65,180 Tiara-Sterling Loop $94,500 $74,000 2 $32,590 San Isidro $181,750 $101,000 2 $32,590 Monarch-Loop 20 $153,000 $153,000 2 $32,590 + Includes semi-cul-de-sac on Gale between McPherson Rd and West Dr. * Does not include the intersection median on McPherson south of Del Mar which has been installed by City The total cost of the medians would be approximately $1,079,100. S ixty-nine crashes could have been prevented by the medians restricting left turns at the driveways, for a direct benefit of $1,124,355 for the two-year period. The benefit/cost ratio would be 1 .04. A ssuming a s imilar crash rate by type for the future, the median improvements would pay for themselves in less than two years. 6.6 Implementation Plan The implementation of the recommendations to improve the mobility along the McPherson Road corridor can be done at any time. Traffic signal timing and phasing improvements. The City traffic personnel

have been continuously working on updating the traffic signal timing along the

October 2008



McPherson Road corridor. Corrections to signal timing and phasing changes are needed to be made when changes are made along the corridor. Recent improvements to McPherson Road south of Shiloh and on University west of McPherson have resulted in changes to the traffic flows through the intersections.

Additional turn lanes. The additional lanes along the McPherson Road corridor

for right turn movements would be beneficial at any time; however, they would not be necessary until the Bartlett Avenue extension to Del Mar Boulevard is completed.

Gale Street/Calle del Norte one-way couplet. P ublic meetings with the

impacted neighborhoods should be c onducted before the one-way pair operation is implemented. The local roadway users should be informed of the plan and educated of the proper usage of the couplet to facilitate compliance with the new operation.

Intersection medians. T he installation of the intersection medians can

commence at any time. Street maintenance funds could be used. The medians can be installed one approach at time, as was accomplished with the median on McPherson Road south of Del Mar Boulevard. The priority of the median installations should be based on the magnitude of the number of crashes that could be prevented by the median. F or instance, the first five median sections should be i mplemented in the following sequence: the segment north of Del Mar, the segment south of International, the segment north of International, the segment north of Calton, and the segment south of Jacaman.

Access Management Policy. T he suggested Access Management Policy,

which deal with driveway spacing, driveway design, and traffic signal spacing could be adopted and implemented immediately.

October 2008



7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 Traffic Signal System Optimization There are seventeen signalized intersections along McPherson Road between Loop 20 and Saunders Road. Aerial photos of each of the intersections are included in Appendix G. The updating of the traffic signal timings and synchronization of the traffic signals along McPherson Road would have a significant impact on t he congestion along the corridor, as measured by the travel time. As previously discussed, the travel time from US 59 (Saunders Road) to Loop 20 (Bob Bullock) is between 16 minutes and 21 minutes. Table 6-3 (reprinted from Section 6.0) indicates the travel times observed at the beginning of the study.

Table 6-3. Existing Travel Times McPherson Rd Mobility Study









Total 15.7 20.6 17.7 17.4

Average Speed 22.2 17.0 Average Speed 19.8 20.2 Table 6-9 (reprinted from Section 6.0) indicates the travel times to be expected when the traffic signal timings are updated and the traffic signals along McPherson Road are synchronized.

October 2008



Table 6-9. Proposed Travel Times



Northbound Southbound Proposed Travel Time Splits Proposed Travel Time Splits Minutes Speed (mph) Minutes Speed (mph)

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM US 59 (Saunders Rd)

to Hillside Rd 3.1 3.0 19.0 19.5 3.1 2.9 19.2 20.2





Total 14.3 16.1 15.5 12.2

Average Speed 24.6 21.6 Average Speed 22.3 28.5 The average speed through the corridor would increase from as low as 17 miles per hour during the evening peak northbound to almost 22 miles per hour, a 27% improvement in progression. In the evening southbound direction, the average speed would increase from 20.2 miles per hour to 28.5 miles per hour, a 41% improvement in progression along the corridor. 7.2 Access Management The records of the reported crashes along the McPherson road corridor from Saunders to Loop 20 indicated a problem attributed to congestion (i.e., rear-end collisions approaching intersections) and a problem of access management. The access management issue is evidenced by the significant number of right angle accidents resulting from left turn in and out of driveways near intersections and by rear-end accidents resulting from unexpected sudden congestion at ill-designed driveways. As discussed in Section 6.0, the corrective actions would be to restrict driveways near signalized intersections to right turns only and to adopt an access management policy that includes driveway design and driveway spacing.

