Commonwealth Transportation Board Sean T. Connaughton 1401 East Broad Street (804) Chairman Richmond, Virginia Fax: (804)

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Commonwealth Transportation Board Sean T. Connaughton 1401 East Broad Street (804) Chairman Richmond, Virginia Fax: (804)"

Transcription

1 Commonwealth Transportation Board Sean T. Connaughton 1401 East Broad Street (804) Chairman Richmond, Virginia Fax: (804) RESOLUTION OF THE COMMONWEALTH TRANSPORTATION BOARD Made By: Mr. Garczynski June 19, 2013 MOTION Action: Motion Carried Seconded By: Mr. Layne Agenda item # 11 Title: Northern Virginia North-South Corridor Master Plan Study Recognition of Completion WHEREAS, pursuant to of the Code of Virginia, the General Assembly has directed the Commonwealth Transportation Board, with the assistance of the Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment (OIPI), to conduct a comprehensive review of statewide transportation needs in a Statewide Transportation Plan that sets forth the assessment of capacity needs for all corridors of statewide significance (Corridor of Statewide Significance), regional networks and improvements to promote urban development areas established pursuant to of the Code of Virginia; and, WHEREAS, on May 18, 2011 in recognition that the designation of Corridors of Statewide Significance is a critical function of the Commonwealth Transportation Board, the Board designated the Northern Virginia North-South Corridor as a new Corridor of Statewide Significance; and, WHEREAS, the Corridor Master Plan (CMP) study process may be initiated by a CTB resolution or a request from the Office of the Secretary of Transportation, MPOs, PDCs and/or the Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment; and, WHEREAS, the CTB initiated the Northern Virginia North-South Corridor of Statewide Significance CMP study process on October 19, 2011; and, WHEREAS, the Northern Virginia North-South CMP followed the Board adopted five step process for studying Corridors of Statewide Significance ( Corridor Master Planning Process or CMP process ) dated May 19, 2010; and,

2 Resolution of the Board North-South Corridor Master Plan Study Recognition of Completion June 19, 2013 Page two of two WHEREAS, pursuant to the CMP process a steering committee and project working group were established to represent the study area s regional stakeholders and public; and, WHEREAS, the CMP process defined the Northern Virginia North-South Corridor as the area generally east and west of Route 234 (Dumfries Road) between I-95 and I-66, the CTB approved location of the Tri-County Parkway between I-66 and Route 50, and connections to the Dulles Greenway and Route 7 along Northstar Boulevard and Route 659 (Belmont Ridge Road); and, WHEREAS, the alternatives studied addressed multimodal considerations, including transit, bike/pedestrian, and HOV travel, and looked at preserving environmental and community characteristics of the corridor; and, WHEREAS, the CMP process involved public participation at various stages and public input was extensive, with over 750 individual comments received at the first round of public meetings in Ashburn and Manassas in December 2012 and in Manassas on January 8, WHEREAS, the final CMP report was presented to the CTB in April In developing the CMP report, consultants reviewed and made recommendations that took into consideration statewide goals, the 2040 base line regional and local transportation plans, technical analysis, and public comments. The recommendations are the consultant s view of the necessary improvements to address anticipated transportation challenges in 2040, from the existing information and public input. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board concurs with the Executive Steering Committee s and the Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment s Recognition of Completion of the Northern Virginia North-South Corridor Master Plan study. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that acceptance of the CMP study and its recommendations does not signify CTB endorsement of the recommended and/or identified projects. Any transportation improvements in the corridor will be pursued in close consultation and coordination with the affected local jurisdictions, and the Board intends that no such improvements shall include the tolling of Route 234 or the installation of HOV lanes on Route 234 (Dumfries Road/Prince William Parkway) from I-95 to I-66 and the proposed Route 234 extension (Bi-County Parkway) from I-66 to US 50. # # # #

3 Northern Virginia North-South Corridor of Statewide Significance Corridor Master Plan final report prepared for Commonwealth of Virginia Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Sharp and Company, Inc. April 8,

4

5 final report Northern Virginia North-South Corridor of Statewide Significance Corridor Master Plan prepared for Commonwealth of Virginia Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc Hampden Lane, Suite 800 Bethesda, MD with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Sharp and Company, Inc. date April 8, 2013

6

7 Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction Corridor Master Plan Purpose Corridor Master Plan Process Stakeholder and Public Involvement Plan Report Organization North-South Corridor Overview Project Vision Project Goals and Objectives Study Area Overview Study Area Socioeconomic Profile Study Area Transportation Profile Study Area Activity Clusters Growth Dulles International Airport Profile and Activity Growth Summary of Regional, County, and Local Transportation Plans Regional Multimodal Plans Local and Jurisdictional Multimodal Plans Dulles International Airport Plans Transportation Alternatives Development Approach to Developing the Alternatives Description of Alternatives Approach to Evaluating the Alternatives Baseline Assumptions for Conclusions Recommended Alternative and Corridor Action Plan Selection of Recommended Alternative Elements Evaluation of the Recommended Alternative Implementation Costs Economic Impact and Environmental Inventory of the Recommended Alternative Implementation Action Plan Cambridge Systematics, Inc. i

8 Table of Contents, continued A. Public Information Comment Summary... A-1 A.1 Round 1 Public Comment Overview... A-1 A.2 Round 1 Public Comments... A-1 A.3 Round 2 Public Comment Overview... A-4 A.4 Round 2 Public Comments... A-4 B. Travel Demand Forecasting Model Validation... B-1 C. Recommended Alternative Component Cost Methodology Report... C-1 C.1 Reference 1 Description of Assumptions... C-1 C.2 Reference 2 VDOT Planning-Level Costs... C-8 C.3 Reference 3 VDOT Bike Planning-Level Costs... C-10 C.4 Reference 4 Tri-County Parkway Location Study... C-11 C.5 Reference 5 North-South Corridor Transit Service... C-12 D. Alternative 1 and 2 Evaluation Summary Findings... D-1 D.1 Purpose of this Appendix... D-1 D.2 Alternative 1 and 2 Evaluation Summary Findings... D-3 ii Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

9 List of Tables Table ES.1 Goals and Objectives for the North-South Corridor... 2 Table ES.2 North-South Corridor Issues and Needs... 3 Table 2.1 Vision Statement, Goals, and Objectives for the North-South Corridor Table 2.2 Population and Employment Growth Summary Table 2.3 Total Daily Vehicle Travel within the Study Area for 2007 and Table 2.4 Commute to Work Mode Shares (Vehicle Trips) Table 2.5 Job and Household Growth in Activity Clusters Table 4.1 North-South Corridor Issues and Needs Table 4.2 North-South Corridor: Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures Table 5.1 Recommended Alternative Table 5.2 Recommended Alternative Table 5.3 AM Peak Travel Time to Dulles International Airport Table 5.4 AM Peak Travel Time to Innovation Center Table 5.5 Household Access to Dulles International Airport Table 5.6 Percent Change in Corridor VMT by Congestion Level (2040) Table 5.7 North-South Corridor Home-Based Work Mode Share Table 5.8 North-South Corridor Bicycle and Pedestrian System Table 5.9 Transit Service Frequency Table 5.10 Accessibility of Minority and Low-Income Populations to Dulles Airport Table 5.11 Economic Growth and Multimodal Investment Measures Table 5.12 Proposed Recommended Alternative Opinion of Probable Cost Table B.1 Table B.2 Percentage Deviation of Estimated Volumes from Observed Volumes by Facility Type and Time of Day (Based on link counts)... B-8 Estimated Volumes versus Observed Volumes by Cutlines in the Study Area (Based on link counts)... B-8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. iii

10 List of Tables, continued Table D.1 North-South Corridor: Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures... D-2 Table D.2 AM Peak Travel Time to Dulles International Airport... D-5 Table D.3 AM Peak Travel Time to Innovation Center... D-5 Table D.4 Household Access to Dulles International Airport... D-8 Table D.5 Percent Change in Corridor VMT by Congestion Level... D-10 Table D.6 North-South Corridor Home-Based Work Mode Share... D-12 Table D.7 Transit Service Frequency... D-15 iv Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

