DOCSLIB.ORG

April 13, 2017 VIA IZIS Chairman Anthony Hood District of Columbia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
April 13, 2017 VIA IZIS Chairman Anthony Hood District of Columbia David M. Avitabile [email protected] 202-721-1137 Tel Cary R. Kadlecek [email protected] 202-721-1113 Tel April 13, 2017 VIA IZIS Chairman Anthony Hood District of Columbia Zoning Commission 441 4th Street NW, Suite 200S Washington, DC 20001 Re: Application to Amend the Campus Plan Approved in Z.C. Order No. 06-11/06-12 Dear Chairman Hood and Members of the Commission: With the accompanying application form and on behalf of the George Washington University, we hereby request an amendment to the campus plan approved in the above- referenced order. This campus plan amendment application is being filed simultaneously with another application for a modification of a First-Stage planned unit development (PUD), a Second-Stage PUD, and a related Map amendment for Square 75, Lots 50 & 51. All of the materials and explanation in support of this proposed campus plan amendment are included with the other application, so please refer to the record in that case. Accordingly, the applicant in this case requests that the Commission consider and review both this case and the other case together. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, /s/ David M. Avitabile /s/ Cary R. Kadlecek 8929168.1 2100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW APPLICATION FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A MODIFICATION OF A FIRST-STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, A SECOND-STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, A RELATED ZONING MAP AMENDMENT, AND AN AMENDMENT TO A CAMPUS PLAN April 13, 2017 8928704.1 DEVELOPMENT TEAM Applicant The George Washington University 2121 I Street NW, 7th Floor Washington, DC 20052 Boston Properties 2200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 200W Washington, DC 20037 Architects Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects 322 8th Avenue, 11th Floor New York, NY 10001 WDG Architecture 1025 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20036 Transportation Consultant Wells + Associates 1420 Spring Hill Road, Suite 600 McLean, VA 22102 Civil Engineer Wiles Mensch Corporation 11860 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 200 Reston, VA 20191 Land Use Counsel Goulston & Storrs, PC 1999 K Street, NW, 5th Floor Washington, DC 20006 i TABLE OF CONTENTS DEVELOPMENT TEAM ....................................................................................................................... I TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................... II EXHIBITS ......................................................................................................................................... III PREFACE ......................................................................................................................................... IV I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 A. Summary of Requested Action ........................................................................................ 1 B. The Applicant ................................................................................................................... 2 C. Project Goals and Objectives and the Benefits of Using the PUD Process ..................... 5 D. Development Timetable ................................................................................................... 5 II. OVERVIEW OF THE FOGGY BOTTOM CAMPUS PLAN AND FIRST-STAGE PUD ........................... 6 III. THE PROPOSED PUD PROJECT .................................................................................................. 8 A. Site Location .................................................................................................................... 8 B. Project Description ......................................................................................................... 10 C. Development Parameters Under the Zoning Regulations .............................................. 14 D. Flexibility under the PUD Guidelines ............................................................................ 16 IV. PLANNING ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................. 20 A. Land Use Impact ............................................................................................................ 20 B. Zoning Impact ................................................................................................................ 20 C. Environmental Impact .................................................................................................... 22 D. Facilities Impact ............................................................................................................. 22 V. SATISFACTION OF STANDARDS FOR A CAMPUS PLAN ............................................................. 24 VI. PUD EVALUATION STANDARDS ............................................................................................. 29 A. Second-Stage PUD Requirements .................................................................................. 29 B. Additional Filing Requirements from Conditions of Approval ..................................... 30 C. Public Benefits and Project Amenities ........................................................................... 33 1. Superior Urban Design and Architecture .................................................................................... 33 2. Site Planning, and Efficient and Economical Land Utilization .................................................. 33 3. Social Services and Facilities ...................................................................................................... 34 4. Environmental Benefits............................................................................................................... 