October 2008



The right turn only restriction for driveways near intersections could be enforced by installing raised medians on the street approaches to the intersection. The length of the median would be determined based on the length of the left turn lane and the length of the transition necessary to accommodate the left turn. The recommended left turn storage length and transition length for each of the approaches along the McPherson Road corridor are indicated in Appendix H. The recommended Access Management Policy is presented in the Section 6.0 and is repeated as follows: ACCESS MANAGEMENT POLICY The basic components of an Access Management Policy would include: Driveway spacing, in relation to other driveways and streets; Driveway throat width; Driveway return radii; Driveway throat depth; and Traffic signal spacing. The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) updated their Access Management Manual in December 2009. The current TxDOT manual addresses the first four of the above components. Table 6-5 (reprinted from Section 6.0) enumerates the TxDOT criteria for the separation of driveways from roadway intersections and from other driveways along an arterial street.

Table 6-5 TxDOT Driveway Spacing Requirements* Minimum Spacing Requirements

Posted Speed (MPH) Distance (ft) ≤ 30 200 35 250 40 305 45 360

≥ 50 425 * From Table 2-2 of TxDOT Access Management Manual, December 2009

October 2008



Appendix C of the TxDOT Roadway Design Manual discusses and enumerates the design criteria for commercial driveways. Table 6-6 (reprinted from Section 6.0) enumerates the TxDOT design criteria for the commercial driveway throat widths and radii.

Table 6-6 TxDOT Commercial Driveway Design Criteria* Designs for Two-Way Commercial Driveways

Condition Radius (ft) Throat Width (ft) One entry lane and one exit lane, fewer than 4 large vehicles per hour 25 28

One entry lane and one exit lane, 4 or more single unit vehicles(3) per hour 30 30

One entry lane and two exit lanes, without divider 25 40

One entry lane and two exit lanes, with divider(4) 25 44(1) – 50(2)

Two entry lane and two exit lanes, with divider(4) 25 56(1) – 62(2)

(1) 4-foot wide divider (minimum width), face of curb to face of curb (2) 10-foot wide divider, face of curb to face of curb (3) Driveway designs for larger vehicles will be considered on a case by case basis (4) Maximum width of divider between one-way driveways recommended 15 feet

* From Table C-2 of TxDOT Roadway Design Manual, Revised May 2010 The driveway return radii for commercial driveways should be l arge enough to allow most vehicles to negotiate a r ight turn movement from the street into the driveway without having to slow to below 10 m iles per hour or having to swing wide into the adjacent street travel lane or into the opposing side of the driveway to make the maneuver. The TxDOT driveway design criteria could significantly reduce the number of rear-end accidents on t he street due to right turn movements. Driveway Throat Depth. Another source of rear-end crashes involving right turn movements would be the situation when a motorist has to stop on the public roadway to wait for another vehicle in the driveway to clear. A key problem of entering vehicles being delayed from clearing the driveway is when there is inadequate distance from the street to the first conflicting maneuver from the driveway, such as cross traffic from the parking area paralleling the street. Appendix C of the TxDOT Roadway Design Manual states that commercial

October 2008



driveways should have a minimum throat depth length of 50 feet and preferably 75 feet. Traffic Signal Spacing. In an urban area, progression along an arterial street can best be accomplished with traffic signals spaced ¼ mile apart. Platooning, or grouping, of vehicles between traffic signals can be accomplished when the traffic signals are synchronized and spaced ¼ mile apart. The vehicles in the platoon would all travel at approximately the same speed between signals, allowing for predictable arrival times between signals. Closer than ¼ mile spacing, the queues at intersections can disrupt the platooning. Further than ¼ mile apart, the platoons of vehicles break up as vehicles tend to spread apart, traveling at various speeds. While the City has control on when and where traffic signals are to be installed on the public streets, private developments occasionally request traffic signals at driveways. T he signalized driveways can be o f benefit to the mobility of the arterial street if the location of the signal would benefit the platooning of traffic along the arterial street. The burden of proof should be on the requestor of the traffic signal at a private driveway to show that the placement and operation of the traffic signal would not adversely impact the progression of traffic along the public roadway. T his burden of proof would be especially important at locations that would result in traffic signal spacing less than ¼ mile apart. 7.3 Alternative Parallel Traffic Routes Within the north-south corridor, defined by Interstate Highway 35 on the west and Loop 20 on the east, there are two parallel traffic routes to McPherson Road: Bartlett Avenue and Springfield Avenue. Neither of these two roadways would extend the entire length of the corridor from Saunders to Loop 20, but they would have potential to relieve the traffic load on McPherson Road along portions of the corridor. Bartlett Avenue is proposed to be extended north to Del Mar Boulevard, providing a direct route from Saunders to Del Mar Boulevard. Combined with the future extension of University Boulevard by the developers of the properties along the University Boulevard alignment, the completion of the Bartlett Avenue extension to Del Mar Boulevard would provide relief to McPherson Road of the traffic movements between McPherson Road and Loop 20, south of Del Mar Boulevard. However, based on the TransCAD trip models from the Wilbur Smith & Associates study, the Bartlett Avenue extension would benefit Loop 20 more than McPherson Road.

