• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Wilma Dykeman Riverway  Road Intersection Re-modernization
 

Wilma Dykeman Riverway Road Intersection Re-modernization

on

  • 860 views

Civil Engineering Technical Project for an existing T intersection needing to be updated. Plans submitted to NCDOT, City of Asheville, and to Wilbur Smith Engineering company over the Wilma Dykeman ...

Civil Engineering Technical Project for an existing T intersection needing to be updated. Plans submitted to NCDOT, City of Asheville, and to Wilbur Smith Engineering company over the Wilma Dykeman Riverway Project in Asheville North Carolina. This was submitted by the Senior Project Class Spring 2011

Statistics

Views

Total Views
860
Views on SlideShare
858
Embed Views
2

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

1 Embed 2

http://www.linkedin.com 2

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Wilma Dykeman Riverway  Road Intersection Re-modernization Wilma Dykeman Riverway Road Intersection Re-modernization Presentation Transcript

    • Wilma Dykeman Riverway
      Transportation Project
      Project team:
      M. Dooly
      J. Ensley
      S. Escobar
      D. Kestner
      J. Lovelace
      L. Roselli
      T. Wyatt
    • Scope of Work
      • Design a Modern Roundabout for the Three leg intersection of:
      • Amboy Rd
      • Meadows Rd
      • Lyman Rd
      • Roadway Connection at or near the Proposed Roundabout for direct access to Asheville-Buncombe Technical Community College.
      • Design a Vehicular Bridge or Refurbish Existing Bridge to Accommodate Increased Vehicular Traffic as well as Pedestrian and Bicycle Traffic.
    • Reference Material
      ASHTO
      USGS
      NCDOT
      http://www.ncdot.org/travel/statemapping/default.html
      Steel Design Text Book
      Reinforced Concrete Design Textbook
      Buncombe County
      http://www.buncombecounty.org/Governing/Depts/GIS
      United States Department of Agriculture
      http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/
    • Hydrology Design Guides
      • FEMA Maps
      • Flood Data
      • 100 yr.
      • 500 yr.
    • AMBOY ROAD BRIDGE
      PEDESTRIAN AND BICICYLE BRIDGE
    • ASHEVILLE-BUNCOMBE TECHNICAL COMM. COL.LYMAN ROAD ACCESS
      “UP YONDER WAY”
    • Bridge Design
      Dillon Kestner
    • Design Methodology
      Evaluation of current intersection of Amboy/Meadows Roads
      Evaluation of existing bridge over French Broad River
    • Existing Bridge and intersection
    • Design Methodology
      Evaluation of current intersection of Amboy/Meadows Roads
      Existing intersection causes excessive traffic queuing and delays onto the Bridge/Amboy Road as well as traffic coming from Biltmore Ave onto Meadows Road
      Evaluation of existing bridge over French Broad River
      In need of remediation if not removal
      Poor pedestrian facilitation
      Bottleneck to proposed 4-lanes of Amboy Road in the feasibility study
    • Existing bridge does not have a walkway but pedestrians daringly still try to use the 2 foot wide curb.
    • The Riverway Project demands a more pedestrian/bicycle friendly bridge and intersection in this area to link the rest of the parks and walkways along the river.
      The traffic volume projections for 2025 (24000 vehicles per day versus the current 16000 vehicles per day from 2004 estimates) indicate that a 4-lane rather than 2-lane bridge would accommodate this flow of traffic as well as be a more cohesive design with the proposed 4 lanes of Amboy Road.
       A 4-lane bridge over the French Broad calls for a new intersection.
    • What should a new bridge feature?
      It should provide better traffic flow to and from Amboy Road.
      It should have pedestrian traffic facilities.
      Its design should be cohesive with the proposed Amboy Road alignment.
      It should have few negative impacts on the surrounding park areas or the French Broad River.
      It should be aesthetically pleasing and reflect the spirit of the River Arts District.
    • The Alternatives Considered:
      • Rehabilitation of current bridge/intersection
      • Construction of New Bridge only
      • Construction of New Intersection only
      • Construction of New Bridge with Roundabout Intersection
      • Do Nothing
      Focus on alternative to construct a new bridge and roundabout intersection
       
