Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights of Way Durham Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way TABLE OF CONTENTS... i LIST OF TABLES... ii LIST OF FIGURES... ii 1. Introduction... 1 1 2. Executive Summary... 2 1 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. 2.6. 3. Background... 3 1 4. Placement of LRT tracks adjacent to NCDOT / USDOT Roadways... 4 1 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5. 4.6. 4.7. 4.8. TABLE OF CONTENTS FORDHAM BOULEVARD B... 2 1 NC 54... 2 2 I 40... 2 2 US 15 501... 2 3 ERWIN ROAD... 2 3 NC 147... 2 4 LOCATIONS...... 4 1 TRAFFIC DATA AND CRITERIA... 4 2 FORDHAM BOULEVARD B... 4 3 NC 54... 4 11 I 40... 4 21 US 15 501... 4 36 ERWIN ROAD... 4 41 NC 147... 4 45 Appendix A Reference Design Criteria... A 1 Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 i
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Clear Zone Criteria... 2 1 Table 2.2 Examples of Actual Clear Zones from Other Transit Cities... 2 3 Table 4.1 Clear Zone Criteria... 4 3 Table 4.2 Examples of Actual Clear Zones from Other Transit Cities... 4 21 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1 Durham Orange Adopted Locally Preferred Alternative... 3 2 Figure 4.1 Durham Orange LRT Photo Locations... 4 2 Figure 4.2 Aerial Track on NW Side of Fordham Blvd looking NE... 4 4 Figure 4.3 Section 2 Aerial Column in Median... 4 5 Figure 4.4 Section 3 At Grade Track on SE Side of Fordham Blvd or NC 54 Looking NE... 4 6 Figure 4.5 Section 4 Aerial Track on SW Side of Fordham Blvd / NC 54 Looking NE... 4 7 Figure 4.6 Photo 1: West Fordham Boulevard/Old Mason Farm Road looking east... 4 8 Figure 4.7 Photo 2: West Fordham Boulevard looking east... 4 8 Figure 4.8 Photo 3: Fordham Boulevard median looking east... 4 9 Figure 4.9 Photo 4: East Fordham Boulevard looking east... 4 9 Figure 4.10 Fordham Boulevard Plan View of LRT Crossing... 4 10 Figure 4.11 Photo 5: NC 54/Barbee Chapel Road intersection looking east... 4 13 Figure 4.12 Photo 6: NC 54/Barbee Chapel Road intersection looking east... 4 13 Figure 4.13 Photo 7: NC 54/Stancell Drive intersection looking east... 4 14 Figure 4.14 Photo 8: NC 54 median/little Creek Bridge looking east... 4 14 Figure 4.15 Photo 9: NC 54 median/little Creek Bridge looking east... 4 15 Figure 4.16 Plan View of NC 54 LRT Crossing... 4 16 Figure 4.17 Detail 1 At Grade Crossing Where Widening Has Occurred... 4 17 Figure 4.18 Detail 2 At Grade Crossing Where Widening Has Not Yet Occurred... 4 18 Figure 4.19 Barbee Chapel Road at NC 54 Grade Crossing,... 4 19 Figure 4.20 Long John Road at NC 54 Grade Crossing, Roadway Widening has not Occurred... 4 19 Figure 4.21 Example of Similar Road Crossing, Hiawatha LRT in Minneapolis... 4 20 Figure 4.22 Ground Level Photograph of Intersection above... 4 20 Figure 4.23 Section 5 At Grade Track on W Side of I 40 Looking N... 4 22 Figure 4.24 Photo 10: I 40 looking westbound (west of MM 272)... 4 23 Figure 4.25 Photo 11: I 40 looking westbound (Farrington Road Bridge)... 4 23 Figure 4.26 Photo 12: I 40 Area Bounded by Eastbound I 40 and the Eastbound On Ramp... 4 24 Figure 4.27 Photo 13: I 40/US 15 501 intersection (I 40 median), looking east... 4 24 Figure 4.28 Photo 14: I 40 Area Bounded by Westbound I 40 and the Westbound Off Ramp... 4 25 Figure 4.29 Column Arrangement of LRT Across I 40... 4 26 Figure 4.30 Column Location for LRT in I 40 Median... 4 27 Figure 4.31 Denver LRT next to Interstate 25 (Century Freeway). 10.5 feet of Shoulder / Clear Zone.. 4 28 Figure 4.32 Denver LRT, Century Freeway Ground shot of LRT in background showing barrier walls.. 4 29 Figure 4.33 Portland LRT adjacent to Interstate 84 (Banfield Freeway)... 4 30 Figure 4.34 San Diego, Mission Valley LRT next to Interstate 8... 4 31 Figure 4.35 San Diego, Mission Valley line next to Interstate 8... 4 32 Figure 4.36 Baltimore Light Rail yard next to Interstate 83... 4 33 Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 ii
