DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft NSF Suitland Transportation Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft NSF Suitland Transportation Management Plan Transportation Management Plan Naval Support Facility Suitland Naval Support Activity Washington 2019 Transportation Management Plan Update for Naval Support Facility Suitland DRAFT REPORT Prepared for review by the National Capital Planning Commission Prepared by The Onyx Group – Contracted by NAVFAC Washington DRAFT – May 2019 Prepared for NCPC Transportation Management Plan Naval Support Facility Suitland CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................... I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... III 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 2. CURRENT CONDITIONS ................................................................................................. 4 2.1. SITE CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................................................. 4 2.2. TRANSPORTATION NETWORK AND FACILITIES .......................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 Local Roadway Network ...................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.2 Suitland Federal Center Site Access and Vehicular Circulation ................................................................... 8 2.2.3 NSF Suitland Site Access and Vehicular Circulation ...................................................................................... 10 2.2.4 Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................................................................. 12 2.2.5 Bicycle Facilities .................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.2.6 Transit Facilities ..................................................................................................................................................... 16 2.2.7 Parking ................................................................................................................................................................... 18 3. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND ROADWAY CAPACITY ....................................... 21 3.1. EXISTING PEAK PERIOD TRIPS .............................................................................................................. 21 3.2. EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS....................................................... 26 3.2.1 Existing Critical Lane Volume Analysis .............................................................................................................. 26 3.2.2 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Analysis .................................................................................................... 27 4. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS .................................................................................... 30 4.1. FUTURE BACKGROUND (NO ACTION) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ............................................................. 30 4.1.1 Study Area Traffic Growth Projections ............................................................................................................. 30 4.1.2 Future Background (No Action) Traffic Conditions Operations Analysis ................................................... 33 DRAFT – May 2019 Prepared for NCPC Transportation Management Plan Naval Support Facility Suitland 4.2. TOTAL FUTURE (ACTION) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ..................................................................................... 36 4.2.1 NSF Suitland Traffic Growth Projections ............................................................................................................ 36 4.2.2 Total Future (Action) Traffic Conditions Operations Analysis ....................................................................... 39 4.3. TRAFFIC CAPACITY ANALYSIS COMPARISON ........................................................................................ 43 5. INITIATING THE PROGRAM ......................................................................................... 45 5.1. EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION SURVEY ..................................................................................................... 45 5.1.1 Residential Locations of NSF Suitland Employees .......................................................................................... 45 5.1.2 Commuting Time of Employees ........................................................................................................................ 48 5.1.3 Employee Vehicle Occupancy ........................................................................................................................ 52 5.1.4 Arrival and Departure Times of Employees ..................................................................................................... 53 5.2. MODE OF TRAVEL COMPARISON (2005 AND 2019) ............................................................................. 54 5.3. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................... 56 5.3.1 Major Transportation Concerns and Issues at NSF Suitland .......................................................................... 56 5.3.2 Goals ...................................................................................................................................................................... 56 5.3.3 Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................. 57 5.3.4 Mode-Share Target Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 57 6. EXISTING TRANSPORTATON DEMAND MANAGEMENT .................................................. 58 6.1. EXISTING SUITLAND FEDERAL CENTER PROGRAMS ................................................................................ 58 6.2. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AT NSF SUITLAND ....................................... 58 7. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) UPDATE ......................................... 62 7.1. EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR (ETC) ........................................................................... 62 7.2. CENTRALIZED COMMUTER TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION ............................................................. 62 7.3. PARTICIPATION IN REGIONAL COMMUTER PROGRAMS AND STRATEGIES ....................................... 62 DRAFT – May 2019 Prepared for NCPC Transportation Management Plan Naval Support Facility Suitland 7.4. INCREASE CARPOOL AND VANPOOL USAGE ....................................................................................... 63 7.5. INCREASE TRANSIT USAGE ......................................................................................................................... 64 7.6. INCREASE BICYCLE USAGE ........................................................................................................................ 66 7.7. EXAMINE PEDESTRIAN NETWORK AND FACILITIES FOR IMPROVEMENTS ............................................ 67 7.8. PARKING MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................................... 67 7.9. EXAMINE EXPANSION OF TELEWORK OPPORTUNITIES........................................................................... 