WHITE OAK SCIENCE GATEWAY MASTER PLAN Transportation Appendix
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
WHITE OAK SCIENCE GATEWAY MASTER PLAN Transportation Appendix Montgomery County Planning Department M‐NCPPC www.montgomeryplanning.org Contents Master Plan and Study Area Boundaries ..................................................................................................... 1 Existing Conditions – Master Planned Roadway Network .................................................................. 1 Intersection Capacity and Roadway Traffic Volumes ............................................................................ 2 US 29 (Columbia Pike) Overview ................................................................................................................ 13 External Trip Making Profile ......................................................................................................................... 14 Existing Metrobus and Ride‐On Service ................................................................................................... 17 Relevant Transit Planning Efforts ............................................................................................................... 19 Technical Approach for Recommendations Pertaining to BRT ...................................................... 25 Summary BRT Network Recommendations ........................................................................................... 28 Other Transit Service ........................................................................................................................................ 28 Pedestrian Network – Existing Conditions ............................................................................................. 30 Transit‐Oriented Development and Density .......................................................................................... 31 Non‐Auto Driver Mode Share Assumptions ............................................................................................ 36 Transportation Policy Area Review (TPAR) ........................................................................................... 38 Local Area Transportation Review (LATR) ............................................................................................. 42 Cordon Line Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 51 Vehicular Traffic Volumes .............................................................................................................................. 51 Recommended Master Plan Roadway Network ................................................................................... 52 Travel Demand Forecasting Process and Assumptions ..................................................................... 56 Travel/3 Forecasting Assumptions ............................................................................................................ 57 Local Area Modeling Process and Assumptions ................................................................................... 58 Figures Figure 1 Master Plan and Study Area Boundaries ........................................................................... 1 Figure 2 Traffic Analysis Sub‐Zones and Network for Local Area Model (LAM)................ 2 Figure 3 Existing Intersection CLVs Using 1600 CLV as the Congestion Standard .......... 6 Figure 4 US 29 South of Industrial Parkway ‐ AADT Volumes .................................................. 7 Figure 5 US 29 South of New Hampshire Avenue ‐ ADDT Volumes ........................................ 7 Figure 6 US 29 South of I‐495 ‐ AADT Volumes ................................................................................ 8 Figure 7 US 29 South of University Boulevard ‐ AADT Volumes .............................................. 8 Figure 8 New Hampshire Ave. North of Randolph Road ‐ AADT Volumes ........................... 9 Figure 9 New Hampshire Avenue North of US 29 ‐ AADT Volumes ........................................ 9 Figure 10 New Hampshire Avenue North of I‐495 ‐ AADT Volumes ..................................... 10 Figure 11 New Hampshire Ave. South of University Blvd.‐AADT Volumes .......................... 10 Figure 12 Randolph Road West of New Hampshire Ave. ‐ AADT Volumes ......................... 11 Figure 13 Cherry Hill Road South or East of US 29 ‐ AADT Volumes ..................................... 11 Figure 14 Cherry Hill Road East of Powder Mill Road ‐ AADT Volumes ............................... 12 Figure 15 Composition of External Travel Along US 29 – Current Conditions ................... 15 Figure 16 Composition of External Travel Along US 29 – Year 2040 ..................................... 16 Figure 17 Existing Local Bus Routes in the WOSG Plan Area and Vicinity ........................... 17 Figure 18 Bus Rapid Transit Conceptual Alignments and Station Locations ...................... 29 2 Figure 19 Plan Area Sidewalk Inventory ............................................................................................. 30 Figure 20 Characteristics of Mixed‐Use Transit‐Oriented Development .............................. 32 Figure 21 Transit Station Area Employment Densities ................................................................. 33 Figure 22 Transit Station Area Household Densities ..................................................................... 33 Figure 23 Transit Station Area Land Use Densities – All Stations ............................................ 35 Figure 24 Transit Station Area Land Use Densities – Low Density Stations ........................ 35 Figure 25 Countywide TPAR Analysis Results .................................................................................. 40 Figure 26 Countywide TPAR Analysis Results Excluding US 29 Traffic ................................ 42 Figure 27 Intersection Congestion Standards by Policy Area .................................................... 43 Figure 28 Intersection Analysis – Alternative Master Plan Scenario with US 29 Interchanges and Full Complement of Un‐programmed Improvements ......... 46 Figure 29 Intersection Analysis – Alternative Master Plan Scenario with US 29 Interchanges and Selected Un‐programmed Improvements ................................ 48 Figure 30 Powder Mill Road and Cherry Hill Road ......................................................................... 50 Figure 31 US 29 and University Boulevard ........................................................................................ 50 Figure 32 Changing Trip Profile with the Plan Vision ................................................................... 52 Figure 33 Street and Highway Classification Map ........................................................................... 55 Figure 34 Travel Forecasting Network ................................................................................................ 57 Tables Table 1 Existing Street and Highway Classifications .................................................................... 3 Table 2 Existing Critical Lane Volumes (CLVs) ............................................................................... 4 Table 3 MDSHA Intersection Level of Service (LOS) at Selected Locations ..................... 13 Table 4 Existing Local Bus Service in the WOSG Plan Area and Vicinity .......................... 18 Table 5 US 29 BRT Corridor.................................................................................................................. 26 Table 6 New Hampshire Avenue BRT Corridor ........................................................................... 27 Table 7 Randolph Road BRT Corridor .............................................................................................. 27 Table 8 Summary of Land Use/Transportation Scenarios ...................................................... 36 Table 9 Standards of Acceptable Roadway Average Level of Service (LOS) ................... 41 Table 10 Intersection Congestion Standards by Policy Area .................................................... 44 Table 11 Intersection Analysis – Alternative Master Plan Scenario with US 29 interchanges and Full Complement of Un‐programmed Improvements ......... 45 Table 12 Intersection Analysis – Alternative Master Plan Scenario with US 29 Interchanges and Selected Un‐programmed Improvements ................................ 47 Table 13 Master Plan Cordon Line Traffic Volumes ..................................................................... 51 Table 14 Existing and Proposed Street and Highway Classifications ................................... 53 Table 15 Local Area Model Peak Hour Trip Generation ............................................................. 58 Master Plan and Study Area Boundaries The transportation analysis for the White Oak Science Gateway Master Plan takes into account a larger study area and a smaller area defined by the Plan boundary (see Figure 1). The study area is comprised of the traffic analysis zones (TAZ’s) which are within and contiguous to the Plan boundary. The definition of the Plan area is important in that it is the first step in establishing the interface between the regional transportation model (Travel/3) and the Master Plan‐specific local area model (LAM). The Plan boundary is formally established by the Planning Board during its deliberations on the Plan scope of work. The more detailed transportation analysis (using the LAM) is conducted for the area within the Plan boundary. Figure 1 Master Plan and Study Area Boundaries The