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.37 BART next to Grove Shatner Freeway, Oakland, CA, Ground Shot... 4 34 Figure 4.38 BART next to Grove Shatner Freeway, Oakland, CA, Aerial Shot... 4 35 Figure 4.39 Section 6 At Grade Track on East Side of US 15/501 looking north... 4 37 Figure 4.40 Photo 15: US 15 501 looking east (near intersection with SW Durham Drive)... 4 38 Figure 4.41 Photo 16: US 15 501 looking east (New Hope Creek Bridge)... 4 38 Figure 4.42 Photo 17: US 15 501 near West Cornwallis Rd looking north... 4 39 Figure 4.43 Photo 18: US 15 501 near West Cornwallis Rd looking north... 4 39 Figure 4.44 Photo 19: US 15 501 near Cameron Boulevard looking north... 4 40 Figure 4.45 Photo 20: US 15 501 near Cameron Boulevard looking north... 4 40 Figure 4.46 Erwin Road Cross Sections, With and Without a LRT Station... 4 42 Figure 4.47 Photo 21: Erwin Road/Fulton Street intersection looking west... 4 43 Figure 4.48 Photo 22: Erwin Road/Fulton Street intersection looking west... 4 43 Figure 4.49 Erwin Road Plan View... 4 44 Figure 4.50 Photo 23: NC 147 median where LRT crosses... 4 45 Figure 4.51 NC 147 Plan View of LRT Crossing... 4 46 Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 iii
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way 1. Introduction This report documents existing conditions and future expansion of US Department of Transportation (USDOT) and North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) major arterials and freeways and presents various cross sections of potential placement of Triangle Transit s Light Rail Transit (LRT) tracks in relation to these roadways. The report presents Triangle Transit s understanding of USDOT and NCDOT criteria in regards to clear zones, horizontal and vertical criteria. This report also presents specific requests from Triangle Transit on where track facilities might be placed, which in certain cases will be less than indicated in the design criteria documents. The intended use of this report is to facilitate initial decision making in regards to the location of Triangle Transit s facilities in and/or adjacent to USDOT and NCDOT s rights of way (ROW). Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 1-1
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way 2. Executive Summary There are eight locations where LRT tracks are proposed to be placed parallel to and/or cross over NCDOT or United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) roadways: Fordham Boulevard / United States Route 15 501 (USS 15 501) North Carolinaa Highway 54 (NC 54) Interstate 40 (I 40) Durham Chapel Hill Boulevard / US 15 501 Bypass Durham Chapel Hill Boulevard / US 15 501 Business (at South Square) University Drive Erwin Road NC Highway 147 (NC 147) There are two locations where LRT tracks are located in thee middle of the street: 1) Erwin Road from Cameron Boulevard to NC 147; and 2) potentially within University Drive from Westgate Drive to Shannon Road (currently shown as side street running in the Alternative Analysis). The University Drive segment and the crossing of Durham Chapel Hill Boulevard / US 15 501 Business are not discussed herein and will be presented and coordinated at a later time. The following sections summarize the requests that Triangle Transit iss seeking from NCDOT for the placement of the two track from NCDOT design standards. Table 2.1 Clear Zone Criteria LRT system. These requests are based on the criteria shown in Table 2.1 as determined Roadway Fordham Boulevard NC - 54 I-40 US 15-501 Erwin Road NC - 147 Posted Speed / Design Speed, mph 45 45 65 55 35 55 Clearr Zone Distance, feet 20 20 30 22 N/A 22 2.1. Fordham Boulevard The LRT having a skewed angle crossing over Fordham Boulevard creates a challenge for placing columns when balancing transit vehicle speed with maximum span lengths. The following request is based on the geometry shown in Figure 4.10: Permit Triangle Transit to have the face of column adjacent to the span over Fordham Boulevard offset 8 feet from the future travel lane instead of 20 feet. Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 2-1
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way The spanss are very long and 200 feet is usually the upper limit for elevated rail structures given the flexural vibration criteria inherent with rail design. With thee 8 feet offset as shown in Figure 4.10, the spans are already just over 200 feet. This leads to the following conclusion: Should the 8 foot offset for the two columns indicated above not be acceptable, Triangle Transit would flatten the curves and the angle across of the alignment to achieve 45 mph. Two straddle bents would be needed, one over each direction of travel. 