Acknowledgements

Lead Agency: Consultant:

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Parsons Brinckerhoff Authority Philip Braum, Project Manager Department of Planning and Joint Development Nicholas Schmidt, EIT Wendy Jia 1401 K Street NW 600 5th Street NW Suite 701 Washington, DC 20001 Washington, DC 20005

The following agencies and stakeholders were TranSystems involved in this project, including, but not limited to: Alan Castaline Jeremy Mendelson Alexandria Economic Development Partnership Shruti Rathore Anne Arundel County Paul Schimek Arlington County City of Alexandria 38 Chauncy Street District Department of Transportation Boston, MA 02111 Fairfax County Department of Transportation Maryland Department of Transportation Maryland Transit Administration Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Montgomery County Department of Transportation Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission Prince George’s County Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation Virginia Department of Transportation

Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region Contents

Executive Summary ES-1 Introduction 1 Virginia Sites 4 Army National Guard Readiness Center 7 BRAC 133 (Mark Center) 13 Engineer Proving Ground 19 Fort Belvoir 25 Maryland Sites 32 Andrews Air Force Base 35 Fort Meade 41 National Naval Medical Center 49 Washington, D.C. Site 56 Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling 59 Implementation 67 Costs 67 Funding 69 Implementation Strategy 70

Appendices Technical Memorandum 2: BRAC Action Updates Technical Memorandum 3.1: Inventory of Existing Transportation Services Technical Memorandum 3.2: Planned Transportation Services to BRAC Sites Technical Memorandum 3.3: Planned Long-Term Transit Expansions Technical Memorandum 4.1: Analysis of Existing and Potential Transit Demand Technical Memorandum 4.2: Development of Transit Service Proposals Technical Memorandum 4.3: Evaluation of Customer Facility Improvements Technical Memorandum 4.4: Cost Estimate and Implementation Strategy

i Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region Figures

Figure ES-1: Study sites ES-1 Figure ES-2: Richmond Highway Express ES-3 Figure ES-3: Customer amenity (shelter and signage) ES-5 Figure ES-4: ARRA grants are an example of one-time federal funding opportunities ES-6 Figure 1: Study sites 1 Figure 2: Access points and new and renovated facilities at ARNGRC 7 Figure 3: Ballston-MU Metrorail station 8 Figure 4: Existing transit service near ARNGRC 9 Figure 5: Residence of existing and incoming employees, 2007 10 Figure 6: Pentagon station bus facility 10 Figure 7: Proposed transit service near ARNGRC 11 Figure 8: Current conditions at George Mason Drive at Main Gate (southbound) bus stop 12 Figure 9: Current conditions at Arlington Boulevard at George Mason Drive (westbound) bus stop 12 Figure 10: Access points and new and renovated facilities for BRAC 133 13 Figure 11: Residence of existing WHS employees, 2006 14 Figure 12: WHS buildings under construction 14 Figure 13: Existing transit service near BRAC 133 15 Figure 14: DASH route AT2 16 Figure 15: Existing transit service near BRAC 133 17 Figure 16: Rendering of planned garage and transit center along Nottingham Drive 18 Figure 17: Location of transit center presently serving as construction staging area 18 Figure 18: Access points and new and renovated facilities at EPG 19 Figure 19: Fairfax County Parkway extension 20 Figure 20: Residence of existing NGA employees 20 Figure 21: Existing transit service near EPG 21 Figure 22: I-495 HOT lanes under construction 22 Figure 23: Proposed transit service near EPG 23 Figure 24: Planned transit center will be located relatively closely to the NGA headquarters 24 Figure 25: Access points and new and renovated facilities at Fort Belvoir’s South Post 25 Figure 26: Access points and new and renovated facilities at Fort Belvoir’s North Post 26 Figure 27: Fort Belvoir South Post 27 Figure 28: Residence of existing Fort Belvoir personnel and employees 27 Figure 29: Existing transit service near Fort Belvoir 28 Figure 30: Richmond Highway Express 29 Figure 31: Proposed transit service near Fort Belvoir 30 Figure 32: Access points and new and renovated facilities at AAFB 35

ii Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Figure 33: Residence of existing AAFB personnel and employees 36 Figure 34: Existing transit service near AAFB 37 Figure 35: Proposed transit service near AAFB 39 Figure 36: Access points and new and renovated facilities at Fort Meade 41 Figure 37: Odenton MARC station 42 Figure 38: Existing transit service near Fort Meade 43 Figure 39: Residence of existing Fort Meade personnel and employees 44 Figure 40: Proposed transit service near Fort Meade 45 Figure 41: Intercounty Connector construction 46 Figure 42: Current view of Reece Road Gate 47 Figure 43: Access points and new and renovated facilities at NNMC 49 Figure 44: Residence of existing NNMC employees 50 Figure 45: Existing transit service near NNMC 51 Figure 46: Evening MARC service 52 Figure 47: Proposed transit service near NNMC 53 Figure 48: Medical Center Metrorail station bus bays and shelters 54 Figure 49: Access points and new and renovated facilities at JBAB 59 Figure 50: Anacostia Metrorail station pylon 60 Figure 51: Residence of existing JBAB personnel and employees 60 Figure 52: Existing transit service near JBAB 61 Figure 53: Current conditions at South Capitol Street and Firth Sterling Avenue (southbound near side) bus stop 62 Figure 54: Current conditions at South Capitol Street and Firth Sterling Avenue (southbound far side) bus stop 62 Figure 55: Proposed transit service near JBAB 63 Figure 56: ARRA grants are an example of one-time federal funding opportunities 70

iii Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region Tables

Table ES-1: Summary of BRAC changes ES-2 Table ES-2: Key characteristics ES-3 Table ES-3: Estimated near-term operating costs by operating agency (FY 2010 $) ES-4 Table ES-4: Detailed summary of estimated near-term operating costs by operating agency (FY 2010 $) ES-4 Table ES-5: Vehicle costs by operator (FY 2010 $) ES-5 Table ES-6: Detailed summary of estimated vehicle costs (FY 2010 $) ES-5 Table ES-7: Estimated customer facility costs by site, in descending order (FY 2010 $) ES-5 Table 1: Key characteristics of ARNGRC 7 Table 2: Estimated transit trips for ARNGRC in 2011 8 Table 3: Summary of ARNGRC service proposals 10 Table 4: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at ARNGRC 12 Table 5: Key characteristics of BRAC 133 13 Table 6: Estimated transit trips for BRAC 133 in 2011 14 Table 7: Summary of BRAC 133 service proposals 16 Table 8: Summary of planned customer facility improvements at BRAC 133 18 Table 9: Key characteristics at EPG 19 Table 10: Estimated transit trips for EPG in 2011 20 Table 11: Summary of EPG service proposals 22 Table 12: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at EPG 24 Table 13: Key characteristics at Fort Belvoir 25 Table 14: Estimated transit trips for Fort Belvoir in 2011 27 Table 15: Summary of Fort Belvoir service proposals 29 Table 16: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at Fort Belvoir 31 Table 17: Key characteristics at AAFB 35 Table 18: Estimated transit trips for AAFB in 2012 36 Table 19: Summary of AAFB service proposals 38 Table 20: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at AAFB 40 Table 21: Key characteristics at Fort Meade 41 Table 22: Estimated transit trips for Fort Meade in 2011 44 Table 23: Summary of Fort Meade service proposals 44 Table 24: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at Fort Meade 47 Table 25: Key characteristics at NNMC 49 Table 26: Estimated transit trips for NNMC in 2011 50 Table 27: Summary of NNMC service proposals 52 Table 28: Key characteristics at JBAB 59 Table 29: Estimated transit trips for JBAB in 2011 60

iv Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Table 30: Summary of JBAB service proposals 62 Table 31: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at JBAB 62 Table 32: Estimated near-term operating costs by site, in descending order (FY 2010 $) 67 Table 33: Estimated near-term operating costs by operating agency, in descending order (FY 2010 $) 67 Table 34: Vehicle costs by operator (FY 2010 $) 68 Table 35: Detailed summary of estimated vehicle costs (FY 2010 $) 68 Table 36: Estimated customer facility costs by site, in descending order (FY 2010 $) 68

v

Executive Summary

image: flickr/Belvoir Army Engineers

Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Executive Summary

Purpose commuting patterns in the area by and capital cost estimates in FY 2010 The Washington Metropolitan Area consolidating tens of thousands dollars. Final decisions on the priority Transit Authority (Metro) initiated of military personnel and civilian and implementation of the proposed a study to provide an analysis of employees to selected metropolitan improvements will be subject to the impacts to and opportunities Washington bases no later than the further identification of transit for regional transit service due to September 15, 2011. In response, this demand at BRAC installations and the Base Realignment and Closure study provided a comprehensive should be made in collaboration (BRAC) process. This process, assessment of the transit impact of with states, local jurisdictions, initiated by Congress in 2005 and the BRAC process and developed transit service providers, and BRAC currently being executed by the transit service concepts that include installations. Department of Defense (DoD), will new and modified transit service by significantly alter employment and nine operators as well as operating ± Source: ESRI

Fort Meade

National Naval Medical Center

Army National Guard Readiness Center

Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling BRAC 133

Andrews Air Force Base

Engineer Proving Ground Fort Belvoir

01.25 2.5 5 Miles

Figure ES-1: Study sites

Executive Summary ES-1 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Sites efforts. In general, NCPC-approved • Residences of present and future With the help of a Transportation employee parking supplies can vary employees identified via survey Advisory Committee (TAC) depending upon the context of the or Census data comprising representatives from local site. For example, NNMC is expected • Published mode share goals and and state jurisdictions and transit to have limited employee parking travel demand management agencies, the study team selected because it is located in a semi-urban (TDM) programs eight DoD sites that are the focus area of Bethesda, Maryland and is • Present transit ridership of this study. Shown in Figure ES-1, adjacent to a Metrorail station. DoD • Present and future site these sites include the Army National parking regulations dictate how much characteristics such as employees, Guard Readiness Center, BRAC 133 parking can be built in all other cases. parking, and housing (Mark Center), Engineer Proving Data listed in Table ES-1 refer to all Ground, and Fort Belvoir in Virginia; parking spaces on site, including Of all these factors, parking Andrews Air Force Base, Fort Meade, spaces designated for employees and availability was more important in and National Naval Medical Center in personnel, visitors, patients of medical estimating potential transit demand, Maryland; and Joint Base Anacostia- facilities, and operational vehicles. particularly as parking is not expected Bolling in Washington, D.C. Therefore, in all cases employee and to keep pace with rapid employee personnel parking is actually slightly growth. The lack of parking supply, These eight sites were selected lower than listed in the table. while challenging to each base, can because they will experience serve as a TDM tool when combined significant personnel and employee Five of the eight sites have permanent with a comprehensive, site-specific growth. As shown in Table ES-1, the on-base resident populations. As TDM program and an adequate study sites are planned to collectively with parking, on-site housing is level of transit service. The shortage receive up to 47,000 personnel and increasing more modestly, if at all. In of parking could then effectively employees by 2015, with a majority some cases the housing stock is being encourage an increasing share of arriving by September 2011. In reconstructed in smaller numbers employees and visitors to use transit, all, these eight sites will account as part of a housing privatization vanpool, and carpool. for almost 148,000 personnel and program. employees within five years, a 47 This study estimated two mode- percent increase from the present. Demand share scenarios for each site, each This study analyzed and considered representing high or low transit usage At the same time, employee parking many factors in estimating future that could be reasonably expected. will increase modestly, as required transit demand at each site: These scenarios are expressed in by NCPC or DoD parking guidelines. terms of estimated total round trips Where NCPC approval is required, • Site location by transit. The analysis found that the agency requires a parking supply • Present and planned nearby transit usage could vary greatly in line with its previous planning transportation services among sites, with some estimates as

Table ES-1: Summary of BRAC changes Personnel and Employees Parking Housing Installation Present 2015 Growth Present 2015 Growth Present 2015 Growth Virginia Army National Guard 1,300 2,500 92% 844 1,112 32% 0 0 None BRAC 133 (Mark Center) 0 6,400 N/A 0 3,990 N/A 0 0 None Engineer Proving Ground 50 8,500 16,900% 50 5,500 10,900% 0 0 None Fort Belvoir 23,707 27,791 17% 27,000 Unknown Unknown 2,070 2,070 None Maryland Andrews Air Force Base 14,678 16,600 13% 3,147 Unknown Unknown 1,300 887 -32% Fort Meade 40,000 62,000 55% Unknown Unknown Unknown 3,007 2,627 -13% Naval Medical Center 8,000 10,500 31% 6,083 8,087 33% 711 1,216 71% Washington, D.C. Bolling-Anacostia Annex 13,000 13,650 5% 6,987 6,987 None 1,040 1,090 5%

ES-2 Executive Summary Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region low as one percent and others as high to receive new or enhanced transit as 45 percent. service, or where transit operations are expected to be modified to Transit Service and Facility alleviate security concerns. Proposals With an estimate of transit demand Because buses are restricted to operate completed, the study progressed within the perimeter of any DoD site, to developing transit service and this study considered locations where Figure ES-2: Richmond Highway Express Center Source: Schumin Web Transit customer facility proposals for each of transit centers would be needed due the eight sites. to potentially high transit demand. purpose: either to improve direct local In some cases DoD is currently Transit service proposals were bus service or express service to a site, building transit centers (BRAC 133) built on estimated demand and or to improve connections to nearby or are actively planning future transit an understanding of existing and transit hubs. These service concepts centers near main entrance points planned transit services. Proposals reflect the notion that each proposed (Fort Belvoir and Engineer Proving are a combination of new services, improvement is essential to offering Ground) with local jurisdictions in modifications of existing or planned a complete set of transit options at cooperation. services, and planned services all sites. In all, this study proposes without any modification. Some an increase of more than 228,000 Several Metrorail stations would proposals were developed specifically annual vehicle revenue hours of serve as primary transfer points for for this study while others were based new, modified, or planned local and proposed services, though some of directly on recommendations from express bus service throughout the these stations are already facing bus local and state transportation plans. region, as summarized in Table ES-2. bay shortages, especially during the peak periods. Metro has identified For all sites, TAC members provided Additionally, this study verified the number of additional bus bays insight and recommendations existing customer facilities for all that are needed for these stations, throughout the process, most notably sites and defined, at a conceptual which will be critical in providing during the development of these level, new facilities that would convenient transfers for BRAC service proposals. be appropriate to support these employees and visitors. expanded transit services. This report describes the proposed The jurisdictions are concerned about transit services in terms of local Customer facility needs were bus bay capacity and congestion bus, express bus, or shuttle determined by identifying any during peak travel periods at several service. Furthermore, proposals existing stops and amenities near each of the Northern Virginia Metrorail are summarized by their intended site entrance that was recommended stations. In particular, based on the service recommendations in

Table ES-2: Key characteristics the study, bus bay capacity and congestion may be of most concern Potential Transit Annual Vehicle Passenger Round Potential Transit at Ballston, Franconia-Springfield, Revenue Hours Trips per Day Mode Share Increase required for King Street, Pentagon, and Van Installation Service Proposals Low High Low High Dorn Street stations. In addition, Virginia Medical Center station in Bethesda, Army National Guard 10,954 280 520 11% 21% Maryland experiences bus bay BRAC 133 (Mark Center) 17,272 830 1,670 13% 26% congestion during peak periods. Bus bay expansions should be considered Engineer Proving Ground 28,584 740 1,510 9% 18% and constructed to accommodate Fort Belvoir 41,406 1,390 2,780 5% 10% the recommended increases in both Maryland bus and shuttle services proposed in Andrews Air Force Base 27,178 420 830 2.5% 5% this report. The USDOT TIGER grant Fort Meade 90,134 460 2,850 1% 5% funded additional bus bays at the Naval Medical Center 13,335 3,150 4,730 30% 45% Franconia-Springfield and Pentagon Washington, D.C. Metrorail stations. Bolling-Anacostia Annex 0 550 1,090 4% 8%

Executive Summary ES-3 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Costs Transit agencies provided operating Capital Costs Order-of-magnitude cost estimates costs in units of dollars per revenue- One-time capital costs account for for the transit services defined in this hour. These data, coupled with annual additional vehicles and customer study were developed to identify the revenue-hours defined during service facilities and amenities. Vehicle costs services’ financial implications. This planning, provide a good estimate apply when an operator purchases, study developed cost estimates for of annual operating costs for each rather than leases, vehicles. transit proposals that could feasibly proposed service. Using the average be implemented by FY 2011 and fare recovery ratio for these agencies, An estimated 97 new vehicles would no later than FY 2015. However, a this study estimated passenger be required to meet the needs of the majority of these proposals are not revenues and subtracted them from transit service proposals. This study funded at this time. total operating costs to achieve an assumed a uniform cost of $560,000 estimate of the net operating cost. per bus, the standard cost for a typical Two types of costs were estimated: 42-foot bus. All required buses would annual operating costs and one- These annual net operating cost total of more than $50 million FY time capital costs, which are shown estimates are summarized in 2010 dollars. Vehicle costs by agency in Tables ES-3 through ES-7. Cost Table ES-3 by operating agency in are reported in Table ES-5 and ES-6, estimates for proposed shuttle descending order, and in Table ES-4 with Metrobus, Fairfax Connector, services were not estimated. All costs by DoD site and operating agency. and CMRT taking the top three spots, are in FY 2010 dollars. representing over 83 percent of all This study found that, if all proposed estimated vehicle costs. Operating Costs services are implemented, Metrobus Annual operating costs include labor, would account for the largest share Customer facilities and amenities vehicle maintenance, fuel, insurance, of net operating costs with about costs were calculated using historical and administration. Some vehicle $5.6 million. Fairfax Connector and pricing data, and are summarized in costs are considered an operating Central Maryland Regional Transit Table ES-7. As with operating and cost when the operating agency pays would be second and third with about vehicle costs, all customer facility a contractor to run its service, like $4.4 and $3.3 million in annual net costs are in FY2010 dollars. Customer MTA commuter buses, for example. operating costs, respectively. facility cost estimates considered In this situation, the cost of vehicles is annualized into overall operating Table ES-4: Detailed summary of estimated near-term operating costs by operating agency (FY 2010 $) costs. Site Operator Cost Army National Guard Readiness Center Metrobus $1,028,867 Table ES-3: Estimated near-term operating costs BRAC 133 (Mark Center) Metrobus $1,121,291 by operating agency (FY 2010 $) DASH $371,157 Net Operating Agency Operating Cost Engineer Proving Ground Metrobus $267,797 Metrobus $5,607,070 Fairfax Connector $2,227,581 Fairfax Connector $4,443,169 PRTC $71,833 Central Maryland $3,275,043 Fort Belvoir Metrobus $1,579,945 Regional Transit Fairfax Connector $2,215,588 Maryland Transit $1,299,714 Andrews Air Force Base Metrobus $267,797 Administration* TheBus $1,170,797 TheBus $1,170,797 MTA $259,943 Alexandria DASH $371,157 Fort Meade Metrobus $267,797 Howard Transit $278,400 CMRT $3,275,043 Ride On $120,169 Howard Transit $278,400 Potomac and $71,833 MTA $1,039,771 Rappahannock Transportation National Naval Medical Center Metrobus $1,073,576 Commission Ride On $120,169 Total $16,637,352 Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling $0 * Vehicles factored into MTA operating costs Total $16,637,352

