/ Multi-Modal Corridor Study Project Briefing Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Transportation Policy Board December 16, 2009
Download ReportTranscript / Multi-Modal Corridor Study Project Briefing Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Transportation Policy Board December 16, 2009
/ Multi-Modal Corridor Study Project Briefing Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Transportation Policy Board December 16, 2009 Study Area / NORTHERN STUDY LIMIT: Biggs Ford Road Multi-Modal Study by SHA and MTA for MDOT 30 miles of Limited Access Highway (I-270 and US 15) 1.5 miles of New Alignment Highway (MD 75) 14-mile Corridor Cities Transitway (CCT) SOUTHERN STUDY LIMIT: Shady Grove Road 1 / Purpose and Need Purpose To investigate options that address congestion and improve safety along the I-270/US 15 Corridor due to existing and projected growth within the corridor. Need The I-270/US 15 Corridor provides an essential connection between the Washington DC metropolitan area and central and western Maryland. It is an essential corridor for carrying local and long distance trips, both within and beyond the corridor. 2 / Project Goals Measures of Effectiveness Support Orderly Economic Growth Enhance Mobility Improve Goods Movement Preserve the Environment Optimize Public Investment Developed through coordination with the I-270/US 15 Focus Group. 3 / Corridor Alternatives Alternative 1 – No Build Alternative 2 – Transportation Systems Management / Travel Demand Management (TSM/TDM) Alternative 3A/B – Master Plan HOV Alternative Alternative 4A/B – Master Plan General Purpose Alternative Alternative 5A/B – HOV + General Purpose Alternative Alternative 5C – HOV + General Purpose Alternative, Express Bus Option Alternative 6A/B – Express Toll Lane (2+1) Alternative Alternative 7A/B – Express Toll Lane (2+2) Alternative Costs of highway build alternatives range between $3.0-4.7 billion. 4 / I-270 Managed Lanes: Part of a Bigger Picture Managed lane network would include: • Virginia HOT Lanes (under construction) • West Side Mobility Study (feasibility study) • Intercounty Connector (under construction) • I-270/US 15 Multi-Modal Study (in planning stage) 5 / CCT Alignment 6 / CCT Project Information 14 miles long with 17 stations (includes 4 beyond 2030) Light Rail Transit (LRT) or Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on a dedicated transitway Transit transfers at Germantown (local / express bus), Metropolitan Grove (MARC), Shady Grove (WMATA Red Line) Connects key growth areas identified by Montgomery County. Special study recently to evaluate Gaithersburg West Master Plan Proposed adjacent bike path for entire length 7 Results Table / Transit Alternative Alt. 6 and Trans. TSM Alt. 6 and Light Rail (A) Alt. 6 and Bus Rapid (B) Alt. 7 and Light Rail (A) Alt. 7 and Bus Rapid (B) Travel Time Shady Grove to COMSAT (minutes) Ridership Capital Cost (Daily Boardings) (millions-2007$) 60 6,000 - 7,000 $86.9 36 24,000 - 30,000 $875.7 38 21,000 - 27,000 $461.2 36 24,000 - 30,000 $875.7 38 21,000 - 27,000 $461.2 8 / Preferred Alternative Frederick Board of County Commissioners Alternative 7B with HOT lanes; improved service to Park and Ride facilities; no reversible lanes Montgomery County Council and County Executive Alternative 7A with two reversible HOT lanes; improved transit connections City of Frederick City of Gaithersburg Build alternative; improve bus service City of Rockville Alternative 7A with HOV lanes National Park Service (Monocacy National Battlefield) Favors Alternative 3 or 4, a maximum of six lanes through the battlefield; shift proposed transitway alignment Comment Cards, E-Comments, and Public Testimony Most comments focused on minimizing community and resource impacts of both transit/highway alternatives. Alternative 7A/B, against using police impound lot as BRT facility 9 / Project Schedule Agency Comments December 1, 2009 Selection of Preferred Alternative Winter 2010 After the Preferred Alternative selection, FHWA and FTA recommend splitting the highway and transit projects. Highway Path • Update and Identify Minimization / Mitigation Opportunities • Prepare Tier 1 FEIS / Record of Decision • Identify Project Segments for Tier 2 Study and Design Transit Path • Submit New Starts Application • Preliminary Engineering and FEIS Preparation • Final Design • Secure Funding for Construction 10