2.2. NC-54 The LRT crossing of NC 54 is a similar situation as Fordham Boulevard yielding a similar request based on the geometry shown in Figure 4.16: Permit Triangle Transit to have the face of column adjacent to the span over NC 54 offset 8 feet from the future travel lane instead of 20 feet. In addition, Triangle Transit is requesting that the easternmost median column also be at an 8 foot offset from the existing inside lane of westbound NC 54. Should the 8 foot offset for the two columns crossing the westbound lanes not be acceptable, then Triangle Transit would need to place a straddlee bent over the roadway with an additional column in the median. For at grade crossings it is important to minimize the distance of the far side railroad warning gate away from the main cross street in order to lessen the overall green time for cars approaching NC 54 to get through the intersection. Minimizing the distance also lessens the green time to clear the cross street traffic that has already passed the railroad gate at the time of the gate deployment by lessening the stacking distance at the intersection. This reason leads to thee following request: It is requested that the clear zone along the drop right turn lane adjacent to Barbee Chapel Road be 13.5 feet. It is further requested thatt the clear zone along the drop right turn lane adjacent to Little John Road and Downing Creek Parkway be 8.5 feet. 2.3. I-40 Triangle Transit LRT tracks parallel I 40 on the west side from approximately ½ mile north of NC 54 the placement of to Old Chapel Hill Road, a distance of about 1.7 miles. With a large cut slope to the west, the LRT tracks furtherr into the hill adds costs (higher retaining walls) and could impact neighboring residences who are currently buffered by the dense tree growth along the west side of I 40. This leads to the following request: Triangle Transit requests permission to have a maximum distance of 40 feet from the edge of existing travelled way along I 40 on the west side.. This will allow for a 16 foot future lane widening resulting in a clear zone of 24 feet. Triangle Transitt further requests that this be reduced by another 6 feet resulting in a total of 34 feet from the edge of existing travelled way. The 34 foot dimension allows for a 16 foot lane widening with a clear zone of 18 feet. These requests are supported by existing conditions on other transit systems that have rail transit running alongside freeways. Table 2.2 summarizes the clear zone distances from these other cities. Figures 4..31 through 4.38 show the aerial images of the existing conditions for the systems contained in Table 2.2.. Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 2-2
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Table 2.2 Examples of Actual Clear Zoness from Otherr Transit Cities Existing Clear Zone Distancess in Other Cities that have Rail Transit City Denver Portland San Diego Baltimore San Francisco (BART) at Grove Shatner Freeway Durham-Orange County Request Technology LRT LRT LRT LRT Heavy Rail LRT Clear Zone Distance, feet 10.5 8.0 17.0 10.0 10.5 18.0 34.0 feet initially with a 16.0 foot allowance for a future managed lane 2.4. US 15-501 The request is to minimize the impact to the forested lands adjacent to the Duke University Golf Course. This is a serious concern for Duke University. Triangle Transit requests permission to have a clear zone of 18 feet from the edge of a future travel lane instead of 222 feet. Triangle Transit will also be studying a new alternative alongg US 15 501 across New Hope Creek. US 15 501 is already three lanes wide, but Triangle Transit recognizes that thiss section of US 15 501 may be transformed to freeway standards. This may result in a wider median. Not knowing the full extent of the freeway cross section, Triangle Transit is requesting input of the minimum clear zone requirement along this portion of US 15 501. This stretch is environmentally sensitive and the LRT guideway will probably impact wetlands and hence it is important to minimize the offset as much as possible given the future US 15 501 build out coupled with the potential for wetland impacts. 2.5. Erwin Road The Duke Medical LRT Station option site at Erwin Road and Fulton Streett is limited in overall width with the addition of a second left turn from Erwin Road to Fulton Street coupled with the station platform. The plan view shows the impacts to both the Duke Medical Center entrance and to the access road and parking facilities at the Durham Veterans Administration Medical Center ( DVAMC). Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 2-3
