White Flint Sector Plan Mobility and Transportation Network

White Flint Sector Plan Mobility and Transportation Network
Planning Board Worksession #1 February 12, 2009 Discussion Topics 1. More Efficient Travel Behavior 2. Land Use / Transportation Balance 3. Recommended Infrastructure 4. Recommended Policies 5. Implementation and Staging
White Flint Sector Plan
MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Considerations Density Diversity Design Destinations Distance to transit
MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DENSITY
100 Single Family units = 103 peak hour trips
275 High Rise units = 106 peak hour trips
MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DESIGN
MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DIVERSITY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES
White Flint is a niche in continuum between Silver Spring and Bethesda
MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DIVERSITY AND DESTINATIONS White Flint donut Circumferential travel Corridor cities
MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DIVERSITY AND DESTINATIONS White Flint donut Circumferential travel Corridor cities
MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DISTANCE TO TRANSIT
Mode shares decrease linearly with door-to-door distance to transit
Currently, most jobs are not close to Metrorail
Planned land use improves density proximity to Metrorail
Northern Metrorail station entrance further improves proximity to Metrorail
MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR CURRENT CONDITIONS TRANSIT AND TDM White Flint Employees 74% drive to work (61% goal) 20% take transit (2/3 rail) 6% walk/bike/other White Flint Residents Focus on high-rise 0.7 employees/residence 58% drive to work (72% goal)
MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE Current conditions The Pike Transit and TDM Staff Analysis Tools TRAVEL/3 travel demand model Cordon Line Analyses Local Area Model (LAM) County Council findings Policy Area Mobility Review Local Area Transportation Review Other Metrorail capacity Zoning capacity / flexibility
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE CURRENT CONDITIONS THE PIKE
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE ANALYSIS TOOLS TRAVEL/3 MODEL
Four-step model
Trip generation Trip distribution Mode choice Trip assignment
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE POLICY AREA MOBILITY REVIEW WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
Relative Arterial Mobility: (Congested Auto Speed / Free Flow Auto Speed)
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 130%
Relative Transit Mobility: (Transit Speed / Congested Auto Speed)
PAMR: Arterial Level of Service

Level of Service F: 0-25% of free-flow auto speed F Level of Service E: 25-40% of free-flow auto speed E Level of Service D: 40-55% of free-flow auto speed D Level of Service C: 55-70% of free-flow auto speed Level of Service B: 70-85% of free-flow auto speed Level of Service A: 85-100% of free-flow auto speed Free-flow auto speeds
0 25% 40% 55%
Congested auto speeds
C B
A
70% 85% 100%
F
0
E
25% 40%
D
55%
C
70%
B
85%
A
100%

100% 85% 70%
A B C
55%
D
40%
E
25%
0%
Arterial Level of Service: Free-flow Conditions

2.7 miles
40 mph 4 minutes
Arterial Level of Service: LOS C

55% of free-flow speed
22 mph
1.5 miles
4 minutes
Arterial Level of Service: LOS D

40% of free-flow speed
16 mph
1.1 miles
4 minutes
PAMR: Transit Level of Service

Transit speeds Level of Service F: Transit speed is less than 42.5% of congested auto speed F Level of Service E: Transit speed is 42.5-50% of congested auto speed E Level of Service D: Transit speed is 50-60% of congested auto speed D Level of Service C: Transit speed is 60-75% of congested auto speed C Level of Service B: Transit speed is 75-100% of congested auto speed B Level of Service A: Transit speed is faster than congested auto speed
0%
42.5% 50% 60%
75%
100%
Congested auto speeds
PAMR: Transit Level of Service

Transit LOS
F
0%
D
60%
C
75%
B
100%
42.5% 50%
Scoring Policy Areas Using PAMR

100%
85% 70%
A B C
Arterial LOS
55%
D
40%
E
25%
F F
0% 0% 42.5% 50%
D
60%
C
75%
B
100%
A Transit LOS
Relationship of Transit and Arterial Levels of Service

TRANSIT ARTERIAL
A
B C
FFD
FED D
D
E
C
B

100%
85% 70%
A B C
Arterial LOS
55%
D
40%
E
25%
F F
0% 0% 42.5% 50%
D
60%
C
75%
B
100%
A Transit LOS

100%
85% 70%
A Acceptable B C
Arterial LOS
55%
D
40%
E
25%
Acceptable with full mitigation E D