11 List of Figures Figure 1.1 Corridors of Statewide Significance Figure 1.2 Corridor Master Plan Process Figure 2.1 North-South Corridor Corridor Map Figure 2.2 Travel and Demographic Subareas Figure Population by Jurisdiction and Combined Areas in the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Jurisdictions Figure 2.4 Employment Growth by Jurisdiction between 2010 and Figure 2.5 Population Growth by Jurisdiction between 2010 and Figure 2.6 Total Population Growth Figure 2.7 Total Employment Growth Figure 2.8 Population Growth per Square Mile Figure 2.9 Employment Growth per Square Mile Figure 2.10 Regional Activity Clusters Figure 2.11 Dulles International Airport Annual Enplanements and Freight Tonnage Figure 3.1 National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board Comprehensive Long-Range Transportation Plan Figure 3.2 TransAction Figure 3.3 Super NoVA Figure 3.4 Loudoun and Prince William County Comprehensive Plans Figure 4.1 North-South Corridor - Corridor Segments Figure 5.1 North-South Corridor Recommended Alternative Figure 5.2 Morning Peak-Period Travel Time Savings to Dulles International Airport Figure 5.3 Morning Peak-Period Travel Time Savings to Innovation Center Figure 5.4 Change in Total Households within 30 Minutes of Dulles International Airport Cambridge Systematics, Inc. v

12 List of Figures, continued Figure 5.5 Change in Total Households within 60 Minutes of Dulles International Airport Figure 5.6 Percent Change in Corridor VMT Compared to the Baseline Figure 5.7 North-South Corridor VMT by Vehicle Type Figure 5.8 Breakdown of Travel Time Savings by Time of Day Figure 5.9 Corridor Environmental and Social Features Figure 5.10 Corridor Environmental and Social Features Figure 5.11 Corridor Environmental and Social Features Figure 5.12 Corridor Environmental and Social Features Figure 5.13 North-South Corridor Recommended Alternative Daily Volumes Figure B.1 Year 2007 HBW Production Trip Distribution for the Study Area... B-3 Figure B.2 Year 2007 HBW Attraction Trip Distribution for the Study Area... B-3 Figure B.3 Year 2007 Production Trip Distribution for All Trips in the Study Area... B-4 Figure B.4 Year 2007 Attraction Trip Distribution for All Trips for the Study Area... B-4 Figure B.5 Year 2007 HBW Trip Production Transit Mode Share... B-5 Figure B.6 Year 2007 HBW Trip Attraction Transit Mode Share... B-6 Figure B.7 Year 2007 All Trip Purposes Trip Production Transit Mode Share... B-6 Figure B.8 Year 2007 All Trip Purposes Trip Attraction Transit Mode Share... B-7 Figure B.9 Definition of Cutlines in the North-South Corridor... B-9 Figure D.1 Morning Peak-Period Travel Time Savings to Dulles International Airport... D-6 Figure D.2 Morning Peak-Period Travel Time Savings to Innovation Center... D-6 Figure D.3 Total Households within 30 Minutes of Dulles International Airport... D-8 Figure D.4 Total Households within 60 Minutes of Dulles International Airport... D-9 Figure D.5 Percent Change in Corridor VMT Compared to the Baseline... D-11 vi Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

13 Figure D.6 North-South Corridor VMT by Vehicle Type... D-14 Figure D.7 North-South Corridor Transit Markets... D-15 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. vii

14

15 Executive Summary The Commonwealth of Virginia Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment commissioned the Northern Virginia North-South Corridor Master Plan (CMP) to comply with the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) process to study designated Corridors of Statewide Significance (CoSS). The study supports the guiding principles articulated in VTRANS 2035, to address the purpose, goals, and objectives of a CoSS study. The corridor is approximately 45 miles in length, and is comprised of transportation facilities following VA 234 between I-95 and I-66, the future location of the Tri-County Parkway between I-66 and U.S. 50, and connections to Dulles International Airport via Northstar Boulevard and a new access road to the west side of Dulles. The corridor continues north to VA 7 following Northstar Boulevard and Belmont Ridge Road (VA 659). Important activity centers within the corridor study area are the Potomac Mills/Woodbridge area, Manassas area, Gainesville area, Washington Dulles International Airport, and the areas surrounding the airport. The Northern Virginia North-South CoSS provides a means to connect other CoSS including I-66, I-95, and U.S. 29, and provides ground access to the primary international air terminal within the Commonwealth at Dulles International Airport. Based on the CoSS framework defined by the CTB, the overall vision for the Corridor was defined. The Northern Virginia North-South CoSS will be an integrated, multimodal network of transportation facilities that connect major centers of activity within and through the Commonwealth and promote the movement of people and goods essential to the economic prosperity of the State. Using the adopted 2012 Financially Constrained Long-Range Plan (CLRP) for the Washington metropolitan region as the 2040 baseline of infrastructure investment, the study establishes a set of measureable goals and objectives, and considers a set of multimodal strategies that best address the goals and objectives. The study followed a CoSS study process outline and included active stakeholder and public involvement throughout the study. Stakeholder and public involvement guided the study process, with two rounds of public meetings that were attended by over 200 attendees. The project also was supported by active stakeholder groups a Project Working Group and Steering Committee. This final report provides a summary of the work completed during the North- South Corridor Study, and includes recommendations and actions that address the study goals and objectives. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. ES-1

16 Goals, Objectives, Issues, and Needs of the North-South Corridor A comprehensive set of goals and objectives for the Corridor illustrated in Table ES.1 was developed with the guidance of the project Steering Committee and the Project Working Group. The goals and objectives are used to guide the overall study, with a focus on providing the basis to measure the performance of the proposed alternatives. The goals and objectives also are supported by a synthesis of state, regional, and local planning goals to ensure consistency with all other planning efforts. Table ES.1 Goals and Objectives for the North-South Corridor Goal 1. Support Economic Growth Objectives Ensure adequate capacity and access to allow for projected growth at Dulles International Airport area Reduce congestion and improve the level of service on existing roadways Improve the quality of connections between travel modes and activity centers for people and goods movement Provide for multiple modes of access and egress to activity centers and key transportation nodes Goal 2. Maintain Existing Assets and Promote Safe Travel Objectives Maintain transportation infrastructure conditions within the study corridor at a fair or better condition Reduce transportation-related fatalities and injuries Ensure that all miles of the corridor roadway conform to access management standards Goal 3. Support Multimodal Investment Objectives Increase the number and quality of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the Corridor Provide integrated transit service, facilities, and connections for the Corridor Maximize the number of modes used within a single right-of-way Goal 4. Foster Environmental Stewardship Objectives Protect environmental and historical resources through sustainable planning and design methods Employ context sensitive design to respect historic, environmental, and community character Provide equitable transportation options to all communities in the Corridor Specific issues and needs of the Corridor were identified based on overall transportation system performance, demographic characteristics, planned and future growth, and the desire to support the economic centers along the Corridor. Table ES.2 provides a summary of the corridor issues and needs. ES-2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