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way The cross section and plan view do not include bike lanes and show the travel lanes being 11 feet wide. If the 11 foot lanes could be further reduced to 10 feet in thee vicinity of the LRT station at Fulton Street, then this would help considerably. Triangle Transit will alsoo investigate narrowing the center platform width, but experience from transit in other cities has shownn this already is very narrow (ref: Hiawatha LRT). Also, this station has high ridership potential and Triangle Transitt will have to study pedestrian capacities versus platform width. Triangle Transit requests review of the Erwin Road cross section in the vicinity of the LRT Station in order to consider the difficulty in accommodating bike lanes and the potential for the reduction of lane widths. 2.6. NC-147 The crossing of NC 147 is consistent with the requirements of Table 2.1. Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 2-4
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way 3. Background The Durham Orange LRT project will greatly expand transit service in Durham and Orange Counties, and is a key element of improved region wide transportation. The LRT project extends on double track alignment approximately 17.1 miles between east Durham (Alston Avenue/North Carolina Central University [NCCU] Station) and University of North Carolina (UNC) Chapel Hill (UNC Hospitals Station). The LRT alignment connects a range of activity centers including NCCU, east and downtown Durham, Duke University, Duke University Medical Center, Durham Veterans Administration Medical Center, the Friday Center, UNC Hospitals, and several park and ride lots. Convenient connections also will be made to Amtrak and local, regional and intercity bus service in downtown Durham. As shown in Figure 3.1, the LRT alignment generally follows the North Carolina Railroad Corridor, Erwin Road, US 15 501, I 40 and NC 54. A total of 17 stations are planned. Station features include a public address system, variable message signs, closed circuit television (CCTV) camera coverage, ticket vending and validation machines, weather protection in terms of canopy protection and wind screens, lighting, decorative finishes, signage and wayfinding and informational kiosks. Up to 3,900 parking spaces at stations along the alignment will be provided to facilitate park and ride trips on the LRT service. The project cost is $1.25 billon (2012 dollars). LRT service will be provided seven days a week, operating at 10 minute headways in the peak periods (weekdays), and 20 minutes during off peak periods and weekends. Travel time between the Alston Avenue/NCCU Station and UNC Hospitals will be approximately 35 minutes. The service will be operated with modern 70 percent low floor LRT vehicles, with an ultimate seating capacity of 68 to 76 seats per car. Power will be provided via an overhead catenary system. The planned fleet size is 12 cars, which includes a 20 percent spare ratio. Fare collection will be on the platform with proof of payment once in the paid zones. Service is expected to begin in 2026. Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 3-1
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 3.1 Durham Orange Adopted Locally Preferred Alternative While the Alternatives Analysis (AA) completed for the Durham Orange corridor has established the majority of the project alignment, two alignment options willl be examined in more detail in the project s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS): Crossing of Little Creek between Meadowmont Village and the proposed Leigh Village development (Alternatives C1 and C2) Crossing of New Hope Creek and Sandy Creek between Patterson Place and South Square: Alternative alignments generally south of Durham Chapel Hill Boulevard The location of a maintenance facility to serve the LRT fleet will also be established during the EIS process. The AA presented four potential LRT storage yardd and maintenance facility sites within the Durham Orange Corridor: Leigh Village, Farrington, Patterson Place, and Cornwallis. These sites were chosen because they have sufficient acreage and length to accommodate the required functions, grading that could accommodate a rail yard, and adjacent land uses and access that could be compatible with a LRT yard and maintenance facility operation. All fourr sites will be examined in detail in the DEIS and if other potential sites emerge, they will also be examined in the DEIS. Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 3-2