34 5. Streetscape Plans ......................................................................................................................... 34 6. Uses of Special Value ................................................................................................................. 35 D. Housing Linkage ............................................................................................................ 35 VII. COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN .................................................................... 37 A. Land Use Maps............................................................................................................... 37 B. Land Use Element .......................................................................................................... 38 C. Other Citywide Elements ............................................................................................... 39 VIII. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 42 ii EXHIBITS Description Exhibit Included Compliance with Second-Stage PUD Requirements herein Application Forms A Agent Authorization Letters B Surveyor’s Plat C Property Owners’ List D Notice of Intent to Surrounding Property Owners and Certificate of Notice E Environmental Analysis F Comprehensive Transportation Review G FAR Report H Foggy Bottom Campus Plan Compliance Report I Streetscape Plan Progress Report J Off-Street Parking Census K Transportation Management Program Status Report L Certificate of Presentation to Advisory Committee and Meeting Minutes M List of Outsourcing Activities N Housing Linkage Calculation Estimate O Architectural Drawings and Elevations, including Tabulation of Development P Data, Zoning Map, and Photographs of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area iii PREFACE This statement and the attached documents support the application of the George Washington University and Boston Properties to the Zoning Commission for review and approval of an amendment to the University’s 2007 Foggy Bottom Campus Plan (“the Campus Plan”), a modification of the University’s First-Stage Planned Unit Development (“PUD”) and a related Zoning Map amendment, and a Second-Stage PUD. The zoning actions will facilitate the redevelopment of a strategic corner site along Pennsylvania Avenue into a signature mixed- use building, and the proposed project’s retail use will significantly strengthen the development of the I Street retail corridor called for in the Campus Plan. The affected property is known as Lots 50 and 51 in Square 75, which have the addresses of 2100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW and 2121 I Street NW, respectively. The subject property is within the boundaries of the Campus Plan. Lot 50’s primary use designation is identified as commercial/investment under the Campus Plan, and it is located in the MU-9 Zone District. Lot 51 is part of Site 75B, which is one of 16 development sites identified in the Campus Plan and related First-Stage PUD for the Foggy Bottom campus that was approved by the Commission in order to facilitate the development of the Campus Plan. Pursuant to the First-Stage PUD, Site 75B was rezoned to the C-3-C Zone District (now known as the MU-9 Zone District). To implement the proposed project, the applicants propose the following zoning actions: • An amendment to the Campus Plan to re-designate Lot 51 for commercial and investment use, rather than academic and administrative use; • A modification to the First-Stage PUD to split Development Site 75B into Sites 75B1 and 75B2, and incorporate Lot 50 into Site 75B1; • A PUD-related rezoning of Lot 50 into the proposed MU-30 Zone District; and iv • Second-stage PUD approval for the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Ronnie Mcghee Raqueeb Albaari R. Mcghee & Associates R. Mcghee & Associates From: Jim Watson
    1140 Connecticut Avenue NW Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036 202.296.8625 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Ronnie McGhee R. McGhee & Associates Raqueeb Albaari R. McGhee & Associates From: Jim Watson, PTP Erwin Andres, P.E. Date: September 13, 2015 Subject: Murch Elementary School Transportation Management Plan (TMP) INTRODUCTION This memorandum presents the framework for the development and implementation of a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) for Murch Elementary School that would be geared to better manage the traffic and parking demand for the school. This plan would identify the various measures that the school can employ to incentivize faculty, staff and students from arriving at the site in a single-occupant vehicle (SOV). Ultimately, the implementation of these measures will likely require a shift in the culture of the entire school population. It is important to note that the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) and the DC Office of Planning support measures to reduce parking demand for public facilities throughout the District. As part of the new Zoning Rewrite Draft, which identifies changes to the existing zoning regulations, the following parking requirement for public education facilities has been proposed, which results in a significantly reduced parking requirement for the Murch School project: Murch Elementary School Transportation Management Plan Page 2 September 13, 2015 Using the proposed development plan of approximately 100,000 s.f. , the parking requirement under the Zoning Rewrite would consist of a minimum of 25 parking spaces for the entire site, which is less than the currently proposed parking supply of 55 - 75 parking spaces on site. In developing these proposed regulations, DDOT envisions that the District would continue to be a more environmentally sustainable city that would promote measures to reduce traffic and parking demand throughout the District by taking advantage of the existing and proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit networks.