October 2008



Springfield Avenue presently extends from south of Saunders to just north of Del Mar Boulevard. N orth of Del Mar Boulevard, Springfield Avenue is discontinuous. When completed, Springfield Avenue will extend north to connect with San Isidro Parkway. Similar to the situation with Bartlett Avenue, the improvements to Springfield Avenue are projected to provide relief to Interstate Highway 35. The Bartlett Avenue extension and the improvements to Springfield Avenue to provide a continuous roadway along the corridor will benefit the north-south corridor between Interstate Highway 35 and Loop 20. Based on the Wilbur Smith & Associates study, the improvements to McPherson Road, Bartlett Avenue, and Springfield Avenue will improve the travel times and relieve congestion; however, Interstate Highway 35 and Loop 20 are projected to see the benefits more than McPherson Road. 7.4 One-Way Side Street Pairing Along the McPherson Road corridor, there are two streets that are only 750 feet apart and both signalized at McPherson Road: Calle del Norte and Gale Street. Calle del Norte extends west from McPherson Road to Interstate Highway 35, providing the north perimeter street to the Mall del Norte. Gale Street extends west of McPherson Road to Springfield Avenue, serving the residential area west of West Drive, and extends east of McPherson Road to the current north end of Bartlett Avenue. Due to the traffic demands on each street, there are a considerable number of northbound left turns on McPherson Road at Calle del Norte and there are a considerable number of southbound left turns on McPherson Road at Gale Street. Due to the close spacing of the street along McPherson Road, there is considerable congestion between the two streets and potential of grid-lock as there is inadequate storage for the two sets of left turn movements. A solution to the problem would be to create a one-way couplet of Calle del Norte and Gale Street. The impact of the one-way couplet west of McPherson Road can be seen in comparing the control delay of the two intersections operating as two-way streets with the optimized signal timings and the control delay of the two intersections operating as one-way streets. Table 7-1 reflects the control delays on each approach and the average control delay for the each intersection with the two-way street operation. Table 7-2 reflects the control delays on each approach and the average control delay for the each intersection with the one-way street operation.

October 2008



Table 7-1 Intersection Delay/Level-of-Service – Two-Way Street Operation

Gale Street & Calle del Norte - Two-Way Streets

AM Peak PM Peak Control Delay LOS Control Delay LOS

McPherson Rd and Gale Street NB McPherson Rd 37.4 D 28.5 C SB McPherson Rd 15.1 B 9.1 A EB Gale St 45.0 D 41.9 D WB Gale St 44.8 D 77.0 E


McPherson Rd and Calle del Norte NB McPherson Rd 6.2 A 11.8 B SB McPherson Rd 23.8 C 28.8 C EB Calle Del Norte 38.5 D 37.3 D


Table 7-2 Intersection Delay/Level-of-Service – One-Way Street Operation

Gale Street & Calle del Norte - One-Way Streets

AM Peak PM Peak Control Delay LOS Control Delay LOS

McPherson Rd and Gale Street NB McPherson Rd 12.4 B 30.0 C SB McPherson Rd 8.7 A 13.0 B EB Gale St - - - - WB Gale St 21.1 C 52.2 D


McPherson Rd and Calle del Norte NB McPherson Rd 17.2 B 26.9 C SB McPherson Rd 11.8 B 15.5 B EB Calle Del Norte 20.9 C 24.9 C


October 2008



The greatest improvement would be during the morning peak at Gale Street, on all approaches on McPherson Road and on Gale Street. The westbound traffic on Gale Street and the eastbound traffic on Calle del Norte would have significant reductions in delay during both the morning and the evening peak periods. Gale Street, east of McPherson Road, would remain a two-way street. Gale Street extends east to Thomas Avenue, which continues south. B artlett Avenue currently extends north to Gale Street. When Bartlett Avenue is extended north, the number of southbound left turns on McPherson Road at Gale Street would be expected to decrease significantly.