69 7.10. FLEXIBLE AND ALTERNATIVE WORK SCHEDULES ..................................................................................... 69 7.11. SHARED-USE VEHICLES AND SHUTTLE SERVICE ....................................................................................... 69 8. MONITORING AND EVALUATION ................................................................................ 70 8.1. PROGRAM MONITORING AND EVALUATION ......................................................................................... 70 8.2. MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS ................................................................................................................... 71 9. FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION ......................................................... 72 DRAFT – May 2019 Prepared for NCPC Transportation Management Plan Naval Support Facility Suitland LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Suitland Federal Center ............................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 2: Regional Site Location ................................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 3: Surrounding Roadway Network ................................................................................................................ 7 Figure 4: Suitland Federal Center Roadway Network and Gate Locations .................................................... 9 Figure 5: NSF Suitland Access Gate Locations and Internal Vehicular Circulation ...................................... 11 Figure 6: Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities ............................................................................................................ 14 Figure 7: Pedestrian Walk Times and Distances ..................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1542‐1550 First Street, Sw Design Review
    COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION REVIEW 1542‐1550 FIRST STREET, SW DESIGN REVIEW WASHINGTON, DC August 4, 2017 ZONING COMMISSION District of Columbia Case No. 17-13 ZONING COMMISSION District of Columbia CASE NO.17-13 DeletedEXHIBIT NO.17A Prepared by: 1140 Connecticut Avenue NW 3914 Centreville Road 15125 Washington Street Suite 600 Suite 330 Suite 136 Washington, DC 20036 Chantilly, VA 20151 Haymarket, VA 20169 Tel: 202.296.8625 Tel: 703.787.9595 Tel: 703.787.9595 Fax: 202.785.1276 Fax: 703.787.9905 Fax: 703.787.9905 www.goroveslade.com This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of services, is intended for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization by Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc., shall be without liability to Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Contents of Study .................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Study Area Overview ................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Case for Reconnecting Southeast Washington DC
    1 Reimagining DC 295 as a vital multi modal corridor: The Case for Reconnecting Southeast Washington DC Jonathan L. Bush A capstone thesis paper submitted to the Executive Director of the Urban & Regional Planning Program at Georgetown University’s School of Continuing Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Masters of Professional Studies in Urban & Regional Planning. Faculty Advisor: Howard Ways, AICP Academic Advisor: Uwe S. Brandes, M.Arch © Copyright 2017 by Jonathan L. Bush All Rights Reserved 2 ABSTRACT Cities across the globe are making the case for highway removal. Highway removal provides alternative land uses, reconnects citizens and natural landscapes separated by the highway, creates mobility options, and serves as a health equity tool. This Capstone studies DC 295 in Washington, DC and examines the cases of San Francisco’s Embarcadero Freeway, Milwaukee’s Park East Freeway, New York City’s Sheridan Expressway and Seoul, South Korea’s Cheonggyecheon Highway. This study traces the history and the highway removal success using archival sources, news circulars, planning documents, and relevant academic research. This Capstone seeks to provide a platform in favor DC 295 highway removal. 3 KEYWORDS Anacostia, Anacostia Freeway, Anacostia River, DC 295, Highway Removal, I-295, Kenilworth Avenue, Neighborhood Planning, Southeast Washington DC, Transportation Planning, Urban Infrastructure RESEARCH QUESTIONS o How can Washington’s DC 295 infrastructure be modified to better serve local neighborhoods? o What opportunities
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Congestion Analysis Report for the Baltimore Region Top 10
    Quarterly Congestion Analysis Report for the Baltimore Region Top 10 Bottleneck Locations 2nd Quarter 2018 Table of Contents About the region .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 How bottleneck conditions are tracked .................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Maps Defined ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Top 10 Bottleneck Map .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Top 10 Bottleneck List ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 #1-10 Ranked Bottlenecks with Maps, Timeline, Traffic Counts and Notes .......................................................................................................................... 8-27 Speed Maps for the Baltimore Region (AM and PM Peak) ...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • I-66 Express Lanes Outside the Capital Beltway Intermediate Traffic and Revenue Study Final Report
    I-66 Express Lanes Outside the Capital Beltway Intermediate Traffic and Revenue Study - FINAL REPORT- Presented to: Submitted By: September 2015 Cover Letter Tollway Towers North, Suite 870 15770 North Dallas Parkway Ali K. Soroush, Ph.D. Dallas, TX 75248 Project Manager Tel: 214-245-5300 [email protected] Fax: 214-889-5049 Date: September 23, 2015 To: Morteza Farajian, Ph.D. Program Manager Office of Transportation Public-Private Partnerships Virginia Department of Transportation Subject: I-66 Express Lanes Outside the Capital Beltway Intermediate Traffic and Revenue Study Final Report Dear Mr. Farajian, C&M Associates, Inc. is pleased to provide you with the Final Report of the I-66 Express Lanes Outside the Capital Beltway Intermediate Traffic and Revenue Study. This report presents an overview of the proposed project, an assessment of existing traffic conditions and socioeconomic data in the project area, and an overview of field data collection and analyses. The report also presents details regarding the modeling approach, methodology, and, most importantly, the traffic and revenue forecast. The C&M project team expresses its sincere gratitude to VDOT for providing the opportunity to participate in this project. Respectfully, Carlos M. Contreras, MBA Ali Soroush, Ph.D. President Project Manager I-66 Express Lanes Outside the Capital Beltway Intermediate Traffic and Revenue Study Prepared For: By: Final Report September 2015 Disclaimer The results of this study constitute the opinion of C&M with respect to the tolled facility’s future traffic and revenue. The traffic and revenue projections provided in this report were developed based on standard professional practices and the information available at the time the study was executed, subject to the time and budget constraints of the study’s scope of work.