17 Table ES.2 North-South Corridor Issues and Needs North-South Corridor Issues Support regional economic growth by investing in multimodal access to the Dulles International Airport and the surrounding area Projected employment and population growth within the Corridor and the associated growing need for north-south travel movements Enhance multimodal options with transit and other more sustainable modes such as high-occupancy vehicles (HOV) and bicycle/pedestrian trails Protect environmental, community, and historical resources in any future plans for the Corridor North-South Corridor Needs Provide adequate multimodal capacity for people and freight movements connecting the Corridor and the Dulles International Airport area Reduce traffic congestion in the Corridor; provide adequate roadway capacity in the Corridor Provide transit connections in the Corridor; provide ways for HOVs to travel the Corridor; provide trail connections Transportation infrastructure improvements to the Corridor should minimize the impact to these resources Development and Testing of the Transportation Strategies To address these issues and needs, the study considered two initial multimodal alternatives for the Corridor. The initial alternatives are described in Section 4.0 of the report. The alternatives support the study goals and objectives, and included the following key elements: Construction of additional roadway capacity; Implementation of high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) and high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane options; Connection to key economic centers; Provision of expanded transit service; and Provision of other multimodal enhancements such as bicycle and pedestrian trails, park-and-ride lots, and transportation demand management programs. The two initial transportation alternatives were presented to the public at the first round of public meetings in Ashburn and Manassas in December Comments from the first round of meetings were used to inform and develop a recommended alternative for the corridor. A draft of the recommended alternative, along with the performance results of the initial two alternatives, was presented to the public at the final public meeting in Manassas on January 8, Overall a total of 208 attendees participated in the three public meetings, with 767 individual written comments received throughout the course of the study. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. ES-3

18 Recommended Alternative Elements for the North-South Corridor The recommended alternative is largely consistent with the planned roadway capacity enhancements documented in county and regional transportation plans in the Corridor. The recommendations deviate in (1) how the planned roadway capacity is best utilized; (2) introduces a western connection from the corridor into the Dulles International Airport area; and (3) recommends new and expanded transit service in the Corridor. The recommendations provide a consolidated and comprehensive view of the entire corridor. The recommendations from the recommended final alternative support the study goals and objectives articulated early on in the study process, and fulfills the objectives of the CMP process. Based on the technical review of the key project performance measures along with public input and the direction from the Steering Committee and Project Working Group, the recommended alternative includes roadway, transit, and other multimodal elements. The recommended alternative is described in detail in Section 5.0 of the report. The key recommended elements of the recommended alternative are listed below. Construction of a continuous high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) facility between I-95 and the area west of Washington Dulles International Airport, which would operate during peak periods in the morning and evening. Establishment of a high-occupancy toll (HOT) system for the Corridor between the intersection of VA 234 and Country Club Drive and the Washington Dulles International Airport area. Vehicles carrying three or more persons (HOV 3+) would be able to access the system at no cost, and other vehicles would pay a toll to access the HOV/HOT lanes during peak periods. Construction of a new roadway connection between the North-South Corridor and the Washington Dulles International Airport area, providing connections to VA 606 and improving regional and statewide access to the airport, surrounding freight facilities, and the Metrorail Silver Line. Provision of new and expanded transit services operating throughout the Corridor. These services will be focused on connecting activity centers, and will operate in identified transit markets near the Metrorail Silver Line, in the Manassas area, and in the I-95/VRE corridor. They will provide north-south mobility as well as connections for individuals destined toward the east and west via transfers at convenient locations such as park-and-rides and rail stations. Construction of a continuous multiuse trail along the Corridor for the use of bicyclists and pedestrians, allowing them to access activity centers throughout the north-south corridor seamlessly. ES-4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

19 Improvements to transportation demand management programs (TDM) within the Corridor, focused on marketing and promotion of the expanded transit services and the HOV network. The recommended alternative provides travel time savings, congestion relief, and improved overall access and mobility for all users of the transportation system. In order to monitor the study recommendations, an action plan also is included in this report. The Commonwealth should continue to work with state, regional, and local agencies to monitor to progress of addressing the action plan elements. The study design along with the content of this report fulfills the requirements of the CMP process for the Northern Virginia North South Corridor Study. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. ES-5

20

21 1.0 Introduction In the VTRANS 2035 plan (2009), Corridors of Statewide Significance were named for the first time. Legislation the same year solidified the status of these corridors within the Commonwealth Corridors of Statewide Significance (CoSS) should meet the following criteria: Involve multiple modes or be a freight corridor extending beyond an individual region; Connect regions, states, or major activity centers; Provide a high level or volume of transport; and Have a unique statewide function or fulfill a statewide goal. A CoSS is defined in VTRANS 2035 as: An integrated, multimodal network of transportation facilities that connect major centers of activity within and through the Commonwealth and promote the movement of people and goods essential to the economic prosperity of the State. The Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) is responsible for designating corridors in the Commonwealth. The Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment (OIPI), housed within the Office of the Secretary of Transportation, is responsible for developing Corridor Master Plans for these corridors. The CTB initially identified 11 Corridors of Statewide Significance that span the entire Commonwealth, as shown in the below list and in the map presented in Figure Coastal Corridor (U.S. 17); 2. Crescent Corridor (I-81); 3. East-West Corridor (I-64); 4. Eastern Shore Corridor (U.S. 13); 5. Heartland Corridor (U.S. 460); 6. North Carolina to WV Corridor (U.S. 220); 7. Northern Virginia Corridor (I-66); 8. Seminole Corridor (U.S. 29); 9. Southside Corridor (U.S. 58); 10. Washington to NC Corridor (I-95); and 11. Western Mountain Corridor (I-77). Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 1-1

22 On May 18, 2011 the CTB defined an additional CoSS the Northern Virginia North-South Corridor. The corridor includes transportation facilities from the interchange of I-95 and VA 234 (Dumfries Road) in Prince William County connecting with I-66, U.S. 50 (Lee Highway), VA 267 (Dulles Greenway), and VA 7 (Harry Byrd Highway). Important roadway facilities along the Corridor include VA 234 (Dumfries Road/Prince William Parkway) west of the City of Manassas, the planned Tri-County Parkway segment between U.S. 50 and I-66, and VA 659 (Belmont Ridge Road) in Loudoun County. Important economic centers along the Corridor include the Dulles International Airport area, the Dale City/Woodbridge area, and the Manassas area. The corridor serves Dulles International Airport, a major economic center for the region and Commonwealth, and provides ground connectivity directly to Manassas Regional Airport and indirectly to Leesburg Executive Airport and Stafford Regional Airport. The North-South Corridor Master Plan (CMP) study was initiated by the study sponsor, the Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment, in May CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN PURPOSE The intent of a Corridor Master Plan (CMP) process is to develop a comprehensive long-range transportation plan for each CoSS. The CMP process is designed to fully engage local, regional, and state planners and corridor stakeholders in jointly defining a common vision for transportation investment and maintenance along the entire corridor. The CMP process is designed to address local, regional, and state transportation goals that are documented in existing plans. These goals should address future multimodal travel and present recommendations on how the Corridor should be improved and managed to promote the movement of people and goods essential to the economic prosperity of the Commonwealth. 1-2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

23 Figure 1.1 Corridors of Statewide Significance Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 1-3

24 1.2 CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN PROCESS As defined by the CTB, the CoSS study flow diagram, presented in Figure 1.2, articulates the major elements of the CMP process. Figure 1.2 Corridor Master Plan Process Regional visioning Establish steering committee Assemble study team Develop public participation plan Corridor-specific visioning and goals Locality and stakeholder involvement Broad multimodal level Alternatives development Identify detailed study area Locality/stakeholder workshops Finalize recommendation and report Corridor Master Plan Local comprehensive plans Funding and location studies Construction 1. Pre-Study Activities 2. Corridor Vision & Plan Framework 3. Technical Analysis 4. Coordination and Study Completion 5. Project Advancement and Implementation Public and Stakeholder Involvement Throughout 1-4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

