![Agenda ,[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Destacado (18)
Similar a I495 route 9 sac meeting 1 9 8-11
Similar a I495 route 9 sac meeting 1 9 8-11 (20)
Último
Último (20)
I495 route 9 sac meeting 1 9 8-11
- 1. Interstate 495 & Route 9 InterchangeImprovement StudyStudy Advisory GroupMeeting #1September 9, 2011
- 3. Study Advisory Group
- 4. Study Area
- 5. Goals and Objectives
- 7. Public Involvement Plan
- 10. Consultant PM – Joanne Haracz, AECOM
- 11. Traffic/Transportation – Jeff Maxtutis, AECOM
- 12. Highway Design – Nick Rubino, AECOM
- 13. Land Use/Environment – Dave Derrig, AECOM
- 14. Economic Analysis – Frank Mahady, FXM Associates
- 16. Regional employment center
- 17. Potential 21% increase in jobs by 2030
- 18. 100,000 vpd on I-495 and I-90
- 19. 50,000 vpd on Route 9
- 21. SAG brings valuable local knowledge, experience, and perspective
- 23. Goals and Objectives
- 25. I-495/I-90 I/C
- 26. I-495 Mainline
- 30. Enhance mobility
- 32. Safety
- 34. Land Use
- 40. General Public
- 41. Coordination
- 42. MassDOT
- 43. CMRPC, MAPC
- 44. WRTA, MWRTA
- 45. Municipalities
- 48. Meetings at project milestones
- 49. Frequent and ongoing project updates
- 52. Engage key stakeholders
- 53. Confirm existing conditions
- 56. Transit
- 57. Environmental
- 61. Accident Data
- 63. Simulation Model
- 64. Evaluate Roadway & Bridge Geometry
- 65. Design Speeds
- 66. Ramp Layouts
- 67. ROW Width
- 68. Profile
- 70. RR Crossings
- 75. I-495 100,000 ADT
- 76. I-90 100,000 ADT
- 77. Rt. 9 average 50,000 ADT
- 79. I-495 SB to Rt. 9 WB – high crash location
- 80. Rear-end collisions predominant
- 83. Cedar Swamp ACEC
- 85. Sudbury River Flood Plain
- 86. Sudbury River Watershed Organization
- 87. Land Use
- 88. Article 97 Land
- 91. Other
- 92. 3 Municipalities & 2 MPOs
- 94. Scenario 1 – Extended Trends Land Use
- 95. Scenario 2 – Revised with Regional Priorities
- 96. CTPS to provide travel model results
- 98. Commute mostly from Worcester and within town (green)
- 99. “Reverse Commute” from east (red) relatively smallSource: 2000 Census Journey to Work
- 101. Commute mostly from Worcester and within town (green)
- 102. “Reverse Commute” from east (red) Source: 2000 Census Journey to Work
- 104. Southborough Station
- 105. Westborough Station
- 106. Bus Service
- 107. Boundary of WRTA and MWRTA
- 109. Issues
- 111. Bus Route Coverage
- 112. InteroperabilityRt. 9 I-495 I-90
- 114. Review Feasibility
- 115. Geometrics
- 116. Right-of-Way
- 118. Bridge Impacts
- 119. Cross-sections
- 122. Short/Mid-term
- 123. Signage/Wayfinding
- 124. ITS/Smart Zones
- 125. TDM
- 127. Access management on Route 9
- 128. Transit enhancements
- 129. Toll plaza operational improvements
- 130. Long-term
- 132. Safety
- 134. Land Use and Economic Development
- 135. Community Effects/Environmental Justice
- 137. Maintain existing outside edge of pavement
- 138. Widen to median
- 139. Minimize impacts to existing ramps
- 141. Task 4 – Alternatives Concept Existing I-495 CD Road Alternative
- 143. Focused on Route 9
- 144. 1.25 miles long
- 145. CD Road – Long Option
- 146. Extends to south of I-90
- 149. Prioritization
- 150. Conceptual Plans
- 151. Costs
- 152. Right-of-way
- 153. Schedule
- 156. Goals & Objectives
- 157. Study Area
- 158. Evaluation Criteria
- 159. Data Collection
- 160. Existing Conditions Summary
- 162. Traffic and Concepts – Alternatives Limits of CD Road at I-90 Ramp Existing Bridge Piers
- 163. Traffic and Concepts – Alternatives Limits of CD Road at Fruit Street Bridge Existing Bridge Piers
- 165. Limited footprint
- 168. Lane Assignments
- 169. Signage
- 170. Increase Fast Lane Usage