How will the roadway system constraints - such as the 2-lane
capacity limit of the Scammell Bridge and US 4 - be accounted
for in the study? (Updated 4/17/08)
Future travel demand projections will reflect roadway system
capacity constraints within the study area such as US 4. The
Seacoast regional travel demand model distributes and assigns
traffic to the roadway network based in part on these capacity
constraints, in conjunction with changes in land use, the origins
and destinations of traffic, and the travel characteristics of
Seacoast area residents, employees and visitors. The travel demand
model has been updated to include the new census data, the
collection of new traffic counts, a new survey of Seacoast area
residents, employee and visitor travel characteristics, and an
updating of study area roadway capacities. The future (2025) study
area traffic projections reflect these updates, including the impact
of the roadway system's capacity constraints. The impact of future
traffic operations on these facilities - such as US Route 4 –
has been analyzed as part of the Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) under both the No Build and various Build Alternatives.
To what degree will the proposed improvements to the Little Bay
Bridges and Turnpike affect the properties of Dover Road
residents and others? (Updated 5/6/09)
During the development of the Preferred Alternative, public meetings
were held and public input received to formulate the Alternative.
The Department has strived to balance the various public benefits
with the environmental issues and impacts to the abutting
properties. In addition to meeting the Project Purpose and Need, the
chosen Alternative needs to be practicable, affordable, permittable,
constructible, and supported by the community. On September
21, 2006, a formal Public Hearing was held to gain approval for the
Preferred Alternative. On August 22, 2007, approval from the
Special Committee was received for the layout of the project.
The general nature and limits of impacts to private properties are
shown on the Selected Alternative. The project’s final
design will refine the design to further minimize property impacts
to the extent practicable while still meeting the project’s
purpose and need.
(
top)
Have noise impacts been addressed? (Updated 4/17/08)
Yes. Sound barriers are proposed along both sides of the Turnpike
from Hilton Park north to approximately 2,000 feet beyond the Dover
toll plaza. Structure type and appearance of the barriers have yet
to be determined.
Will potential noise impacts to study area residents and
businesses resulting from recommended study improvements be
assessed and mitigated? (Updated 5/6/09)
Yes, noise impacts under the Build (infrastructure improvement
alternatives) conditions were analyzed as part of the EIS.
This analysis deemed four (4) segments of noise walls on the Dover
side of the channel exceed a 66-decibel threshold or exceed the
no-build condition by 15-decibels. The Department will conduct
meetings with the neighborhoods adjacent to the soundwalls to
determine if the neighborhoods support the construction of a
soundwall.
How can residents and interested parties stay informed on the
project and be notified of future public meetings? (Updated
5/6/09)
The project website contains pertinent project information,
including current project status, meeting notes, schedule of
upcoming public meetings and contact information. A
feedback form and project mailing list subscription
is also available to those desiring to offer comments or receive
notices via the internet. Additionally, one can contact Ms. Jennifer
Reczek, Project Manager, directly at the NHDOT (603) 271-3401 and
request subscription to the project mailing list and receive notices
of upcoming public meetings. The abutting property owners within the
project limits receive notice of the Public Informational Meetings
as they are scheduled.
(
top)
Why is the project's timeline so long? Why can't construction
start sooner than 2010? Why isn't stronger consideration given
to advance the project's schedule considering this is a major
evacuation route for an incident at the nuclear power plant or
other natural or man-made disaster in the seacoast area? Can
something be done in the interim to alleviate some of the
congestion and safety problems evident in the area? (Updated
5/6/09)
Prior to undertaking construction to remedy the problems in vicinity
of the Little Bay Bridges, engineering and environmental evaluations
(completed within the framework of an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)) and the final engineering design must be completed and proper
approvals and permits received. For a project of this magnitude in
an area of high sensitivity, there are numerous environmental,
transportation and property related concerns that must be fully
evaluated that typically takes a fair amount of time to resolve.