25 1. Pre-Study Activities The vision and goals for the CoSS should be developed using all available local, regional, and state plans. The vision and goals for the particular corridor should represent the key elements in these planning documents. A critical element of the pre-study activities include: 1) organizing the project Steering Committee for the project was established consisting of stakeholder agency and jurisdictional executive leadership; 2) creating a Project Working Group (PWG) consisting of stakeholder agency and jurisdictional key planning staff; and 3) developing the public involvement plan that will guide the study team and define all stakeholder and public outreach activities for the duration of the study. 2. Corridor Vision and Planning Framework The Steering Committee and PWG will represent the local, regional, and statewide perspectives that will be used to develop the overall vision and goals for the Corridor. This will include the development of the issues and needs, along with potential solutions on a corridor and subarea basis. This information will be vetted through public outreach and used to guide the CMP development throughout the entire process. 3. Technical Analysis Based on the issues and needs, the study team will conduct technical analysis to best assess long-term solutions that fully support the established vision, goals, issues, and needs of the Corridor under study. Based on the guidance from both the project Steering Committee and the PWG, the corridor goals should be broad and address all relevant transportation modes and economic centers included in the Corridor. Based on the scale of the public involvement plan, technical analysis will provide the basis to present long-term transportation options to the public through a combination of efforts including open house meetings and webbased information sharing. 4. Coordination and Study Completion The project Steering Committee, PWG, and public outreach activities provide the basis to ensure that the CMP process is recognizing and addressing the confluence of local, regional, and state vision for the transportation corridors. Based on the CMP process study scope, these activities should help guide the study team through the process of providing a set of recommendations that account for the transportation needs and economic considerations, while supporting the statewide vision for the Corridor. Transparent interaction with all stakeholder groups at key decision points through the study provides for fully informed recommendations to be made. Public comments received throughout the study process will be summarized and used to help inform the final recommendations in the CMP. 5. Project Advancement and Implementation The CMP document includes an implementation action plan describing how the Commonwealth and other governmental bodies can work together to achieve the Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 1-5

26 recommendations of the CMP. These may include adding the corridor recommendations to county comprehensive plans, beginning environmental processes under National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) guidelines, and identifying a financing strategy to secure funds to construct new multimodal facilities. 1.3 STAKEHOLDER AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN Perhaps the most critical element of the CMP process is defining the stakeholder interaction process and approach. The Stakeholder and Public Involvement Plan is developed to inform a broad array of stakeholders, with particular focus on representation from jurisdictions within the Corridor, and to obtain guidance for the CMP process. As part of the North-South Corridor Study, the study team developed a stakeholder and public involvement plan. As detailed in Figure 1.2, stakeholder and public involvement strategies and actions were utilized throughout the study to facilitate early dialogue, continuous information flow, and meaningful engagement. The program of strategies accommodated various stakeholder communication preferences and reflected the diversity of stakeholders in the study area. The activities of the Steering Committee, the PWG, and opportunities for public participation were carried forward hand-in-hand throughout the study process. Steering Committee For the North-South Corridor Study, the project Steering Committee with executive-level representation was convened early in the study and included the following members: VDOT Deputy Secretary of Transportation Mr. David L. Tyeryar; Past Virginia Commonwealth Transportation Board Member Mr. J. Doug Koelemay; Virginia Commonwealth Transportation Board Member Mr. F. Gary Garczynski; and VDOT Chief Engineer Mr. Garrett Moore (Note: Mr. Moore was the VDOT Northern Virginia District Administrator for a portion of the study process). The Steering Committee provided the project team high-level guidance regarding study schedule and outreach activities, corridor goals and objectives, mobility option development and refinement, and corridor recommendations. Project Working Group (PWG) A Project Working Group with voluntary representation from stakeholder agencies and jurisdictions provided technical advisement, study guidance, and supported public engagement activities throughout the study. The PWG met on 1-6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

27 four occasions during the study to review and provide input on draft materials. In addition, representatives served as liaisons with their respective agencies and officials to distribute study information via stakeholder distribution lists, agency web sites, and regular briefings. The member agencies and jurisdictions participating in the PWG are listed below. Loudoun County; Prince William County; Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA); Department of Aviation; VDOT Northern Virginia District; and Department of Rail and Public Transportation. Coordinate and Conduct Meetings of the Steering Committee and PWG The Steering Committee and Project Working Group met in person and via teleconference several times throughout the course of the study. Key topics addressed at the Steering Committee and PWG meetings included the following items. Study introduction, vision, and goals development; Review and comment on the public and stakeholder involvement plan; Review and summary of all previous studies, data, and information relating to the Corridor; Identification and discussion of local and regional transportation goals and objectives, including aligning where they differ; Development and presentation of corridor issues and needs; Review of data sources and technical procedures; Presentation of potential mobility options (alternatives) in the Corridor; Development of potential study performance measures; Transportation alternatives technical analysis for all alternatives tested; Review of all material presented at the public meetings; Summary of public input and comments from all meetings; Presentation of refined final alternative; and Review of comprehensive study findings mobility options, modeling results, and public input (organized thematically). Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 1-7

28 Coordinate and Conduct Public Meetings Two rounds of public meetings, consisting of a total of three individual meetings, took place in December 2012 and January All meetings were organized around an open house approach, where meeting attendees were given the opportunity to review presentation study materials and directly interact with study team members. The public meetings provided an occasion to provide the public with direct interaction with the study team and members of the PWG to reinforce the commitment to sharing study information as well as seeking public input to the project material. These meetings were announced in conformance with the VDOT Policy Manual for Public Participation in Transportation Projects. Announcements were made through the study web page, via the PWG, and to select local area advertising outlets and the media. The VDOT Public Affairs Office handled all media inquiries and announcements. The first round of meetings took place December 18, 2012 and December 19, 2012 and provided a review of: Corridor of Statewide Significance Corridor Master Plan approach; Vision, goals, and objectives of the study; Corridor description; Corridor issues, needs, and existing and future conditions; and Alternative descriptions. The meetings were scheduled from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the evening at Stone Bridge High School in Ashburn, Virginia on December 18, 2012 and at the Four Points Sheraton Manassas Battlefield on December 19, At the public meetings, attendees were given the opportunity to fill out a comment card and leave with the study team, or submit comments directly via or U.S. mail to OIPI. Total attendance at the December meetings was 148 public participants and 447 individual comments were received. The second round of public meetings were held at the Four Points Sheraton Manassas Battlefield on January 8, 2013 to present the technical analysis of the initial two transportation alternatives and to provide the public the opportunity to review and comment on the draft-recommended alternative for the Corridor. Total attendance at the January meeting was 60 public participants and 318 additional individual comments were received. Overall, 208 attendees participated in the three public meetings with 765 individual comments received. Meeting comments received during all three meetings as well as comments received via and mail were documented and summarized for consideration during the process of developing study recommendations. Meeting presentation material and public comments 1-8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

29 (summarized by theme) are located in Appendix A Public Information Comment Summary of this document. Develop and Maintain Study Contact Database Working with contacts in Northern Virginia, including, but not limited to, members of the PWG, and staff from the VDOT Public Affairs Office, existing lists were identified and used to reach an array of stakeholders, including minority and disadvantaged populations. This information dissemination approach was used to distribute project information and news, including announcements about upcoming public meetings, and other key milestones. This effort also was coordinated with VDOT and the PWG, with content provided to them so that they were able to disseminate information to their proprietary lists. Prepare Project Newsletters Newsletters for public consumption informed the public about study progress and key findings. Three factsheets were prepared at key milestones: at the alternatives development stage; at the proposed final alternative stage; and at the study completion. Paper copies of the first newsletter, also made available on the study web site, were made available at the public meetings. The first factsheet addressed overall study goals and methodology, corridor definition, key features of the Corridor, project milestones, and next steps. The second factsheet outlined corridor issues and needs, presented the definitions of Alternative 1 and Alternative 2, and reviewed the performance of both Alternatives. The third factsheet will present a summary of the final report and recommendations. The newsletters were distributed electronically to PWG representatives for dissemination to their respective lists and were made available on the study web site. The project factsheets also are located in Appendix A of this document. 1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION The remainder of this report includes the following sections. Section 2.0 North-South Corridor Overview: Describes the corridor vision, goals, and objectives; Describes the general features of the corridor study area and specifics regarding the targeted corridor alignment; and Provides information regarding population and employment growth forecasts through 2040 and the importance of corridor activity clusters. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 1-9