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way 4. Placement of LRT tracks adjacent to NCDOT / USDOT Roadways 4.1. Locations There are eight locations where LRT tracks are proposed to be placed parallel to and/or cross over NCDOT or USDOT roadways: Fordham Boulevard / US 15 501 NC 54 I 40 Durham Chapel Hill Boulevard / US 15 501 Bypass Durham Chapel Hill Boulevard / US 15 501 Business (at South Square) University Drive Erwin Road NC 147 There are two locations where LRT tracks are located in the middle of the street: Erwin Road from Cameron Boulevard to NC 147 and potentially within University Drive from Westgatee Drive to Shannon Road (currently shown as street side running in the AA). The University Drive segment and the crossing of Durham Chapel Hill Boulevard / US 15 501 Business are not discussed herein and will be presented and coordinated at a later time. Photographs of the existing conditions are also presented under each of the roadway section headings. An overall map of the photograph locations is shown in Figure 4.1 for reference. Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-1
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4..1 Durham Orange LRT Photo Locations 4.2. Traffic Data and Criteria Appendix A contains selected pages from the NCDOT Criteriaa extracted from the NCDOT Design Manual, standard drawings and details from the NCDOT standard drawings dated July 2006, Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) volumes, and posted speed limits of the roadways. The clear zone design criteria for the NCDOT roadways are presented below. This is based on the Clear Zone Distance Table in Appendix A. Triangle Transit intendss to have a 6:1 slope or flatter for the clear zones. Alll of the AADT volumes are greater than 6,000 for the subject roadways. It is understoodd that the design speed could be higher than the posted speed,, but for the sake of this paper, they are assumed to be the same. The requested distances and clearances in this report would remain the same. Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-2
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Table 4.1 Clear Zone Criteria Roadway Fordham Boulevard NC - 54 I-40 US 15-501 Erwin Road NC - 147 Posted Speed / Design Speed, mph 45 45 65 55 35 55 Clearr Zone Distance, feet 20 20 30 22 N/A 22 4.3. Fordham Boulevard Cross section Figures 4.2 and Figure 4.3 pertain to Fordham Boulevard. Figures 4.4 and 4.5 pertain to both Fordham Boulevard and NC 54. Figure 4.2 shows the northwest side of Fordham Boulevard (UNC side). The dimensions shown in Figure 4.2 allow for a future lane widening of 12 feet, including the widening of the drop right in the median of Fordham Boulevard. Figures 4.4 and 4. 5 show the track configuration for both an aerial structure and for at grade construction. Added width of clear zone is provided for in turn lane at Manning Drive. Figure 4.3 shows the approximate dimensions for the column Figure 4.44 because the clear zone requirements place at grade tracks further away from the edge of travelled way and the tracks shown in Figure 4.44 need to align with the tracks shown in Figure 4.5. Photographs of the existing conditions are shown in Figures 4.6, 4.7, 4.8 and 4.9. Figure 4.10 shows the plan view of the Fordham Boulevard aerial crossing. The curve radius and spiral lengths are chosen to maximize the allowable speed balanced against the angle of the tracks across Fordham Boulevard while also considering the span lengths. In laying this out in detail, the allowable speed was reduced to avoid the need for two straddle bents (one each over the southbound and northbound travel lanes). Three columns would need to be placed in the median of Fordham Boulevard if two straddle bents were required. For this reason, it seemed prudent to lower the allowable speed of the LRT trains. The specific request for Fordham Boulevard is as follows: Permit Triangle Transit to have the face of column adjacent to the span over Fordham Boulevard to be offset 8 feet from the future travel lane instead off 20 feet. The spanss are very long and 200 feet is usually the upper limit for elevated rail structures given the flexural vibration criteria inherent with rail design. With thee 8 feet offset as shown in Figure 4.10, the spans are already just over 200 feet. This leads to the following conclusion: Should the 8 foot offset for the two columns indicated above not be acceptable, Triangle Transit would flatten the curves and the angle across of the alignment to achieve 45 mph. Two straddle bents would be needed, one over each direction of travel. Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-3