The final engineering design was started in 2009 and will take
approximately 5 years to complete the designs for the entire
project. The Department is planning on utilizing several
construction contracts to construct the entire project and will
pursue the project construction schedule as aggressively as
possible. A
schedule of the various phases with targeted timeframes
is included on the project's website.
In order to alleviate some of the problems in vicinity of the Little Bay Bridges in the near term, the Department has worked with the Town of Newington to construct an interim project at Exit 4 and 4N to improve safety and traffic flow in that area. As part of that project, improvements to the on and off ramps at Nimble Hill Road and at Shattuck Way, the construction of a two-way connection beneath the Turnpike with the extension of Shattuck Way intersecting Nimble Hill Road, and the elimination of the southbound median turnaround were constructed in 2006. In Dover, short-term improvements were completed to the Exit 6W deceleration lane (completed in June 2005) and are planned for the Exit 6 southbound on-ramp merge condition (completed in summer 2008) to improve safety and traffic operations in the Exit 6 area. These projects are intermediate steps toward improving safety and lessening frustration in the study area prior to the ultimate improvement being constructed.
The so called “Stimulus” funding that was appropriated to the Department was considered for this project. However, the final engineering design was started in January 2009 which didn’t provide sufficient time to develop construction plans, acquire the necessary property and address utility relocations within the timeframe required within the stipulated regulations. The utilization of additional “Stimulus” funding should it become available will be evaluated for use on this project.
(
top)
(
top)
Will the project take into account the growth that is
anticipated to occur in the seacoast area and points north over
the next 10, 20 years, and widen the bridges and the turnpike
accordingly to adequately handle the projected traffic? (Updated
4/17/08)
The Seacoast travel demand model has been updated in conjunction
with the Little Bay Bridge project to forecast future traffic
volumes. The model takes into account changing land use and travel
patterns in the region. The model also establishes a more accurate
calibration of transportation mode choices specific to the Seacoast
area to help identify possible alternative transportation choices.
The project has used the model information to forecast projected
traffic volumes (2025) along the many sectors of the corridor and
has designed the various components accordingly.
Will this project address the limited sight distance over the
existing bridges created by the sharp vertical curvature of the
riding surface? (Updated 4/17/08)
The existing profile of the Little Bay Bridges (LBB) corresponds to
a 60 mph design speed and reflects the 3.5 percent grades on the
bridges. Driver sight distance associated with 60 mph is not a
safety deficiency, in contrast to the narrow shoulders
(2’-0” to 2’-3”) on the existing bridges
which are safety deficiencies. The 60 mph design speed is 10
mph greater than the 50 mph posted speed limit for the bridges and
the Exit 1 through Exit 6 study area. The 50 mph posted speed
limit is appropriate for the study area; this area is a zone of
transition where abutting land use is developed, interchange spacing
is relatively close, and there are relatively high volumes of
traffic entering and exiting the Turnpike. Under these
conditions, drivers expect reduced speeds, similar to comparable
sections of urban roadways such as I-93 in Manchester and the F.E.
Everett Turnpike in Nashua.
The Selected Alternative maintains the 60 mph design speed profile, widens and rehabilitates the LBB and eliminates the substandard shoulder deficiencies, and improves the traffic weaving conditions which are prevalent on the existing approaches to the bridges.
(
top)
Will this project include a study of the possible
re-construction of the old railroad bridge east of the Little
Bay Bridges? Will the design of the future bridges across the
Bay include provisions for the grade and weight requirements of
railroads? (Updated 4/17/08)
The reconstruction of the old railroad bridge east of the Little Bay
Bridges to follow the old railroad corridor (from Bloody Point
through Hilton Park alongside the Turnpike) is not considered
feasible due to the extremely high cost of such an endeavor and the
magnitude of impacts to private property, Hilton Park, and Little
Bay. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) reviewed the railroad
corridors in the region and identified existing and planned rail
networks. Opportunities to enhance the existing network and
constraints to providing passenger and freight rail service were
identified and evaluated. This evaluation weighed the
potential to divert automobile trips to passenger rail against the
infrastructure requirements, capital costs and impacts to the
environment and private properties. Based on this evaluation,
expansion of the existing Downeaster service to better serve the
commuters in the Dover and Rochester vicinity was deemed the most
viable of the rail alternatives, was incorporated as part of the
Selected Alternative, and was implemented in August 2007.