30 Section 3.0 Summary of Regional, County, and Local Transportation Plans: Summarizes the multimodal transportation investment included in recently developed and regional or locally approved short- and long-range transportation plans. Section 4.0 Transportation Alternatives Development: Identifies issues and needs not addressed in current transportation plans, and translates these into the definition of corridor alternatives; Reviews the decision-making and technical approach supporting the development and evaluation of corridor transportation alternatives; Summarizes transportation system assumptions and performance consistent with implementation of approved and fiscally constrained transportation plans; and Presents outcomes from the analysis of the corridor alternatives. Section 5.0 Recommended Alternative and Corridor Action Plan: Identifies the best performing alternative elements and describes the recommended corridor alternative; Reviews the outcomes from the analysis of the recommended alternative, including economic and environmental impacts; Discusses the recommended alternative implementation costs and possible revenue sources; and Identifies critical next steps for supporting Corridor Master Plan implementation Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

31 2.0 North-South Corridor Overview 2.1 PROJECT VISION The CTB outlined four criteria to help define a CoSS. Based on the CTB criteria, corridors are expected to be multimodal (must include multiple transportation modes), provide connectivity (must connect major activity centers), include a high volume of travel (must involve a high volume of passenger and/or freight travel), and provide a unique function (must provide a unique statewide function or address statewide goals). Additionally, the CoSS legislation provides guidance on potential study activities and, by extension, the outline for the goals of a CoSS study. These activities include the following elements. Identify transportation solutions to promote economic development and all transportation modes, intermodal connectivity, environmental quality, accessibility for people and freight, and transportation safety; Help address mobility and accessibility within corridors of statewide significance and regional networks, and promote commuter choice inclusion; Assess freight movements and promote intermodal and multimodal solutions to address freight needs, including assessment of intermodal facilities; Assess and coordinate transportation safety needs related to passenger and freight movements by all transportation modes; Coordinate the adequate accommodation of pedestrian, bicycle, and other forms of nonmotorized transportation in the six-year improvement program and other state and regional transportation plans; and Establish standards for the coordination of transportation investments and land use planning to promote commuter choice and transportation system efficiency. Based on the CoSS framework provided by the CTB along with input from the project Steering Committee and PWG, the overall vision for the North-South Corridor was defined. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-1

32 Northern Virginia North-South Corridor Vision Statement The Northern Virginia North-South CoSS will be an integrated, multimodal network of transportation facilities that connect major centers of activity within and through the Commonwealth and promote the movement of people and goods essential to the economic prosperity of the State. The vision statement provides a framework for all subsequent study activity. This includes the development of the project goals, objectives, issues, and needs. The alternatives tested as part of the study are designed to address all guiding elements articulated in the CMP process. 2.2 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The North-South Corridor goals and objectives were organized around the goals and objectives established by the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA), counties, and other jurisdictions within the study area. They also support the overall vision statement for the study. The goals and objectives shown in Table 2.1 are organized based on the goals of the Commonwealth s Transportation Plan, VTRANS 2035, and are informed by goals established in recent agency and county planning documents. Table 2.1 Vision Statement, Goals, and Objectives for the North-South Corridor North-South Corridor Vision North-South Corridor Goal CoSS Proposed Vision The Northern Virginia North-South CoSS will be an integrated, multimodal network of transportation facilities that connect major centers of activity within and through the Commonwealth and promote the movement of people and goods essential to the economic prosperity of the State. CoSS Goals and Objectives 1. Support Economic Growth: Support current and projected growth of economic activity within this vital economic engine for the Commonwealth Objectives Ensure adequate capacity and access to allow for projected growth at Dulles International Airport area Reduce congestion and improve the level of service on existing roadways Improve the quality of connections between travel modes and activity centers for people and goods movement Provide for multiple modes of access and egress to activity centers and key transportation nodes 2-2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

33 North-South Corridor Goal CoSS Goals and Objectives (continued) 2. Maintain Existing Assets and Promote Safe Travel: Preserve and maintain the condition of the existing transportation system within the North-South Corridor region and improve transportation safety Objectives Maintain transportation infrastructure conditions within the study corridor at a fair or better condition North-South Corridor Goal Reduce transportation-related fatalities and injuries Ensure that all miles of the corridor roadway conform to access management standards 3. Support Multimodal Investment: Support the use of alternate transportation modes within the Corridor Objectives Increase the number and quality of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the Corridor Provide integrated transit service, facilities, and connections for the Corridor Maximize the number of modes used within a single right-of-way North-South Corridor Goal 4. Foster Environmental Stewardship: Protect the environment, facilitate the effective coordination of transportation and land use, and minimize impacts on historical resources, to improve the quality of life for those living in or passing through the North-South Corridor region Objectives Protect environmental and historical resources through sustainable planning and design methods Employ context sensitive design to respect historic, environmental, and community character Provide equitable transportation options to all communities in the Corridor 2.3 STUDY AREA OVERVIEW The North-South Corridor study area is within Loudoun and Prince William Counties as well as the City of Manassas and the City of Manassas Park, and generally follows an area east and west of the VA 234 (Dumfries Road/Prince William Parkway) corridor, the future location of the Tri-County Parkway, and north-south connections to the Dulles Greenway and VA 7 as delineated by the CTB in the resolution establishing the CoSS. The corridor s location in Northern Virginia presents a strong opportunity to support economic growth and address increased access to the Dulles International Airport area. The corridor links growing activity centers and residential areas in eastern Loudoun County and Prince William County and provides new access from I-95 and Prince William County to Dulles International Airport and the area surrounding the airport. The North-South Corridor also provides an alternative to other north-south transportation corridors in Northern Virginia, including U.S. 15, VA 28, Fairfax County Parkway, and I-495. The transportation corridor comprises north-south multimodal transportation facilities from the interchange of I-95 and VA 234 (Dumfries Road) in Prince William County to connect with U.S. 50 (Lee Highway), I-66, VA 267 (Dulles Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-3

34 Greenway), and VA 7 (Harry Byrd Highway). Important roadway facilities along the Corridor include VA 234 (Dumfries Road/Prince William Parkway) west of the City of Manassas, the planned Tri-County Parkway segment between U.S. 50 and I-66, and VA 659 (Belmont Ridge Road) in Loudoun County. The corridor serves Dulles International Airport, a major economic center for the region and Commonwealth, as well as provides ground connectivity directly to Manassas Regional Airport and indirectly to Leesburg Executive Airport and Stafford Regional Airport. Figure 2.1 presents a map of the study corridor and the three segments of study. The corridor is approximately 45 miles in length: I-95 to I-66 via VA 234 (Dumfries Road and Prince William Parkway) 22.6 miles; I-66 to U.S. 50 via the Tri-County Parkway planned alignment 11.8 miles; and U.S. 50 to VA 7 via Northstar Boulevard and VA 659 (Belmont Ridge Road) 10.6 miles. 2-4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

35 Figure 2.1 North-South Corridor Corridor Map Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-5

36 Study Analysis Subareas In order to better analyze travel and demographic data, several distinct homogeneous subareas were defined within the metropolitan Washington, D.C. area. As displayed in Figure 2.2, the subareas cover the Metropolitan Washington region with primary focus on Northern Virginia. The specific corridor traffic analysis zones (TAZ) extracted from the study area political boundaries for more detailed analysis also is highlighted in Figure 2.2. Figure 2.2 Travel and Demographic Subareas 2-6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