ES-4 Executive Summary Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region factors such as design, temporary Transit center costs were estimated Costs for additional bus bays at facilities, project delivery, contractor using typical components (e.g. Metrorail stations are not included profit, overhead allowance, and shelters, benches, signage, etc.). As in study cost estimates, as these bonding. These factors, which are also such, these cost estimates should be improvements are often an shown in Table ES-7, provide a more considered an absolute minimum. inseparable part of large-scale station complete picture of expected total cost Transit center costs would be higher improvements, including expansion to construct all proposed customer if more complex designs (e.g. a small of bus circulation and pedestrian facilities and amenities. building) are desired by the funding access. In all, this study estimates total jurisdictions. customer facilities and amenities costs Table ES-5: Vehicle costs by operator (FY 2010 $) for all eight sites at more than $1.4 Operating New million, though this number would Agency Vehicles Total Cost Table ES-7: Estimated customer facility costs by likely be higher if more complex site (FY 2010 $) Metrobus 29 $16,240,000 designs are used for transit centers. Fairfax Connector 27 $15,120,000 Site Total Cost Central Maryland 20 $11,200,000 AAFB $171,303 Funding Regional Transit Fort Belvoir $155,316 Funding to support new and TheBus 8 $4,480,000 JBAB $112,889 expanded transit services could come Maryland Transit 6 $0 EPG $97,878 from two sources—increasing the Administration* ARNGRC $60,638 amounts provided through existing Howard Transit 3 $1,680,000 transit funding sources or obtaining Fort Meade $57,438 DASH 2 $1,120,000 funds from new sources. The former Subtotal $655,462 Potomac and 1 $560,000 is a challenge, as these sources are Rappahannock Factors Transportation already strained simply to support Commission Design 30% existing services. Temporary Facilities 25% Ride On 1 $560,000 Project Delivery 35% Total 97 $50,960,000 Existing Funding Sources Grand Total $1,437,920 * Vehicles factored into MTA operating costs Because fare revenues are already built into this study’s net operating cost estimates and advertising Table ES-6: Detailed summary of estimated vehicle costs (FY 2010 $) revenues have limited potential, state New Site Vehicles Operator Cost and local funds remain the primary operating funding sources. These Army National Guard Readiness Center 4 Metrobus $2,240,000 funds are severely constrained, BRAC 133 (Mark Center) 4 Metrobus $2,240,000 especially when the economy is weak 2 DASH $1,120,000 and tax revenues are significantly Engineer Proving Ground 2 Metrobus $1,120,000 reduced. Implementing this study’s 10 Fairfax Connector $5,600,000 service proposals would likely require 1 PRTC $560,000 contributions at the state and/or local Fort Belvoir 7 Metrobus $3,920,000 level. 17 Fairfax Connector $9,520,000 Andrews Air Force Base 2 Metrobus $1,120,000 8 TheBus $4,480,000 2 MTA* $0 Fort Meade 2 Metrobus $1,120,000 20 CMRT $11,200,000 3 Howard Transit $1,680,000 4 MTA* $0 National Naval Medical Center 8 Metrobus $4,480,000 1 Ride On $560,000 Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling 0 $0 Total 97 $50,960,000 Figure ES-3: Customer amenity (shelter and *Does not include the four MTA vehicles required, as they are factored into MTA operating costs signage)

Executive Summary ES-5 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

It would be difficult to implement application opportunities have service decisions must be made on a this study’s service proposals without passed, but they illustrate the types of site-by-site basis. Each site has unique funding sources that can be sustained, other funding programs that could be market and service characteristics, particularly given challenges in created in the future: and different DoD agencies have maintaining current levels of transit responsibility for the various sites. service with limited funds. • The American Recovery and Reinvestment act of 2009 Agreement on funding is crucial Present funds for transit capital (ARRA) grants, including the to implementation of services, as investments come from federal funds, Transportation Investments these services would add to the cost state and local funds, and other Generating Economic Revenue of regional transit. The state and sources including private investments. (TIGER) grants local governments, DoD, and transit A few federal transportation grants operators must cooperate on service can be used for transit purposes and • Specific appropriations; for decisions, funding, and customer could be applied to the construction example, the DoD Appropriations facilities to ensure that changes of passenger facilities (e.g. the Act of 2010 included $300 million are compatible with current transit Congestion Management and Air for transportation improvements services and consistent with transit Quality grants); competition for in support of National Naval development plans. Finally, DoD and federal dollars can be great. Private Medical Center and Fort Belvoir each BRAC installation can effectively funds are generally used for transit medical facilities participate in these decisions as investments where the resulting they have the best and most-current vehicles or facilities would create • U.S. Department of information on the characteristics of some benefit to the private entity. Transportation’s livability grants relocated employees and the timing of relocation actions. DoD also controls Future Funding Sources Implementation Strategy access to the sites. In consideration of the current Decisions about new and enhanced funding constraints, new funding transit services must be made Transit service enhancements should sources must be explored to allow collaboratively by the public agencies be in place before major employee local jurisdictions, states, and transit that fund transit services, the state relocations occur so that employees service provider to timely initiate the and local agencies responsible for have access to the services from the best-fit transit improvements to BRAC transportation system operations, and beginning of their tenure in their installations, especially those that can the Department of Defense. new locations. Early implementation feasibly be done by September 2011. of priority services would allow Although there is a regional interest employees located at each site to New sources of funds could either be in ensuring the availability of take advantage of these services and programs not specifically intended adequate transit services at the sites allow the base to provide a market to for transit purposes or those that affected by BRAC relocations, transit support their commute needs. are newly created. For example, the Defense Access Road (DAR) program To allow services to be implemented typically provides funding for on schedule, more-detailed operations improvements to public roads when planning, including prioritization growth at a military facility would of service concepts, must begin cause a significant increase in traffic now, and in fact it has for some congestion. DoD recently approved sites. The implementation strategies the use of DAR funds for a transit should include identification of project at the National Naval Medical reliable funding sources, decisions Center. With DoD approval, the use on which service improvement of DAR funds for other transit capital alternatives to implement (especially investments could also be possible. those considered feasible by 2011), decisions on customer facility Other types of federal grant programs enhancements, and development of a have been created in response to the transit marketing program to inform current economic situation. These employees of existing and anticipated Figure ES-4: ARRA grants are an example of one- programs are one-time efforts and time federal funding opportunities transit services, vanpool and carpool

ES-6 Executive Summary incentives, and other demand management alternatives.

Transit service proposals and their estimated costs presented in this report are not final nor can they be considered recommendations by Metro. This high-level study and its results are the beginning of a process to identify and ultimately implement transit service improvements in response to regional BRAC changes; it serves as a starting point for local jurisdictions to conduct further, more- detailed service and implementation planning that fits within their unique needs and budgetary situations.

Further, most proposals within this report were intended to serve the immediate commuting needs of personnel and employees at or even before the BRAC September 15, 2011 deadline, unless otherwise noted. As such, this report does not prioritize proposals; that is a task only the local jurisdictions can complete. Proposals that could be implemented between this deadline and 2015 (the planning horizon of this study) include estimated costs, and those proposals that are estimated to be implemented after 2015 do not have cost estimates (see technical memo 4.4: Cost Estimate and Implementation Strategy). Costs for shuttle services were not estimated, as they would require more detailed planning by DoD.

Introduction

image: flickr/Belvoir Army Engineers

Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Introduction

Background later than September 15, 2011. The analysis of the impacts and In 2005, Congress passed the most shift in personnel and employees opportunities on regional transit recent Base Realignment and requires transportation infrastructure due to BRAC changes, specifically Closure (BRAC) law, outlining improvements and transportation at eight DoD sites throughout the which Department of Defense (DoD) planning to help accommodate metropolitan area. These eight sites, bases throughout the United States significant commuting changes. as shown in Figure 1, were selected would be realigned, consolidated, or because they will experience a net closed. This process will affect bases Study Purpose and gain in personnel and employees. within the metropolitan Washington Methodology The sites include the Army National region by moving tens of thousands The Washington Metropolitan Area Guard Readiness Center, BRAC 133 of military personnel and civilian Transit Authority (Metro) initiated (Mark Center), Engineer Proving employees to selected bases no this study to provide a comprehensive Ground, and Fort Belvoir in Virginia; ± Source: ESRI

Fort Meade

National Naval Medical Center

Army National Guard Readiness Center

Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling BRAC 133

Andrews Air Force Base

Engineer Proving Ground Fort Belvoir

01.25 2.5 5 Miles

Figure 1: Study sites

Introduction 1 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Andrews Air Force Base, Fort Meade, which priority service proposals and National Naval Medical Center in to implement based on its policy, Maryland; and Joint Base Anacostia- budgetary, and funding situation, as Bolling in Washington, D.C. well as site-specific demand.

The product of this study is a Stakeholder Outreach list of proposed transit service Given the complexity and time- improvements in response to growth sensitive nature of BRAC changes, this and estimated transit demand study was guided by a transportation of each of the eight BRAC sites. action committee (TAC) composed of Transit service proposals are site- many jurisdictional representatives specific and include bus services and other key stakeholders. The TAC provided by Metro, regional transit provided comments, feedback, and providers (PRTC, MTA), and local continual support throughout the jurisdictions. These service proposals process. were developed by estimating transit demand, identifying opportunities for modifications in existing transit services, and planning for future changes to regional transportation services and infrastructure.

Transit demand was estimated by researching and summarizing expected changes in personnel and employees, on-site housing, and availability of on- and off-site parking for each of the eight BRAC sites through 2015. This information was provided through previous on-base surveys and studies and through direct contact with various DoD offices.

This report concludes with a discussion of estimated operating and capital costs in FY2010 dollars, potential funding sources, and an implementation strategy. Data on average operating costs were provided directly from the transit agencies or found in the National Transit Database. Capital costs were derived from historical cost data.

Service proposals found in this report were developed solely in response to estimated transit demand at each of the eight BRAC sites. Therefore, this study represents unconstrained transit service needs throughout the region. The jurisdictions will decide

2 Introduction

Virginia Sites

Army National Guard Readiness Center BRAC 133 (Mark Center) Engineer Proving Ground Fort Belvoir

image: flickr/Belvoir Army Engineers

Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Army National Guard Readiness Center Arlington County, Virginia

Table 1: Key characteristics of ARNGRC Now By 2015 Growth Personnel 1,300 2,500 92% 2 Living Units 0 0 None 2 Parking 844 1,112 32%

Background The Army National Guard Readiness Center (ARNGRC) is a major National 3 Guard post located in Arlington 1 County, Virginia. The post lies at the southeast corner of the Arlington Boulevard and George Mason Drive intersection. Completed in 1992, the 1 ARNGRC sits on a 15-acre plot of land adjacent to the historic Arlington Hall and is limited to a single 279,000- square-foot building. ARNGRC and Arlington Hall are distinct facilities and are separated by security fencing. BRAC construction Other construction 1 Readiness Center addition None Currently, ARNGRC employs 2 Garage parking (456 spaces) 1,300 people. Two separate parking 3 Main Gate relocation decks totaling 656 spaces flank the ARNGRC to the north and south. Off- site parking provides an additional Access points Days Hours 166 spaces across George Mason 1 Main Gate Unknown Unknown Drive. In all, 822 spaces are available 2 Arlington Boulevard Unknown Unknown for employees, while 22 spaces are for Figure 2: Access points and new and renovated facilities at ARNGRC visitors. No permanent or temporary housing is provided on site. Access Transportation Services Growth Access to the ARNGRC is and will ARNGRC will almost double to remain limited. Two secure access Existing 2,500 total employees once BRAC points are located on the west and ARNGRC, adjacent to Arlington construction is complete. Employee north sides of the site, each with a 100 Boulevard and within two miles of parking is expected to become more percent ID check policy. The Main I-66 and I-395, has good highway constrained. At present, the employee Gate is located along George Mason access due to its location in central to employee parking ratio stands Drive, just south of the intersection Arlington County. The most at 1.58. Once BRAC construction is with Arlington Boulevard’s service recent traffic analysis found that complete, an additional 456 employee roadways. Gate locations are shown intersections generally operate at parking spaces will be available (for in Figure 2. Hours of operation acceptable levels. However, the a total of 1,278), which, due to the of each gate are unknown. BRAC intersections of George Mason Drive growth in employees, will increase the construction will move the Main Gate and Arlington Boulevard’s service ratio to 1.96 employees per employee 50 feet north of its current location to roadways are congested during parking space. accommodate the building addition. peak periods. Commuters also have

Army National Guard Readiness Center 7 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region difficulty exiting the Main Gate due to the lack of a traffic signal.

The ARNGRC area has a good coverage of transit service, including Source: flickr/scott*eric Metrorail, Metrobus, and Arlington Transit. Ballston-MU station on the Orange Line and Pentagon station on the Blue and Yellow Lines are the closest Metrorail stations to the Main Gate. These stations, as well Figure 3: Ballston-MU Metrorail station as the Shirlington Transit Station, provide many transfer opportunities Planned This study estimates a transit mode for local bus service. Both VRE lines, Planned transportation services for share in 2011 lower than 35 percent the Manassas and Fredericksburg, ARNGRC can be found in the Virginia due to the lack of a nearby Metrorail are accessible via the Crystal City Six-Year Improvement Plan. Notable station and the future amount of Metrorail station, which is more than projects with relevance to ARNGRC available parking. four miles from the Main Gate. include multimodal corridor improvements to Columbia Pike and About seven percent of current Metrobus route 22A is the only bus spot improvements to I-66. Projects ARNGRC employees commute via service directly to the Main Gate. and studies beyond 2020 that may bus or rail, or a combination of the Other bus routes, including Metrobus affect travel to and from ARNGRC are two, while 56 percent of Jefferson 4A, 4H, 10B, 23A, 23C, Columbia Pike discussed further in the Constrained Plaza employees use transit. Most lines, and Arlington Transit (ART) Long-Range Transportation Plan, Jefferson Plaza employees use transit route 41 all stop within 0.75 miles of prepared by TPB. because their workplace is located the Main Gate. within a short walking distance of Demand the Crystal City Metrorail station, No shuttle buses currently serve the The transportation management which cannot be said for ARNGRC facility. However, DoD operates a plan (TMP) for ARNGRC includes where the closest Metrorail station shuttle to Arlington Hall, located a goal for a 35 percent transit mode (Ballston-MU) is 1.5 miles away. This adjacent to ARNGRC, with access share by 2011, the completion date is certainly a walkable distance, but through Ceremonial Drive. This 30- of all BRAC construction. This not close enough to ARNGRC to grow minute headway shuttle provides a study estimates an 11 to 21 percent transit ridership from seven to 35 connection from the Pentagon Transit transit mode share by 2011, based percent. Center to Arlington Hall, among other on a review of existing transit mode destinations, and not ARNGRC. share at both ARNGRC and Jefferson Additionally, while parking will Plaza in Crystal City (the current become more constrained once George Mason Drive includes location of the 1,200 employees to BRAC construction is complete, total sidewalks on both sides with a be relocated to ARNGRC), as well on- and off-site parking at ARNGRC crosswalk for the Main Gate, though it as an understanding of current and will remain high enough to ensure is unsignalized. The Arlington County future parking availability. Table 2 many employees will still drive alone, Master Transportation Plan denotes summarizes this mode share range unless DoD implements an aggressive George Mason Drive and Arlington and what it means for total transit parking management program to Boulevard as signed bicycle routes. trips. encourage otherwise. However, neither roadways have bicycle lanes. Table 2: Estimated transit trips for ARNGRC in Beyond 2011, ARNGRC is not 2011 expected to undergo another period Existing transportation services Transit of significant expansion. Therefore, are summarized in Figure 4 on the Transit Round this study assumes transit mode share Scenario Share Personnel Trips following page. will remain consistent and within the Low 11% 2,500 280 estimated range. High 21% 2,500 520

8 Army National Guard Readiness Center ! ! !

Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region '4B ROSSLYN '61 ! ê23C '4A 23A ê '4B '4H 23C ê COURT HOUSE ¨¦§66 0 0.25 0.5 1 ê23A 4B! Miles ' ¤£50 ± ¤£1 '41 EAST FALLS CHURCH CLARENDON '4B '61 ! '4E ê23A VIRGINIA ¨¦§66 ê23C '62 '53 SQ - GMU ê16Y BALLSTON - MU ! '41 '77 '4A ! ARLINGTON 52 CEMETERY '51' ! '4H ê10B ê22A '42 ê23A ê23C '4E ê16Y '4B '42 '41 ê22A ê10B ¤£50 ê23A '4H '75 '4A 1 4B '4B 23C ¤£ ' 4A ê ' 395 '4E Arlington Boulevard ¨¦§ ê10B '4H 4H ! 4A ' '4B ' '41 '42 PENTAGON '4B '4A '4B '4H ê16Y '16 '16 ê23C ê22A Army National Guard '74 ê23A 10B Readiness Center ê ê22A '16 '4A '87 PENTAGON '4A Columbia Pike ! CITY '16 '41 '41 '77 $ ê22A CRYSTAL CITY '41 22A '74 ê ê23A ! '4A ê23C ê16W '4A '16 Glebe Road ê23A NATIONAL ! 23C 4A 75 ê AIRPORT ' ' ê16W 22A ê 23C ê ê23A 10B ê ê23C 395 Metrobus/ART Routes ê23A ¨¦§ '87 ê23C ê10B ! Metrorail Stations '77 ê22A ê23C 23A $ ê22A ê VRE Stations ê23C Metrorail ê10B ê10B ¤£1 ê23A VRE ê23C Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI Figure 4: Existing transit service near ARNGRC ê22A ê22A 9 Army National Guard Readiness Center 22A ê ê22A ê22A ¨¦§395 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Transit Service and Facility Table 3: Summary of ARNGRC service proposals Proposals Purpose Proposal ARNGRC is like other employment Direct local service Increase weekday frequency for Metrobus route 22A centers located in a semi-urban Connections to major Allow ARNGRC employees access to existing State Department shuttle setting. Providing transit service transit centers between Rosslyn and Arlington Hall directly to the site’s access gates is Implement shuttle connecting ARNGRC, Pentagon station, and Crystal City desirable. Convenient pedestrian station via Washington and Arlington Boulevard walkways and amenities around the site would also make transit service proposals presented in this headways to 30 minutes. Additionally, more accessible. Because ARNGRC section. These connections can be this study proposes adding Sunday occupies a small site, there is no need provided through local bus service or service operating 15 hours per day at for internal transit service. site-specific shuttle buses, which are a 30-minute headway. summarized in Table 3 and displayed According to a 2007 employee in Figure 7. Shuttle Proposals survey, employees at ARNGRC and ARNGRC has two shuttle Jefferson Plaza are primarily located Local Bus Proposals opportunities: a shuttle to Rosslyn in Virginia. Most of these residential Metrobus route 22A is the only bus station and a shuttle to Pentagon and locations, especially Fairfax County, service to the Main Gate on George Crystal City stations. Arlington, and Alexandria, are served Mason Drive. This route operates by a transit via Metrorail and bus between Ballston-MU and Pentagon The Department of State currently routes designed to feed into Metrorail Metrorail stations, and connects to operates a shuttle between Rosslyn stations. Suburban locations farther the communities of Barcroft and Metrorail station and Arlington Hall, south in Virginia have access to Fairlington. Travel time between a campus adjacent to ARNGRC that commuter rail and bus services. Ballston-MU station and ARNGRC houses the National Foreign Affairs is up to seven minutes, while travel Training Center. This shuttle is The site has a reasonable level of bus time between Pentagon station and only available to State Department service, but only route 22A runs by ARNGRC is about 28 minutes, despite employees, excluding shared use the Main Gate. Several transit nodes the relatively short 4.3-mile distance. by National Guard employees. This are located in a four-mile radius study proposes that DoD and the of the site, though walking is not a This study proposes increasing the State Department begin negotiations convenient option at such distances. frequency of route 22A by reducing for shared use of this service. DoD Consequently, providing reliable weekday peak headways to 10 would likely have to contribute and frequent service to cover the last minutes, weekday off-peak periods to operating funds if shared use is leg of the trip is the focus of transit 20 minutes, and Saturday and Sunday established. Other Other MD Fairfax County Fairfax County Montgomery County Prince William County Prince George’s County Prince William Arlington County County Alexandria Other VA

Arlington Other VA Source: Federal government County Prince George's County Alexandria Montgomery County

Other MD

Other

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Figure 5: Residence of existing and incoming employees, 2007 Figure 6: Pentagon station bus facility

10 Army National Guard Readiness Center ! ! ! MCPHERSON SQUARE

! ! ROSSLYN Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region !