Other rail alternatives – which would provide passenger and
rail service between Rochester and Portsmouth – were deemed
infeasible based on the high capital costs of infrastructure
requirements ($205.5 million - $250.7 million (2007 dollars)),
relatively low ridership projections, and the impacts to the
environment and private properties.
Why doesn’t the study area include the Dover Tollbooth?
(Updated 4/17/08)
It has been consistently stated and acknowledged from the
project’s initiation, as well as repeated throughout the study
at numerous Public Informational and Advisory Task Force meetings
that the Dover toll facility and toll-related issues fall outside
the project study area and scope of study. First, the
project’s study area was identified and established following
the 1998 Route 16 Corridor Protection Study and the 2000
Newington-Dover Feasibility Study by determining that the current
and future Turnpike traffic operating conditions north of the toll
plaza were satisfactory. In contrast, the section of the
Turnpike between Exit 1 and the Dover Toll Plaza operates at a poor
level of service, both in the current and future design year.
Secondly, changes to the Turnpike tolling system require State
Legislative and Executive Council approval, and may have revenue
impacts. These are considered state-level issues potentially
affecting the entire Turnpike system, not project level
matters. The Newington-Dover project was never envisioned to
include an assessment of potential traffic impacts resulting from
changes in toll facility locations or tolling pricing policies.
(
top)
Will this project help reduce bypass traffic using Dover Point
Road to avoid paying the toll? (Updated 4/17/08)
The NHDOT has reviewed the historic traffic data on Dover Point
Road, US 4, and Spaulding Turnpike in the area of the Dover Toll
Plaza. Traffic volumes (AADT), from 1993-2003, have increased
from 25,223 to 39,109 (55%) at the Dover toll facility, while
traffic volumes along Dover Point Road (at traffic counter 125001
which is located south of Middlebrook Road) have decreased from
13,547 to 12,901 (-4.7%). During the same 1993-2003 period, NB
traffic exiting the Turnpike at Exit 6 to travel east on Dover Point
Road has increased slightly (1%) on a daily basis, and has actually
decreased by approximately 7.6% during the weekday PM peak
hour. With respect to US 4, daily and weekday PM peak hour NB
exiting traffic from the Turnpike at Exit 6 to travel westbound on
US 4 has decreased during the 1996-2003, 7-year period, by
approximately 1.5% and 11%, respectively. As such, the
perception that traffic is using Dover Point Road to bypass the
Dover Toll Plaza is misconceived. To the contrary, historic
traffic volume data and regional travel demand projections
demonstrate a greater regional transportation dependency on the
Turnpike (or allowing more traffic to stay on the Turnpike) as
opposed to a larger diversion of traffic to the secondary routes in
the region.
Is the No-Build Alternative a viable long-term solution?
(Updated 4/17/08)
No. The purpose of this project is to improve transportation
efficiency and reduce safety problems while minimizing social,
economic and environmental impacts. Travel demand management
alternatives – expanded bus and rail service and
employer-based programs such as ridesharing and flexible work hours
– will not in and of themselves, or in conjunction with
short-term transportation system management (TSM) improvements,
significantly improve the current level of traffic congestion nor
eliminate the major safety deficiencies (e.g., lack of adequate
shoulder areas on the bridges and bridge approaches, inadequate
auxiliary lanes and close spacing of interchanges) within the study
area. Future No-Build traffic conditions will significantly increase
both the level and duration of daily traffic congestion with or
without implementation of transit and other TDM alternatives, and
the probability of increased vehicle crashes.