37 The next sections will rely on the subareas in Figure 2.2 to summarize travel and demographic data derived from the U.S. Census and Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) long-range travel and demographic data. 2.4 STUDY AREA SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE Recent Population Growth Trends In the 10 years between the 2000 and 2010 decennial census, Northern Virginia led the region (as compared to Maryland suburbs and the District of Columbia) in both percentages and total numbers of new residents, adding 415,428 residents to a total of 2,230,623 persons at a 10-year growth rate of 22.9 percent. It comprised 64.6 percent of all population growth in the Metropolitan Washington region during this period. Loudoun, Prince William, and Fairfax taken separately were responsible for 22 percent, 19 percent, and 17 percent of the region s total new residents, growing faster than any other jurisdictions in the region. In 2010, Fairfax County had nearly 1.1 million residents, Prince William County had 402,002 residents, and Loudoun County had 312,311 residents. The most recent U.S. Census statistics estimating the population growth just in the single year after the decennial census (reflecting population on April 1, 2011) continue to show rapid population growth in the study corridor. The City of Manassas Park was the fourth fastest growing jurisdiction in the entire nation, adding 1,059 residents totaling 15,332 at a 7.4 percent annual growth rate. The jurisdictions of Prince William and Loudoun Counties were the 17 th and 18 th fastest growing in this single year each growing 4.2 percent to 419,006 and 325,005 persons, respectively (Arlington County was 21 st on this nationwide list, and the City of Manassas was 24 th ). The growth in Northern Virginia from 2000 to 2010 increased its share of the Commonwealth s total population from 26 percent in 2000 to 28 percent in Figure 2.3 presents a comparison of different subregions and jurisdiction populations within the Metropolitan Washington region as a point of reference for population forecast discussions going forward. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-7

38 Figure Population by Jurisdiction and Combined Areas in the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Jurisdictions Metro Washington Region Northern Virginia - Total City of Manassas Park City of Manassas City of Falls Church City of Fairfax City of Alexandria Prince William County Loudoun County Fairfax County Arlington County Maryland Suburbs - Total Town of Bladensburg City of Greenbelt City of College Park City of Bowie Prince George's County City of Takoma Park City of Rockville City of Gaithersburg Montgomery County City of Frederick Frederick County District of Columbia Population (in Millions) Projected Growth in Employment, Households, and Population between 2010 and 2040 The MWCOG cooperative land use forecasts (Round 8.1) project continuing strong growth in the Washington region between 2010 and The number of jobs in the census-defined metropolitan statistical area is expected to increase from 4.0 million to 5.6 million. Similarly, household growth is expected from 2.5 million to 3.3 million and population from 6.6 million to 8.7 million. Northern Virginia alone will add 0.7 million jobs, 0.8 million people, and 0.3 million new households by Compounded annually, annual percentage job growth will average 1.4 percent between 2010 and 2040, with population growing at a 1.0 percent annual rate. Employment growth in Fairfax County will be slightly lower than the regional trend (42 percent between 2010 and 2040) but Prince William and Loudoun are 2-8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

39 expected to generate jobs at more than double the regional trend (109 percent and 99 percent, respectively) and will be the fastest growing job centers in the Washington region. Taken together, Loudoun and Prince William Counties will add jobs at a rapid pace of 2.4 percent annually over 30 years. Figure 2.4 presents the employment growth by corridor jurisdiction between 2010 and Figure 2.4 Employment Growth by Jurisdiction between 2010 and 2040 Employment (thousands) +37% % +109% % +13% 0 Fairfax Loudoun Prince William Manassas Manassas Park Population growth in Fairfax County will be somewhat lower than the regional trend (30 percent) but Prince William and Loudoun will grow much faster than the regional trend (52-54 percent). Northern Virginia as a whole will increase in population by 36 percent between 2010 and Figure 2.5 presents the population growth by corridor jurisdiction between 2010 and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-9

40 Figure 2.5 Population Growth by Jurisdiction between 2010 and 2040 Population (thousands) 1,400 1,200 1, % % +52% % +11% Fairfax Loudoun Prince William Manassas Manassas Park Present and future employment and population growth projections also are available by study area subareas (refer to Figure 2.2). Table 2.2 presents population and employment growth in each of the study subarea. This data was used to develop Figures summarizing the population and employment growth in Northern Virginia. Table 2.2 Population and Employment Growth Summary Population Subarea Employment Percent Change Percent Change Corridor North 56,429 96,017 70% 12,195 46, % Corridor Central 25,246 57, % 6,883 17, % Corridor South Manassas 112, ,663 42% 55, ,451 87% Corridor South I , ,526 44% 34,520 68,562 99% North-South Corridor Subtotal 353, ,105 54% 109, , % Dulles East 137, ,556 24% 91, ,970 72% Dulles West 11,749 31, % 5,983 21, % Loudoun West 87, ,530 60% 31,203 52,476 68% Prince William East and Manassas Park 85, ,562 52% 22,135 43,417 96% Prince William West 89, ,336 52% 27,377 52,649 92% Fairfax County and City 878,720 1,075,784 22% 547, ,632 40% Inside the Capital Beltway 559, ,498 23% 461, ,037 37% Fauquier County 74, , % 27,324 52,578 92% Stafford County and Fredericksburg 153, ,459 86% 78, ,962 77% Remainder of Northern Virginia 2,078,539 2,836,125 36% 1,292,951 1,916,929 48% 2-10 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

41 While the developed subareas to the east of the Corridor continue to contain a large share of Northern Virginia s population and employment, the rate of growth in the developing study corridor subareas, particularly Corridor Central and Corridor North, is predicted to be very high. Between 2010 and 2040, Corridor Central is expected to grow 234 percent in terms of population and 312 percent in employment; by far the fastest rate of growth of any of the subareas. Corridor North will increase 34 percent in population and 196 percent in employment. Employment and population growth projections also are mapped by the geographic subareas. Figures 2.6 and 2.7 show growth in population and employment between 2010 and 2040, as well as the percentage growth in areas of the Corridor (the darker the color, the higher the percentage growth). In order to provide a sense of the density of employment and population growth in the subareas, maps of 2010 to 2040 growth density are shown in Figures 2.8 and 2.9. These maps show the number of new jobs and people per square mile for each of the analysis subareas. Figure 2.8 illustrates the density of population growth which is notable along the corridor with greater densities of growth west of Dulles Airport, in eastern Prince William County, and inside the Capital Beltway. Figure 2.9 shows the relatively dense growth in jobs along the corridor and in the Dulles area, along with dense job growth inside the Capital Beltway. While Fairfax County continues to be the largest population base in northern Virginia adding approximately 200,000 people and jobs, the rate of growth is relatively small. High rates of growth are expected to be north and west of Manassas in the area of the Corridor between I-66 and VA 7, for both population and employment (as also documented in Figure 2.6 and Figure 2.7). The area adjacent to the North-South Corridor near Dulles International Airport is expected to increase between 200 percent and 282 percent in jobs and increase by 168 percent in population from 2010 to In total, the Dulles West area of the Corridor is anticipated to add 44,829 jobs and 72,241 residents by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-11

42 Figure 2.6 Total Population Growth Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

43 Figure 2.7 Total Employment Growth Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-13

44 Figure 2.8 Population Growth per Square Mile Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

45 Figure 2.9 Employment Growth per Square Mile Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-15

46 Economic Importance Aggregating the total economic power of the jurisdictions in the study corridor (Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William County, City of Manassas, and City of Manassas Park) demonstrates the strength of their economies and their importance to the Commonwealth as a whole. The 2007 Economic Census showed that this area, in aggregate, represents 22 percent of the total employer business revenue generated in Virginia. The U.S. Census 2009 County Business Patterns indicate that the area is responsible for 23 percent of all business establishments, 26 percent of all the paid employees, and 35 percent of all payroll dollars paid in the Commonwealth. Fairfax County, the largest jurisdiction by population in the Commonwealth, is located largely to the east of the study corridor and much of its economic power lies outside the area affected by the North-South Corridor. Removing Fairfax County from the totals, the combined economies of Loudoun, Prince William, and Manassas still represent a significant statewide share of business establishments (eight percent), paid employees (seven percent), and payroll dollars (eight percent). The immediate study corridor area contains over 109,000 jobs in 2010 based on MWCOG land use data. When adding jobs in the Dulles International Airport area, just to the east of the study corridor, this total increases to over 205,000 jobs in STUDY AREA TRANSPORTATION PROFILE Commuting Patterns from the Census Census Transportation Planning Package (CTPP) county-to-county flow tables derived from the American Community Survey three-year estimates were used for this analysis. It is useful to compare those flows that may be more north-south in nature, than those for which workers would tend to travel in a more east-west direction. Only 1,525 daily commuters travel from Loudoun to Prince William Counties (1 percent of all commute trips from Loudoun). From Prince William to Loudoun Counties, the number is larger at 5,915 (3 percent of all commute trips from Prince William). Fairfax County, having the greatest number of jobs in the study corridor, is the largest work destination for residents of Loudoun and Prince William Counties, with 52,090 and 54,315 commuters making that trip (totaling 33 percent of all commute trips from Loudoun and Prince William Counties). Manassas City serves as a smaller job hub for Prince William County residents; 9,950 of them (5.4 percent of the total commuting population) travel there for 2-16 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

