Final Environmental Impact Report - Whittier Bridge/I-95 ...

Final Environmental Impact Report - Whittier Bridge/I-95 ... Final Environmental Impact Report - Whittier Bridge/I-95 ...

mhd.state.ma.us
from mhd.state.ma.us More from this publisher
27.01.2015 Views

Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Project FEIR Chapter 2.0: Response to Comments on the Environmental Assessment/Draft Environmental Impact Report New highway lights will be installed along I-95 in the area from the Main Street/Evans Place overpass in Amesbury through the Exit 58 (Route 110) interchange. New highway lights will also be installed along I-95 southbound in the area of the on-ramp from Route 286 and along I-95 northbound in the vicinity of the Route 286 off-ramp and on-ramp. The height and number of the lights will be determined in the final design of the project. Actual heights will be similar to existing lights along the corridor. No adverse lighting impacts to adjacent locations are anticipated. 2.6.4 Jay Harris Jay Harris submitted two comment letters, the first dated December 20, 2011 and the second dated December 27, 2011. JH-1: Safety: The EA/DEIR claims (p. 4-27) that two interchanges within the projected work area were on the state's top 1,000 list from 13 years ago. (NOT THE BRIDGE ITSELF) Is this the best the department could come up with I notice that no part of the area is on the current list of the state's top 200 dangerous locations. Response: The reason that none of the study area is listed on the current list of Top 200 Crash Locations is because that report pertains solely to intersection locations (and not interstates) in an effort to improve safety on local roadways. The last time that MassDOT issued a report that included all locations (both interstates and intersections) was the 1997-1999 report referenced in the EA/DEIR. This report was referenced in order to provide a perspective for locations in the area that may warrant further considerations for safety improvements during the highway design process. JH-2: Shoulders: The lack of adequate shoulders is mentioned as a safety concern. Indeed the crash rate (.73) on the northbound section from Route 113 to Route 110 is 28% higher than the statewide average for interstate highways. However traveling southbound the rate is 38% LOWER (.35) (Table 4-10) As the shoulders are the same, clearly something else is responsible for the crash rate. In any case the rate is lower than the statewide average for all roads, either urban (2.12) or rural (.86). Response: The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (2004) recommends a shoulder width of at least 10 feet on heavily traveled, high-speed highways to accommodate the width of a vehicle to be clear of the traveled way. Shoulders on the existing Whittier Bridge are less than two feet (in both the northbound and southbound directions). A variety of factors attribute to the cause of the crashes (both driver errors and roadway features), but the northbound crashes in particular are driven by a combination of factors: traveling downgrade; the presence of an inside curve; and the dropping of a travel lane and then narrowing left and right shoulders to two feet. These conditions provide the driver with several roadway geometry changes over a half mile transition. As drivers enter the bridge, they have very limited recovery room to react to vehicles and roadways hazards. This limited recovery room is responsible for the preponderance of accidents involving sideswipes and barrier impacts. Providing improved roadway geometry with a consistent number of lanes and consistent shoulder widths that meet design standards will provide additional recovery space for drivers between the traveled way and median or outside barriers, resulting in a reduction in accidents. JH-3: Congestion: The proposed, wider bridge would reduce peak travel time across the span from 34.1 seconds to 30.6 seconds in 2030. (Table 3-2) This savings of 3.5 seconds at peak weekend travel times hardly seems worth the 2-58

Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Project FEIR Chapter 2.0: Response to Comments on the Environmental Assessment/Draft Environmental Impact Report projected $300 M price tag, especially given that most of that peak traffic will come to a full stop shortly after it crosses the state line and reaches the Hampton Tolls. As to the projected 'D' Level of Service for the 'No Build' solution (Table 3-3), that doesn't seem to be a problem for the section of I-95 between I-495 and Rt. 286 which would still be at Level 'D' even after spending $300M (p. 5-19). Response: The $300 million project cost is driven by the need to replace the structurally deficient Whittier Bridge. Since MassDOT is making the investment to replace the bridge based on structural deficiencies, the new bridge will be designed to accommodate future (2035) traffic volumes. The MassDOT Highway Design Manual describes the minimum design level of service (LOS) for Urban and Suburban Freeways to be LOS ―C‖, and therefore the new Whittier Bridge was designed with eight lanes to meet the LOS ―C‖ criteria for both I-95 northbound and southbound based on future (2035) traffic projections. Additionally, Open Road Tolling (ORT) lanes at the Hampton Tolls in New Hampshire provides four ORT lanes which allow vehicles with an E-Z Pass transponder to travel at highway speeds through the tolls, reducing congestion at the tolls. JH-4: N-S Corridor: Neither of the bridges immediately to the north or south of the Whittier handles more than six travel lanes. The Tobin Bridge also carries three lanes in each direction with no shoulders, while the Piscataqua to the north carries three lanes with shoulders. Response: The current six-lane cross section of I-95 from immediately south of the Merrimack River to Exit 59 in Salisbury does not match the eight-lane cross section existing immediately south (from Danvers to Newburyport) and north (from the I-495 interchange to the New Hampshire state line) of the project limits and does not meet the current AASHTO standards for consistency in the number of travel lanes. An important highway design principle is that the number of travel lanes be consistent along any major route ―irrespective of changes in traffic volumes‖ to provide for safe travel conditions. The intent is that the basic number of lanes (in this case, eight lanes) should be established for a substantial length of freeway and should not be changed through pairs of interchanges irrespective of traffic volumes entering or leaving the highway at any one interchange. The MassDOT Highway Design Manual describes the minimum design level of service for Urban and Suburban Freeways to be LOS ‗C‘, and therefore the new Whittier Bridge was designed with eight lanes to meet the LOS ‗C‘ criteria for both I-95 northbound and southbound based on future (2035) traffic projections. JH-4A: Nevertheless, the DOT's contention that making the necessary repairs to the existing structure would necessitate building a temporary bridge during construction and would thereby make that approach economically unfeasible seems to be a convincing argument (p.5-49). I share the concerns of the Historic Preservation Office, but I agree that building a temporary bridge is not a practical alternative. My only reservation is that your analysis and conclusion can only reasonably be evaluated by another engineer and I am not sure that anyone in either the commonwealth's legislative or executive branches with the appropriate qualifications has reviewed the report. Response: As with any major project, a value/engineering (V/E) study was conducted for the project by a qualified, independent engineering firm. The V/E study report supported the conclusions of the design team as to the condition of the existing bridge and the need to construct a new replacement bridge. JH-5: As a layman, I am struck by the different approaches taken by the DOT toward the Whittier compared to the Corps of Engineers toward the Sagamore Bridge. One can't help but wonder why a bridge of essentially the same 2-59