! COURT HOUSE ¨¦§66 ! 0 0.25 0.5 1 ! Miles ¤£50 ± ¤£1

EAST FALLS CHURCH CLARENDON ! ! VIRGINIA ¨¦§66 SQ - GMU BALLSTON - MU ! ! ARLINGTON ! ! CEMETERY

Ð22A

¤£50 ¤£1 ¨¦§395 Arlington Boulevard ÐShuttle ! PENTAGON

Army National Guard Readiness Center PENTAGON Ð22A Columbia Pike ! CITY $ Ð22A CRYSTAL CITY !

Glebe Road NATIONAL ! AIRPORT Existing Service

Proposed Service 395 Shuttle ¨¦§

! Metrorail Stations

$ VRE Stations

Metrorail ¤£1

VRE

Figure 7: Proposed transit service near ARNGRC Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI

11 Army National Guard Readiness Center

¨¦§395 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Unlike the previous proposal, the Table 4: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at ARNGRC second shuttle proposal would be Location Improvements Reason an entirely new service. This study George Mason Dr. Shelter, bench, trash bin, Passengers waiting for 22A. Would not proposes shuttle service between @ Main Gate (southbound) info. signage need if Pentagon/Crystal City shuttle implemented ARNGRC and Pentagon and Crystal Arlington Blvd. Shelter, bench, pedestrian Passengers waiting for 4A, 4H City stations via Washington @ George Mason Dr. pad, trash bin, info. and Arlington Boulevards. These (westbound) signage, adequate lighting stations are included because they are intermodal hubs providing connections to a variety of regional buses, Metrorail lines, and VRE commuter rail lines. This study suggests 10- to 15-minute peak headways and coordinated connections with VRE schedules, to the extent possible. It may be necessary to create a shuttle stop and turnaround area at ARNGRC to facilitate shuttle bus operations. Figure 8: Current conditions at George Mason Figure 9: Current conditions at Arlington Drive at Main Gate (southbound) bus stop Boulevard at George Mason Drive (westbound) bus stop Customer Facility Improvements Improvements in customer facilities and amenities are needed in two better serve boarding passengers who locations, as summarized in Table 4. reside in Fairfax County and western Recommended facility improvements Arlington County. are generally for boarding passengers only. In other words, customer facilities should be provided in situations where passengers may be expected to wait for service.

In lieu of the recommended DoD shuttle between ARNGRC, the Pentagon Transit Center, and the Crystal City VRE, the southbound George Mason Drive bus stop needs a shelter with a bench, trash bin, and information signage for passengers heading east towards Pentagon. If the recommended shuttle is implemented, most personnel heading in this direction would likely not use the 22A, thus not requiring further amenities over what exists today.

Unlike its eastbound side, westbound Arlington Boulevard at George Mason Drive is missing many bus stop amenities. This stop is recommended to mimic its eastbound counterpart by including a shelter with a bench, pedestrian pad, trash bin, information signage, and adequate lighting to

12 Army National Guard Readiness Center Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

BRAC 133 (Mark Center) City of Alexandria, Virginia

Table 5: Key characteristics of BRAC 133 Now By 2015 Growth Personnel 0 6,400 n/a Living Units 0 0 None Parking 0 3,990 n/a 1 2

Background The BRAC 133 project is being built in the Mark Center area of 1 Alexandria, Virginia, west of the I-395 and Seminary Road interchange. BRAC 133 will result in consolidated administrative space for the Washington Headquarters Services (WHS), an organization BRAC construction Other construction within the Department of Defense 1 Washington Headquarters None (DoD). Originally intended for Fort Service buildings Belvoir, DoD decided to consolidate 2 Parking facility with transit center WHS employees elsewhere to minimize effects on underdeveloped Access points Days Hours transportation infrastructure near the 1 Main Gate Unknown Unknown base. Figure 10 shows that parcels on which the headquarters are being Figure 10: Access points and new and renovated facilities for BRAC 133 built were previously unoccupied. Construction is under way. Mark Center. These employees will be Transportation Services consolidated into two buildings. The Any congestion at the I-395 Shirley development will provide 3,840 total Existing Highway/Seminary Road interchange employee parking spaces in garage BRAC 133 will be located adjacent will likely cause delay to transit structures, per DoD regulations to I-395 with immediate highway service in the corridor serving the requiring 1.67 employees per space. access via Seminary Road, also Mark Center and Southern Towers The primary parking garage will adjacent to the site. Subsequently, area. DoD and VDOT should work include a transit center as well, which the site has excellent highway access, together to identify and fund ways is detailed later in the discussion of though I-395 and Seminary Road are to make transit the most efficient transit facilities. The development currently congested. For example, means of travel in the area to help does not include housing. the sections of I-395 and Seminary make transit trips more attractive. Road closest to the site are traveled by This is especially important until Access 173,000 and 50,000 vehicles per day on physical improvements are made Once complete, access to the WHS average, respectively. to accommodate bus, shuttle, and buildings will likely be limited to one vehicular traffic from I-395 to Mark secure entry and exit point that will The closest Metrorail station is Van Center. employ a 100 percent ID check policy. Dorn Street station on the Blue Line The general location of the access (2.4 miles). King Street station (also a Growth point can be found in Figure 10. Its VRE commuter rail station), Pentagon The BRAC process will result in a schedule is presently unknown. station, and the Shirlington transit realignment of 6,400 WHS employees center are all relatively close as well, from throughout the region to the and each offer several connections to

BRAC 133 (Mark Center) 13 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region nearby bus routes. About 16 park- other city-wide improvements such as that a majority of these employees and-ride lots are within a six-mile ITS implementation and traffic light currently reside in northern Virginia, radius of the Mark Center, with the synchronization. Projects and studies particularly Fairfax County. Transit heaviest concentration near the I-395/ beyond 2020 that may affect travel service proposals for BRAC 133 are I-495 intersection (the Mixing Bowl), to and from BRAC 133 are discussed tailored to reflect this distribution, many of which are free of charge. further in the Constrained Long-Range Transportation Plan, which is prepared Many bus routes operate along by the Transportation Planning Board. Table 6: Estimated transit trips for BRAC 133 in 2011 Seminary Road, but only one route, the Metrobus 7 line, in particular 7A Demand Transit Transit Round and 7F, operates within the Mark An official transit mode share goal for Scenario Share Personnel Trips Center site along Nottingham Drive. this site has not been defined, though Low 13% 6,400 830 the BRAC 133 EA uses a transit mode Other routes in the immediate area High 26% 6,400 1,670 include Metrobus 7B, D, E, W, and share of 20 percent in calculating total X; 16L; 25B; 28A, F, and G; and work trips. However, 30 percent of Alexandria Transit DASH routes AT1 incoming employees currently take Southern Fairfax County public transit to work, likely because and 2. Northern Fairfax & Loudoun Counties manyD.C. of these employees work in The Institute of Defense Analysis Crystal City and other locations well Alexandria & Arlington County Other MD offices, already located at Mark served bySouthern transit. Prince William County Montgomery County Fairfax County Center, currently operate a Pentagon Other VA shuttle with 15-minute headways This study estimates a 13 to 26 percent transit mode share range by Prince George's County from 7:20 a.m. to 6:20 p.m. DukePrince George's Northern Fairfax & Realty, developers of the Mark CenterCounty 2011, based Loudonon an Countiesunderstanding Montgomery County site, also provides two shuttles, the of proximity to transit and carpool Other MD Metro Express to the Pentagon CityOther VA facilities, residence of incoming Alexandria & D.C. Metrorail station and Lunchtime Princepersonnel, Arlington and future County parking Express to restaurants and retail in Williamavailability. Table 6 summarizes this Other County immediate Mark Center area. Metro range and what it means for total Express operates during peak periods transit trips. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% only with 15-minute headways, while Figure 11: Residence of existing WHS employees, Lunchtime Express only runs for Beyond 2011, the WHS headquarters 2006 several hours during midday with 10- is not expected to undergo another minute headways. period of significant expansion. The opening of a potential HOV off-ramp The Mark Center area is relatively to Seminary Road, which is currently dense but is still auto-centric. under review, may increase the Sidewalks, when available, are carpool and vanpool usage, possibly generally narrow and inconsistently at the expense of transit use. On the placed, sometimes requiring other hand, the new ramp could also pedestrians to cross where sidewalks create the possibility of express bus abruptly end. Existing transportation that could serve the site. In spite of Source: flickr/Belvoir Army Engineers services are summarized in Figure 13 these possibilities, this study assumes on the following page. transit mode share will remain consistent and within the estimated Planned range. Planned transportation services for BRAC 133 can be found in the Transit Service and Facility Virginia Six-Year Improvement Plan. Proposals Notable projects with direct relevance Figure 11 summarizes the current to BRAC 133 include a potential residential distribution of WHS direct HOV access ramp from I-395, employees awaiting reassignment to the Mark Center. The table reveals additional DASH bus purchases, and Figure 12: WHS buildings under construction

14 BRAC 133 (Mark Center) Glencarlyn Park " $ Army Navy Country Club " Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

!3/4 " 7A 0 0.25 0.5 1 ê25B " Miles ê28B "7B Metrobus/DASH Routes Leesburg Pike "7D " "7E Metrorail Stations "7F ê16L 28FGê "7W $ ê16L Columbia Pike ê25B VRE Stations ê28B "7X 28FG 28FG ê ê16L ê ê25B Metrorail ê25D ê25D 7A, 7B, 7E, 7F, 7W, !6 28FGê 7X, 25B, 28G ê25B VRE 25D "7A ê28Bê 28B ê "7B "7E BRAC 133 at ê16L "7F "7A"7E !6 Mark Center 28FG !6 ê "7B"7F ¨¦§395 !1 !2 28FGê ê25D ê16L !1 !2 "7X "7W "7D "7X 5 "7W ! "7F !6 King Street !2 !5 "7A !4 !3 !2 !5 !1 ê25B !10 "7X "7F !5 ê28B Seminary Road Beauregard Street "7W !5 "7A !6 !1 !2 25B !1 ¨¦§395 ê ê25B !2 !2 "7F "7W "7A ê28B ê25B ê25B 7A " !7 !5 "7F !4 !1 !2 !2 !2 !5 BRADDOCK RD " 2 DukeDUKE ST Street 5 ! ê25B ! !5 !1 !8 !2 !5 !5 !6 !7 !8 !10 ê28B KING ST !2 !5 $" !5 !7 !1 !5 !2 !8 5 ! 1 §95 ¨¦§495 !6 ! ¨¦ !7 !1 !8 ê25B !6 !5 " VAN DORN ST " ê25B EISENHOWER AVE ± !7 Figure 13: Existing transit service near BRAC 133 Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI

15 BRAC 133 (Mark Center) " !3 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region with an understanding that as time Table 7: Summary of BRAC 133 service proposals passes employees will likely further Purpose Proposal consolidate into northern Fairfax Direct local service Reroute Metrobus bus routes 7 (B, D, and E), 28F, 25 (A, B, and D) County much in the same pattern as Reroute DASH routes AT1 and AT2 employees already working in the Implement circulator service to WHS transit center via Seminary Road and Mark Center area. Beauregard Street Reroute planned cross-town DASH service between Landmark Mall and The WHS buildings are being built in Potomac Yard Shopping Center to serve WHS transit center a semi-urban setting, where providing Direct express service Implement new Omniride route that would serve Seminary Road from Lake Ridge in the long term transit service directly to the Main Implement express route between Franconia-Springfield and Pentagon Gate is desirable and feasible. Its Metrorail stations via Beauregard Street relatively compact footprint in Mark Connections to major Improve connection to Pentagon with Metrobus 7D and 25D Center eliminates the need for any transit centers Improve connection to Orange Line stations with Metrobus 25B internal circulation, thus transit Improve connection to King Street VRE and Metrorail station with DASH AT2 service proposals will focus on Improve connection to Braddock Road Metrorail station with a DASH AT2 transporting employees from nearby variant transit hubs and modifying and Implement shuttle service connection to a major transit center creating regional and local bus routes. All service proposals are summarized in Table 7 and displayed in Figure 15.

Local Bus Proposals Several Metrobus and Alexandria Transit (DASH) bus routes operate in and around the Mark Center area and offer a significant opportunity

for greater and more frequent Center Source: Schumin Web Transit connections to the planned WHS transit center, located within the north parking garage along Nottingham Drive and adjacent to the main entry and exit point. Figure 14: DASH route AT2 This study proposes the modification of Metrobus routes 7 (B, D, and E), Metro should increase frequencies Metrorail stations in northern Virginia 28F, and 25 (A, B, and D), as well as of Metrobus route 7 (B, D, and E) and should be routed to directly serve DASH routes AT1 and AT2 to serve and 25D. In particular, the frequency the WHS transit center. the planned WHS transit center. of route 7D, an express route to These routes already serve a variety Pentagon Metrorail station in the Route 25B operates between Van Dorn of Mark Center locations and should reverse commute direction, can be Street and Ballston-MU stations. This be extended or modified to serve the increased by converting deadhead study proposes adding a variant to upcoming transit center. In many trips from routes 7B, D, and E into route 25B with three morning and cases, route modifications involve revenue trips. Afternoon peak-period afternoon peak trips offering limited- adding a WHS transit center stop for frequency should be increased stop service. routes that already serve Southern for route 25D towards Pentagon Towers, one of Alexandria’s highest Metrorail station, provided it stops at The headway of DASH route AT2, ridership locations. the WHS transit center. which operates between King Street station and Southern Towers, should This study also proposes WHS employees would benefit be reduced to 20 minutes. Alexandria strengthening connections to nearby from better regional connectivity by Transit should also implement Metrorail stations (Pentagon, King increasing the frequency of Metrobus limited-stop service on some peak- Street, and Orange Line stations) route 25B in addition to DASH route period trips to better coordinate with through increased frequency. AT2. These routes stop at several VRE commuter trains. Route AT2 will

16 BRAC 133 (Mark Center) Glencarlyn Park

Army Navy Country Club " Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region "

0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Existing Service Leesburg Pike

Proposed Service

7B Ð Shuttles ÐEXP Ð7D Ð25A Ð7E " Metrorail Stations

Ð25B ÐPRTC $ Ð7E VRE Stations Ð28F Ð7B ¨¦§395 Metrorail !2 Ð7E Ð28F VRE ÐEXP Ð7D To Transit Center: Ð25A CT, PRTC, AT1, AT2, 7B,7D, 'CT 7E, 25A, 25B, 25D, 28F ÐPRTC

Seminary Road !1 King Street ÐEXP BRAC 133 Ð25B 2 (Mark Center) ! ¨¦§395 !2 ÐShuttle 'CT Ð25B

ÐPRTC

ÐShuttle Alternate Route BRADDOCK RD " DukeDUKE STStreet 2 !1 to King Street Station !

KING ST ÐEXP $"

!1 495 ¨¦§95 ¨¦§ !1 Ð25B " VAN DORN ST " ± EISENHOWER AVE Figure 15: Existing transit service near BRAC 133 Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI

17 BRAC 133 (Mark Center) Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region provide an essential connection to the Table 8: Summary of planned customer facility improvements at BRAC 133 planned Potomac Yard transit corridor Location Improvements Reason via the Braddock Road Metrorail Parking structure Transit center (climate- To serve existing and proposed bus routes station. This connection may be @ Nottingham Drive controlled interior waiting area, large canopy, time consuming, though, as AT2 seating, and five saw- also connects to King Street station BUILDING DESIGNtoothed bus bays) AND before serving the Mark Center area. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ® CONSTRUCTION This study proposes a quicker route • 2 multi-story via West Braddock Road and King office towers

Street to provide an more efficient •North and south connection. parking garages • Transportation In a memorandum regarding FY2009 Center supplemental budget requests, • Visitor’s Center Alexandria proposed a cross-town Source: flickr/Belvoir Army Engineers route from Landmark Mall to Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Potomac Yard Shopping Center. The city could consider serving Mark Figure 16: Rendering of planned garage and Figure 17: Location of transit center presently Center on this proposed route or on a transit center along Nottingham Drive serving as construction staging area The Corps’ First Team! 13 separate cross-town connection. This would offer better connectivity within The I-95/I-395 Transit/TDM Study station would be advantageous due the city and possibly attract transit also proposed express Metrobus to its VRE connection, but Van Dorn ridership. service along Kingstown-Van Dorn- Street station would provide DoD Shirlington via Beauregard Street with a less congested shuttle route. Finally, this study proposes a that continues to Pentagon via HOV circulator service to serve Southern lanes. This would operate on one of Customer Facility Improvements Towers, the WHS transit center, the three dedicated transit corridors As part of the WHS development, Northern Virginia Community proposed in the City of Alexandria Duke Realty is building a large College (Alexandria campus), Skyline Master Plan with 20-minute peak transit center on the north end of the City, and Bailey’s Crossroads along and 30-minute off-peak headways. parking structure shown in Figure 16, Seminary Road and Beauregard This study proposes the extension eliminating the need to upgrade the Street. A circulator would of this express service to Franconia- existing Nottingham Drive bus stops complement local and express bus Springfield Metrorail station in order specifically for the BRAC process. service in the area. to take advantage of intermodal connections and parking. The transit center will include a Express Bus Proposals climate-controlled interior waiting During the I-95/I-395 Transit/ Shuttle Proposals area, large canopy, ample seating, TDM Study, the Potomac and Neither the Duke Realty (WHS compliance with the Americans with Rappahannock Transit Commission building developer) Mark Center Disabilities Act, and five saw-tooth (PRTC) proposed a new Omniride employee shuttle nor the Institute bus bays. Additionally, the city has route between Lake Ridge and for Defense Analyses employee asked DoD and Duke Realty to Seminary Road that serves the Mark shuttle will offer service to WHS include real-time bus information, a Center area. This route would require employees. However, the BRAC 133 commuter store or kiosk, and an area an additional eight revenue hours environmental assessment indicates for maps and route information. of service per day with headways of that DoD will operate a shuttle to a 45 minutes, equaling four trips per Metrorail/VRE station east of the site. Additional bus stops will be built, peak period. This service would be if needed, on the opposite side of contingent on constructing direct While there are several intermodal Nottingham Drive from the transit HOV access. If funded, this route hubs east of the Mark Center center. These plans are currently in could stop at the planned WHS that could provide many transit the approval process by Alexandria. transportation center. The target date connections, this study proposes the for this service is 2020, but no funding use of either King Street or Van Dorn has been identified. Street Metrorail stations. King Street

18 BRAC 133 (Mark Center) Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Engineer Proving Ground Fairfax County, Virginia

Table 9: Key characteristics at EPG Now By 2015 Growth Personnel < 50 8,500 16,900% 2 Living Units 0 0 None 3 4 Parking < 50 5,500 10,900%

1 5 Background Engineer Proving Ground (EPG) is located within Fairfax County near Springfield, Virginia, approximately 3 13 miles southwest of Washington, 1 D.C. The site is bounded by Franconia 4 Springfield Parkway, I-95, Fullerton Road, and Rolling Road. EPG is 6 considered part of Fort Belvoir and 2 not a separate base, despite a distance of several miles between the two. Originally used by the military as a land mine deployment and detection test facility from the 1940s and on, BRAC construction Other construction the 820-acre site is now largely 1 NGA headquarters 5 Physical fitness center abandoned, except for a few small 2 Corps of Engineers offices 6 Private development facilities and minimal personnel. 3 Child development center 4 Emergency services center Existing facilities at EPG are located in the northeastern corner. Before BRAC Access points Days Hours construction the site was occupied by 1 Main Gate Unknown Unknown fewer than 50 personnel. The site does 2 I-95 SB access Unknown Unknown not include any living quarters and 3 I-95 HOV access Unknown Unknown had about 50 parking spaces. 4 Barta Road Unknown Unknown New roadway

Growth Figure 18: Access points and new and renovated facilities at EPG EPG will balloon from 50 to 8,500 personnel after the completion of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Access will be upgrade from its existing Agency’s (NGA) headquarters. The Access to EPG will be limited. Four condition. The status of the new influx of thousands of employees potential secure access points will be southbound and HOV I-95 access every day requires construction of located on the west and south sides is unknown. Construction costs for several new roadways within and of the site, each with a 100 percent ID these entrances, particularly for HOV through the site, most notably the check policy. The location of the gates access, may be prohibitive. extension of the Fairfax County are found in Figure 18, but the hours Parkway along the western perimeter. of operation of each gate is unknown. Transportation Services DoD will construct approximately 5,500 parking spaces, of which 5,100 The Main Gate will be accessed Existing will be for employees. No housing from the Fairfax County Parkway Highway access is and will remain will be provided. extension. The Barta Road entrance above average as EPG is located

Engineer Proving Ground 19 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region between I-95 and Franconia Beyond 2011, EPG is not expected to Springfield Parkway, and will also undergo another period of significant border the future Fairfax County expansion, though the potential Parkway extension. BRAC relocations construction of a network of in this area, which also includes Fort HOT lanes, combined with new Source: Fairfax County Belvoir a few miles to the south, will express bus service, could improve increase traffic volumes on all major transit service to EPG. In spite of routes in the area, particularly I-95 these possibilities, this study assumes and Fairfax County Parkway. These transit mode share will remain roadways are already at or nearing consistent and within the estimated capacity. range.