60%
F
0% 0%
C
75%
B
100%
A Transit LOS
42.5% 50%

100%
85% 70%
A Acceptable B C
Arterial LOS
55%
D
40%
E
25%

60%
F
0% 0%
C
75%
B
100%
A Transit LOS
42.5% 50%

100%
85% 70%
A Acceptable B C
Arterial LOS
55%
D
40%
E
25%

60%
F
0% 0%
C
75%
B
100%
A Transit LOS
42.5% 50%
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE POLICY AREA MOBILITY REVIEW 2005
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE POLICY AREA MOBILITY REVIEW 2030 WITH CURRENT PLAN
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE POLICY AREA MOBILITY REVIEW 2030 GROWTH INCLUDES Job Growth: 1,150 in Twinbrook 4,500 at NIH/NNMC 6,700 in Bethesda 29,000 in Rockville 114,000 in Washington DC 170,000 in Montgomery County 1,200,000 in DC region Up to 30,000 in White Flint
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE POLICY AREA MOBILITY REVIEW 2012 (for current development review)
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE GROWTH POLICY TRENDS
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE POLICY AREA MOBILITY REVIEW 2030 RECOMMENDED MASTER PLAN
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE SUBREGIONAL CONSTRAINTS White Flints location advantageous for reverse-flow commuters Travel constraints are just beyond Sector Plan boundary Rock Creek Established land uses Constraints are along Montrose Parkway (west) Rockville Pike (south)
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE CORDON LINE VOLUMES
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE LOCAL AREA TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE METRORAIL CAPACITY
LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE ZONING CAPACITY / FLEXIBILITY
RECOMMENDED NETWORK
Street grid The Pike Bikes / peds Metrorail / MARC Bus transit
RECOMMENDED NETWORK STREET GRID Arterials Business streets Secondary streets Target speeds Road code
RECOMMENDED NETWORK STREET GRID
RECOMMENDED NETWORK The Pike
Curb lane management Transit Bikes Parking? Turns East side constraints Stage 1 study Stage 3 implementation
RECOMMENDED NETWORK Metrorail / MARC
RECOMMENDED NETWORK Bikes / peds Regional / park connections Access and mobility On-street functions Pike / Nebel Street
RECOMMENDED NETWORK Local transit service concepts Types Feeder Circulator Shuttle Evolution Functions Routes
RECOMMENDED POLICIES Parking Supply Management
Aimed at commercial uses Manage demand Not PLD, but parking authority Linkage to commercial zoning requirements Operations / management concerns
RECOMMENDED POLICIES Travel Demand Management Strategies Infrastructure Services Policies Private / public sector Target markets Relationship to GHG
RECOMMENDED POLICIES White Flint Metro Station Policy Area boundary
IMPLEMENTATION AND STAGING Staging triggers Zoning flexibility Staging to J/HH and mode share Monitoring program Neighborhood circulation
IMPLEMENTATION AND STAGING Transportation Infrastructure Financing
SUMMARY

White Flint Sector Plan Mobility and Transportation Network

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

White Flint Sector Plan Mobility and Transportation Network

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

White Flint Sector Plan Mobility and Transportation Network

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

White Flint Sector Plan Mobility and Transportation Network

White Flint Sector Plan

White Flint Sector Plan

MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DENSITY

100 Single Family units = 103 peak hour trips

275 High Rise units = 106 peak hour trips

White Flint Sector Plan

MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DESIGN

White Flint Sector Plan

MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DIVERSITY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES

White Flint is a niche in continuum between Silver Spring and Bethesda

White Flint Sector Plan

White Flint Sector Plan

White Flint Sector Plan

MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DISTANCE TO TRANSIT

Mode shares decrease linearly with door-to-door distance to transit

White Flint Sector Plan

MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DISTANCE TO TRANSIT

Currently, most jobs are not close to Metrorail

White Flint Sector Plan

MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DISTANCE TO TRANSIT

Planned land use improves density proximity to Metrorail

White Flint Sector Plan

MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR DISTANCE TO TRANSIT

Northern Metrorail station entrance further improves proximity to Metrorail

White Flint Sector Plan

White Flint Sector Plan

MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL BEHAVIOR MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL

White Flint Sector Plan

White Flint Sector Plan

LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE CURRENT CONDITIONS THE PIKE

White Flint Sector Plan

LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE CURRENT CONDITIONS THE PIKE

White Flint Sector Plan

LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE CURRENT CONDITIONS THE PIKE

White Flint Sector Plan

LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE ANALYSIS TOOLS TRAVEL/3 MODEL

White Flint Sector Plan

LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE

White Flint Sector Plan

LAND USE / TRANSPORTATION BALANCE

White Flint Sector Plan

Relative Transit Mobility: (Transit Speed / Congested Auto Speed)

PAMR: Arterial Level of Service

Congested auto speeds

PAMR: Arterial Level of Service

PAMR: Arterial Level of Service

Arterial Level of Service: Free-flow Conditions

Arterial Level of Service: LOS C

Arterial Level of Service: LOS D

PAMR: Transit Level of Service

42.5% 50% 60%

Congested auto speeds

PAMR: Transit Level of Service

Scoring Policy Areas Using PAMR

Relationship of Transit and Arterial Levels of Service

Scoring Policy Areas Using PAMR

Scoring Policy Areas Using PAMR

Acceptable with full mitigation E D