CPIT Meeting – April 26, 2011 - Amazon Web Services · – Build on Street Space Planning Task Force ... CPIT Meeting – April 26, 2011 Analysis ... Road Ped. crossing near S

CPIT Meeting – April 26, 2011

Columbia Pike Implementation Team (CPIT) Meeting

April 26, 2011


AgendaIntroductions / purpose of meeting

Multimodal project:

– Recap

– Concept Design

– Analysis

– Next Steps

Parallel Bike Network Study update

Pike Transit Initiative update

Summary

PHOTO


Recap

Concept design as of last CPIT meeting

Feedback since last meeting

– Your comments — thank you!

– Additional meetings with civic associations

– “Back of curb” considerations

Response: Modified concept design

Your feedback is requested tonight on revised design


Project Vision and Objectives

Vision: Near-term implementation of a complete street thatachieves an appropriate balance of travel modes and thatsupports future high-quality, high-frequency transit service

Objectives:– Build on Street Space Planning Task Force recommendations

– Coordinate with many other on-going efforts

– Provide a complete street design to meet Arlington, VDOT, andFHWA approvals

– Complete a multimodal transportation analysis

– Complete necessary environmental studies and NEPAdocumentation


Complete StreetDesigned and operated to enable safe,attractive, and comfortable access and travelfor all users:

– Pedestrians

– Bicyclists

– Transit riders

– Motorists

More livable, safer, accessible

Elements:– Wider sidewalks

– Minimized crossing distances

– Bicycle accommodations

– Accessibility to transit

– Public amenities


Design of Street Space

Build on Street Space Planning TaskForce recommendations

Provide street design to meetArlington, VDOT, and FHWAapprovals

Coordinate with many other on-going efforts

Design for all modes

Attain 56-ft curb face to curb face“cartway” dimension

Minimize right-of-way impacts


Street Design ConsiderationsBalance between pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicle spaces

Achieve 56-ft cross section– Include left turn lanes/medians

– Eliminate right turn lanes and bus pull-outs

Behind curb line:– Wider sidewalks

– Street trees, planting strips

– On street parking

– “Furniture zone”

– Bicycle accommodations

Drainage

Utilities

Additional ROW


Proposed Near-Term Typical Plan


Proposed Near-Term Typical Cross Section



Segment: County line/S. Jefferson St. to east of S. Frederick St.56-ft cross section: AchievedBetween curbs: Medians, new signal/WB left turn lane at Frederick, driveway accessBehind curbs: Sidewalks, landscaping, cycle tracks (Jeff to Fred), on street parking,

transit stops, shared use sidewalk (north side, Frederick to Four MileRun)



Segment: East of S. Frederick St. to east of S. Four Mile Run Dr.56-ft cross section: Achieved with exception of Four Mile Run Bridge areaBetween curbs: Medians, new WB left turn lane at Four Mile Run Dr., driveway access,

no left turns in/out at Arlington Mill (except for emergency vehicles)Behind curbs: Sidewalks, landscaping, trail connections, transit stops/super stops,

shared use sidewalk (north side, Frederick to Four Mile Run)


Cross Section – West of S. Dinwiddie St.



Segment: East of S. Four Mile Run Dr. to east of S. Taylor St.56-ft cross section: Achieved east of S. Wakefield St. onlyBetween curbs: Medians, new left turn lanes at Thomas & Taylor, full access maintained

for most driveways, left turns in/out eliminated at one drivewayBehind curbs: Sidewalks, landscaping/walls, transit stops, realignment of Thomas



Segment: East of S. Taylor St. to east of S. Quincy St.56-ft cross section: AchievedBetween curbs: Medians, pedestrian refuges, new left turn lanes at Quincy, full access

maintained for side streets and most drivewaysBehind curbs: Sidewalks, landscaping, on street parking, transit stops, elimination of 3

driveways


Cross Section – West of S. Oakland St.



Segment: East S. Quincy St. to east of S. Glebe Road56-ft cross section: Achieved to west of OaklandBetween curbs: Medians, ped refuge, new traffic signal at Oakland, access maintainedBehind curbs: Sidewalks, landscaping, on street parking, transit stops



Segment: East of S. Glebe Rd. to S. Cleveland St.56-ft cross section: Achieved east of GarfieldBetween curbs: Median in Town Center area, full access maintained for most drivewaysBehind curbs: Sidewalks, landscaping, transit stops/super stop


Cross Section – West of S. Cleveland St.



Segment: S. Cleveland St. to east of S. Courthouse Road56-ft cross section: AchievedBetween curbs: Medians, pedestrian refuges, full access maintained for most driveways,

consolidation of some drivewaysBehind curbs: Sidewalks, landscaping, transit stops, shred use sidewalk (north side,

Courthouse to Quinn)



Segment: East of S. Courthouse Road to Washington Blvd interchange56-ft cross section: Achieved to S. Rolfe St.Between curbs: Medians, pedestrian refuges, full access eliminated for some driveways,

new signals at Rolfe and Queen (VDOT), new WB left turn lane at QueenBehind curbs: Sidewalks, some landscaping, transit stops, shared use sidewalk (north

side, Courthouse to Quinn)


Cross Section – West of S. Rolfe St.