    [Show full text]
  • Bowie Washington Clinton Oxon Hill Camp Springs
    503 Z7 to/from Laurel to/from Columbia 409 Z2 to/from Olney C8 to/from White Flint to/from Elkridge Z11 to/from Laurel Racetrack Burtonsville Park & Ride Montgomery 295 St 302 Main St Z6 Sandy Spring Rd 89M WESTFARM to/from Burtonsville/ RTA provides local service Castle Blvd Z7 Old Sandy 87 Z2 Z7 to/from throughout Central Maryland, Spring Rd Z8 Z6 Paul S. Sarbanes Transit Center to/from Greencastle/Briggs Chaney (Silver Spring m ) Sweitzer Ln including Laurel. 503 COLUMBIA PIKE 302 Gorman Ave 5th St WHITE OAK 409 K6 Industrial Intercounty Connector Van Dusen Rd 87 Pkwy CALVERTON 141 89 89M 89 Laurel Tech Broadbirch Dr 141 to/from Rd Galway Dr Gaithersburg Park & Ride Calverton Blvd Laurel 301 Washington Blvd Van Dusen Rd Fort Meade Rd B30 Z6 Z7 Regional Z7 302 LAUREL Baltimore-Washingtonto/from Pkwy BWI Airport via Arundel Mills Z7 502 Hospital Ashford 4th St LOCKWOOD DR Blvd 502 to/from Arundel Mills Z11 K9 R2 Beltsville Dr 87 C8 FDA Cherry Ln Z2 C8 Red Clay Rd PATUXENT RIVER Plum Orchard Dr Towne Centre 502 Old Z8 Mulberry St Laurel 87 Annapolis Rd Broadbirch Dr Broadbirch R2 Z6 95 301 White Oak Cherry Hill Rd 89 Cherry Ln Adventist St Cypress 302 502 89M Laurel-Bowie Federal Medical Center 87 Z7 Rd Research South Laurel NEW HAMPSHIRE AVE AmmendaleVirginia Rd B30 Muirkirk Park & Ride Center 86 Manor Ritz Way Baltimore Ave COLUMBIA PIKE Rd Rd Z7 Centerpark Powder Mill Rd Laurel-Bowie Rd89M 87 Office Park Contee Rd 301 89 Z2, Z6, Z7, Z8, Z11 to/from Powder Mill Rd Muirkirk Rd 89M Muirkirk Paul S.