<strong>Whittier</strong> <strong>Bridge</strong>/I-<strong>95</strong> Improvement Project FEIR<br />

Chapter 2.0: Response to Comments on the <strong>Environmental</strong> Assessment/Draft <strong>Environmental</strong> <strong>Impact</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />

projected $300 M price tag, especially given that most of that peak traffic will come to a full stop shortly after it<br />

crosses the state line and reaches the Hampton Tolls. As to the projected 'D' Level of Service for the 'No Build'<br />

solution (Table 3-3), that doesn't seem to be a problem for the section of I-<strong>95</strong> between I-4<strong>95</strong> and Rt. 286 which would<br />

still be at Level 'D' even after spending $300M (p. 5-19).<br />

Response: The $300 million project cost is driven by the need to replace the structurally deficient<br />

<strong>Whittier</strong> <strong>Bridge</strong>. Since MassDOT is making the investment to replace the bridge based on structural<br />

deficiencies, the new bridge will be designed to accommodate future (2035) traffic volumes. The<br />

MassDOT Highway Design Manual describes the minimum design level of service (LOS) for Urban<br />

and Suburban Freeways to be LOS ―C‖, and therefore the new <strong>Whittier</strong> <strong>Bridge</strong> was designed with<br />

eight lanes to meet the LOS ―C‖ criteria for both I-<strong>95</strong> northbound and southbound based on future<br />

(2035) traffic projections. Additionally, Open Road Tolling (ORT) lanes at the Hampton Tolls in New<br />

Hampshire provides four ORT lanes which allow vehicles with an E-Z Pass transponder to travel at<br />

highway speeds through the tolls, reducing congestion at the tolls.<br />

JH-4: N-S Corridor: Neither of the bridges immediately to the north or south of the <strong>Whittier</strong> handles more than six<br />

travel lanes. The Tobin <strong>Bridge</strong> also carries three lanes in each direction with no shoulders, while the Piscataqua to<br />

the north carries three lanes with shoulders.<br />

Response: The current six-lane cross section of I-<strong>95</strong> from immediately south of the Merrimack River<br />

to Exit 59 in Salisbury does not match the eight-lane cross section existing immediately south (from<br />

Danvers to Newburyport) and north (from the I-4<strong>95</strong> interchange to the New Hampshire state line) of<br />

the project limits and does not meet the current AASHTO standards for consistency in the number of<br />

travel lanes. An important highway design principle is that the number of travel lanes be consistent<br />

along any major route ―irrespective of changes in traffic volumes‖ to provide for safe travel<br />

conditions. The intent is that the basic number of lanes (in this case, eight lanes) should be<br />

established for a substantial length of freeway and should not be changed through pairs of<br />

interchanges irrespective of traffic volumes entering or leaving the highway at any one interchange.<br />

The MassDOT Highway Design Manual describes the minimum design level of service for Urban<br />

and Suburban Freeways to be LOS ‗C‘, and therefore the new <strong>Whittier</strong> <strong>Bridge</strong> was designed with<br />

eight lanes to meet the LOS ‗C‘ criteria for both I-<strong>95</strong> northbound and southbound based on future<br />

(2035) traffic projections.<br />

JH-4A: Nevertheless, the DOT's contention that making the necessary repairs to the existing structure would<br />

necessitate building a temporary bridge during construction and would thereby make that approach economically<br />

unfeasible seems to be a convincing argument (p.5-49). I share the concerns of the Historic Preservation Office, but I<br />

agree that building a temporary bridge is not a practical alternative. My only reservation is that your analysis and<br />

conclusion can only reasonably be evaluated by another engineer and I am not sure that anyone in either the<br />

commonwealth's legislative or executive branches with the appropriate qualifications has reviewed the report.<br />

Response: As with any major project, a value/engineering (V/E) study was conducted for the project<br />

by a qualified, independent engineering firm. The V/E study report supported the conclusions of the<br />

design team as to the condition of the existing bridge and the need to construct a new replacement<br />

bridge.<br />

JH-5: As a layman, I am struck by the different approaches taken by the DOT toward the <strong>Whittier</strong> compared to the<br />

Corps of Engineers toward the Sagamore <strong>Bridge</strong>. One can't help but wonder why a bridge of essentially the same<br />

2-59

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!