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.2 Aerial Track on NW Side of Fordham Blvd looking NE Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-4
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.3 Section 2 Aerial Column in Median For all columns in the medians above, Triangle Transit intends to follow the Standard Guardrail Placement Detail shown in Appendix A. Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-5
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.4 Section 3 At Grade Track on SE Side of Fordham Blvd or NC 54 Looking NE Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-6
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.5 Section 4 Aerial Track on SW Side of Fordham Blvd / NC 54 Looking NE Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-7
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.6 Photo 1: West Fordham Boulevard/Old Mason Farm Road looking east Figure 4.7 Photo 2: West Fordham Boulevard looking east Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-8
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.8 Photo 3: Fordham Boulevard median looking east Figure 4.9 Photo 4: East Fordham Boulevard looking east Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-9
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.10 Fordham Boulevard Plan View of LRT Crossing Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-10
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way 4.4. NC 54 Figures 4..4 and 4.5 depict the track arrangement on the southwest side of NC 54. Figure 4.3 shows the clearances from a traffic barrier for the columns in the median of NC 54. Photographs of the existing conditions are shown in Figures 4.11, 4.12, 4.13, 4.14 and 4.15. Figure 4.16 shows the plan view of the NC 54 aerial crossing. The curve radius and spiral lengths are chosen to maximize the allowable speed balanced against the angle of the tracks across NC 54 while also considering the span lengths. An allowable train speed of 35 mph for these two reversing curves is considered to be the minimum. It is important the allowablee speeds are maximized in order to achieve optimum travel time which in turn enhances ridership and cost effectiveness. Permit Triangle Transit to have the face of column adjacent to the span over NC 54 to be offset 8 feet from the future travel lane instead of 200 feet. In addition, Triangle Transit is also requesting that the easternmost median column also be an 8 foot offset from the existing inside lane of westbound NC 54. The spans over the westbound lanes are very approved. long at approximately 210 feet with the 8 foot offset Should the 8 foot offset for the two columns crossing the westbound lanes not be acceptable, then Triangle Transit would need to place a straddle bent over the roadway with an additional column in the median. For the eastbound lane crossing, the span would be over 3000 feet and hence a straddle bent will have to be used for this crossing. Triangle Transit would also like to note that the column on the southwest side that is offset 8 feet from the future travel lane (20 feet from the existing travel lane) will be located behind an existing guard rail. In regards to track placement, it is important to consider the equipment arrangement at the grade crossings. Using the 20 foot clear zone requirement for NC 54 along with provisionss for a future lane results in a 46.5 foot offset from the existing travel lane (or 34.5 feet from the future travel lane) to the centerlinee of the two tracks Figure 4 17, Detail 1 depicts the at grade crossing arrangement for Barbee Chapel Road (as an example). Barbee Chapel Road is located along portion of NC 54 that has already been widened. The geometrical layout of the intersection works best if the 34.5 foot distance is increased to 40 feet as the tracks per Figure 4.4. Crossing gates are ideally placed 12 feet from the nearest track center. approach the intersection. The clear zone will then vary from 20 feet to 25.5 feet. With the introduction of the 12 foot drop right turn lane, this clear zone becomess 13.5 feet from the edgee of the drop right turn lane in the vicinity of the intersection. It is further requested that the clear zone along the drop rightt turn lane adjacent to Barbee Chapel Road be 13.5 feet. Figure 4.18, Detail 2 presents the geometric arrangement of an intersection where the widening has not yet occurred. The geometrical layout of this intersection (such as at Little John Road or Downing Creek Parkway) works best if the 46.5 foot distance from the existing travel lane is increased to 47 feet as the Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-11