    [Show full text]
  • NCPC Provides Feedback on the Smithsonian's South Mall Campus Master Plan
    MEDIA RELEASE For Immediate Release Julia Koster April 6, 2018 202-482-7211 or [email protected] Stephen Staudigl 202-482-7279 or [email protected] NCPC Provides Feedback on the Smithsonian’s South Mall Campus Master Plan Commission also comments on three potential sites for the Desert Storm and Desert Shield Memorial Washington, DC—At its Thursday, April 5 meeting, the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) provided comments on the Smithsonian Institution’s draft master plan for its 17-acre South Mall Campus that stretches from the Freer Gallery of Art to the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden. The plan will guide short- and long- term development at the site over the next 20-30 years and identifies projects to improve visitor services and address long-term space requirements as well as physical and operational deficiencies. The draft master plan has changed substantially since the Smithsonian released the original concept in 2014. It takes into consideration feedback obtained through the planning process, including public comments. The Commission supported the Smithsonian’s preferred option for the master plan. This option: • Restores the Smithsonian Castle as the main visitor center and the physical and symbolic center of the Smithsonian’s museums on the National Mall. • Makes the underground Quadrangle Building more functional and modern, with its public spaces consolidated, and its 30-year old roof replaced. • Creates two new pavilions to improve pedestrian connections and accessibility and provides better entries into the Sackler Gallery and National Museum of African Art. • Locates a new Haupt Garden, maintaining many of the current garden’s characteristics, on the Quadrangle Building’s reconstructed roof.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    INTRODUCTION Other Transportation Documents This report is a TMP (Transportation Management Plan) for the This TMP is just one of several transportation new DC United Stadium in the Buzzard Point neighborhood of efforts/reports that will be performed for the new DC Washington, D.C. This TMP was prepared in coordination with a United Stadium. Other efforts will include a partnership between the District of Columbia government, Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) presented via an including the DC Department of Transportation (DDOT), and Environmental Mitigation Study (EMS) and a the ownership of the DC United professional soccer club. Transportation Operations Plan (TOP). This TMP document is a planning-level report that summarizes The TIA will contain a detailed technical review of the travel characteristics of Stadium patrons, reviews intersection capacity, as well as impacts to other modes of travel on game-days. It is intended to identify comparable stadiums, and outlines recommendations for each the amount of additional transportation activity mode of transportation for accommodating game-day expected during game-days and will recommend transportation needs. It is intended to be the guiding document mitigation measures to alleviate concerns. This will be that outlines transportation strategies that other included in the EMS for the new Stadium. This TMP transportation efforts and actions follow. As such, it will be document will be coordinated with the TIA by providing updated several times prior to the expected inaugural season in information on patron travel characteristics and strategies to manage demand. 2017. The TOP, prepared closer to the stadium’s opening, This report is written assuming that the new DC United Stadium acts as an operations “how to” manual.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Traffic Technical Report
    United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Headquarters Consolidation Traffic Technical Report December 2016 GSA/CIS Preliminary Draft Review Prepared by: The US General Services Administration With Technical Assistance from: 1 USCIS Lease Consolidation Traffic Technical Report Project Summary 1 PROJECT SUMMARY 2 INTRODUCTION 3 This Traffic Technical Report has been prepared for the United States General Services Administration (GSA) 4 to assess and report potential transportation impacts resulting from the proposed consolidation of the 5 United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) at a site in southeastern Maryland, located at One 6 Town Center, Camp Springs, Prince George’s County. The proposed consolidation would result in the 7 relocation of approximately 3,200 USCIS employees to a single 575,000 rentable square-foot (RSF) office site, 8 from six other offices: 20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, 131 M Street, NE, 9 1200 First Street, NE, and 633 Third Street, NW in Washington, DC and 2121 Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. 10 The One Town Center site is located within the Town Center at Camp Springs, a 227.4 acre subdivision 11 originally known as Capital Gateway. This subdivision is located on the northeast side of the Branch Avenue 12 Metro Station in the Morningside area of Prince George’s County, Maryland. There have been several 13 Detailed Site Plan approvals covering different parts of the Capital Gateway subdivision, zoned as M-X-T, that 14 include plans for residential, retail, and office uses. The latest and final approved plan includes the proposed 15 10.96 acre USCIS headquarters.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Southern Green Line Station Area Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment
    Preliminary Southern Green Line Station Area Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment SOUTHERN AVENUE NAYLOR ROAD SUITLAND BRANCH AVENUE The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission www.pgplanning.org Abstract Title: Preliminary Southern Green Line Station Area Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment Author: The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Subject: Approved Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for Central Annapolis Road Date: May 2013 Source of Copies: The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission 14741 Governor Oden Bowie Drive Upper Marlboro, MD 20772 (301) 952-3195 Series Number: 108132405 Number of Pages: 202 Abstract: II Preliminary Southern Green Line Station Area Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment Southern Green Line Station Area Plan Preliminary Southern Green Line Station Area Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment May 2013 The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission 14741 Governor Oden Bowie Drive Upper Marlboro, Maryland 20772 301-952-3972 www.pgplanning.org III Preliminary Southern Green Line Station Area Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Elizabeth M. Hewlett, Chairman Françoise Carrier, Vice Chairman Officers Patricia Colihan Barney, Executive Director Joseph Zimmerman, Secretary-Treasurer Adrian R. Gardner, General Counsel The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission is a bicounty agency, created by the General Assembly of Maryland in 1927. The Commission’s geographic authority extends to the great majority of Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties: the Maryland-Washington Regional District (M-NCPPC planning jurisdiction) comprises 1,001 square miles, while the Metropolitan District (parks) comprises 919 square miles, in the two counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Fiscal Year 2021 Committee Budget Report
    FISCAL YEAR 2021 COMMITTEE BUDGET REPORT TO: Members of the Council of the District of Columbia FROM: Councilmember Mary M. Cheh Chairperson, Committee on Transportation & the Environment DATE: June 25, 2020 SUBJECT: DRAFT Report and recommendations of the Committee on Transportation & the Environment on the Fiscal Year 2021 budget for agencies under its purview The Committee on Transportation & the Environment (“Committee”), having conducted hearings and received testimony on the Mayor’s proposed operating and capital budgets for Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2021 for the agencies under its jurisdiction, reports its recommendations for review and consideration by the Committee of the Whole. The Committee also comments on several sections in the Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Support Act of 2020, as proposed by the Mayor, and proposes several of its own subtitles. Table of Contents Summary ........................................................................................... 3 A. Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................... 3 B. Operating Budget Summary Table .................................................................................................. 7 C. Full-Time Equivalent Summary Table ............................................................................................. 9 D. Operating & Capital Budget Ledgers ........................................................................................... 11 E. Committee Transfers ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Final PMOC Safetrackreport (June2017)
    Monthly Report SafeTrack Program Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) June 2017 Progress Surge 15 – Building forms for new grout pads between Cheverly and Landover Stations October 25, 2017 PMOC Contract Number: DTFT60-14-D-00011 Task Order Number: 006, Project Number: DC-27-5272, Work Order No. 02 OPs Referenced: 01, 25 Hill International, Inc. One Commerce Square 2005 Market Street, 17th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 PMOC Lead: Michael E. Radbill, P.E. (215) 309-7926 [email protected] Length of Time PMOC Assigned to Project under current Contract: 3 years, 5 months Length of Time PMOC Lead Assigned to Project: 5 years, 6 months TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1 A. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 2 B. PROGRAM STATUS ....................................................................................................... 2 C. CORE ACCOUNTABILITY INFORMATION ....................................................................... 3 D. MAJOR PROBLEMS/ISSUES ........................................................................................... 4 MAIN REPORT ....................................................................................................................... 7 1. PROGRAM STATUS ........................................................................................................... 7 2. PROGRAM COST ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ROUTE RESTRICTIONS Bridge Under Clearance/Overhead Clearance Information September 3, 2021 Page 1 of 16 INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS
    *Restrictions are subject to change at any time MARYLAND ROUTE RESTRICTIONS Bridge Under Clearance/Overhead Clearance Information September 3, 2021 Page 1 of 16 INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS I-70 All loads 120,000 lbs or more must crawl Bridge #2111803 (I-70 EB over MD 65/exit [Washington] 29) at 5 MPH. I-495 (IL)/ I-95 All permit loads crossing Bridge No. 1615905 (I-495/ I-95 IL (innerloop) over MD 4) [Prince Georges] must cross the bridge using the 2 left lanes going to Virginia. I-83 Baltimore Beginning July 29, 2020 until further notice, wide loads permitted moves please use the 2 left lanes through the project work zone from Timonium Rd to Warren RD (North and South) I-95 No permitted loads allowed in the right lane (over I-695 –Bridge #0319900), [Baltimore/ move all loads into the left lane until further notice. Southside] I-95 BALTIMORE: Permitted loads over 120,000 lbs going to Dundalk Marine Terminal on [Baltimore] I-95 must use Exit 59 (Eastern Ave) to the Baltimore City Line. Loads that are over 120,000 lbs and over 14’6” H must move during night time hours only with a Baltimore City Police Escort. Permittee must apply for a Baltimore City Permit. Please call the Baltimore City Permit office at 443-984-2195 for assistance. I-95 Permit loads over 120,000 lbs coming from the Dundalk Marine Terminal to I-95N MUST [Baltimore] USE EXIT 57 (O’Donnell St.) from the Baltimore City Line. Permittee must call the Baltimore City Permit Office to apply for a Baltimore City Permit.
    [Show full text]