    [Show full text]
  • August 28, 2018 VIA IZIS Zoning Commission of the District of Columbia 441 4Th Street, NW, Suite 210 Washington, DC 20001 Re
    800 17th Street, NW, Suite 1100 | Washington, DC 20006 | T 202.955.3000 | F 202.955.5564 Holland & Knight LLP | www.hklaw.com Kyrus L. Freeman 202-862-5978 [email protected] Jessica R Bloomfield 202-469-5272 [email protected] August 28, 2018 VIA IZIS Zoning Commission of the District of Columbia 441 4th Street, NW, Suite 210 Washington, DC 20001 Re: Applicant’s Transportation Assessment Report Z.C. Case No. 18-03 - Consolidated PUD and Related Map Amendment 4611-4615 41st Street, NW (Square 1769, Lots 1 and 2) Dear Members of the Zoning Commission: On behalf of Dancing Crab Properties, LLC (the “Applicant”), and pursuant to 11-Z DCMR § 401.8, we hereby submit the attached Transportation Assessment Report prepared for the above-referenced case by Wells + Associates. The resume for Jami Milanovich, the expert from Wells + Associates who prepared the Transportation Report, is included in the record at Exhibit 13D. As indicated below, a copy of the Transportation Report is also being served on ANC 3E, the Office of Planning, and the District Department of Transportation (“DDOT”). The Applicant previously provided a copy of the Transportation Report to DDOT on August 13, 2018. The Applicant appreciates the Commission’s continued review of this project. Sincerely, Kyrus L. Freeman Jessica R. Bloomfield Enclosure cc: Jennifer Steingasser, D.C. Office of Planning (see Certificate of Service) Joel Lawson, D.C. Office of Planning (with enclosure, via Email and Hand Delivery) Crystal Myers, D.C. Office of Planning (with enclosure,
    [Show full text]
  • Board of Zoning Adjustment District of Columbia Case No. 17703A 29
    Board of ZoningBoard Adjustment of Zoning Adjustment District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia CASE NO.17703A Case No. 17703A EXHIBIT NO.29 29 Site Design • A robust network of public streets surrounds the Sidwell Friends School site. These streets include Wisconsin Avenue, Upton Street, 37th Street, and Quebec Street NW, providing multimodal access to the school; • The street network has the potential to disperse site traffic in a way that minimizes the action’s impact on the external road network and improves connectivity to the adjacent neighborhoods; • The school occupies nearly the entirety of this large block, necessitating vehicular access points and pedestrian and bicycle accommodations to allow access for users to and through the school campus; • Loading access for the school is proposed to occur from existing access points on Wisconsin Avenue and 37th Street; • Vehicular access to the Site is proposed via one of five driveways on Wisconsin Avenue, one on Upton Street, and one on 37th Street; • Both Upper and Middle School access will be via the entrances on Wisconsin Avenue, while the Lower School will utilize the Upton and 37th Street entrances; • 353 onsite off-street vehicular parking places will be provided, with 307 of these within a parking garage. Of these, 25 are additional proposed surface spaces as part of this addition, which may not be necessary due to underutilization and should be reexamined by the Applicant; • 45 long-term bicycle parking spaces are proposed within the school facilities; and • DDOT is currently conducting an independent safety analysis of the Wisconsin/Upton intersection. The analysis is expected to be finished in 2016, and will recommend physical and operational improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority Board Action/Information Summary
    Report by Finance, Administration & Oversight Committee (A) 05-22-08 Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority Board Action/Information Summary Action MEAD Number: Resolution: Information 99997 Yes No PURPOSE To request Board approval of the staff report and recommendations on the proposed restructuring of regional Metrobus Routes 30, 32, 34, 35, 36, which comprise the Pennsylvania Avenue Line. DESCRIPTION The proposed changes to routes and service in Docket No. B08-1 are described below: • Maintain local Routes 32 and 36 between Friendship Heights and Southern Avenue stations (Route 32) and Naylor Road Station (Route 36) serving all stops and operating seven days a week. • Implement new peak period limited-stop services on Route 37 between Friendship Heights and Archives stations via Massachusetts Avenue and 22nd/23rd Streets, and on Route 39 between Naylor Road and Foggy Bottom- GWU Stations via Southern and