47 work. As is often the case, most people commute within their own jurisdiction. 288,710 workers make a trip exclusively within Fairfax; 67,095 within Loudoun; and 69,280 within Prince William (50 percent of all commute trips from the threecounty area). Forecasted Future Travel Patterns Using the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board travel demand model CLRP forecast for 2040, a greater share of north-south travel is projected to occur by East-west travel represents the majority share of directional travel in northern Virginia, and is expected to remain this way through However, growth in north-south travel will be greater than eastwest travel through 2040, increasing the share in the North-South Corridor from 28 to 31 percent. Within the corridor, total daily north-south vehicle travel nearly doubles from 2007 to In some areas of the corridor, north-south directional travel represents greater than 40 percent of all travel. For example, in the Dulles West subarea, northsouth travel (primarily trips accessing Dulles International Airport) represents 50 percent of total daily vehicle travel. Table 2.3 summarizes directional travel patterns in 2007 and 2040 for the designated study subareas (see Figure 2.2). The highlighted rows in Table 2.3 represent the corridor study area. Table 2.3 Total Daily Vehicle Travel within the Study Area for 2007 and Percent of Percent of Change in Subarea North-South Travel Total North- South Travel North-South Travel Total North- South Travel North-South Travel Corridor North 35% 26,691 35% 68,367 41,676 Corridor Central 45% 16,795 47% 52,568 35,773 Corridor South Manassas 27% 72,540 32% 135,324 62,784 Corridor South I-95 25% 76,389 25% 122,414 46,025 North-South Corridor 28% 192,416 31% 378, ,257 Dulles West 50% 10,013 50% 34,418 24,405 Dulles East 11% 40,856 17% 85,926 45,070 Loudoun West 4% 5,052 5% 10,089 5,037 Prince William East and Manassas Park 34% 58,681 34% 89,604 30,923 Prince William West 33% 50,247 36% 101,808 51,561 Fauquier County 10% 16,432 9% 31,980 15,548 Stafford County and Fredericksburg 10% 25,970 9% 47,107 21,137 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-17

48 Mode Choice from the Census The 2010 American Community Survey estimates mode choice characteristics for workers living in Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William Counties as well as the Commonwealth (refer to Table 2.4). Driving alone is the most popular commute mode; 69 percent of Prince William County residents commuted this way, along with 72 percent of Fairfax residents, and 77 percent of Loudoun residents. Likely due to the effect and time savings afforded by HOV facilities along I-95, Prince William residents were much more likely to commute in a carpool with 15 percent of them reporting this mode. Public transportation was a more popular mode among Fairfax residents with 9 percent of commuters choosing to commute by bus or rail; only 5 percent of Prince William and 3 percent of Loudoun residents used public transportation to get to work. All three counties do not differ greatly from the statewide average commuting mode choices (77 percent drive alone, 10 percent carpool, 4 percent transit). Table 2.4 Commute to Work Mode Shares (Vehicle Trips) Jurisdiction Drive Alone Carpool Public Transit Fairfax 72% 10% 9% Loudoun 77% 9% 3% Prince William 69% 15% 5% Source: 2010 American Communities Survey. The American Communities Survey also tracks bicycle and walk commute trips. Across the three counties, the average bicycle to work share is 0.2 percent and the average walk to work share is 1.7 percent. Region Attitude Survey Results As part of the Greater Washington 2050 study (since retitled Region Forward), residents from around the Washington region were surveyed on their attitudes toward various policy areas of strategic importance (land use, transportation, environmental, climate and energy, economic, housing, health and human services, education, and public safety). Eighty-four percent of Loudoun residents placed traffic/transportation as the most important long-term issue compared to 53 percent of the Washington Region making it the most popular choice by far among the options. The next highest category chosen by just 20 percent of respondents was economy/jobs. Among Fairfax residents, 70 percent chose traffic/transportation as their top choice (economy/jobs was second with 22 percent) and it also was the top choice of 56 percent in Prince William (economy/jobs was a closer second choice here with 42 percent of residents). These figures demonstrate a high degree of public support for transportation improvements among residents of the study area Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

49 2.6 STUDY AREA ACTIVITY CLUSTERS GROWTH Activity clusters represent larger grouping of individual activity centers as defined by TPB in the Washington metropolitan region. Activity clusters in the study area are presented in Figure These areas are forecast to experience significant growth compared to the Washington metropolitan region through Almost 57 percent of all new jobs and 32 percent of all new households in the Washington metropolitan region will be located inside activity clusters by The activity clusters associated with the North-South Corridor include: Manassas Area, Gainesville, and Potomac Mills/Woodbridge, Leesburg, North Dulles, South Dulles, and Dulles Corridor. The growth in jobs and households in these clusters are presented in Table 2.5 and displayed in Figure Table 2.5 Job and Household Growth in Activity Clusters Activity Cluster Job Growth Household Growth Manassas Area 143% 85% Gainesville 136% 363% Potomac Mills/Woodbridge 110% 191% Leesburg 39% 15% North Dulles 71% 191% South Dulles 51% 407% Dulles Corridor 41% 185% North-South Study Area 54% 42% Source: MWCOG cooperative land use forecasts, Round 8.1 (2011). Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-19

50 Figure 2.10 Regional Activity Clusters 2-20 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

51 2.7 DULLES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PROFILE AND ACTIVITY GROWTH Dulles International Airport is the largest airport in the Commonwealth of Virginia and is a key economic driver for the entire Washington Metropolitan Region. According to the Virginia Department of Aviation - Virginia Airport System Economic Impact Study, in 2010 Dulles International Airport contributed $10.12 billion in economic activity to the Virginia economy, created and sustained 96,980 jobs, and realized 3.99 billion in payroll as a result of jobs created. This represents 1.5 percent of Virginia s total economic output, and 2.1 percent of Virginia jobs. According to the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) Economic Impacts Study 2009, on-site employment at Dulles International Airport totaled 17,948 in 2009, with an additional 4,500 employees when including Dulles International Airport-based flight crew. Passenger and freight demand at Dulles International Airport is anticipated to grow significantly between now and Annual enplanements are expected to grow from 11.3 million to nearly 36 million by The market share of Dulles Airport also is expected to grow in relation to the other Washington Metropolitan Region airports. 1 While current passenger service in the region is almost evenly split between Washington Reagan (DCA), Dulles International (IAD), and Baltimore-Washington International (BWI), by 2040 the FAA projects that Dulles International will become the Washington region s primary airport. As the geographic catchment area of the airport grows, the need for efficient landside connections will increase. Air Cargo Needs The roadway network surrounding Dulles International also is important because of air cargo needs. A significant portion of the Airport s cargo is fully or partially processed or staged in nearby off-airport facilities. 2 Between 2010 and 2030, the demand for freight (goods) coming in and out of Dulles International Airport is projected to grow at an annual rate of four percent with international freight expected to grow at a faster rate than domestic. 3 1 Transportation and Air Traveler Characteristics Findings from the 2011 Washington- Baltimore Regional Air Passenger Survey, Transportation Planning Board, Rich Roisman, December 19, Washington Dulles International Airport Cargo Area Study, prepared for Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority by Ricondo & Associates, Inc., January Washington Dulles International Airport Cargo Area Study, prepared for Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority by Ricondo & Associates, Inc., January Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2-21