Segment: Washington Blvd interchange to west of Air Force Memorial56-ft cross section: AchievedBetween curbs: Medians, pedestrian refuges, new signal at Orme, full access maintained

for side streets and 2 driveways, 2 driveways eliminated, EB left turnlanes at Orme Street and new “Nash Street”

Behind curbs: Sidewalks, limited/no landscaping, transit stops, shared use sidewalk(north side, Orme to Joyce)


Cross Section – East of Future Nash St.



Segment: West of Air Force Memorial to S. Joyce St./S. Southgate Road56-ft cross section: AchievedBetween curbs: Wider median to match existing, ped refuge, access maintainedBehind curbs: Sidewalks, landscaping, multiuse trail (north side, Orme to Joyce)


CONCEPT DESIGN

FEEDBACK?


Multimodal Transportation Study

Introduction

Existing conditions

Analysis methodologies

Existing and “No Build” analyses

Multimodal street design

“Build” analyses

Conclusions


Existing Conditions SummaryLength / speed limit 3.5 miles / 25 to 35 mphDaily Traffic 31,000 vpdDaily transit ridership 16,000 trips

Signalized / unsignalized intersections 22 / 17Intersections without left turn lanes 10Signalized / unsignalized ped crossings 2 / 3Driveways 103On street parking spaces 69 (Columbia Pike only)Area parking spaces 8,000

Transit access 32 bus stops21 existing shelters3 proposed sheltersMetrobus and ART (Pike Ride)

Pedestrian access Sidewalks of varying widthInconsistent, often substandard

Bicycle access W&OD, 4MR, perpendicular routesParallel bike routes (under study)


Analysis Methodologies

Study years: 2010, 2018, 2038

Consideration of programmed improvements

Traffic volume projections

– MWCOG travel demand model

– Traffic volumes for study years

Intersection capacity analysis vehicle level ofservice (LOS)

Street segment analysis multimodal LOS (MMLOS)


Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) Examples


Existing MMLOS: Observed Trends

Average auto service

Functionally great transit service

Average pedestrian service

Poor bicycle service

MMLOS varies slightly betweeneastbound and westbound travelers

CPIT Meeting – April 26, 2011Existing Multimodal Level of Service PM Peak Hour (Bidirectional)S.

Car

lin S

prin

gs R

oad

S. J

effe

rson

Stre

et

S. G

reen

brie

r S

treet

S. F

rede

rick

Stre

et

S. D

inw

iddi

e S

treet

S. F

our

Mile

Run

Driv

e

S. B

ucha

nan

Stre

et

S. W

akef

ield

Stre

et

S. T

hom

as S

treet

S. T

aylo

r S

treet

S. G

eorg

e M

ason

Driv

e

S. Q

uinc

y St

reet

S. O

akla

nd S

treet

S. M

onro

e S

treet

S. G

lebe

Roa

d

S. H

ighl

and

Stre

et (

wes

t)

S. W

alte

r Ree

d D

rive

S. B

arto

n S

treet

S. W

ayne

Stre

et

S. C

ourth

ouse

Roa

d

Ped

. cro

ssin

g ne

ar S

. Sco

tt S

treet

S. Q

uinn

Stre

et

S. Q

ueen

Stre

et

S. O

rme

Stre

et

Ped

. cro

ssin

g at

Nav

y A

nnex

Auto Transit Bicycle Pedestrian

S.J

oyce

Stre

et

MMLOS A

MMLOS B

MMLOS D

MMLOS F

MMLOS E

MMLOS C


Multimodal Street ImprovementsNew left turn lanes (4 intersections)

Removal of right turn lanes (2 intersections)

New traffic signals (2 + 2 VDOT)

New medians in 9 locations

New pavement, curbs and gutters

Utility relocations

Improved bus stops and shelters

Elimination of some driveway entrances

Improved driveway aprons – narrowerwidths, integrated with sidewalk

Wider sidewalks, improved transit access

Street trees and benches

10-ft Shared Use Sidewalks

Bike racks

CPIT Meeting – April 26, 2011S.