Pennsylvania Avenues. • Implement new seven-day-a-week neighborhood connectors on Route 31 between Friendship Heights and Foggy Bottom stations and on Route M5 between Naylor Road and Eastern Market stations. • Eliminate Routes 30, 34 and 35. Two public hearings were conducted in the District of Columbia on March 17 and 19, 2008, concerning the proposed route restructuring. Twenty-one persons attended each of the public hearings and a total of 23 witnesses testified for the record. In addition, 12 persons submitted written testimony for the record. The most often mentioned comments from witnesses were general support for the proposals, especially Routes 31 and 37; concerns about the effectiveness of the supervision and monitoring plan to reduce bus bunching and delays; concerns about maintaining adequate frequency of service and capacity in critical areas; and suggestions to speed the boarding process on limited-stop routes by restricting use of cash.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014-2015 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Performance Oversight Questions
    2014-2015 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Performance Oversight Questions Agency Organization 1. Please provide a complete, up-to-date organizational chart for each division within WMATA including, either attached or separately, an explanation of the roles and responsibilities for each division and subdivision. Answer: Please access the following link: http://wmata.com/pdfs/Org_Chart_1-14-15.pdf Human Resources 2. Please provide a complete, up-to-date position listing for WMATA in Excel spreadsheet format, which includes the following information: Title of position Name of employee or statement that the position is vacant, unfunded, or proposed For each vacant position, how long has it been vacant and what is the status to fill the position Date employee began in position Salary and fringe benefits, including the specific grade, series, and step of position Job status (continuing/term/temporary/contract) Answer: See Attachment #2 3. What is the current vacancy rate and turnover rate? Answer: Current Vacancy rate = 6% Turnover Rate = 6.8% 4. What number and percent of your employees are District residents? What number and percent of new hires in FY’14 and FY’15 to date are District residents? Answer: DC Residents = 12.7% Fiscal Year DC Resident Total Hires % DC Residents CY 2014 1815 841 14% CY 2015 YTD 1641 12% 5. How many individuals have been interviewed and/or hired by WMATA as a result of the partnership with the DC Office of Employment Services (DOES) in FY’14, FY’15 to date, and total to date since the program’s inception? Has the nature of the partnership been reviewed or revisited to increase candidates? Answer: FY2013 = 5 FY2014 = 1 Total DOES hires since inception = 7 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Board of Zoning Adjustment District of Columbia CASE NO.19943 EXHIBIT NO.24
    Board of Zoning Adjustment District of Columbia CASE NO.19943 EXHIBIT NO.24 MEMORANDUM TO: Kelsey Bridges, DDOT 1420 Spring Hill Road, Suite 610, FROM: Will Zeid, P.E. Tysons, VA 22102 703‐917‐6620 Jeffrey D. Edmondson, EIT WellsandAssociates.com COPY: David Tuchmann, Akridge Paul Tummonds, Goulston & Storrs Lawrence Ferris, Goulston & Storrs RE: Transportation Assessment (BZA Case No.19943: ) The Mills Building Associates, LLC 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20006 DATE: February 11, 2019 INTRODUCTION The Mills Building Associates, LLC (the “Applicant”) proposes to renovate and expand the existing building at 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. The site currently is occupied by an existing office building with ground floor retail totaling about 165,000 SF (square feet). The site currently is split‐zoned as D‐5 and D‐6. The eastern portion of the subject site is zoned D‐5 and the western portion of the site is zoned D‐6. The renovation will include an addition (increasing the height from 90’ in the D‐5 zone and 110’ in the D‐6 zone) to the maximum 130’ height now permitted. The square footage of the building will increase by approximately 37,000 SF of gross floor area (GFA). The subject site is located on Square 168 (Lot 50) in Ward 2 about half a block northwest from the White House. The site is bounded by an existing building to the west, Pennsylvania Avenue to the north, 17th Street to the east and G Street to the south. There are two existing curb cuts, one located on Pennsylvania Avenue (parking garage access) and one on G Street (loading bay access).