The closest Metrorail station is Transit Service and Facility Franconia-Springfield, which is Proposals several miles to the northeast. It is Figure 20 summarizes the current also the closet commuter rail station, Figure 19: Fairfax County Parkway extension residential distribution of NGA serving VRE’s Fredericksburg Line. employees awaiting reassignment to Several dozen park and ride lots are Demand the EPG. Most employees currently found within Fairfax County, with live in northern Virginia, particularly Though a specific TDM goal for EPG particularly large concentration near Fairfax and Loudoun Counties. A is unknown at the time of this study, Springfield and west Fairfax County. significant minority of employees live the Fort Belvoir final environmental in Maryland. Transit service proposals impact statement (FEIS) developed No Metrobus route provides service for EPG are tailored to reflect this preliminary concept service plans that near EPG, but several Fairfax distribution, with an understanding assume both a five and 10 percent Connector routes operate nearby, that employees will likely further transit mode share. EPG is a smaller including routes 304, 205, 331, and consolidate into northern Virginia as site and is more closely located to 332. Pedestrian and bicyclist amenities time passes. major transit hubs and services are almost completely non-existent. compared to Fort Belvoir, so it will Existing transportation services are The NGA is reviewing options that likely see higher transit usage. shown in Figure 21. may allow public transit buses to enter the outer perimeter of the EPG This study estimates a nine to 18 Planned site. Buses would serve a proposed percent transit mode share range bus berthing area along the inner Planned transportation services for by September 2011. This estimate is perimeter surrounding the visitor EPG can be found in the Virginia based on an understanding of mode parking area, bringing transit riders Six-Year Improvement Plan. Notable share at Fort Belvoir, which would projects with relevance to EPG be comparable to EPG, and the site’s include the Fairfax County Parkway proximity to transit and carpool Northern Fairfax & Loudoun Counties Extension, improvements to I-95, and facilities, future parking availability, a Saratoga park-and-ride facility. The major planned and proposed Southern Fairfax County Fairfax County Parkway extension infrastructure improvements, and Prince William County will be constructed in four phases, planned transportation management with DoD providing some of the strategies, including shuttle service. Alexandria & Arlington County funding. Currently, only phases I and Table 10 summarizes this range and Other VA II are funded and will be completed what it means for total transit trips. this year. Montgomery County

Projects and studies beyond 2020 that Table 10: Estimated transit trips for EPG in 2011 Prince George's County Transit may affect travel to and from EPG are Other MD Transit Round discussed further in the Constrained Scenario Share Personnel Trips D.C. Long-Range Transportation Plan, Low 9% 8,500 740 prepared by TPB. High 18% 8,500 1,510 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Figure 20: Residence of existing NGA employees

20 Engineer Proving Ground

Other D.C.

Fairfax & Loudon Counties

Maryland

Prince William County

Alexandria & Arlington County Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

0 0.5 1 2 Miles Backlick Road ¨¦§395 ± ! $ $ ¨¦§495 ¨¦§495 ¨¦§95 Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI

18R, 18S, S80, S91, !331 171, 231, 232, 301, !231 "18S §95 !331 ¨¦ 303, 304, 305, 310, !232 !332 !332 321, 322, 331, 332, 380, 401, OmniRide

! $ "18R "18S !305 !231 "18S Franconia/Springfield !301 !232 !231 !171 "18R !305 !232 !304 !305 Fairfax County Parkway !303 !331 !231 18R " Engineer !332 !232 Proving Ground !304 !231 !301 !301 !232

!305 !303 !331 !332 !304 !331 !331 !305 !332 !332 !305 ¨¦§95 !304 Telegraph!303 Road Fort Belvoir

!171 !331 !171 !332 !331 !307 Lorton !171 !332 $ !171 !171 !171 ¤£1 151 !307 ! !REX !152 !171 Richmond Highway !171 ¤£1

!307 Metrobus/Fairfax Connector Routes !REX ! Metrorail Station ¤£1 $ !REX VRE Stations !171 Fort Metrorail Belvoir

VRE

Figure 21: Existing transit service near EPG

Engineer Proving Ground 21 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region within walking distance of the main Table 11: Summary of EPG service proposals building. Purpose Proposal Direct local service Implement new Fairfax Connector route 333 Many of the proposals for EPG were Direct express service Implement express service to and from Tysons Corner via I-495 developed for the Fairfax County Implement cross-county express service to and from Herndon via Fairfax Department of Transportation’s County Parkway (FCDOT) Transit Development Modify PRTC Prince William Metro Direct route to include EPG stop Plan (TDP). EPG-related service Implement PRTC routes to/from Dale City and Woodbridge in the long term enhancements recommended in Connections to major Improve connection to Franconia-Springfield Metrorail station and/or the TDP are primarily routing transit centers Lorton VRE station with new Fairfax Connector routes 309, 333, and 371, modifications to local and regional and restructured route 304 bus services. These modifications Encourage use of the PRTC Prince William Metro Direct route to Franconia- Springfield Metrorail station would improve connections to the Improve connection to Lorton VRE station with new shuttle service new NGA campus from the local neighborhoods as well as from the Franconia-Springfield Metrorail FCDOT proposes restructuring areas connecting service at the Lorton and Lorton VRE stations. All service route 171 into two separate routes transit center. From there passengers proposals are summarized in Table 11 that would incorporate portions of would be able to reach the NGA and displayed in Figure 23. the existing route 331/332 operating Campus through new route 371 or the east of I-95. New route 171 would planned BRAC shuttle. FCDOT envisions enhancing the incorporate the route segments from bus loading area at the Lorton VRE the existing 331/332, while a new The restructured route 304 would station to provide space for more route 371 would operate between originate at the Franconia-Springfield routes and amenities. This upgraded the Franconia-Springfield Metrorail Metrorail station then proceed to the transit center would support several station and the Mount Vernon Lorton transit center via the Saratoga local transit routes that would Hospital via Backlick and Fullerton neighborhood. Saratoga could then provide connections to both EPG Roads west of I-95. Route 371 would transfer at Lorton to either EPG or and to sites within the Fort Belvoir include a stop at the EPG Barta Road Fort Belvoir. military reservation. In addition, the gate as well as the Lorton VRE transit I-95 HOT lane project was planned center. Express Bus Proposals to incorporate an in-line bus stop on This study proposes two new the west side of Lorton station and The TDP proposes a new route 309. express routes serving EPG. The its tracks, including a pedestrian This route would operate between first would operate between Tysons overpass over the tracks, but it is the Franconia-Springfield Metrorail Corner and Lorton, originating at the likely that this station will be dropped station and the Lorton transit center Sydenstricker park and ride lot. This from the plan. via the Sydenstricker Park and Ride. route would use the I-495 HOT lanes, Linking these two routes and creating which are scheduled to be completed Local Bus Proposals route 309 provides residents of the in 2013, and would include reverse The TDP proposes that Fairfax high-growth Lorton and Laurel Hill peak service stopping within EPG. Connector (FC) routes 331 and 332 be restructured due to roadway changes resulting from the extension of Fairfax County Parkway. This new route, named route 333, would serve the communities west of I-95. The proposed route 333 would operate between Franconia-Springfield Metrorail station and the Fullerton and Virginia I-95 industrial parks

via the new NGA east campus. Source: Virginia Department of Transportation Morning service would operate in the counter-clockwise direction, with the afternoon service operating clockwise. Figure 22: I-495 HOT lanes under construction

22 Engineer Proving Ground Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

0 0.5 1 2 Miles Backlick Road ¨¦§395 ± ! $ $ ¨¦§495 ¨¦§495 ¨¦§95 Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI ìEXP

¨¦§95

! $ 333, 371, Franconia/Springfield 304, 309, 333, PRTC, Express 371, PRTC Fairfax County Parkway ìCC Engineer Proving Ground ì Shuttle

ì Shuttle ¨¦§95

Telegraph Road ìPRTC CC ì Fort Belvoir 304, 309, 371

Lorton $ ¤£1

Existing Service PRTC Richmond Highway ì ¤£1 Proposed Service ìPRTC Shuttle ! Metrorail Stations ¤£1 $ VRE Stations Fort Metrorail Belvoir

VRE

Figure 23: Proposed transit service near EPG

Engineer Proving Ground 23 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

The other proposed route, cross- Table 12: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at EPG county express service from Herndon Location Improvements Reason to Fort Belvoir, would follow the Visitor parking lot Transit center (three To serve proposed local, express, and Fairfax County Parkway corridor @ North Loop Road shelters and benches, shuttle routes to EPG large pedestrian pads, and connect locations from the sidewalk, lighting, trash northern and western Fairfax County bins, information signage, LED Next Bus display, and communities with BRAC sites in two bus bays at minimum) the southern portion of the county, Franconia-Springfield Further study to determine To support additional transit services that including EPG. Implementation Metrorail station the feasibility and design would utilize the station of this new service would not be of additional bus bays and passenger amenities expected until after 2020.

PRTC is considering extending its Prince William Metro Direct route (operating between Dale City/ Woodbridge and the Franconia- Springfield station) to provide 30-minute frequency peak period circulation in Springfield in 2015, however, the plan is not funded. Source: flickr/Belvoir Army Engineers If ridership demand to the EPG is expected to be higher, PRTC would consider re-directing the extension to EPG.

PRTC originally proposed new express routes to serve EPG from Figure 24: Planned transit center will be located relatively closely to the NGA headquarters the Dale City and Woodbridge park and ride lots as part of their long station is built, though its construction Given the estimated need at this range plan, but these proposals were now seems unlikely. location, Metro bus stop design eventually removed. Though no guidelines require three shelters, funding has been identified, these Customer Facility Improvements sufficient sidewalk and pedestrian proposals are still worth exploring as Most routes are expected to use the pad space, adequate lighting, long-term possibilities. Barta Road Gate to enter EPG, but information signage of maps and buses coming from the west will use schedules, trash bins, and a Next Shuttle Proposals the new Fairfax County Parkway Bus LED screen for real-time arrival The I-95/I-395 Transit/TDM Study extension to enter at the Rolling information. Next Bus technology suggests establishing shuttle routes Road Main Gate. The latter routing should still be implemented at this with small buses to serve each awaits approval because security location for future use. of the two Fairfax County BRAC may require passengers to board and installations. The route to the NGA alight from public buses closer to Additionally, while Franconia- headquarters would follow Pohick the Barta Road Gate, which is where Springfield Metrorail station currently and Rolling Roads to the NGA service visitors will enter to use the visitor has ample capacity for passenger road, terminating at the bus berths parking. Whichever direction the circulation, bus bay utilization has that will be constructed near the buses may enter, if at all, they would reached capacity. Additional bus bays visitor parking lot. This route should stop at the planned bus berth area and passenger amenities are needed be timed to meet VRE trains at the near the visitor parking lot just north to support new and modified services Lorton station, with train service of the main building. to EPG. More detailed planning is currently operating during peak needed to determine the feasibility periods (with the exception of one Details of this area, like the number of and design of additional bus bays and midday trip). These services could bus bays, shelters, types of amenities, passenger amenities. be augmented in the future if the or whether if it will resemble a transit planned I-95 in-line bus stop at Lorton center at all, are presently unknown.

24 Engineer Proving Ground Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Fort Belvoir Fairfax County, Virginia

Table 13: Key characteristics at Fort Belvoir Now By 2015 Growth Personnel 23,700 27,790 17% Living Units 2,070 2,070 0% 2 3 4 Parking 27,000 Unknown Unknown 1 2 8

Background 18 3 Fort Belvoir is one of the largest military bases in the National Capital 17 Region and contains almost 100 16 6 different organizations. The base was 1 founded in 1917 during World War I 9 and quadrupled in size over the next 5 several decades. Historically, the base 7 is known for training over 147,000 14 11 engineer troops during World War II. 15 13 The base is divided by Richmond Highway into two posts: South Post 10 and North Post. The South Post is the largest and most developed of the 12 two, and directly abuts the Potomac River. The North Post stretches as far north and west as Telegraph Road, less than a mile from I-95. The 7,780- BRAC construction Other construction acre base currently includes more 1 MDA headquarters 11 PEO administrative building than 23,700 personnel, 2,070 family 2 DeWitt Army Community Hospital 12 JPRA renovation and addition housing units (excluding barracks), 3 Dental clinic 13 Veterinary clinic addition and reportedly as many as 27,000 4 NARMC headquarters 14 Museum support center parking spaces. Many of these spaces 5 Network operations center 15 Industrial support center are reserved for other uses and are not 6 USA NCA support facility 16 249th Engineer Battalion hqs. utilized daily. 7 Administrative buildings 17 Fire station replacement 8 AMC relocatables 18 Operations training facility Growth 9 PEO EIS administrative facilities BRAC realignments will result in a 10 MWR family travel camp net gain of almost 4,100 personnel Access points Days Hours to Fort Belvoir’s North and South 1 Tulley Gate Every day All day Posts, though the South Post will 2 Pence Gate Every day 5 a.m. - 9 p.m. receive almost all the new BRAC Walker Gate Every day 5 p.m. - 9 p.m. facilities, including the DeWitt Army 3 Community Hospital. Total new Figure 25: Access points and new and renovated facilities at Fort Belvoir’s South Post parking is currently unavailable, though the base expects the hospital to include 3,500 new spaces for Many additional facilities will be Museum of the U.S. Army, which will visitors, patients, and employees. constructed independent of BRAC likely be built in the west side of the actions. The most significant is the North Post. The museum is expected

Fort Belvoir 25 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region to receive 1,000,000 annual visitors, as part of the housing privatization policy. The location and hours of or roughly 4,000 daily visitors during program. Reconstructed houses operation of each gate are revealed peak season. Other significant new will be much larger, which officials in Figures 25 and 26. Fort Belvoir is facilities not associated with BRAC estimate will contribute to an increase unique in that it is the only base in include the Information Dominance in Fort Belvoir’s on-base population, this study that allows public transit Center, operations training facility, perhaps reaching 8,000 people. to operate on base. The Metrobus and the Post Exchange (PX) Richmond Highway Express expansion. All of these facilities can be Access (REX) currently operates between located in Figures 25 and 26. Access to both posts at Fort Belvoir Alexandria and Fort Belvoir’s South is and will remain limited. The base Post. The status of this route once Total family housing will remain at includes seven secure access points, BRAC actions have been completed 2,070 units, but 1,700 will be rebuilt each with a 100 percent ID check is unknown. The REX, as well as other bus routes in the area, will be discussed in further detail in later sections.

Transportation Services 8

4 Existing Fort Belvoir is located near I-95 and is accessible by two exits, one at Lorton Road and the other at Fairfax County Parkway. U.S. Route 1, otherwise

4 known as Richmond Highway, bisects the site and provides additional highway access. The roadways near Fort Belvoir experiences heavy 3 11 7 10 traffic volumes, particularly I-95 and

9 Richmond Highway, and their ability 6 to handle additional traffic is severely 5 2 2 limited. Traffic is frequently congested 3 1 1 at base entrances, including at Belvoir Road, Gunston Road, and Kingman Road.