Car

lin S

prin

gs R

oad

S. J

effe

rson

Stre

et

S. G

reen

brie

r S

treet

S. F

rede

rick

Stre

et

S. D

inw

iddi

e S

treet

S. F

our

Mile

Run

Driv

e

S. B

ucha

nan

Stre

et

S. W

akef

ield

Stre

et

S. T

hom

as S

treet

S. T

aylo

r S

treet

S. G

eorg

e M

ason

Driv

e

S. Q

uinc

y St

reet

S. O

akla

nd S

treet

S. M

onro

e S

treet

S. G

lebe

Roa

d

S. H

ighl

and

Stre

et (

wes

t)

S. W

alte

r Ree

d D

rive

S. B

arto

n S

treet

S. W

ayne

Stre

et

S. C

ourth

ouse

Roa

d

Ped

. cro

ssin

g ne

ar S

. Sco

tt S

treet

S. Q

uinn

Stre

et

S. Q

ueen

Stre

et

S. O

rme

Stre

et

Ped

. cro

ssin

g at

Nav

y A

nnex

Pedestrian Multimodal Level of Service PM Peak Hour Comparison (Bidirectional)

2010 Existing 2038 No Build 2038 Build

S.J

oyce

Stre

et

MMLOS B

MMLOS C

MMLOS D

MMLOS E

CPIT Meeting – April 26, 2011S.

Car

lin S

prin

gs R

oad

S. J

effe

rson

Stre

et

S. G

reen

brie

r S

treet

S. F

rede

rick

Stre

et

S. D

inw

iddi

e S

treet

S. F

our

Mile

Run

Driv

e

S. B

ucha

nan

Stre

et

S. W

akef

ield

Stre

et

S. T

hom

as S

treet

S. T

aylo

r S

treet

S. G

eorg

e M

ason

Driv

e

S. Q

uinc

y St

reet

S. O

akla

nd S

treet

S. M

onro

e S

treet

S. G

lebe

Roa

d

S. H

ighl

and

Stre

et (

wes

t)

S. W

alte

r Ree

d D

rive

S. B

arto

n S

treet

S. W

ayne

Stre

et

S. C

ourth

ouse

Roa

d

Ped

. cro

ssin

g ne

ar S

. Sco

tt S

treet

S. Q

uinn

Stre

et

S. Q

ueen

Stre

et

S. O

rme

Stre

et

Ped

. cro

ssin

g at

Nav

y A

nnex

Bicycle Multimodal Level of Service PM Peak Hour Comparison (Bidirectional)

2010 Existing 2038 No Build 2038 Build

S.J

oyce

Stre

et

MMLOS C

MMLOS D

MMLOS E

MMLOS F


Recommendations / Next Steps

Complete multimodal transportationstudy report

Complete environmental document(Categorical Exclusion)

Move into preliminary engineeringfor segments of the Pike

Continue to coordinate withstakeholders and public:

– Next CPIT meeting

– Public meeting: Fall 2011


Community Input Process

Goal: inform/seek feedback

Website: www.pikemultimodal.com

CPIT meetings and public meetings

“Progress on the Pike” e-newsletter onArlington website

Presentations

– Transportation Commission

– County Board

http://www.pikemultimodal.com/



Multimodal project:

– Recap

– Concept Design

– Analysis

– Next Steps



Summary

PHOTO


Bike Boulevards

What are they?

What do they look like?

Why here?

Who benefits?


Bike Boulevards: What are they?Attractive, convenient, and safe alternative routes to busy, congested arterials fornon-motorized users (i.e, bikes and peds)

– Optimized for bicycle travel

– Can also provide significant safety benefits for pedestrians, transit users, and even cars

Design of each bike boulevard is unique – customized to its specific location andsituation, BUT…

All bike boulevards share a set of similar characteristics:– “Shared” roadways

– Low traffic volume (w/significantly reduced cut through traffic)

– Low speeds

– Reduced delay for cyclists

– Well-marked routes and directional signage

– Convenient access to destinations

– Comfortable, safe intersection crossings (for cyclists and pedestrians)

– Maintains local vehicular access to properties


What do they look like?Mix and match parts working togetherto create a bike boulevard





Left-turn restrictionMedian refuge


Why here?• Columbia Pike is a busy arterial roadway• Fairly continuous parallel streets close-by• Good connectivity back to Columbia Pike• Low traffic volumes w/minimal cut-through• Low traffic speeds• First phase of a larger network of alternate routes


Who benefits?•• BicyclistsBicyclists traveling east-west along the Pike and

those going north to Clarendon, Courthouse, andRosslyn

•• PedestriansPedestrians going to and from the library, careercenter, and Patrick Henry and Randolph Elementaryschools

•• Transit ridersTransit riders (ART & Metro) along Glebe Road,S. George Mason Drive, and S. Walter Reed Drive



Multimodal project:

– Recap

– Concept Design

– Analysis

– Next Steps



Summary

PHOTO


Pike Transit Initative Update


Draft Proposed Transit Alignment and Stations

Multimodal Street ImprovementsProject Area



Multimodal project:

– Recap

– Concept Design

– Analysis

– Next Steps



Summary

PHOTO


Columbia Pike Implementation Team (CPIT) Meeting

April 26, 2011

Documents

CPIT Meeting – April 26, 2011 - Amazon Web Services · – Build on Street Space Planning Task Force ... CPIT Meeting – April 26, 2011 Analysis ... Road Ped. crossing near S