    [Show full text]
  • Downtown West Transportation Planning Study: Existing Conditions Report
    DOWNTOWN WEST Transportation Planning Study Downtown West Transportation Planning Study Existing Conditions Report September 27, 2016 55 M Street, SE, Suite 400 Washington, D.C. 20003 Downtown West Transportation Planning Study Existing Conditions Table of Contents Table of Contents ..............................................................................................................................................................................ii Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................................1 STUDY GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND METRICS .................................................................................................................................................................................................2 Study Goal ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................2 Study Objectives .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................2 Study Metrics ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Priority Corridor Network Plan
    Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Priority Corridor Network Plan PRIORITY CORRIDOR NETWORK PLAN Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority PRIORITY CORRIDOR NETWORK PLAN Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority THE NEED FOR IMPROVED BUS SERVICES The Washington metropolitan area has Figure 1: Transit Modes Used Figure 2: Metrorail, Metrobus, and been growing steadily for the past 30 years Local Service Areas and is expected to continue to grow. Accord- ing to Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) estimates, jobs are expected to increase by 31 percent between 2008 and 2030, and population is expected to grow 26 percent over the same period. How- ever, the region is not growing uniformly. The outer suburbs are expected to grow much faster than the regional core, with dramatic increases in population and employment. The regional core and inner suburbs will still have the highest concentrations of jobs in 2030, but the inner and outer suburbs will have the ma- jority of the population. per year, and is expected to continue to grow Between 2000 and 2008, travel time by Me- as population and employment increase. This trobus has increased due to growing conges- The growth in population and employment growth has led to challenges for the Metrobus and the pattern of growth both are contribut- tion. For example, Route 52 on Fourteenth service. Not only has demand been increas- Street in Washington DC experienced nearly ing to increased vehicle travel. More people ing, but the added traffic congestion stem- are traveling longer distances to reach their a 14 percent increase in travel time, Route ming from regional growth has been increas- 29K on Little River Turnpike/Duke Street in places of employment and other destinations.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed DC Bus Changes
    FY22 Proposed Metrobus Service Changes District of Columbia FRIENDSHIP HEIGHTS-SOUTHEAST LINE – ROUTES 30N, 30S SERVICE GUIDELINE SCORES Line Benefit Score 46 Line Classification Framework Overall Grade B Activity Tier 1 AVERAGE DAILY RIDERSHIP Winter 2019-2020 Weekday Saturday Sunday Pre-Pandemic 4,947 3,774 3,795 PROPOSED CHANGES TO PRE-PANDEMIC SERVICE 1st half Fiscal Year 2022 (July-December 2021) • Eliminate service and replace with additional 31, 33 trips between downtown, Georgetown and Friendship Heights Metrorail Station, and additional 32, 36 trips between downtown, Capitol Hill and Naylor Road/Southern Ave. Metrorail stations 2nd half Fiscal Year 2022 (January-June 2022) • Continue proposed 1st half fiscal year adjustments PROPOSED SERVICE FREQUENCIES (minutes) Early Weekday Weekday Morning- FY 2022 Saturday Sunday Peak Off-Peak Late Evening (all days) July-December 2021 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A January-June 2022 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ALTERNATIVE SERVICE 1st half Fiscal Year 2022 (July-December 2021) • Routes 31, 33 between downtown, Georgetown and Friendship Heights Metrorail Station • Routes 32, 36 between downtown, Capitol Hill and Naylor Road/Southern Ave Metrorail station 2nd half Fiscal Year 2022 (January-June 2022) • Same as 1st half of fiscal year AVERAGE DAILY RIDERSHIP Fall 2020 Weekday Saturday Sunday Total Ridership 2,092 N/A N/A Percentage affected 1 0% N/A N/A 1st Half FY 2022 Percentage affected 1 0% N/A N/A 2nd Half FY 2022 1 – Estimated percent of trips that can no longer board at the same stop using Metrobus.