BRAC construction Other construction The closest Metrorail station is 1 Barracks modernization 2 Physical fitness center Franconia-Springfield, which is 3 DCNG resources training center several miles north of the North 4 Golf course clubhouse Post. Franconia-Springfield station 5 Military police station addition and Lorton station are the closest 6 Soldier support center commuter rail stations, both serving 7 Museum of the U.S. Army the VRE Fredericksburg Line. Several 8 DCEETA remote delivery facility dozen park and ride lots are found 9 Flight control tower nearby, with particularly large 10 Information Dominance Center concentration near Springfield and 11 PX expansion Woodbridge along I-95 as well as western Fairfax County. Access points Days Hours 1 Woodlawn Village Every day All day Nearby Metrobus service is limited 2 Farrar Gate Every day All day to the REX and 11Y, though REX is 3 Kingman Gate Every day 5 p.m. - 9 p.m. the only route that enters the base. 4 Telegraph Gate Monday - Friday 5 a.m. - 9 p.m. Several Fairfax Connector routes

Figure 26: Access points and new and renovated facilities at Fort Belvoir’s North Post operate with stops along Fort Belvoir,

26 Fort Belvoir Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Table 14: Estimated transit trips for Fort Belvoir in 2011 Transit Transit Round Scenario Share Personnel Trips Low 5% 27,790 1,390 High 10% 27,790 2,780 Source: flickr/Belvoir Army Engineers of significant expansion. The potential construction of a network of HOT lanes, combined with new express bus routes, could improve transit service to Fort Belvoir. Over time, relocated personnel will likely move closer to Fort Belvoir, which might affect the attractiveness of transit. In spite of Figure 27: Fort Belvoir South Post these possibilities, this study assumes transit mode share will remain including routes 171, 301, 331, and Lorton station and the potential Fort consistent and within the estimated 332. Other Fairfax Connector service Belvoir shuttle (Shuttle 2 in Figure 31) range. in the immediate area includes routes is being investigated but is currently 151, 152, 231, 232, 303, and 307. unlikely to be built. Transit Service and Facility Additionally, Lee Coaches operates Proposals a bus from Fredericksburg to Fort Projects and studies beyond 2020 that Figure 28 summarizes the residential Belvoir via I-95 HOV lanes, providing may affect travel to and from EPG are distribution of Fort Belvoir a single trip in the morning and one discussed further in the Constrained employees. The figure shows that in the afternoon. A shuttle for hospital Long-Range Transportation Plan, a majority of current personnel patients operates between the DeWitt prepared by TPB. and employees reside in northern Community Hospital on Fort Belvoir Virginia, particularly southern Fairfax Demand and the Walter Reed Medical Center County and Prince William County. Fort Belvoir conducted an employee in northern Washington. Incoming personnel and employees survey of transportation modes in also primarily live in northern September 2008. The survey found On the base, pedestrian and bicycle Virginia, but are more evenly that four percent of employees take facilities and amenities are limited. distributed among the inner Beltway some form of transit, with a majority D.C. Existing transportation services are of these employees using commuter summarized in Figure 29 on the rail. Northern Fairfax & Loudoun Counties following page. Prince William County MarylandThough a specific transit mode share Planned goal for Fort Belvoir is unknown, Southern Fairfax County Planned transportation services the Fort Belvoir FEIS developed Alexandria & Southern Alexandria & Arlington County for Fort Belvoir can be found in Arlingtonthe CountypreliminaryFairfax concept County service plans Virginia Six-Year Improvement Plan. that assume both a five and 10 Other VA Northern Fairfax & percent transit mode share. This Prince George's County Notable projects with relevanceLoudon Counties to Fort Belvoir include the Fairfax study estimates a similar five to 10 Montgomery County County Parkway extension, percent transit mode share range by improvements to I-95, and additional Prince2011, William given County the uncertainty of future Other MD U.S. Route 1 crosswalks. DoD is availability of parking and travel D.C. considering shuttle service between demand management strategies. Table Other Lorton station and Fort Belvoir 14 summarizes this range and what it to accommodate future growth, means for total transit trips. including BRAC-related changes. A 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% commuter bus drop-off point from the Beyond 2011, Fort Belvoir is not Figure 28: Residence of existing Fort Belvoir I-95 HOV lane that would connect to expected to undergo another period personnel and employees

Fort Belvoir 27 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

!331 !231 95 331 0 0.5 1 2 ¨¦§ ! !232 !332 Miles !332 ± 18R, 18S, S80, S91, 171, 231, 232, 301, 303, 304, 305, 310, ! 321, 322, 331, 332, $ 380, 401, OmniRide "18R "18S !305 !231 18S !232 " !301 !301 !231

!171 Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI "18R !305 !232 !304 !303 !331 Fairfax County Parkway !231 Engineer !332 !232 Proving Ground !304 !231 !301 !301 !232

!305 !303 !331 !332 !304 !331 !331 !332 !332 !305 ¨¦§95 !304 Telegraph!303 Road

Fort Belvoir !151 !171 !171 !171 !152 !331 !REX !332 !331 !307 Lorton !171 !332 $ !171 !171 !171 ¤£1 151 !307 ! !REX !152 !171 Richmond Highway !171 "11Y ¤£1

!307 !REX ¤£1 !REX !171

Metrobus/Fairfax Connector Routes ! Metrorail Station $ VRE Stations

Metrorail

VRE

Figure 29: Existing transit service near Fort Belvoir

28 Fort Belvoir Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region counties and are more likely to live in Table 15: Summary of Fort Belvoir service proposals Maryland. Fort Belvoir transit service Purpose Proposal proposals in this study are tailored Direct local service Implement new Fairfax Connector route 333 to reflect these distributions, with an Extend PRTC Jefferson Highway route to South Post understanding that as time passes Direct express service Implement express service to and from Tysons Corner via I-495 incoming personnel and employees Implement express service to and from Vienna via I-66 and I-495 will likely consolidate into southern Implement cross-county express service to and from Herndon via Fairfax Fairfax County and Prince William County Parkway County. Connections to major Improve connection to Lorton VRE station with Metrobus REX extension, new transit centers Fairfax Connector routes 309 and 371, and new shuttle service Communities around Fort Belvoir Improve connection to Franconia-Springfield station with modified Fairfax will experience high growth over Connector route 171 and new routes 329 the next decade, at least in part due Encourage use of the PRTC Prince William Metro Direct route to Franconia- Springfield Metrorail station to the increased employment at the BRAC sites in southern Fairfax County. As a result, Fairfax County worth mentioning in the context of PRTC has also proposed extending Connector and Metrobus services Fort Belvoir. This proposed route their Route 1 Jefferson Highway will likely experience increased would provide a connection for the line beyond its current terminus at demand. Service proposals of this Lorton and Laurel Hill communities the Woodbridge VRE station to Fort study reflect this understanding, to Lorton station. From there Belvoir’s South Post by no later than though much emphasis is given to passengers would be able to reach 2025. The service would be extended providing connections to nearby Fort Belvoir by transferring to the during the peak hours to provide trips major transportation hubs. All service proposed route 371, Metrobus REX, at hourly headways. proposals are summarized in Table 15 and the planned shuttle. and displayed in Figure 31. Express Bus Proposals FCDOT also proposes a new route 329 The service proposals developed here Local Bus Proposals to operate from Franconia-Springfield incorporate suggestions from the Like proposals for EPG, several Fort Metrorail station to Pence Gate Fairfax County TDP. The Metrobus Belvoir proposals were developed as via Telegraph Road and a planned Richmond Highway Express (REX) part of the FCDOT TDP. Some of the extension of Mulligan Road. This is a popular service that travels Fort Belvoir proposals are the same as proposed route provides the rapidly directly into Fort Belvoir’s South Post, EPG proposals due to their proximity. developing Kingstowne and Hayfield requiring security clearance at Pence communities with expanded service Gate. Moving forward, the REX likely FCDOT proposed restructuring route to the Franconia-Springfield Metrorail cannot continue to operate within 171 into two separate routes. New station and a direct connection to Fort Belvoir once BRAC construction route 171 would be of particular Richmond Highway in the Fort is completed. In response, Metro has importance to Fort Belvoir, as it Belvoir area. proposed extending the REX along is planned to operate between the Franconia-Springfield and Huntington Metrorail stations along Richmond Highway. This route would stop at Pence Gate and continue to serve the Defense Logistics Agency parking lot. Additionally, the new route 371 would remain important to Fort Belvoir, similar to EPG, since it Source: Schumin Web Transit Center Source: Schumin Web Transit would provide a connection between Franconia-Springfield Metrorail station, Lorton station, and Pence Gate at Belvoir Road.

A new route 309 was previously discussed under EPG, too, but it is Figure 30: Richmond Highway Express

Fort Belvoir 29 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

0 0.5 1 2 ¨¦§95 Miles ±

! $ Franconia/Springfield 171, 329, PRTC Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI ìCC Fairfax County ParkwayEngineer Proving Ground ìEXP

95 ¨¦§ ì Shuttle

Telegraph Road PRTC ì Fort Belvoir 309, REX, Shuttle North Post: CC REX ì 171, Shuttle ì EXP Lorton ì $ ¤£1 ìREX ì Shuttle

Richmond Highway ìPRTC ìREX ¤£1 South Post: 171, 371, 329, REX, PRTC, Shuttle ¤£1

ì Shuttle

Existing Service

Proposed Service

Shuttles ! Metrorail Stations $ VRE Stations

Metrorail

VRE

Figure 31: Proposed transit service near Fort Belvoir

30 Fort Belvoir Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Richmond Highway to the Lorton Table 16: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at Fort Belvoir VRE station. The REX would still drop Location Improvements Reason off and pick up passengers at Pence Belvoir Road Transit center (three To serve proposed local, express, and Gate, requiring some form of on-base @ Pence Gate shelters and benches, shuttle routes to Fort Belvoir South Post, large pedestrian pads, and to accommodate the modification of shuttle service so that passengers may sidewalk, lighting, trash the REX route complete their journey. bins, information signage, LED Next Bus display, and two bus bays at minimum) This study proposes a new express Defense Logistics Agency Enhanced bus stop (two To serve proposed local and express route operating between Tysons parking lot shelters and benches, routes to the Defense Intelligence Agency Corner and Fort Belvoir with more lighting, trash bins, and information signage) reverse peak service terminating at a proposed park and ride lot one mile east of Pence Gate. This new route would provide a connection to Fort Shuttle Proposals the exact number of bays would Belvoir for residents of northern The I-95/I-395 Transit/TDM Study require more detailed operational Fairfax County communities and suggests DoD should establish shuttle planning. would use the I-495 HOT lanes that routes to serve each of the two Fairfax are currently under construction and County BRAC installations. The route More customer facilities are also expected to be completed by 2013. to Fort Belvoir would stop at the needed near the Defense Logistics Defense Logistics Agency building Agency building to accommodate A new express route from Vienna to near Fairfax County Parkway then passenger growth. The teardrop- Fort Belvoir would provide quick and proceed to Pence Gate. This route shaped roadway in the parking lot convenient access for residents of the should be timed to meet VRE trains at already includes a 100-foot bus pull-in western portion of Fairfax County. the Lorton station, with train service area, large eight-foot sidewalks, and This express route would operate currently operating during peak lighting for the adjacent parking lots. via I-66, I-495, and I-395, taking periods (with the exception of one Metro bus stop guidelines suggest advantage of HOV lanes on I-66 and midday trip). These services could this location should incorporate two the HOT lanes on I-495. Note that this be augmented in the future if the shelters with benches, increased route will not be able to use the I-95 planned I-95 in-line bus stop at Lorton lighting, trash receptacles, and HOT lanes in the peak direction, as station is constructed. information signage including maps, this facility will operate northbound routes, and Next Bus instructions. only during the morning peak and Customer Facility Improvements southbound only during the evening Fort Belvoir is currently constructing peak. a transit center just outside Pence Gate to accommodate the modified A proposed cross-county express REX route, which will no longer be service from Herndon to Fort Belvoir able to operate within the South Post. would follow the Fairfax County The route will require passengers Parkway corridor and would likely to exit at the new transfer area and not be implemented until after 2020. board a DoD-operated internal shuttle this route would also serve EPG. to complete their journey. The newly constructed Pence Gate is being By 2011, Fort Belvoir employees built with the transfer area in mind would be able to make immediate despite that funding for an internal use of PRTC’s existing Prince shuttle has not been identified. Based William Metro Direct route, which on the number of proposed routes serves the Franconia-Springfield that may serve this transfer area and Metrorail station from Dale City and the number of potential boarding Woodbridge. Employees could then passengers, at least two bus bays and connect to Fort Belvoir via local bus three shelters would be needed in service. addition to other amenities listed in Table 16, as prescribed by Metro bus stop design guidelines. Determining

Fort Belvoir 31

Maryland Sites

Andrews Air Force Base Fort Meade National Naval Medical Center

image: flickr/MilitaryHealth

Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Andrews Air Force Base Prince George’s County, Maryland

Table 17: Key characteristics at AAFB Now By 2015 Growth 2 Personnel 14,678 16,600 13% Living Units 1,300 887 -32% Parking 3,147 Unknown Unknown 1

4 Background 5 11 Andrews Air Force Base (AAFB), 3 located six miles southeast of 6 Washington, D.C. in located Camp 5 1 Springs, Maryland, was established in 3 12 1947 and most famously serves 7 as the home for Air Force One. In 9 addition to this responsibility, AAFB is operated and maintained by the 10 2 316th Wing, which acts as the host wing. The 4,346-acre base is divided by two runways and is bounded by I-495 to the north, Dower House Road to the east, and Branch Avenue 8 and Allentown Road to the west. Presently, the base includes 14,678 4 personnel and provides housing with about 1,300 barracks and family housing units. Parking is limited to BRAC construction Other construction 3,147 total spaces throughout the base. 1 F-16 parking 6 316th Wing headquarters 2 113th Wing vehicle parking 7 Library/education center Growth 3 Administrative offices 8 Golf course clubhouse All BRAC realignments will result 4 Air National Guard addition 9 JPO administrative office in a net gain of approximately 800 5 New Pearl Harbor Gate lane 10 316th BCE complex personnel, a five percent increase. 11 Consolidated security forces Displaced regional staff, representing 12 PAX terminal most new personnel, will work on Access points Days Hours the west side of the base. Additional 1 Main Gate Every day All day Air National Guard (ANG) personnel 2 North Gate Monday - Friday 6 a.m. - 9 a.m. will work on the east side of the base (peak direction only) 3 p.m. - 6 p.m. once the ANG addition is completed. 3 Pearl Harbor Gate Every day All day Growth in parking supply is currently 4 Virginia Ave. Gate Monday - Friday 5 a.m. - 11 p.m. unavailable. 5 West Gate (potential) Closed Closed

AAFB will grow by a further Figure 32: Access points and new and renovated facilities at AAFB 1,200 personnel due to non-BRAC construction, bringing total growth housing, total housing units will Access to 2,000 personnel. There will be drop by 32 percent over a three-year Access to AAFB is and will remain no growth in on-base housing. Due period. limited. The base includes four access to privatization of on-base family points with security gates, though a

Andrews Air Force Base 35 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region potential fifth pedestrian gate was and not well-connected to its Table 18: Estimated transit trips for AAFB in 2012 recommend in the TMP. Each access surroundings. As such, most of the Transit point employs a 100 percent ID check area surrounding the base features Transit Round Scenario Share Personnel Trips policy. The location and hours of poor sidewalk connectivity. Sidewalks Low 2.5% 16,600 420 operation of each gate are shown in are abundant within the base west of Figure 32. the airfield. However, sidewalks are High 5.0% 16,600 830 less common east of the runways. Transportation Services Transit Service and Facility Existing transportation services are Proposals Existing summarized in Figure 34 on the Figure 33 summarizes the residential AAFB directly borders I-95/I-495 following page. distribution of current AAFB (Beltway), Pennsylvania Avenue, employees. The figure shows that and Branch Avenue, ensuring good Planned most of current personnel live in highway access. The proximity of the Planned transportation services Prince George’s County (which Beltway and Washington, D.C. means for AAFB can be found in the includes the base itself), while a that AAFB is in a high-traffic area, Transportation Improvement Program significant amount of personnel live especially on its northwest side near for the Metropolitan Washington Region, in other areas of Maryland. About the Main Gate. The average commute FY2010–2015, Maryland State BRAC a quarter of all personnel commute of AAFB personnel 45 to 60 minutes. Action Plan, Maryland’s Consolidated from northern Virginia. Transit service Transportation Program, and Prince proposals have been developed From the Main Gate, Branch Avenue George’s County BRAC Action Plan. in response to this distribution by station on the Green Line is the closest Notable projects with direct relevance both improving local bus service Metrorail station with a distance of to AAFB include new and modified for the majority that lives near the roughly two miles. The base is not transit service, a new interchange at installation, and adding express served by any nearby commuter rail Suitland Parkway and Pennsylvania bus services and strengthening stations. Eight park-and-ride lots are Avenue, and other planning studies. connections to the Metrorail system close to AAFB, several of which are Projects and studies beyond 2020 for those that do not. All service Metrorail stations. that may affect travel to and from proposals are summarized in Table 19 AAFB are discussed further in the and displayed in Figure 35. Most of the bus service near AAFB Constrained Long-Range Transportation is concentrated on the western Plan, which is prepared by the periphery of the base with some Transportation Planning Board (TPB). Fairfax County service to the Main Gate. Metrobus routes near AAFB includeD.C. the D12- Prince WilliamDemand Fairfax County Alexandria 14, C11 and C13, K11-13,County J11-13, The draft AAFB transportation and W15. TheBus, Prince George’s management plan reviewed for this Prince William County Alexandria County’s local bus service, operates study did not contain mode share a few routes within the vicinity of goals. However, census data shows Other VA Other MD AAFB, including the 20, 30, 32, andOther VA that 2.5 percent of AAFB employees Prince George's County 33. No MTA commuter bus directly take some form of transit. serves AAFB. Charles County This study estimates a similar 2.5 to AAFB used to operatePrince George's shuttle County five percent transit mode share range Anne Arundel County service Montgomerywithin County the base, but it was by 2012, as summarized in Table discontinued in 2006 due to low 18. Some of the non-BRAC growth Calvert County ridership. will occur after the September 2011 Other MD deadline, thus the forecast year for Because AAFB is closely located to AAFB is 2012, compared to 2011 for D.C. Washington, D.C., the area adjacent all the other sites. This study assumes to the base’s northwest side along transit mode share will remain 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Allentown Road includes adequate consistent and within the estimated sidewalks. The remaining periphery range. Figure 33: Residence of existing AAFB personnel and employees of the base is relatively isolated

36 Andrews Air Force Base Transit Service Impacts of the BRACNEW RecommendationsCARROLLTON in the Metropolitan Washington Region " GEORGIA AVENUE - PETWORTH BROOKLAND - CUA LANDOVER " ±

RHODE ISLAND AVE

" CHEVERLY " DEANWOOD MINNESOTA AVE MORGAN UNION STATION " " 214 BLVD LARGO UV CAPITOL HTS TOWN CTR ADDISON " " Source: MWCOG, MTA Maryland, Navteq, and ESRI " ROAD " BENNING RD " J11 NAVY YARD ¨J12 WATERFRONT - SE U ¨J13 ANACOSTIA !20 J11 ¨J12 J13 ¨K11 NAYLOR RD K11 ¦§¨495 " J11 ¨K12 ¨J12 " J13 !32 D13 SUITLAND ¨D14 !20 " K12 Suitland Parkway !20 D13 J12 32 BRANCH AVE " ¨D14 ! ¨J13 !30 ¨J11 K11 !33 K12 495 ¨ Allentown !33 ¦§¨ Road 902,904 D13 !20 ¨D14 !20 !33 903,905, 902,904 !32 909,913 !30 Andrews Pennsylvania Avenue !33 Air Force Base !32 D13 ¨D14 D13 !30 ¨D14 !32 !33 W15 W15 ¨ Branch Avenue

!30 !32

!30

903,905,909,913

Metrobus, TheBus, MTA Service

" Metrorail Stations

Metrorail 00.5 1 2 MARC Miles

Figure 34: Existing transit service near AAFB

Andrews Air Force Base 37 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Table 19: Summary of AAFB service proposals County TSOP proposes longer-term Purpose Proposal express service between Largo Town Direct local service Implement a variant of TheBus route 20 serving the North Gate Center Metrorail station and National Implement TheBus service to Marlton and Rosaryville Harbor. This service would operate Implement a variant route based on Metrobus routes J11, 12, and 13 via I-495 from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., with 20-minute peak and 30-minute Direct express service Implement express service between National Harbor and Largo Town Center Metrorail station via I-495 with a direct stop at Main Gate off peak headway. The TSOP Implement express service between New Carrollton and Branch Avenue proposes this route stop at Branch Metrorail stations via I-495 with a direct stop at Main Gate Avenue Metrorail station and not Implement a variant of MTA route 901 with a stop at Main Gate AAFB. If demand warrants, adding Modify MTA route 902 to stop at Main Gate a stop at the Main Gate would add Connections to major Improve connection to Branch Avenue Metrorail station with new shuttle four minutes of total running time transit centers service and could be by request only. Total Improve connection to Addison Road-Seat Pleasant Metrorail station with running time between Largo Town new variant of TheBus route 20 Center station and AAFB would be 15 Improve connection to King Street VRE and Metrorail station with new shuttle service minutes in uncongested conditions, though peak service would be more reliable if buses could use shoulder Local Bus Proposals Heights areas. In response, this lanes. The Prince George’s County’s Transit study proposes a new variant of the Service and Operations Plan (TSOP) Marlboro Pike Line (J11, 12, and 13) This study also proposes a peak- proposes a new route from Upper that would serve AAFB’s North Gate period express route operating Marlboro to AAFB via Marlton and on eastbound morning trips and between New Carrollton and Branch Rosaryville. Another alternative westbound evening trips, with at least Avenue Metrorail stations via I-495 proposed in this study would three trips in each time period. This with a stop at AAFB’s Main Gate. separate this route into two routes, route would be supplemented by the New Carrollton station is a critical the first of which would be a variant modified TheBus route 20. intermodal hub as it provides of TheBus route 20 that would serve connections to the MARC Penn Line, AAFB’s North Gate. Early morning The TSOP has proposed reducing the the Metrorail Orange Line, Amtrak’s and late evening eastbound and headway TheBus route 30 from 40 to Northeast Corridor, future Purple westbound trips that do not serve the 30 minutes, beginning in the first year Line service, and many express and Melwood Training Center could serve of plan implementation. This route local buses. Stopping at Largo Town the North Gate. Later trips already provides the only service west of the Center is not recommended since have a scheduled deviation to the base. The TSOP also proposes adding this additional stop would add at Melwood Training Center. Of these, Saturday service in the fourth year of least eight minutes to the running every alternate trip could serve AAFB plan implementation. This route is not time (there is no direct connection instead. Similarly, evening alternate expected to attract many destined for from I-495) and the station would trips from 4:00 to 5:20 p.m. in both the AAFB because the service is indirect, already be served by the previous directions could serve AAFB. infrequent, and does not provide a TSOP proposal. This proposal would direct connection to buildings at the also benefit from an I-495 bus bypass The second route would be a new installation. shoulder policy. local route that would serve Marlton and Rosaryville. The service would Express Bus Proposals Finally, two MTA commuter bus operate during peak periods only, 5:30 AAFB’s location adjacent to I-495 routes pass near AAFB without to 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 to 6:30 p.m. This and several existing MTA commuter stopping. MTA should establish a new route would serve the Pearl Harbor routes make it an ideal candidate for variant of route 901 that would stop at Gate if it could be designed to connect express service. This study proposes the Main Gate and terminate at to an on-base shuttle serving that gate; several express routes and one Branch Avenue Metrorail station. For otherwise, it would serve the Main modification of an existing route to personnel residing in Calvert County, Gate. allow for more commuting flexibility. MTA would only need to add an AAFB stop to commuter route 902, AAFB currently lacks direct service In addition to local route which already passes by the base. from the Marlboro Pike and Capitol modifications, the Prince George’s Not all route 902 trips would serve