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way tracks approach the intersection. The clear zone will then vary from 20 feet to 20.5 feet. With the introduction of the 12 foot drop right turn lane, this clear zone becomes 8.5 feet from the edge of the drop right turn lane in the vicinity of the intersection. It is further requested that the clear zone along the drop right turn lane adjacent to Little John Road and Downing Creek Parkway be 8.5 feet. It is important to minimize the distance of the far side warning gate location away from the main cross street in order to lessen the overall green time for cars approaching NC 54 to get through the intersection. Minimizing the distance also lessens the green time to clear the cross street traffic that has already passed the railroad gate at the time of the gate deployment by lessening the stacking distance at the intersection. For these reasons, Triangle Transit will have to plan for two different intersection layouts at these cross streets because of the potential for future widening, assuming that the future widening has not occurred at the time of the LRT construction. The phased implementation of these intersections is shown in Detail 2. Not allowing the two requests above may lessen the safety of the intersections. Figures 4.19 and 4.20 show the intersection arrangements described above on the aerial photo background. Figures 4 21 and 4 22 show examples of this configuration from the Hiawatha LRT line in Minnesota. Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-12
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.11 Photo 5: NC 54/Barb ee Chapel Road intersection looking east Figure 4.12 Photo 6: NC 54/Barb ee Chapel Road intersection looking east Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-13
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.13 Photo 7: NC 54/Stancell Drivee intersection looking east Figure 4.14 Photo 8: NC 54 median/littlee Creek Bridge looking east Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-14
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.15 Photo 9: NC 54 median/littlee Creek Bridge looking east Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-15
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.16 Plan View of NC 54 LRT Crossing Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-16
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.17 Detail 1 At Grade Crossing Where Widening Has Occurred Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-17
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.18 Detail 2 At Grade Crossing Where Widening Has Not Yet Occurred Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-18
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.19 Barbee Chapel Road at NC 54 Grade Crossing, Roadway Widening Alreadyy Completed Figure 4.20 Long John Road at NC 54 Grade Crossing, Roadway Widening has not Occurred Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-19
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.21 Example of Similar Road Crossing, Hiawatha LRT in Minneapolis Figure 4.22 Ground Level Photographh of Intersection above Note Gate Arm Location inn Sidewalk Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-20
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way 4.5. I-40 Figure 4.23 shows the cross section along I 40. This is followed by the photographs of the existing conditions as seen in Figures 4.24 and 4.25. The cross sectionn shown in Figure 4.23 accounts for a future 16 ft lane widening. The clear zone criterion is 30 feet. Figures 4.26, 4.27 and 4.28 are photographs of the medians where the LRT tracks would cross I 40. Figures 4.29 and 4.30 show the plan view and column locations for the I 40 crossing. The columns to the outside of the eastbound lanes and on ramp Triangle Transit LRT tracks parallell I 40 from approximatelyy ½ mile north of NC 54 to Old Chapel Hill and the westbound lanes and off ramp are located far outside the clear zone distances. Road, a distance of about 1.7 miles. As seen in Figures 4.244 and 4.25, I 40 was cut through a large hill when it was constructed as evident by the large cut slope on the left side (southwest) of the photograph. With a large cut slope to the west, the placement of the LRT tracks further into the hill adds