October 2008



8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations, as result of the study, generally follow the four major issues of the study: traffic signal system optimization, access management, alternative parallel traffic routes, and one-way street pairing. 8.1 Traffic Signal Optimization. The updating of the traffic signal timings and t he synchronization of the traffic signals along McPherson Road would have a significant impact on reducing delays along the corridor. The reduction in delay during the morning and evening peak periods would be an average of 17.47% or a reduction in delay of more than 13,000 person-hours annually. 8.2 Access Management. The access management recommendation is in two parts.

1. R aised medians at signalized intersections. T he analyses of the reported crashes indicate the need to prohibit left turns in and out of driveways near the signalized intersections. T he raised medians would provide positive barriers to prevent the left turns. The total cost of the medians would be appr oximately $1,079,100. S ixty-nine crashes could have been prevented by the medians restricting left turns at the driveways, for a savings of $1,124,355 for the two-year period. The benefit/cost ratio would be 1. 04. Assuming a similar crash rate by type for the future, the median improvements would pay for themselves in less than a year. 2. An Access Management Policy would provide guidelines and design criteria for future driveways along the McPherson Road corridor and along other similar corridors.

8.3 Alternative Traffic Routes – Intersection Improvements. The alternative traffic routes that would have the greatest impact on McPherson Road would be the extension of Bartlett Avenue and University Boulevard. The extension of these two roadways would be expected to impact the travel patterns along McPherson Road. Intersection improvements are recommended along McPherson Road to provide turn lanes. McPherson Road at Shiloh Drive – southbound right turn lane on McPherson Road. University Boulevard at McPherson Road – widen north side of Fenwick Drive to

facilitate dual right turn movements on westbound University Boulevard. Jacaman Road at McPherson Road – rechannelize Jacaman Road to provide three

westbound approach lanes and one eas tbound departure lane to provide for dual left turn and dual right turn movements from Jacaman Road to McPherson Road.

October 2008



8.4 One-Way Street Pairing. Gale Street and Calle del Norte are recommended to be made into a one -way couplet between McPherson Road and West Drive. G ale Street would be one -way westbound and C alle del Norte would be one -way eastbound, eliminating the northbound left turn movement from McPherson Road to Calle del Norte. 8.5 Implementation Plan. The implementation of the recommendations to improve the mobility along the McPherson Road corridor can be done at any time. Traffic signal timing and phasing improvements. The City traffic personnel

have been continuously working on updating the traffic signal timing along the McPherson Road corridor. Corrections to signal timing and phasing changes are needed to be made when changes are made along the corridor. Recent improvements to McPherson Road south of Shiloh and on University west of McPherson have resulted in changes to the traffic flows through the intersections.

Additional turn lanes. The additional lanes along the McPherson Road corridor

for right turn movements would be beneficial at any time; however, they would not be necessary until the Bartlett Avenue extension to Del Mar Boulevard is completed.

Gale Street/Calle del Norte one-way couplet. P ublic meetings with the

impacted neighborhoods should be c onducted before the one-way pair operation is implemented. The local roadway users should be informed of the plan and educated of the proper usage of the couplet to facilitate compliance with the new operation.

Intersection medians. T he installation of the intersection medians can

commence at any time. Street maintenance funds could be used. The medians can be installed one approach at time, as was accomplished with the median on McPherson Road south of Del Mar Boulevard. The priority of the median installations should be based on t he magnitude of the number of crashes that could be prevented by the median. F or instance, the first five median sections should be i mplemented in the following sequence: the segment north of Del Mar, the segment south of International, the segment north of International, the segment north of Calton, and the segment south of Jacaman.

October 2008



Access Management Policy. T he suggested Access Management Policy, which deal with driveway spacing, driveway design, and traffic signal spacing could be adopted and implemented immediately.

8.6 Other Recommendation. In the Section 6.5, a secondary concern was discussed: Fenwick Drive, between McPherson Road and Del Mar Boulevard. The concern for the traffic situation of Fenwick Drive is outside the scope of the McPherson Road mobility study. However, if the improvements to McPherson Road exacerbate the traffic situation on Fenwick Drive, resulting in an increase of through traffic on the residential street, the concern should be mentioned. The recommendation regarding Fenwick Drive, as well as McPherson Drive and Manor Drive, is to consider making these residential streets discontinuous between McPherson Road and Del Mar Boulevard.

Prepared by: Joe F. Nix, P.E., P.T.O.E. Civil Engineering Consultants Texas Firm Registration No. F-2214

TRAFFIC SIGNAL STUDY · 7.1 Traffic Signal Optimization 88 7.2 Access Management 89 7.3 Alternative Parallel Traffic Routes 92 7.4 One-Way Side Street Pairing 93 8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

Documents