    [Show full text]
  • 3220 PROSPECT STREET Transportation Impact Study
    3220 PROSPECT STREET Transportation Impact Study February 2015 Board of ZoningBoard Adjustment of Zoning Adjustment District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia CASE NO.18977 Case No. 18977 EXHIBIT NO.25E 25E TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 Study Scope and Objectives .................................................................................................... 1 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES 2 Roadway Network ............................................................................................................................................ 2 Table 1: Roadway Segment Details ...................................................................................... 2 Safety Analysis .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Table 2: Crash Data Summary ............................................................................................... 3 Non-Auto Transportation Facilities .......................................................................................................... 4 Public Transportation Facilities and Services ............................................................................... 4 Table 3: Metrorail Headways (in minutes) ....................................................................... 4 Table 4: Metrobus and DC Circulator Headways (in minutes) .................................. 5 Streetcar ........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • District of Columbia
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PROPOSED BUS SERVICE CHANGES FISCAL YEAR 2011 WISCONSIN AVENUE LINE, ROUTE 31 SERVICE AREA Friendship Heights, Tenleytown, Georgetown, Foggy Bottom, Potomac Park, State Department HEADWAY CHANGE / TRIP ELIMINATION Discontinue weekday trips leaving Friendship Heights at 5:25, 5:55, 6:20, and 6:35 a.m. and leaving Potomac Park at 5:59, 6:29, 6:41, 6:54, 7:09, and 7:20 a.m. Discontinue Saturday trips leaving Friendship Heights at 5:51 and 6:21 a.m. and leaving Potomac Park at 6:39 and 7:09 a.m. ALTERNATIVE SERVICE AVAILABLE Routes 32 and 36 between Friendship Heights and Washington Circle. Route L1 between Washington Circle and Potomac Park. Page 2 of 5 MOUNT PLEASANT LINE, ROUTE 42 ONLY SERVICE AREA Mount Pleasant, Adams Morgan, Dupont Circle, Farragut Square, McPherson Square, Metro Center ROUTE / SEGMENT ELIMINATION Shorten Route 42 to operate between Mount Pleasant and Franklin Square via the current route from Mount Pleasant to the intersection of H Street & New York Avenue NW, then via New York Avenue, 13th Street, and I (Eye) Street to the new terminal on the north side of I (Eye) Street between 13th and 14th Streets. The portion of Route 42 between Franklin Square and 9th & G Streets NW would be discontinued. There would be no change in the frequency or span of service. ALTERNATIVE SERVICE AVAILABLE Route 42 passengers who use stops east of 13th Street could transfer to Routes 54, 80, G8, and X2. Mount Pleasant Line lnr rouu- anu srhedule mfnmlJlIOn •,. Note. :...... ,~ ­ \..- ... ~. t<CUl(- ~~, O'~';.;lF"' v'''' .n­ lJUPOr-.:', Avl''''~ "''''Jf'r~",'!J~ ..r: ~;<JLJ(''":' CIRCLf STATIOI\ fARRAGUT NORTH STATION 151 ,­ McPHERSO:'-! SC) • STAno" !;' s GALLERY PL CHINATOWI\ STATI01\ W'F 'J'"").,'dI<t M~0P,i~'v Met'i)l"i3I!lc~ \.~: ...., t"'l:'.it~.
    [Show full text]
  • 4000 Wisconsin Avenue Comprehensive Transportation Review
    &YIJCJU$ 4000 Wisconsin Avenue Comprehensive Transportation Review March 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 1 Overview ................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Scope .............................................................................................................................. 2 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES ___________________________________________ 2 Roadway Network ..................................................................................................................... 3 Table 1: Roadway Segment Details ........................................................................ 2 Non-Auto Transportation Facilities ........................................................................................... 3 Public Transportation Facilities and Services ...................................................................... 3 Table 2: Metrorail Headways (in minutes) ............................................................. 4 Table 3: Metrobusl Headways (in minutes) ........................................................... 4 Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................................ 5 Table 4: Pedestrian Inventory by Intersection ....................................................... 6 Bicycle Facilities .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]