    • A Roundabout is a more modern intersection that can help to ease congestion on Amboy/Meadows Roads
      Key Features:
      • High capacity
      • Safer than signalized intersection
      • Low delay times
      • More on Roundabouts Later!
    • Decisions before design
      A new bridge should be constructed while existing bridge is still in operation for better traffic mitigation.
      Design should be cohesive with Amboy Road and aesthetically pleasing.
      Design should not effect river channel dramatically.
      New bridge will operate while existing bridge is removed for construction of another bridge making the total 4 lanes.
    • Basic Cross Section of Bridge
      Lane width at 11 ft for continuity with proposed Amboy Road alignment
      2 lanes each direction
      18 inch curb and gutter outside travel way
      60 inch side walk outside travel way
      Aluminum parapet railing along sidewalk for traffic/pedestrian safety
    • Aluminum parapet
      Weight savings advantage over steel/concrete
      No need to treat for weather corrosion
      Higher than steel initial cost but much lower maintenance cost
    • Roundabout and 2D New Bridge Drawings over GIS Image
    • New Bridge Alignment with Roundabout
    • Image Drawn in 3D showing ground surface
    • Image Drawn in 3D showing ground surface
    • Image Drawn in 3D showing ground surface
    • Conceptual Rendering
    • Alternatives to Consider
      5 foot median between sides of bridge can be mulched and flowered for beautification purposes, or parapet divided.
      Sidewalks can be tied into facilities on Amboy and Meadows Roads and to the park not shown in Rendering.
      Bridge section could be widened to better accommodate cyclists that do not use sidewalks.
    • Alternatives to Consider
      Steel members and Piers analyzed for current span lengths but larger members can be considered to increase span lengths and reduce any negative impacts on the French Broad River.
    • Next Phase Planning
      Evaluation of concrete reinforcement
      Pier installation feasibility in river
      Bolted/welded connection analysis
      Impacts on local wildlife and park areas
    • An Introduction and Overview of Modern Roundabouts
      Presented By: Truman Wyatt
    • General Terminology
      Comparison of Traffic Circles
      Applications and Examples
      General Information
      Topics
    • Many misperceptions
      Not simply a circular intersection
      Roundabouts Include:
      Yielding at entry
      Low speeds due to the curve
      Designed precisely based on peaked traffic volumes
      What is a Modern Roundabout
    • Slowing Down/Calming Effect
      Very Safe
      Low Maintenance Cost
      Easily Modified
      Eliminates Red lights
      Good Traffic Operations/Few Delays
      RoundaboutsPros
    • Concepts almost identical to traffic signals
      Pavement Markings will guide you
      SELECT YOUR LANE BEFORE THE YIELD LANE
      YIELD TO TRAFFIC WITHIN CIRCLE
      LEFT TURNS ARE MADE FROM THE LEFT (inside) APPROACH LANE
      How to Drive a Roundabout
    • Lyman Rd.
      2, 12ft lanes w/ 5 ft bike lane
      Truck Lane
      Circle
      Amboy Rd.
      Meadow Rd.
    • Pedestrian Bridges
    • Proposed Pedestrian Bridge Location
    • Types of Pedestrian Bridges
    • Types of Pedestrian Bridges
    • Types of Pedestrian Bridges
    • Proposed Pedestrian Bridge
    • Jonathan Lovelace
      Proposed AB Tech Bridge/Roadway
    • Preliminary Data
      AB Tech Growth
      Annual student growth of 8.2%
      Annual Faculty growth of 21.8%
      ADT
      17, 500 (2010)
      75,000 (2025)
      20% added for business traffic
    • Proposed Road Design
      Turning Bay
      2010 – 175 ft.
      2025 – 500 ft.
      Calculated by 25 ft bumper to bumper distance
      2000 ft allowable
      Specifications
      Four lanes
      Currently two lanes are needed
      Non divided
      Double Yellow, no turning lanes
      1176 ft. traffic circle to proposed Lyman Rd. intersection
      3500 ft. Lyman Rd. to AB Tech intersection (Behind Maple)
    • Proposed Road Design Cont.
      Next phase planning
      Cut and fill
      Switchbacks
      Currently placed to grade
      radius to small for 4 lane road
      Tie in point at intersection of AB Tech campus
      4 lane to 2 lane
      Currently road between 3% and 7% grade
      Topo survey needed to obtain proper grade
      Landscape buffering between road and residential properties
    • Proposed Bridge to A-B Technical C.C.
    • Proposed AB Tech Bridge
      Design Specifications
      240 Ft Bridge span