38 Andrews Air Force Base WEST HYATTSVILLE FORT TOTTEN

Transit Service Impacts of the BRACNEW RecommendationsCARROLLTON in the Metropolitan Washington Region " GEORGIA AVENUE - PETWORTH BROOKLAND - CUA LANDOVER COLUMBIA HEIGHTS " ±

RHODE ISLAND AVE

I-495 Express to " New Carrollton CHEVERLY " DEANWOOD METRO CENTER MINNESOTA AVE MORGAN UNION STATION " " 214 BLVD LARGO UV CAPITOL HTS TOWN CTR ADDISON " " Source: MWCOG, MTA Maryland, Navteq, and ESRI L'ENFANT PLAZA " ROAD " BENNING RD "

NAVY YARD WATERFRONT - SE U J variant

ANACOSTIA !20

NAYLOR RD " ¦§¨495 " SUITLAND " Suitland Parkway

J variant BRANCH AVE " !30

ì Shuttle ¦§¨495 ìTheBus Allentown Road !20 ì901 I-495 Express to: !30 Andrews Pennsylvania Avenue National Harbor, MD Air Force Base Alexandria/Springfield, VA

Branch Avenue

ìTheBus

!30

Existing Service

Proposed Service

Shuttles

" Metrorail Stations

Metrorail 00.5 1 2 MARC Miles

Figure 35: Proposed transit service near AAFB

Andrews Air Force Base 39 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region the Main Gate, however. Each service Table 20: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at AAFB would have to offer at least three trips Location Improvements Reason in the peak period and direction to Main Gate New transit center (three To serve as a transfer point between be viable. Over 20 percent of AAFB shelters and benches, proposed routes and internal and large pedestrian pads, external AAFB shuttles personnel live in southern Maryland sidewalk, lighting, trash counties served by these routes. bins, information signage, LED Next Bus display, and two bus bays at minimum Shuttle Proposals North Gate New bus stop (sign, To serve as a transfer point between A frequent DoD-operated shuttle bus sidewalk, and pedestrian peak period local service and a to Branch Avenue Metrorail station pad) potential extension of the internal shuttle is needed. After serving the station, Pearl Harbor Gate New bus stop (sign, To serve as a transfer point between this proposed shuttle would enter at sidewalk, and pedestrian proposed Marlton/Rosaryville local the Main Gate and circulate within pad) route and potential extension of the the base. A shuttle is important to internal shuttle facilitate access to AAFB from the Allentown Road Information signage, To serve neighborhoods and retail @ Suitland Road (westbound) trash bin center west of AAFB (TheBus 30 and regional transit system and also Metrobus D13, D14) to facilitate movements within the Allentown Road Shelter, bench, larger To better serve and encourage use installation for personnel not arriving @ Robert M Bond Drive pedestrian pad, of pedestrian entrance at West Gate by private vehicle. Such a shuttle will (West Gate)* information signage, (TheBus 30 and Metrobus D13, D14) trash bin, crosswalk be evaluated as part of the AAFB improvements TMP. * Location of a potential transit center if demand warrants

Additionally, this study proposes would utilize the Main Gate, this peak-period DoD-operated shuttle location would require a transit from the King Street Metrorail station center large enough to accommodate to serve the large minority of AAFB the estimated demand but not too personnel who reside in Virginia. intrusive to cause additional traffic Originating the shuttle at King Street congestion. While a potential transit station would allow for connections center can be broken down into with both VRE lines, Metrorail’s Blue common elements as expressed in and Yellow lines, and other local and Table 20, its actual design would regional buses. This shuttle could also require further, more detailed be used in the reverse direction for operations planning and engineering. WHS employees living in Maryland, assuming the proposed King Street station DoD shuttle to the Mark Center is implemented.

Customer Facility Improvements Customer facility needs are summarized in Table 20. One of these improvements is a bus stop along Allentown Road near the currently closed West Gate. This improvement is proposed under the assumption that the West Gate will be opened as an off-road pedestrian-only entrance, as proposed in the AAFB TMP.

Other improvements are needed at the Main, North, and Pearl Harbor Gates, with an emphasis on the Main Gate. As most of the service proposals

40 Andrews Air Force Base Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Fort Meade Odenton, Anne Arundel County, Maryland

Table 21: Key characteristics at Fort Meade Now By 2015 Growth Personnel 40,000 62,000 55% 2 Living Units 3,007 2,627 -13% Parking Unknown Unknown Unknown 7

Background 8 1 7 Fort Meade, established in 1917 10 during World War I and used to train 7 over 3.5 million troops during World 9 1 War II, is a U.S. Army base about 3 6 20 miles north of Washington, D.C. 5 near Odenton, Maryland. The 5,067- 4 3 2 4 acre installation is bounded by the 6 Baltimore-Washington Parkway, Annapolis Road, and Patuxent 5 Freeway, and contains a variety of administrative and operational facilities, including the headquarters for the National Security Agency 8 (NSA). Fort Meade currently includes 40,000 personnel, excluding NSA employees, and houses many BRAC construction Other construction throughout its 3,007 living quarters. 1 DISA administrative buildings 4 Centralized post exchange Including the NSA, Fort Meade is 2 DMA administrative buildings 5 Centralized physical fitness center the largest employer in the State of 3 Adjudication administrative buildings 6 Personnel housing Maryland. The amount of parking 7 EUL administrative offices is unavailable, though the total is 8 Golf course and clubhouse estimated to be as high as 22,000 9 NSA expansion spaces. 10 Proposed DOIM facility Access points Days Hours Growth 1 Reece Road Every day All day Most of Fort Meade’s BRAC growth 2 Rockenbach Road Monday - Friday 5 a.m. - 9 p.m. is attributable to the Defense 3 MD 175 Closed Closed Information Systems Agency (DISA), 4 Llewellyn Avenue Monday - Friday 5 a.m. - 7 p.m. Defense Media Activity (DMA), and 5 MD 32 Every day 5 a.m. - 9 p.m. Adjudication Activities. Together, 6 Samford Road Unknown Unknown these three activities will account 7 Canine Road Unknown Unknown for 1.24 million square feet of new 8 Caine Road Unknown Unknown administrative and research space. Figure 36: Access points and new and renovated facilities at Fort Meade DISA will account for 75 percent of the 5,700-personnel increase associated with BRAC actions. The Non-BRAC actions, like NSA 16,000 personnel and employees by Army will construct an additional expansion and the enhanced use lease 2015. The EUL process, which leases 3,968 parking spaces to accommodate (EUL) program at Fort Meade, could underused DoD-owned land to fund new employees and visitors. accelerate growth by adding up to construction activities at the base,

Fort Meade 41 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region would allow private companies to capacity around Fort Meade until from Odenton station and from lease and develop 173 acres of land 2015 or later, which is beyond the Savage station, a pilot shuttle program along the eastern edge of the base horizon of this study. connecting Fort Meade to Odenton for a 50-year period. EUL actions are and Savage stations, and the Defense expected to add up to two million Fort Meade lies outside the Metro Information School (DINFOS) shuttle square feet of private development. compact, meaning the nearest that circulates within the base. Metrorail stations, Greenbelt and New Access Carrollton, are about 20 miles away. The base is very large and isolated Access to Fort Meade is and will However, two MARC commuter from surrounding communities. remain limited. Eight access points rail stations, Odenton and Savage, Not all facilities around Fort Meade with security gates are located are located nearby within several are served by sidewalks, nor are the primarily on the west and east sides miles of the main access points along sidewalks interconnected throughout of the base, each with a 100 percent Annapolis Road. The base is also the installation in a manner to ID check policy. Three of the eight within several miles of 17 park-and- facilitate walking. access points are for the NSA only. ride lots, several of which are MARC The location and hours of operation of commuter rail stations. Existing transportation services are each gate are revealed in Figure 36. summarized in Figure 38 on the Central Maryland Regional Transit following page. Transportation Services (CMRT) and Howard Transit provide local bus service in the Fort Meade Planned Existing area. Only CMRT, via route K, serves Planned transportation services Fort Meade’s gates have excellent Fort Meade directly. Other nearby for Fort Meade can be found in the highway access, as the base is CMRT routes include the F (serving Maryland’s Action Plan for Military cradled by the Patuxent Freeway the NSA on the western side of Installations and the Maryland and Baltimore Washington Parkway, Fort Meade), J, and B. Even though Consolidated Transportation Program. and also within several miles of I-95. Metrobus does not serve Fort Meade, Notable projects with direct relevance However, Fort Meade’s Comprehensive route B30, an express line between to Fort Meade include planning for a Expansion Master Plan found that Greenbelt station and the Balitmore- new 2,500-space garage at Odenton Annapolis Road, which provides Washington International Airport, station as well as other planning access to the main gate at Reece Road, runs along I-95 and within a few miles projects and MARC commuter rail is the base’s most pressing congestion of the base. expansion to BRAC zones. For the issue, followed closely by nearby long term, the TPB is studying a highways at or exceeding vehicle Fort Meade is well served by shuttle regionwide BRT network that would capacity. The plan states that there is buses, including the Link Shuttle potentially serve Fort Meade. little opportunity to increase highway between BWI and NSA, NSA shuttles Demand Not many Fort Meade personnel commute by transit. According to census data, only 0.4 percent of personnel took some form of transit. This relatively low percentage is due to Fort Meade’s remote location, Source: flickr/thisisbossi large size, and lack of present transit options. Furthermore, the base has not formally established a transit mode share goal, as it lies outside of the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) jurisdiction and is not required to develop a TMP.

The large number of personnel assigned to Fort Meade coupled

Figure 37: Odenton MARC station with the very low existing rate of

42 Fort Meade Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

0 0.5 1 2 $ Miles BWI Airport ±

Dorsey $ ÐB30 I-95 ÐSilver ÐSilver Source: MWCOG, CMRT, Navteq, and ESRI

J, K, Silver !J

Baltimore Washington Parkway Jessup $

Ridge Road

!K

!J

Annapolis Road $ ÐB30

Savage

!K !F Fort Meade !J !F NSA

!K $ Patuxent Freeway Odenton

Metrobus/CMRT Routes $ MARC Stations

MARC

Figure 38: Existing transit service near Fort Meade

Fort Meade 43 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Table 22: Estimated transit trips for Fort Meade Transit Service and Facility most recent TDPs for Anne Arundel in 2011 Proposals or Howard Counties. Transit Figure 39 summarizes the residential Transit Round Scenario Share Personnel Trips distribution of current Fort Meade The Anne Arundel County TDP has Low 1% 45,700 460 personnel. A majority of these proposed four new routes that would serve Crofton, Laurel, Arnold, and High 5% 45,700 2,850 personnel live in Anne Arundel County. Many of the incoming Piney Orchard, among others. personnel live and work in northern transit use suggests that there could Virginia. According to the Howard One of these new routes would be potential for significant transit County TDP, 58 percent of these operate between Crofton and ridership growth if the base develops incoming employees surveyed said Odenton station (route 1, Figure a comprehensive TDM program, they would commute, not move. 40), where personnel could transfer offering incentives for transit use. This to a shuttle to complete their trip. study estimates a one to five percent This long distance, especially with Contrary to the TDP proposal, this transit mode share range by 2011, as Washington, D.C. in the middle, study proposes the route to not summarized in Table 22. presents many challenges in detour to the EUL area, which could developing service proposals. For be better served by a separate shuttle Fort Meade is unique among all sites example, adding a Fort Meade stop from Odenton station. However, if the in this study in that it is expected to some existing Metrobus B30 trips public bus is permitted only to stop to grow significantly after BRAC was not considered desirable due to adjacent to Fort Meade (and not to recommendations are implemented. the requirement of a considerable circulate inside), as is likely, then the The EUL area could add up to an detour, its larger fare (the B30 fare route could continue to and terminate additional 16,000 employees if is a $6), and the importance of at the EUL area. developed to its fullest. However, providing rapid and reliable transit given the state of the economy, it is service to the Baltimore-Washington Another new route would run likely that this area will not see full International Airport. Proposals for between Severna Park and Odenton build out by 2015. Fort Meade thus focus on serving station as partial express service both nearby neighborhoods and far- via I-97 and MD 32 (route 2, Figure This study has taken the possibility of off communities. All service proposals 40). This study proposes extending EUL development into consideration are summarized in Table 25 and the route south on College Parkway when estimating future transit trips displayed in Figure 40. through Arnold and Cape Saint Clair, and proposing transit services, and which could add up to 15 minutes,

Montgomery County estimates that transit mode share Local Bus Proposals or extending service directly to Fort will remain consistent and within the All of the following local bus Meade instead of requiring a transfer Carroll County estimated 2011 range. proposals have been identified in the at Odenton. The latter alternative may Prince George's County be operated as a DoD-provided route.

Anne Arundel County Table 23: Summary of Fort Meade service proposals Baltimore City Purpose Proposal & County Anne Arundel County Montgomery County Direct local service Increase frequency of and add a variant of CMRT route F Implement service to and from Piney Orchard and Columbia Gateway Howard County Carroll County (Figure 40 routes 3 and 4, respectively) Restructure Howard Transit Blue Route (Figure 40 route 5) Prince George's County Restructure and extend Connect-A-Ride routes K

Baltimore City & County Direct express service Implement express service to and from Annapolis (X1) Implement express service to and from Greenbelt Metrorail station (X2) Howard County Implement express service to and from Gaithersburg via the ICC (X3) Implement express service to and from Brooklyn Park and Glen Burnie (X4) Other Connections to major Improve connection to Odenton MARC station with new public shuttle transit centers service, and new local service to and from Crofton, Severna Park, Piney Orchard (Figure 40 routes 1, 2, and 3, respectively) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Improve connection to Savage MARC station with new public shuttle service Figure 39: Residence of existing Fort Meade personnel and employees Improve connection to Greenbelt Metrorail station with new BWIP shuttle

44 Fort Meade Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

0 0.5 1 2 $ Miles BWI Airport ±

Dorsey $

I-95 (!4 Source: MWCOG, CMRT, Navteq, and ESRI

(!K2

Baltimore Washington Parkway (!K2 (!K1 Jessup $

Ridge Road

(!3 (!4 (!X4 (!4 (!X2 (!K1 (!3 (!X3 (!X3 (!X2 Annapolis Road $ 3, 4 (!K1 Savage Shuttle (!K2 ì X4 (! (!K1 4, F, X2, X3 1, 2, 4, K2, (!K1 X1, X2, X3, X4

(!F Fort Meade (!X3 (!1 X2 NSA (! (!2 (!3

(!2 (!X1 (!2 (!K1 (!X1

Existing Service ì Shuttle (!K1 $ Proposed Service Patuxent Freeway Odenton (!1 (!3 Shuttles 1, 2, 3, K1 $ MARC Stations

MARC

Figure 40: Proposed transit service near Fort Meade

Fort Meade 45 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Anne Arundel County designated a Howard County has proposed the Harry S. Truman Park and Ride proposed new route between Piney two routes in its TDP as well. One in Annapolis to Fort Meade via Orchard and Odenton (route 3, Figure of which would serve Columbia U.S. 301, I-97, and MD 32 (route X1, 40) a high priority, and operating Gateway, the Dorsey MARC station, Figure 40). Anne Arundel County funds and vehicles have been and then enter Fort Meade at the has proposed extending this route to identified for this service. The route Reece Gate to make several on-base the Navy Stadium Park and Ride in would not terminate at Odenton, stops (route 4, Figure 40). It would the center of Annapolis. This service instead continuing to Fort Meade operate during peak hours and would provide three trips to Fort and the EUL area, and then to Savage weekdays only, and on a 60-minute Meade in the morning peak period station. headway. and three return trips in the evening peak period. Parking at the Harry S. Finally, the Anne Arundel TDP The second route proposed by Truman Park and Ride lot is presently proposes to split and extend the Howard County would be a constrained. existing Connect-A-Ride Route K. restructuring of the Howard Transit One route (called K1) would loop Blue Route (route 5, Figure 40). One Second, the MTA proposes express through neighborhoods in Severn variant would start in Clarksville service between Greenbelt Metrorail and Odenton, connect to Arundel while the other variant would start at station and Fort Meade via the Mills Mall, and continue to serve the Columbia Town Center, though both Baltimore-Washington Parkway (route Main Gate at Reece Road. Route K1 variants would serve Savage station, X2, Figure 40). The route could enter would not enter Fort Meade. The the NSA, the EUL area, and then near the NSA and make several stops other route (called K2) would connect enter Fort Meade and circulate within throughout the base. This service the Baltimore-Washington Airport on base. These two variants would would provide three trips to Fort (BWI) to Anne Arundel Mills Mall, operate weekday peak hours only, Meade in the morning peak period the EUL area, and Fort Meade. At the on a 60-minute headway, largely as and three return trips in the evening BWI MARC station, connections are express routes. The route originating peak period. available to Baltimore light rail, MTA in Columbia should receive higher route 17, Howard County Red Route, priority since it would serve higher The Maryland Department of MARC, Amtrak, and shuttle buses to density housing. Transportation (MDOT) Secretary the airport terminals. has approved an MTA-proposed Express Bus Proposals route (route X3, Figure 40) from While the TDP did propose a new The MTA Commuter Bus Study has Gaithersburg to Fort Meade via the route to Russett Green, this study proposed several express bus services forthcoming Intercounty Connector proposes modifying Connect-A-Ride for the Fort Meade area. Travel time (ICC). Proposed route 202 would Route F instead. Route F already reliability for these routes would be include three morning peak trips passes by Russett Green between strengthened if a bus bypass shoulder to Fort Meade from an I-270 park Laurel and the NSA visitor center, policy is implemented for periods of and ride lot and the Shady Grove though it only offers two trips in high traffic congestion. Metrorail station and three evening each peak period. This route could be return trips, with one possible midday improved to provide four trips on 30- The first MTA-proposed route is return based on demand. This route minute headways, and a variant could actually recommended as an express could start as early as fall 2010 when be added to serve the Laurel park and shuttle, not a commuter bus, between the initial ICC segment is completed. ride lot on Sandy Spring Road.