costs (higher retaining walls) and could impact neighboring residences who are currently buffered by the dense tree growth along the east side of I 40. Triangle Transit requests permission to have a maximum distance of 40 feet from the edgee of existing travelled way along I 40. This will allow for a 16 foot future lane resulting in a clear zone of 24 feet. Triangle Transit further requests that this be reduced by another 6 feet resulting in a 34 foot distance from the edge of existing travelled way. The 34 foot dimension allows forr a 16 foot lane widening with a clear zone of 18 feet. These requests are supported by existing conditions on other transit systems that have rail transit running alongside freeways. Table 4.2 summarizes the clear zone distances from these other cities. Figures 4..31 through 4.38 show the aerial images of the existing conditions for the systems contained in Table 4.2.. Table 4.2 Examples of Actual Clear Zoness from Otherr Transit Cities Existing Clear Zone Distancess in Other Cities that have Rail Transit City Denver Portland San Diego Baltimore San Francisco (BART) at Grove Shatner Freeway Durham-Orange County Request Technology LRT LRT LRT LRT Heavy Rail LRT Clear Zone Distance, feet 10.5 8.0 17.0 10.0 10.5 18.0 34.0 feet initially with a 16.0 -foot allowance for a future managed lane Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-21
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.23 Section 5 At Grade Track on W Side of I 40 Looking N Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-22
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.24 Photo 10: I 40 looking westbound (west of MM 272) Figure 4..25 Photo 11: I 40 looking westbound (Farrington Road Bridge) Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-23
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.26 Photoo 12: I 40 Area Boundedd by Eastbound I 40 and the Eastbound On Ramp Figure 4.27 Photo 13: I 40/US 15 501 intersection (I 40 median), looking east Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-24
Analysis of thee Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.28 Photo 14: I 40 Area Bounded by Westbound I 40 and the Westbound Off Ramp Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-25
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.29 Column Arrangement of LRT Across I 40 Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-26
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.30 Column Location for LRT in I 40 Mediann Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-27
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.31 Denver LRT next to Interstate 25 (Century Freeway). 10.5 feet of Shoulder / Clear Zone Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-28
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.32 Denver LRT, Century Freeway Ground shot of LRT in background showing barrier walls Note overhead catenary in the LRT area Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-29
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.33 Portland LRT adjacent to Interstate 84 (Banfieldd Freeway) Shoulder distance from edge of travelled way to barrier is 8 feet. freeway right lane is dropped, addedd distance goes to the LRT side Notice when Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-30
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.344 San Diego, Mission Valley LRT next to Interstate 8 Shoulder is 17 feet wide to barrier. Shoulder is narrower in other places Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-31
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.35 San Diego, Mission Valley line next to Interstate 8 (same location as shown in previous picture) Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-32
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.36 Baltimore Light Rail yard next to Interstate 83 Shoulder width from edgee of travelled way to barrier is 9.5 feet Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-33
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.37 BART next to Grove Shatner Freeway, Oakland, CA,, Ground Shot Note the metal plates in the shoulder. Notice the plates covering a duct bank of conduits for BART in the shoulder area Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-34
Analysis of the Use of FHWA and NCDOT Rights-of-Way Figure 4.38 BART next to Grove Shatner Freeway, Oakland, CA, Aerial Shot 10.5 foot wide shoulder to New Jersey barrier Durham-Orangee Light Rail Transit Project January 2013 4-35