      Minimum height 26 ft.
      With in specifications for railroad crossing
      Allowed for two tracks on either side of previous tracks
      Next phase planning
      Currently 9% grade from bridge to Lyman Rd intersection
      Approximately 20 ft of fill needed to obtain reasonable grade
      Bridge Piers
      Bridge Gerters
    • Proposed Bridge location to A-B Tech C.C.
    • Proposed Bridge to A-B Tech C.C. Over Rail Road Yard
    • Preliminary Soil StudyFrom the United States Department of Agriculture
      Jared Ensley
    • Amboy Bridge
    • Soil Report
      • Sandy Clay soil
      • Requires certain depth
      • Assumptions made, need to be reviewed at next stage
      • If replacement needed, soil cut could be placed
    • Abutments
      • Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE)
      • Drilled Shaft
    • Mechanically Stabilized Earth Abutment
      Pros:
      • Earthwork is usually cheaper
      • Speed of construction
      • Multiple contractors may be used
      Cons:
      • Excavated soil would be wasted
      • Reusable soil would need to be stored off site temporarily
      http://www.sr85-123.com/gallery_past.php
      http://www.berlinvt.org/1057-01%20Report.pdf
    • Drilled Shaft Abutment
      Pros:
      • Limited excavation
      • As long as it is placed in the bedrock, no rehabilitation needed on back slope
      Cons:
      • Auger cuttings would likely be wasted
      • More expensive than MSE abutment
      http://northwest.construction.com/northwest_construction_news/2010/1001_DBMCompletes.asp
      http://www.berlinvt.org/1057-01%20Report.pdf
    • Bridge to AB-Tech
    • Soil Report
      • Loamy Clay Soil (fill)
      • Good base
      • Assumptions made
      • More testing needed
    • Hydrology & Hydraulics for Bridge Design
    • Bridge Design Objectives
      Provide for the safe traveling of the public across a waterway.
      Allowing for transportation of storm discharges through the structure without impacting the traveling public, damage to properties or the environment.
    • Real-Time Water Data for French Broad Watershed
    • Asheville Flood, 2004
    • FRENCH BROAD RIVER AT ASHEVILLE, NC 
      Daily stream flow Avg.;  
      (Min)(Max)
      2,420(ft3/s)   3,050(ft3/s)
    • PeakRunoff (existing)
    • PeakRunoff (proposed)
    • PeakRunoff (comparison)
      Proposed 3,000,000(cfs)
      Existing 1,200,000(cfs)
      An addition of 1,800,000 cfs
      • 37% more runoff then existing road.
      • 3,000,000 cfs can fill a basketball court 10 feet high in 1 min.
    • Storm Water
      Increase of 60-75 percent of impervious area due to lane widening and proposed design.
      Probably exceed design criteria for current storm water removal.
      Removal to be evaluated in the next phase.
    • Hydraulic Consideration for Bridge design
      Scour
      Bank
      Piers
      Backwater elevation change
    • Scour
      • Recommended Prevention Methods
      • Rip Rap (Piers and Bank)
      • A-Jacks (Piers only)
      • Further detail in the next phase
      • Placement
      • Size
      • Amount
    • ScourPrevention
    • Design for Scour Prevention
      Round piers were chosen
      Round piers allow a smoother transition of flow around pier
      Creates less backwater elevation
    • Bridge Requirements
      Any other structures located within the Downstream
      and Upstream survey limits should be surveyed like
      the project structure
      Any sharp bends, head cut, or significant changes in
      the stream channel or floodplain within the survey
      limits should also be surveyed.
      Channels that are flatter than 0.0004 ft/ft requires an
      additional cross section at 4000 ft. downstream of the
      Bridge.
    • Allowable Backwater
      • In general, the bridge should be designed to clear the
      design frequency flood
      • Meet NFIP (National Flood Insurance Program)
      requirements
      • Limited to 1-foot raise in 100-year backwater
      • Backwater should not be allowed to flood “Unreasonably large areas of usable land”
      • Backwater should not be increased in urban areas
    • BRIDGE DESIGN CRITERIA:
      Bridge was design to pass the 100 year
      storm with 2 feet of freeboard.
      There should be no impact to the
      upstream water surface elevation or
      floodway.
      BRIDGES OVER WATERWAYS
    • Preliminary estimates:
      New Vehicular Bridge Construction Over French Broad: $5,068,000
      Removal of Existing Bridge: $483,000
      New Pedestrian Bridge: $1,350,000
      Roundabout Construction: $1,750,000
      Total Construction Cost of $8,651,000