Figure 41: Intercounty Connector construction

46 Fort Meade Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Lastly, the Fort Meade EIS Table 24: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at Fort Meade recommended improving service to Location Improvements Reason the Glen Burnie, Linthicum, and Main Gate @ Reece Road Transit center (two shelters To serve passengers waiting to transfer Brooklyn Park neighborhoods. with benches, trash bin, to or from a DoD shuttle information signage, and Express service (route X4, Figure improved lighting) 40) would start in Brooklyn Park and continue to Glen Burnie where it would serve the light rail station. Residents of Linthicum and other nearby communities could take the light rail to Glen Burnie to change to the express bus. From Glen Burnie, this proposed service would travel Source: Wikipedia/Sallicio to the Reece Road Gate via MD 174, making some stops in Severn on the way. The one-way trip length is 13 miles, and could be traveled in about 30 minutes if traffic is not particularly heavy.

Shuttle Proposals As of February 2009, Fort Meade personnel have been granted the Figure 42: Current view of Reece Road Gate ability to use the NSA shuttle to and from Odenton MARC station. Customer Facility Improvements This is a step in the right direction, Given that buses would likely not be but additional shuttle service is still able to operate within Fort Meade’s needed. perimeter, bus passengers would need to transfer to a DoD shuttle from The Anne Arundel County TDP has proposed routes to reach their final proposed adding two additional destination, thus requiring a transit shuttles: one to Odenton station center at the Reece Road Gate. and another to Savage station. Both shuttles would be open to the public The Reece Road Gate would need and would serve the EUL area, additional customer facilities as though only the Odenton shuttle is summarized in Table 24. This gate proposed to operate on base after a would likely need two standard security check. The Savage shuttle, shelters or one large shelter because it as recommended in the TDP, would would act as the terminus for several not circulate on base. Security routes and the majority of passengers requirements at Fort Meade are would travel during peak periods unknown, so the Odenton shuttle only. Determining the proposed proposal may need modification if it transit center’s exact bus bay needs cannot enter the base. would require more detailed operational planning. However, given The BWI Business Partnership the number of proposals, this transit (BWIP) proposed adding shuttle center would likely need a minimum service between Greenbelt Metrorail of two bus bays. station and the NSA. More planning is needed, as BWIP has not yet determined if the shuttle will be open to Fort Meade personnel or if NSA employees will have exclusive use.

Fort Meade 47

Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

National Naval Medical Center Montgomery County, Maryland

Table 25: Key characteristics at NNMC Now By 2015 Growth Personnel 8,000 10,500 31% Living Units 711 1,216 71%

Parking 6,083 8,087 33% 12 8 5 1 Background 6 5 14 The National Naval Medical Center 1 3 (NNMC) is a military medical campus located in southern Montgomery 2 County, Maryland. Founded in 1940, 1 the NNMC is one of the Navy’s 16 largest health care delivery systems, 9 5 2 15 with almost half a million annual 7 4 patients and visitors. The rolling 10 243-acre campus is adjacent to the 11 National Institutes of Health (NIH) 13 3 and is bounded by I-495 to the north and east, Jones Bridge Road to the south, and MD 355 (Rockville Pike) BRAC construction Other construction to the west. Currently, the NNMC 1 Medical care, new construction 10 Navy Lodge expansion employs 8,000 personnel, a majority of 2 Medical care, renovation 11 Navy exchange (NEX) which are concentrated in the hospital 3 Parking 12 Senior officers quarters facilities, and features more than 4 Warrior Transition Unit 13 Day care centers 6,000 parking spaces, though less than 5 Administrative space 14 Athletic fields half for employees. The campus also 6 Physical fitness center 15 Security gates contains more than 700 permanent 7 Brain injury center 16 Commercial vehicle inspection and temporary living spaces. 8 Bachelor enlisted quarters 9 Fisher Houses

Growth Access points Days Hours The BRAC process will add up to 1 North Gate Monday - Friday 5 a.m. - 7 a.m. 2,500 new personnel to NNMC. The 2 South Gate Every day All day campus will be renamed the Walter 3 NEX Gate Monday - Friday 5 a.m. - 7 a.m. Reed National Military Medical 4 Navy Lodge Gate Monday - Friday 5 a.m. - 3 p.m. Center (WRNMMC) after receiving 5 USUHS Gate Monday - Friday 5 a.m. - 8:30 a.m. realigned personnel from the closing Walter Reed medical facility in Figure 43: Access points and new and renovated facilities at NNMC northern Washington, D.C. Various Air Force staff from across the nation New housing will be constructed visitors, and other uses is expected to will be relocated to the WRNMMC to accommodate additional grow significantly. as well. Realigned employees will personnel and patient growth. be located almost entirely within the Employee parking will become Access hospital. By 2011, patient and visitor more constrained. Once BRAC Access to NNMC is and will remain load is expected to double to 981,000 recommendations have been limited. Five access points with per year. implemented, staff parking will total security gates are located on the west 2,462 spaces. Parking for patients, and south sides of the site, each with

National Naval Medical Center 49 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region a 100 percent ID check policy. The Road directly to Medical Center Table 26: Estimated transit trips for NNMC in location and hours of operation of station. The Capital Crescent Trail 2011 each gate are revealed in Figure 43. and Bethesda North Trolley Trail are Transit Transit Round nearby, as well. Scenario Share Personnel Trips Transportation Services Low 30% 10,500 3,150 Existing transportation services are High 45% 10,500 4,730 Existing summarized in Figure 45 on the NNMC is located on Rockville Pike following page. Transit Service and Facility (MD 355) in proximity to the I-495/ Proposals I-270 interchange, giving the site Planned Figure 44 summarizes the residential exceptional regional highway access. Planned transportation services distribution of current NNMC However, Rockville Pike and I-495 are for NNMC can be found in the employees. Slightly less than half of some of the most congested roadways Maryland’s Action Plan for Military all employees reside in Montgomery in the region, with more than 52,000 Installations and the Maryland County, while more than a quarter and 250,000 average vehicles per day, Consolidated Transportation Program. live in other parts of Maryland. A 2002 respectively. Notable projects with direct relevance survey of Walter Reed employees to NNMC include nearby intersection found that 80 percent lived in NNMC’s unique advantage is the upgrades and a potential vehicle Maryland (with a concentration in the nearby Medical Center Metrorail and pedestrian tunnel near Medical Silver Spring and White Oak areas), station, found on the west side of Center station. Projects and studies four percent in Virginia, and 5.5 in Rockville Pike directly across the beyond 2020 that may affect travel Washington. More of the Walter Reed street from the South Gate, that serves to and from NNMC are discussed employees are likely to take transit to the Red Line. Medical Center station further in the Constrained Long-Range work after their relocation. includes six bus bays for a variety of Transportation Plan, which is prepared regional and local bus routes, several by the Transportation Planning Board Service proposals in this section of which use the station as a terminal (TPB). have been tailored to reflect the location. Kensington MARC station is residential locations of all employees. the closest commuter rail location at Demand Montgomery County, and NNMC in 2.8 miles to the northeast, across I-495. Up to 14 percent of current NNMC particular, already has strong transit employees commute via some form service. Therefore, service proposals Medical Center station is served by of transit. The majority of these will focus increasing transit’s the Metrobus J routes (J1, 2, 3, 7, and commuters arrive via Metrorail due convenience and filling in the gaps 9) and several Montgomery County to the proximity of Medical Center where they may exist. All service Ride On route (30, 33, 34, 46, and 70). station. The NNMC TMP suggests a proposals are summarized in Table 27 NNMC provides shuttle bus access 30 percent transit mode share will be and displayed in Figure 47. from Medical Center station via the required due to parking constraints. Metro Direct shuttle from 5:30 a.m. However, because parking will be to 6:30 p.m. The Metro Direct shuttle so constrained for the amount of Virginia & Other only takes passengers to the main employeesD.C. by 2011, up to 45 percent hospital. Three additional internal of employees mayVirginia need to arrive by Montgomery County Other MD shuttle routes provide passengers public transportation. Prince George's County with travel options within the campus Anne Arundel County from the main hospital. Prince ThisGeorge's study estimates the 2011 Countytransit mode share goal to fall Howard County The Medical Center area is fairly somewhereMontgomery between County30 and 45 dense with relatively good sidewalk percent, as summarized in Table 26. Frederick County connectivity and some dedicated No significant growth is planned for Other MD bicycle facilities. Sidewalks are NNMC beyond 2011, therefore transit available on both sides of Rockville mode share will likely remain within D.C. Pike, with varying degree of quality the estimated range. As the Purple and width. A paved, multi-use Line becomes operational in the 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% trail connects some surrounding future, transit ridership may rise to Figure 44: Residence of existing NNMC neighborhoods and Old Georgetown the higher end of the range. employees

50 National Naval Medical Center Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

!33 !34 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles GARRETT PARK !34 UV355 " !34 UV547 UV193 WHEATON J7 J9 UV97 GROSVENOR-STRATHMORE !34 " Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI UV187 KENSINGTON !46

J1 !34 J2 J3 Old Georgetown Road

!33 !30

!30 !30 !30 !46 Pike Rockville !70

!34

!70 J1 J2 J3 !30 J1 National Naval J2 Medical Center J3 !30 !33 !34 !46 !70 " J1 J1 J1 J2 J3 J7 J9 !33 UV185 UV191 MEDICAL CENTER Jones Bridge Road !70 !33 J3 J9 J2 !30 !34 !70 J1

!30 J7 J4 !34 J3 !70 !33 J2 J9 UV410 East West Highway

BETHESDA " !30 !33 !34 !70 Connecticut Avenue Connecticut J2 J3 J4 J7 J9 UV355 UV190

MontgomeryWashington County

Existing Service " Metrorail Stations $ MARC Stations

Metrorail " FRIENDSHIP HTS MARC ± Figure 45: Existing transit service near NNMC

National Naval Medical Center 51 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Local Bus Proposals Table 27: Summary of NNMC service proposals The Bethesda-Silver Spring Metrobus Purpose Proposal routes (Routes J1, 2, and 3) provide Direct local service Increase frequency to Metrobus routes J1, 2, and 3 until the opening of the direct service between Silver Spring Purple Line and Medical Center Metrorail Extend Ride On route 30 stations. Until the Purple Line is Direct express service Implement midday and late evening trips to Metrobus route J9 and Ride On route 70 completed and operational, these routes will remain the primary Implement express service to and from Columbia Pike corridor (U.S. 29) east-west connection in southern Implement express service to and from Greenbelt Metrorail station via I-495 until the opening of the Purple Line Montgomery County. Service Connections to major Implement midday and late evening trips to the MARC Brunswick Line improvements on these routes should transit centers Implement planned express service to the Rockville Metrorail station from be made when necessary to relieve the Columbia Pike corridor via the ICC crowding and improve reliability.

Ride On Route 30 operates in a partial to Medical Center station, and then no longer be needed once the Purple loop, with a gap between Medical continue to and terminate at Bethesda Line is operational. This route would Center and Bethesda Metrorail station. The route would operate at benefit from a bus bypass shoulder stations. If demand warrants, this peak times in the peak direction only. policy. Maryland State Highway route could be extended into a full Agency (SHA) would need to study loop to significantly decrease travel An MTA-approved ICC express shoulder use on the congested times for residents along Huntington route would also serve the Columbia Beltway to better understand Parkway and Old Georgetown Road. Pike corridor, but would first travel operational safety. Extending this route would also to Rockville before continuing decrease travel times to downtown to Medical Center and possibly Commuter Rail Proposals Bethesda. Bethesda. Alternatively, passengers The last morning MARC train arrives could transfer to Metrorail at in Rockville at 8:34 a.m. and the Express Bus Proposals Rockville station. first afternoon train departs at 2:12 Metrobus route J9 and Ride On p.m. The last northbound evening route 70 provide express service Finally, this study proposes express trip departs Rockville at 7:42 p.m. to Gaithersburg via HOV lanes on service between Greenbelt and Providing later morning trips, earlier I-270. These lanes are planned to Medical Center stations via I-495, afternoon trips, and possibly later be extended farther north. Once providing a connection to NNMC evening trips would help those who completed, routes J9 and 70 should be employees taking the MARC Camden work unusual schedules. However, in extended to better serve MARC and Line. Service would operate only addition to the cost of providing more other park and ride lots. Additionally, during the peak period, and would train trips, ridership is constrained midday and late evening trips should be added to these routes to increase their convenience to employees, patients, and visitors alike. Current ridership figures suggest that further J9 service may already be warranted. Its average maximum load in the peak hour exceeds the number of seats. Source: flickr/Gilliamhome

This study proposes a direct connection from the Columbia Pike (U.S. 29) corridor. A new 45-minute route would start at the Burtonsville Park and Ride, then serve the Greencastle Road park and ride and the White Oak Shopping Center. It would then run express via U.S. 29, I-495, MD 185, and Jones Bridge Road Figure 46: Evening MARC service

52 National Naval Medical Center Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles GARRETT PARK UV355 " UV547 UV193 WHEATON UV97 GROSVENOR-STRATHMORE "

J9 Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI UV187 !70 KENSINGTON

J1, J2, J3

!70 Old Georgetown Road New Express Routes: Greenbelt - NNMC " Burtonsville - NNMC !30 Rockville Pike Rockville

J1, J2, J3 J9 National Naval !70 Medical Center

J1, J2, J3, J4, J9 " J1 30, 70, Express UV185 UV191 MEDICAL CENTER Jones Bridge Road

!30 !70 !30 J2, J3

UV410 East West Highway

BETHESDA " Connecticut Avenue Connecticut

UV355 UV190 Existing Service

Proposed Service MontgomeryWashington County

" Metrorail Stations $ MARC Stations

Metrorail

MARC " FRIENDSHIP HTS Purple Line ± Figure 47: Proposed transit service near NNMC

National Naval Medical Center 53 " Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region by the lack of parking spaces at most stations in the corridor, with the exception of Metropolitan Grove.

Shuttle Proposals NNMC already operates shuttle service from Medical Center station.

Customer Facility Improvements Both bus stops along Rockville Pike near NNMC feature adequate amenities, according to Metro bus stop guidelines.

New or enhanced service proposals would directly serve Medical Center station and not these stops. This Metrorail station already contains Figure 48: Medical Center Metrorail station bus bays and shelters bus facilities and amenities, with the exception of bike facilities. Medical Center station has one of the highest bike access mode shares in the Metrorail system, and includes 38 bike lockers and 88 bike racks. All lockers are utilized as of April 2009 and 35 percent of all bike racks were used in 2006. This station is a likely candidate for additional bike facilities.

Metro recently studied access to Medical Center station and developed alternatives to promote pedestrian safety and to reduce traffic delay for vehicles exiting NNMC and the National Institutes of Health. The study found that the alternative with high-speed elevators and a pedestrian tunnel under Rockville Pike would provide the greatest benefit.

Montgomery County has applied for both Defense Access Road and TIGER (Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery) grant funding with a modified tunnel alternative that would wide enough to accommodate vehicles. The DoD approved the DAR funding request of up to $20 million for a transit-oriented project in its FY ’10 budget, though Congress ultimately must appropriate funding. The project was not awarded TIGER grant funding.

54 National Naval Medical Center

Washington, D.C. Site

Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling

image: flickr/Julie Lyn

Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling Washington, D.C.

Table 28: Key characteristics at JBAB Now By 2015 Growth Personnel 13,000 13,650 5% Living Units 1,040 1,090 5% 1 Parking 6,987 6,987 None

Background Bolling Air Force Base (BAFB) and the Naval Support Facility Anacostia (NSFA), more commonly known as Anacostia Annex, are contiguous DoD facilities located between the Potomac River and I-295 in Washington’s Southwest quadrant. Both opened in 1918, and both served as some 2 of the region’s first airfields. Today, BAFB houses the 11th Wing and provides ceremonial assistance to the White House, while NSFA is the headquarters for the Navy Office of the Chief of Information and houses support helicopters for Marine Force One. 3 The BRAC process recommended these sites undergo base operating support consolidation, forming Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling (JBAB). BRAC construction Other construction These combined bases include Naval Systems Management Activity Unknown 13,000 employees and personnel (location unavailable) (10,000 at BAFB and 3,000 at NSFA). Between the bachelor enlisted and Access points Days Hours officer quarters, family homes, and 1 Firth Sterling Gate Unknown Unknown temporary quarters, both bases have 2 Main Gate Unknown Unknown 1,040 housing units. The bases include 3 Overlook Ave. Gate Unknown Unknown almost 7,000 parking spaces. Figure 49: Access points and new and renovated facilities at JBAB Growth Once all realignments, both into exact location is unavailable. Total located on the east and south sides of and out of JBAB, are completed, the parking will remain the same. About the site, each with a 100 percent ID base will gain approximately 650 50 living quarters will be added by check policy. Gate locations are shown personnel. All additional personnel 2015. in Figure 49. Hours of operation for will be located in former NSFA area each gate are unknown. at the northern end of the base. The Access base will construct a new building Access to the JBAB is and will remain to accommodate this increase, but its limited. Three secure access points are

Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling 59 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Transportation Services Sidewalks and pedestrian entrance No other major changes to the points are available at both the Main installation are planned. Over time, Existing Gate and the Firth Sterling Gate. relocated personnel are expected to JBAB’s location adjacent to I-295 However, field surveys done as move closer to the installation, but ensures it has adequate highway part of the Bolling TMP point out no change in transit use is expected access. The base has direct access deficiencies including lack of proper compared to the estimated 2011 range via Malcolm X Avenue SE from the signage, missing curb cuts, and summarized in Table 29. Main Gate. Traffic near the base is crosswalk inconsistencies. considered congested, as reported Transit Service and Facility in MWCOG’s 2008 Traffic Survey, Existing transportation services are Proposals with I-295, South Capitol Street, and summarized in Figure 52 on the Figure 51 shows that the majority the 11th Street Bridge as the most following page. of residences of JBAB personnel are congested. almost evenly split between Fairfax Planned County, Prince George’s County, and Anacostia station is the nearest Planned transportation services Washington. The remaining personnel Metrorail station at 0.5 miles from for JBAB can be found in the live in other areas of Virginia and Firth Sterling Gate. Congress Heights Transportation Improvement Program Maryland. Since most of the residents station is located 1.4 miles from the for the Metropolitan Washington Region, live in Metrorail-accessible locations, Main Gate. Thirteen park-and-ride FY2010–2015. Notable projects with and because JBAB is so close to lots are within a six-mile radius of direct relevance to JBAB include the Anacostia station, transit service JBAB, including several Metrorail Anacostia streetcar and the Frederick proposals for JBAB are focused on stations with paid lots and parking Douglass Memorial Bridge (South increasing service between Metrorail garages as well as few free lots at Capitol Street). Projects and studies and the base’s main gates (see nearby businesses. beyond 2020 that may affect travel Figure 55). All service proposals are to and from JBAB are discussed summarized in Table 30. Firth Sterling Gate and the Main Gate further in the Constrained Long-Range are served by transit via Metrobus Transportation Plan, which is prepared Streetcar Proposals routes (A9; P17, 18 and 19; and W4, by the Transportation Planning Board The District Department of 13, and 14) ) and one MTA Commuter (TPB). Transportation is currently planning Bus route (907). Only routes A9, P17, and has begun constructing a 37-mile P19, W13, and 907 provide peak Demand streetcar system. The first phase will period service to the base. Census data shows that slightly be located in Anacostia and operate more than four percent of all Joint along South Capitol Street to Firth Bolling is served by two shuttles: Base personnel commute by public Sterling Avenue, Howard Road, one to the Pentagon and the other transportation. The draft TMP and Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, provides some suggestions related to passing by Anacostia Metrorail to Anacostia Metrorail station. TheD.C. Pentagon shuttle offers seven trips theFairfax promotion County of public transit, but Fairfax County per day while the Anacostia station does not provide specific mode share shuttle provides 20-minute headway targets. This study estimates transit Alexandria & Arlington County Other MD mode shareAlexandria to at least stay constant service during peak periods. Prince William County Prince William at four percent,County but a share of eight Arlington County percent seems plausible if some of Other VA the proposedOther VA improvements to transit Prince George's County Montgomery County Prince George's Countyservice are implemented and parking Charles County supply continues to be constrained. Anne Arundel County

Montgomery County Table 29: Estimated transit trips for JBAB in 2011 Other MD Transit Transit Round D.C. Scenario Share Personnel Trips

Source: Schumin Web Transit Center Source: Schumin Web Transit Low 4% 13,650 550 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% High 8% 13,650 1,090 Figure 51: Residence of existing JBAB personnel Figure 50: Anacostia Metrorail station pylon and employees

60 Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling ! ! ! ! Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in! the Metropolitan Washington Region ¨¦§395 !

