Connecting the Nation's Capital Transportation System

Transcription

1 Connecting the Nation's Capital Transportation System 12th National Light Rail Conference November 2012 Greg Benz, Henry Kay Mike Madden, Monica Meade

2 Overview New LRT systems can provide intermodal connectively in established transit systems Existing conditions provide opportunities and constraints alignment and station facilities existing and planned development LRT s flexibility/adaptability can provide convenient connections Sometimes you just have to make do

3 Project History 1986 Montgomery County completes feasibility study of using Georgetown Branch as transitway, subsequently purchases right-of-way 1990s SHA begins Capital Beltway HOV Study, becomes Capital Beltway/Purple Line Study 1996 MTA develops conceptual plans for transitway and trail, DEIS completed 2002 Capital Beltway/Purple Line Study recommends Inner Purple Line to provide a transportation alternative to the increasingly congested Capital Beltway 2002 Georgetown Branch Study expanded east to New Carrollton; two projects: Purple Line East and Purple Line West 2003 Two projects combined, renamed Bi-County Transitway, evaluation of BRT added 2007 returned to name Purple Line 2008 Purple Line AA/DEIS Published with public hearings 2009 Locally Preferred Alternative identified October 7, 2011 FTA Permission to Enter PE 3

4 Purple Line Corridor - Overview 16-mile east-west corridor extending from Bethesda in Montgomery County to New Carrollton in Prince George s County Just north of Washington, D.C. and inside the Capital Beltway (I-495) Illustrates emerging underserved travel market

5 Purple Line Locally Preferred Alternative 16-mile east-west light rail line between Bethesda and New Carrollton Connects major activity centers Connects to: Metro s Red, Green and Orange Line All three MARC commuter rail lines, Amtrak and local bus services 5

6 Locally Preferred Alternative Twenty-one stations Ridership: +60,000 daily riders 30% will use Metro for part of their trip Cars off the road: 20,000 daily Two maintenance and storage facilities Capital Cost: $2 Billion (Year of Expenditure) 6

7 Context Established inner ring suburbs Mix of residential, commercial and institutional land uses Key employment and activity centers: Bethesda, Silver Spring, Takoma/Langley Park, University of Maryland/College Park, and New Carrollton Major transportation routes generally radial Limited continuous major east-west arterials & bus routes High levels of congestion Most Intersections operate at LOS E/F Many bus routes operate slower than 10 mph Limited opportunities to expand roadway capacity Heavy transit usage on Metrorail and Bus

8 Context / Activity Levels Employment Corridor employment 201,000 DC employment 736,400 Comparable CBD Employment Population Denver 126,000 Seattle 155,100 Boston 257,000 Corridor residents 280,600 Large transit-dependent population 12.4% zero car households

9 Context / Transit Services Transit Usage Four radial Metrorail routes/stations Red Line-west leg: Bethesda & Medical Center Red Line-east leg: Silver Spring (also MARC) Green Line: College Park (also MARC) Orange Line: New Carrollton (also MARC/AMTRAK) East-west trips on Metrorail require users to go into and out of DC Buses Ride On The Bus WMATA U of Maryland Shuttle (over 750 buses/day in corridor) 75 bus routes in corridor Only 12 provide E-W service some E-W routes are the busiest in system No 1-seat ride for length of corridor

10 Purpose of Improvement Alternatives Improve Travel Times For Travel within the corridor Major activity centers Adjacent communities Travel from corridor to areas outside Feeding to and distributing passengers from radial corridors via Metrorail/MARC Especially to DC Travel to corridor from areas outside Especially north and east of corridor Along Metrorail lines and major arterials

11 Bethesda LRT Terminal Planned South Metrorail Connection Opportunities Metrorail station Bus interface Trail Robust development Challenges Integrate with new entrance Vertical differential Very constrained tunnel Trail continuity 11

12 Bethesda Terminal/Trail with South Metro Entrance 12

13 Silver Spring Transit Center Station Opportunities Metrorail station New major bus facility MARC station Robust development Challenges CSX crossing Vertical connections Existing development Operational needs 13

14 Silver Spring Transit Center Station 14

15 Silver Spring Transit Center Station 15

16 Silver Spring Transit Center Station Purple Line Platform Purple Line Mezzanine/ T.C. Kiss and Ride Metrorail/MARC Platforms T.C. Upper Bus Level T.C. Lower Bus Level / Metro Entrance 16

17 Planned Takoma-Langley Transit Center Opportunities Major bus node Two major arterials New bus transit center Planned developments Challenges Maintain street alignment Proximity to intersection Pedestrian street grade crossing 17

18 Planned Takoma-Langley Transit Center

19 College Park Metrorail/MARC Station Opportunities Metrorail station MARC station Bus interface Development activity Challenges Existing facilities TOD proximity Operational needs 19

20 College Park Metrorail/MARC Station

21 New Carrollton Opportunities Metrorail station MARC station Amtrak Station Bus interface TOD Plans Challenges Existing transit facilities Amtrak plans/timing TOD proximity/timing Operational needs 21

22 New Carrollton Station 22

23 Summary New LRT systems can provide intermodal connectively in established transit systems Existing conditions provide opportunities and constraints alignment and station facilities existing and planned development LRT s flexibility/adaptability can provide convenient connections Sometimes you just have to make do

24 Mr. Michael Madden Project Manager Maryland Transit Administration Transit Development and Delivery 100 South Charles Street Baltimore, MD En Español: Carlos Abinader For media inquiries contact: Terry Owens Director, MTA Office of Media Relations