(
top)
Were high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes considered as an
alternative to reduce the number of lanes required and reduce
the width of pavement cross section? (Updated 4/17/08)
Several HOV lane alternatives were considered. Unfortunately, given
the compactness of the study area, the relatively short distance
between Exits 1 and 6 in comparison to the distance required to
safely merge and weave traffic entering and exiting the HOV lane,
and the relatively low level of projected ridership, HOV
alternatives between Exits 1 and 6 are infeasible from a traffic
safety and operations perspective. Also, the seven-lane and
eight-lane HOV alternatives require a wider pavement cross-section
than the eight-lane typical section.
Why are four lanes of travel in each direction recommended
between Exits 3 and 6, as opposed to three lanes of travel in
each direction? (Updated 4/17/08)
Three general purpose lanes and one traffic management lane are
required between Exits 3 and 6 to provide a satisfactory level of
traffic service for the design year (2025) and beyond, as well as
allowing traffic to safely enter, change lanes or exit the Turnpike
between Exits 3 and 6. Three lanes in each direction combined with
the most aggressive transit and TDM program will not provide a safe
and satisfactory level of traffic service, thus would not meet the
project’s purpose and need.
Why are Exits 3 (Woodbury Avenue) and 6 (US 4/Dover Point Road)
being reconfigured? (Updated 4/17/08)
Reconfiguration of Exit 3 will allow full access from the north and
south to both Woodbury Avenue and Arboretum Drive (Pease Tradeport).
Reconfiguration of Exit 6 allows full access from the north and
south to US 4 and Dover Point Road and improved local connections
between Spur Road and Boston Harbor Road, and between US 4 and Dover
Point Road. These full-service interchanges will eliminate some of
the circuitous travel that presently occurs on the Turnpike.
(
top)
At Exit 6, why is the signalized diamond interchange preferable
for northbound exiting traffic to US 4, in comparison to the
current loop ramp? (Updated 4/17/08)
Future travel demands would require a 2-lane loop ramp. The
signalized northbound off-ramp (double left-turn) will be safer,
cost approximately $2M less to construct and would avoid the
potential for vehicles queuing back from the Dover Toll Plaza and
blocking the new northbound on-ramp which would occur under the
2-lane loop ramp concept.
Won’t traffic signals at Exit 6 cause excessive delay for
exiting northbound traffic headed westbound to US 4? (Updated
4/17/08)
No. Once existing traffic turns left towards US 4, traffic will flow
freely onto the Scammell Bridge. The existing traffic signal at
Boston Harbor Road/Spur Road will be eliminated, and westbound
traffic will not be required to stop at the proposed southbound
on-ramp traffic signal.
Why must Exits 2 (Fox Point Road) and 5 (Hilton Drive) be
closed? (Updated 4/17/08)
Given the proximity of Exit 2 to Exit 3, and the proximity of Exit 5
to Exit 6, both are proposed to be closed due to traffic operational
and safety concerns. In addition, redesign of the Exit 5 ramps to
minimum standards would severely impact both Hilton Park and the
Wentworth Terrace neighborhood.
What is the extent of wetlands impact and what is proposed as
mitigation? (Updated 2/24/11)
Approximately 11.9 acres of wetlands in Newington and 8.5 acres of
wetlands in Dover will be impacted as a result of the project. The
wetlands mitigation package for these impacts consists of the
following:
- The preservation of the 120-acre Tuttle Farm in Dover is completed
- The preservation of the 40-acre Day property in Dover within the Blackwater Brook watershed is completed
- A conservation easement for the restoration of approximately 3,400 feet of Railway Brook in Newington is currently being pursued
- The Department was unable to come to an agreement on the Watson property and is currently pursuing other properties for preservation in the Knight Brook watershed in Newington.
(
top)
How much will the project cost to construct, and what is the
construction schedule? (Updated 2/24/11)
The estimated construction cost of the "Selected
Alternative" is $207 M (2010 dollars). The total cost,
including right-of-way acquisition, engineering, TDM/TSM measures,
and mitigation is estimated to be $257 M (2010 dollars).
Construction is planned to occur from 2010 to 2018. During
construction, two lanes of traffic flow in each direction will be
maintained and expanded bus service, as proposed, will be provided.