0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles !907 WATERFRONT - SE U NAVY YARD ! ! ± ¨¦§295 UV27 UV110 !A9 !P17 !907 ! !P18 ¨¦§395 P19

! Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI !W13

90, 94, A2, A4, A5, ANACOSTIA ! A6, A7, A8, A33, ! $ A42, A46, A48, B2, P1, P2, P6, P18, !A9 CRYSTAL CITY U2, W2, W3, W4, ! W5, W8, W14 !907 !P17 NATIONAL AIRPORT ! !P18 !P19 Suitland Parkway !W4 !W4 !W13 92, 93, D51, !W14 M8, M9, W2, W3, W4 CONGRESS HEIGHTS ! Joint Base !W4 Anacostia-Bolling

SOUTHERN AVENUE ! !33

South Capitol Street

Southern Avenue

!A9

!33

! !P17 !!P18P18 Metrobus/TheBus/MTA Routes !P19 ! !907 !W13 Metrorail Stations !W14 $ ¨¦§495 VRE Stations

Metrorail ¨¦§295 VRE

Figure 52: Existing transit service near JBAB

Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling 61 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region station and JBAB’s Firth Sterling Gate. Table 30: Summary of JBAB service proposals Eventually the Anacostia segment Purpose Proposal will continue along to the 11th Street Connections to major Implement planned Anacostia Streetcar to Firth Sterling Gate and the Bridge and onto M Street SE. transit centers Defense Intelligence Analysis Center from Anacostia Metrorail station Increase frequency and add off-peak service to existing shuttle from Anacostia Metrorail station The base’s draft TMP recommends Use Anacostia Metrorail station’s north parking garage as pick up and extending the Streetcar to a stop near drop off point for shuttle service the Defense Intelligence Analysis Add sidewalks and crosswalks along Firth Sterling Avenue SE and adjacent Center access road. A stop at this to the Main Gate and Firth Sterling Gate location would bring the streetcar beyond Firth Sterling Gate but not Table 31: Summary of proposed customer facility improvements at JBAB quite to the Main Gate. The stop Location Improvements Reason would require a new pedestrian South Capitol Street New transit center (one To act as a waiting area for bus entrance control facility with secure @ Firth Sterling Avenue large shelter with benches, passengers leaving the base in the (southbound near side) large pedestrian pad, evening and for passengers waiting to biometrics at South Capitol Street. sidewalk connectivity, board the shuttle bus as it enters the improved lighting, trash base. This transit center would serve Shuttle Proposals bin, and LED Next Bus routes P17, P19, A9, W13, and MTA display) Commuter Bus 907. Constructing Even once the first phase of the this transit center would require streetcar is completed in 2012, the coordination with DDOT concerning the impending streetcar stop. DoD shuttle to Anacostia station will South Capitol Street @ One standard shelter To act as a waiting area for passengers still be necessary. The shuttle will be Firth Sterling Avenue with bench and trash boarding the P18, W14, or W4. needed to provide direct service to (southbound far side) bin, improved lighting, Primarily for local, off-peak service. on-base buildings, while the streetcar concrete pedestrian pad, and sidewalk with curb is only planned to serve the Naval Anacostia Metrorail station Further study to determine To serve as a transfer point between Annex portion of the site. Even the parking garage if sufficient space is Metrorail and the Joint Base shuttle proposed extension to serve the DIAC available for a shuttle turnaround area and would not provide a convenient trip passenger amenities. for many personnel who work in buildings farther south. Additionally, current shuttle bus service frequency should be increased to every 10 minutes to provide an average wait of five minutes. If demand is sufficient, peak shuttle service could be split into two routes to provide a quicker trip to different portions of the installation.

Off-peak shuttle service should be Figure 53: Current conditions at South Capitol Figure 54: Current conditions at South Capitol added, and could be provided on Street and Firth Sterling Avenue (southbound near Street and Firth Sterling Avenue (southbound far side) bus stop side) bus stop demand. It could service both the DIAC and JBAB. The shuttle vehicle Customer Facility Improvements Because the District is encouraging would wait at Anacostia Station after Table 31 summarizes customer the use of the Anacostia station garage the morning peak through early facility needs at JBAB. Most of these as the terminus for shuttle routes, the afternoon and then wait on base in needs are at the Firth Sterling Gate, station would require further study the afternoon before and after the including a transit center and a to determine if sufficient space is afternoon peak regular service. streetcar stop. These two facilities available for a shuttle turnaround area may potentially be consolidated. No and passenger amenities. The current The District is encouraging the use plans have been revealed that outline configuration of the parking garage’s of the Anacostia station’s bus garage the design and amenities of this access roadway likely does not north of I-295 as the point of pick- proposed streetcar stop, but amenities provide room for a shuttle, and since up and drop-off for future shuttle at streetcar stops in systems around no buses or shuttles currently use this buses to avoid impacting traffic along the country are typically consistent location there are probably minimal Howard Road. with transit center amenities. customer amenities.

62 Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling ! !

!

! ! ! ! ! Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in! the Metropolitan Washington Region ¨¦§395 !

0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles WATERFRONT - SE U NAVY YARD ! ! ± 295 UV27 UV110 ¨¦§

! ¨¦§395 Source: MWCOG, Navteq, and ESRI

ANACOSTIA ! ! $ ìShuttle

CRYSTAL CITY !

NATIONAL AIRPORT StreetcarStreetcar ! ì Suitland Parkway

CONGRESS HEIGHTS ! Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling

SOUTHERN AVENUE !

South Capitol Street

Southern Avenue

! Future Streetcar Route Shuttle

Existing Service ! Metrorail Stations $ ¨¦§495 VRE Stations

Metrorail ¨¦§295 VRE

Figure 55: Proposed transit service near JBAB

Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling 63

Implementation

Costs Funding Implementation Strategy

image: flickr/Belvoir Army Engineers

Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Implementation

Decisions about implementing also identified, where information Operating BRAC-related transit service will be was available, whether these Tables 32 and 33 provide a summary a collaborative process among the additional vehicles would require of the estimated net annual operating region’s states and local jurisdictions, expanded capacities in storage and costs by site and operating agency in transit service providers, and BRAC maintenance facilities. descending order, respectively. These installations. Decisions will differ costs were developed by estimating among the sites analyzed in this Finally, the study considered the steps the annual revenue hours of service study—each site creates unique transit necessary to implement the proposed proposals and then multiplying by demands, and the priority of meeting services, including obtaining the the average cost per hour and fare these demands varies because of each financial resources needed to support recovery ratio of the agency expected site’s specific characteristics. them. to operate the route.

Several factors will be important in Costs In total, this study estimates annual these decisions. One factor is who This study provides order-of- net operating costs would increase by would operate the services. This magnitude cost estimates for the more than $16.6 million to support the report includes assumptions as to transit proposals that are considered proposed transit improvements. the operators of proposed service feasible for implementation between depending on bus routing and FY 2011 and FY 2015. Some proposals Table 32: Estimated near-term operating costs by location. For example, some proposed could possibly be implemented after site, in descending order (FY 2010 $) services would stay within one FY 2015, pending transit demand and Net jurisdiction and serve local needs. In available funding at that time. Site Operating Cost these cases, the local jurisdiction is the Fort Meade $4,861,011 suggested operator. Other proposed Two types of costs were estimated Fort Belvoir $3,795,533 services may also serve more regional in this study: annual operating costs EPG $2,567,211 needs and would be operated by and one-time capital costs. This study AAFB $1,698,537 did not estimate costs associated with regional service providers including BRAC 133 $1,492,448 Metro, MTA, and PRTC. proposed DoD shuttle services. NNMC $1,193,745 ARNGRC $1,028,867 Another factor is the cost of the Annual operating costs include services, which in some cases is labor, vehicle maintenance, fuel, JBAB $0 related to the identity of the operator. insurance, and administration. Some Total $16,637,352 To provide information to support vehicle costs are considered an operating cost when the operating Table 33: Estimated near-term operating costs these decisions, this study identified by operating agency, in descending order (FY potential operators in the Task 4.2 agency contracts its service. For 2010 $) technical memo; this report provides example, MTA commuter bus service Net estimates of the resulting operating is provided through contract with Operating Agency Operating Cost and capital costs. Recognizing that a private company, therefore MTA Metrobus $5,607,070 each site will be different, this report does not purchase its own fleet. In Fairfax Connector $4,443,169 presents information for each site, and this situation, the cost of vehicles is CMRT $3,275,043 annualized into overall operating it also summarizes the information to MTA* $1,299,714 demonstrate the scale of the questions costs. TheBus $1,170,797 the region must address. One-time capital costs include DASH $371,157 New and enhanced transit services acquiring additional vehicles and Howard Transit $278,400 would require additional transit building customer facilities and Ride On $120,169 vehicles. This study estimated the amenities. Vehicle costs apply when PRTC $71,833 number of additional vehicles needed an operator purchases, rather than Total $16,637,352 for each proposed service. The study leases, vehicles. * Vehicles factored into MTA operating costs

Implementation 67 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

Capital of proposed transit services, not FY 2010 dollars. Based on the table’s In addition to operating costs, this counting spare vehicles. In order summary, the top three operators by study calculated capital costs for new to estimate the total cost of these total new vehicles account for over 83 vehicles and their garage needs, as vehicle requirements, this study percent of all estimated vehicle costs. well as improvements to customer assumed a uniform cost of $560,000 Vehicle requirements and costs are facilities and amenities. per bus, the standard cost for a summarized in more detail in Table typical 42-foot Metrobus. Table 34 35. Vehicles summarizes vehicle costs by operator, An estimated 97 new vehicles and totals more than $50 million in With respect to Fort Meade express would be required to meet the needs bus proposals, MTA vehicle costs are

Table 36: Estimated customer facility costs by site, not included in either table. MTA in descending order (FY 2010 $) commuter bus service is contracted Table 34: Vehicle costs by operator (FY 2010 $) Site Total Cost and operated by a private company, Operating New Agency Vehicles Total Cost AAFB $171,303 therefore its vehicle costs are factored Metrobus 29 $16,240,000 Fort Belvoir $155,316 into the operating costs, which were reported in Tables 32 and 33. Fairfax Connector 27 $15,120,000 JBAB $112,889 CMRT 20 $11,200,000 EPG $97,878 On-Site Customer Facilities TheBus 8 $4,480,000 ARNGRC $60,638 Customer facility and amenity needs MTA* 6 $0 Fort Meade $57,438 were previously identified on a site Howard Transit 3 $1,680,000 Subtotal $655,462 by site basis, and their total costs are DASH 2 $1,120,000 Factors estimated here based on historical PRTC 1 $560,000 Design 30% unit cost data. Unit costs include Ride On 1 $560,000 Temporary Facilities 25% contractor profit, overhead allowance, and bonding. Other factors are Total 97 $50,960,000 Project Delivery 35% applied as well to provide a more * Vehicles factored into MTA operating costs Grand Total $1,437,920 complete picture of overall cost to construct. These factors account Table 35: Detailed summary of estimated vehicle costs (FY 2010 $) for design (30 percent), temporary New facilities overhead (25 percent), and Site Vehicles Operator Cost project delivery (35 percent). Army National Guard Readiness Center 4 Metrobus $2,240,000 BRAC 133 (Mark Center) 4 Metrobus $2,240,000 All on-site customer facility 2 DASH $1,120,000 and amenity cost estimates are Engineer Proving Ground 2 Metrobus $1,120,000 summarized in Table 36, and total 10 Fairfax Connector $5,600,000 more than $1.4 million. Transit center 1 PRTC $560,000 costs were estimated using typical Fort Belvoir 7 Metrobus $3,920,000 components (e.g. shelters, benches, 17 Fairfax Connector $9,520,000 signage, etc.). As such, transit center Andrews Air Force Base 2 Metrobus $1,120,000 cost estimates should be considered an absolute minimum. Transit center 8 TheBus $4,480,000 costs will be higher if more complex 2 MTA* $0 designs (e.g. a small building or Fort Meade 2 Metrobus $1,120,000 a large bus turnaround area) are 20 CMRT $11,200,000 desired or required by the funding 3 Howard Transit $1,680,000 jurisdictions. 4 MTA* $0 National Naval Medical Center 8 Metrobus $4,480,000 Transfer Metrorail Stations 1 Ride On $560,000 Several Metrorail stations will serve Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling 0 $0 as primary transfer points, though Total 97 $50,960,000 some of these stations are already facing bus bay shortages, especially *Does not include the four MTA vehicles required, as they are factored into MTA operating costs during the peak periods. Metro has

68 Implementation Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region identified the number of additional for new and expanded BRAC-related create some benefit to the entity bus bays that are needed for the services would have to be made in the providing the funds. For example, the stations, which will be critical in context of funding for overall transit transit center at BRAC 133 is being providing convenient transfers for services. built by the developer as part of the BRAC employees and visitors. new buildings. Capital Funds Costs for additional bus bays Present funds for transit capital New Funding Sources are not included in this study, as investments come from federal New sources of funds could be either these improvements are often an funds, state and local funds, and programs not designed specifically inseparable part of large-scale station other sources including private intended for transit purposes or improvements, including expansion investments. Several types of federal those that are newly created. One of bus circulation and pedestrian funds could be used for the types of type of funding program was access. capital investments identified in this designed specifically for roadway study, primarily federal formula or improvements related to military Funding other types of federal grants. bases but is being used to support Funding to support new and a transit project at one of the BRAC expanded transit services could come Federal formula transit grants can be sites in the Washington region. The from two sources—increasing the used to purchase vehicles and to build Defense Access Road (DAR) program amounts provided through existing passenger facilities. Because the total typically provides funding for transit funding sources or obtaining amount available for the Washington improvements to public roads when funds from new sources. The former region is set by formula, funds growth at a military facility would is a challenge, as these sources are used for BRAC-related vehicles and cause a significant increase in traffic already strained simply to support facilities would then not be available congestion. DoD recently approved existing services. The latter is also a for other transit projects. the use of DAR funds for a transit challenge, as there are few potential project at the National Naval Medical new sources, and there is typically In addition to the transit grants, other Center. With DoD approval, the use considerable competition for them. federal transportation grants can be of DAR funds for other transit capital Ultimately, funding sources will be used for transit purposes and could investments could also be possible. identified by local jurisdictions during be applied to the construction of their further planning processes. passenger facilities. These programs Several types of federal grant include the Congestion Management programs have been created in Existing Funding Sources and Air Quality grants and response to the current economic Enhancement Program grants. The situation. These programs are Operating Funds amounts available to the Washington one-time efforts and application Present transit operating funds region are also set by formula, so opportunities have passed, but they for all the transit operators in the BRAC-related transit investments illustrate the types of other funding Washington region come primarily would have to compete with other programs that could be created in the from fare and parking revenues, projects in the region. future. state and local funds, and revenues generated by business activities State and local funds are used for The American Recovery and such as selling advertising space transit capital purposes. The local Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), on vehicles. The net operating costs jurisdictions use these funds for which was intended to stimulate identified in this study already vehicle purchases and to build economic activity and generate jobs, take fare revenue into account, and passenger facilities. Metro typically provided funds for transportation revenues from business activities are uses these funds for projects that programs. ARRA transit formula relatively smaller and have limited are initiated by a local jurisdiction. grants were allocated using the same opportunity for growth, so the These funds would be subject to the formula as the regular transit formula remaining primary operating funding decisions and control of the local grants described above and increased source is state and local funds. These jurisdictions. the amount of funding available in state and local funds are severely the region for transit purposes. The constrained, especially when the Private funds are generally used Transportation Investment Generating economy is weak and tax revenues for transit investments where the Economic Recovery (TIGER) grants are reduced, so decisions to use them resulting vehicles or facilities would under the ARRA program were

Implementation 69 Transit Service Impacts of the BRAC Recommendations in the Metropolitan Washington Region

to those states or local jurisdictions employees have access to the services that will implement the transportation from the beginning of their tenure improvements. A potential in their new locations. A complete mechanism for transferring the funds set of transit services should be has not yet been defined. available at the time when people are making choices about their new Implementation Strategy commuting patterns. Implementation Decisions about new and enhanced of new services need not wait until transit services must be made employees have been relocated collaboratively by the public agencies at most sites, as there are already that fund transit services, the state employees located there who could and local agencies responsible for take advantage of the services and transportation system operations, provide a market to support them. and the Department of Defense, Figure 56: ARRA grants are an example of one- time federal funding opportunities though implementation planning for To allow services to be implemented enhanced transit services must be led on this schedule, more-detailed by local jurisdictions that are expected planning must begin now, and discretionary and could be used for a to own and operate these services. in fact it has for some sites. The variety of transportation investment implementation strategies should purposes. Other new grant programs Although there is a regional interest include identification of reliable have been suggested and considered in ensuring the availability of funding sources, decisions on which by Congress; if they are established, adequate transit services at the sites service improvement alternatives they might be applicable to the affected by BRAC relocations, transit to implement (especially those that investments needed to support service decisions must be made on a can be implemented immediately), BRAC-related transit services. site-by-site basis. Each site has unique decisions on customer facility market and service characteristics, enhancements, and development of a The U.S. Department of and different public agencies have transit marketing program to inform Transportation recently established a responsibility for the various sites. employees of existing and anticipated program to support urban circulators transit services, vanpool and carpool and bus “livability” projects. Projects Agreement on funding is obviously incentives, and other demand are to be selected for funding based crucial to implementation of services, management alternatives. on several criteria—livability, as these services will add to the cost sustainability, economic development, of transit in the region. The state Additional planning is needed with and leveraging of public investments. and local governments that operate respect to bus bay assignments for Competition for these funds is transit services and Metro must new or expanded bus and shuttle intense. cooperate on service decisions and the service. Metro prioritizes bus bay construction of customer facilities to usage according to a predefined Specific appropriations are also ensure that changes are compatible hierarchy of services, where private possible. For example, the DoD with current transit services and or other organizations are given last Appropriations Act of 2010 included consistent with transit development priority. Where applicable, agencies $300 million to support transportation plans. Finally, DoD should participate or organizations seeking to utilize improvements at the two military in these decisions because they have bus bays at Metrorail stations should medical installations in the National the detailed and most up-to-date begin planning with Metro as soon as Capital Region—Fort Belvoir and information on the characteristics possible. National Naval Medical Center. In this of relocated employees, the timing specific appropriation, DoD will only of BRAC relocation actions, and fund transportation improvement potential funding to support the projects in direct support of these transit goals at installations. DoD also two facilities that are selected by the controls access to the eight sites. state or local jurisdictions in which the medical campuses are located. New and enhanced transit services This appropriation has no precedent should be in place before major and will require a new or modified employee relocations occur so that mechanism for delivering these funds

70 Implementation