52 Dulles cargo handling capability is split between cargo shipments that are handled in the belly of passenger aircraft (belly cargo) and cargo carried on dedicated cargo aircraft. While current projections assume that belly cargo will be the principal driver of growth, with additional investment in nearby warehousing and landside connections, MWAA also hopes to attract international all-cargo services in the future. 4 Figure 2.11 presents current growth projections. Landside access will be a key consideration in determining how the airport grows to accommodate additional cargo volume and how effectively it competes for discretionary cargo with other major freight airports. Figure 2.11 Dulles International Airport Annual Enplanements and Freight Tonnage /2040 Enplanements (Annual People Leaving or Connecting) Freight Tonnage (Annual Metric Tons) 40,000 1,000,000 35, ,000 Annual Enplanements (Thousands) 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 Annual Metric Tons of Freight 800, , , , , , ,000 5, , Source: Federal Aviation Administration, Terminal Area Forecasts Source: Metro Washington Airports Authority and 2012 Boeing World Air Cargo Forecasts. 4 Dulles, Loudoun County Pursue Cargo Hub, Michael Neibauer, Washington Business Journal Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

53 3.0 Summary of Regional, County, and Local Transportation Plans A key part of the North-South Corridor study process is to examine already approved plans that exist within the Corridor. In addition to comprehensive plans adopted by Loudoun County and Prince William County, there are state and local transit plans, plans affecting Dulles International Airport, and bicycle and trail plans that describe how future needs will be accommodated. The study uses existing plans that will shape the transportation and land use future of the Corridor to help develop future recommendations. 3.1 REGIONAL MULTIMODAL PLANS National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board Constrained Long-Range Transportation Plan The Constrained Long-Range Transportation Plan (CLRP) represents all projects within the Washington metropolitan area that have been approved by the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) as having sufficient funding for construction and clearing air quality conformity and other approvals as required by the MPO. Projects in the approved CLRP are by definition eligible for Federal funding. The currently approved CLRP covers a period of 2012 to 2040 and was approved on July 20, The North-South Corridor study assumes the 2040 CLRP as a baseline for analyzing any changes beyond what is in the approved list of funded projects for Key projects in the 2040 CLRP within the North-South Corridor area are as follows (and are presented in Figure 3.1): Tri-County Parkway The approved location of the Tri-County Parkway comprises Segments C and D of the Tri-County Parkway Draft Environmental Impact Statement. It calls for constructing a four-lane, limited access facility on new alignment between I-66 and U.S. 50 in Prince William and Loudoun Counties by 2035; with access points at U.S. 29, VA 234 (Sudley Road), and VA 620 (Braddock Road) as well as at the endpoints of the project. U.S. 50 Widening of U.S. 50 within the North-South Corridor is to be constructed in phases between 2014 and Between VA 642 (Poland Road) and VA 28, U.S. 50 will be widened to a four- or five-lane section by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3-1

54 2014. Between VA 642 and VA 659 Relocated (also referred to as Tri-County Parkway or Northstar Boulevard), U.S. 50 will be widened to a four- or fivelane section by An interchange is planned at Loudoun County Parkway and U.S. 50 in Northstar Boulevard Northstar Boulevard is often referred to as VA 659 Relocated in the CLRP. The CLRP describes a study of this corridor from Manassas National Battlefield Park to the Dulles Greenway. For purposes of the North-South Corridor study, Northstar Boulevard is assumed to be constructed by 2040 between U.S. 50 and VA 659 (Belmont Ridge Road) due to ongoing VDOT studies and right-of-way designations by Loudoun County. The segment of Northstar Boulevard between U.S. 50 and Evergreen Mills Road is being studied in the context of the Improving Access to Dulles Airport study, with the study area shown. VA 659 (Gum Spring Road and Belmont Ridge Road) VA 659 is included in several segments and projects within the CLRP within Loudoun County. From south to north, the CLRP plans widening Gum Spring Road to a fourlane facility between the Prince William County line and Braddock Road by 2035, and between Braddock Road and U.S. 50 by The CLRP also calls for widening Belmont Ridge Road between Dulles Greenway and Gloucester Parkway as well as between VA 7 and Russell Branch Parkway to four lanes by The segment of VA 659 between VA 7 and Dulles Greenway in the CLRP calls for a widening of the roadway to a six-lane section by Finally, an interchange at VA 659 and VA 7 is to be constructed by Prince William Parkway Formerly referred to as VA 3000, and now designated VA 294, Prince William Parkway is a corridor to the north and east of VA 234 (Dumfries Road) south of the City of Manassas, joining the North-South Corridor at the intersection of Brentsville Road in Prince William County. From Liberia Avenue to Hoadly Road, this roadway is planned to expand to a six-lane section by Segments to the south between Hoadly Road and Minnieville Road either already are or will be widened to a six-lane section by Loudoun County Parkway Located to the east of VA 659 and Northstar Boulevard, VA 607 (Loudoun County Parkway) is planned to expand to a four-lane section between VA 606 and VA 772 by A six-lane section is planned between the W&OD Trail and Redskin Park Drive by VA 28 From the Fauquier County Line to Vint Hill Road Relocated, VA 28 will be widened to four lanes by Continuing north and east, VA 28 is planned to be widened to six lanes from Vint Hill Road Relocated to Linton Hall Road in 2013, and between the western limit of the City of Manassas and Godwin Drive in The VA 28 PPTA (public private partnership) project will widen the roadway between I-66 and VA 7 to eight lanes in Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

55 I-66 The HOV lanes along I-66 are to be extended to Gainesville in Other changes to I-66 are being considered, but are not approved in the CLRP. U.S. 29 and VA 234 within Manassas National Battlefield Park, Battlefield Bypass Once the Battlefield Bypass is constructed utilizing a segment of the Tri-County Parkway between I-66 and VA 234 and along new alignment north of the National Park, U.S. 29 and VA 234 through the Park are planned to be closed to through traffic in Park-and-Ride Lots The CLRP plans a 150-space park-and-ride lot on U.S. 50 at Stone Ridge (between Gum Spring Road and Northstar Boulevard) by A 200-space park-and-ride lot is planned on U.S. 50 at the East Gate development south of Dulles International Airport in Near VA 234 and I-66 along Cushing Road, a 433-space lot will open in There will be a 100-space park-and-ride in the Brambleton neighborhood in Loudoun County by 2015, and a 300-space lot in Arcola. Metrorail The Metrorail Silver Line will extend to VA 772/Ryan Road station in Loudoun County, along with a large 3,300-space park-and-ride lot by Trail along VA 234 A multiuse (pedestrian and bicycle) trail is planned along VA 234 (Dumfries Road) from south of Manassas to the Montclair area of Prince William County in Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3-3

56 Figure 3.1 National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board Comprehensive Long-Range Transportation Plan Relevant North-South Corridor Projects 3-4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

57 Northern Virginia Transportation Authority TransAction 2040 Recognizing that the regionally approved CLRP does not comprise the full list of projects important for future travel in the Northern Virginia area, the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA) conducted a study of projects beyond the CLRP and prioritized them on their impact to multimodal travel in the region. The study will assist the State and region prioritize additional projects for the regional CLRP should new funding be identified to construct them. For purposes of the North-South Corridor study, important projects from TransAction 2040 are mostly within the identified corridor of the Loudoun County Parkway, Prince William Parkway, Belmont Ridge Road, and Gum Spring Road (Corridor #2 in the study). Corridors #3 (VA 28) and #4 (Prince William Parkway) also include important north-south roadway and trail projects, while Corridor #6 includes east-west transit improvements. Key projects in the TransAction 2040 within the North-South Corridor area are as follows (and are presented in Figure 3.2): Interchange Construction/Reconstruction The study calls for constructing a grade separated interchange at Prince William Parkway (VA 294) and Liberia Avenue, constructing an interchange at Prince William Parkway (VA 234) and Liberia Avenue, reconstructing the interchange at VA 28 and Prince William Parkway. Loudoun County Parkway Between Arcola Boulevard and U.S. 50, the study plans for an eight-lane section of this roadway west of Dulles International Airport. Prince William Parkway Between I-66 and Brentsville Road, the study calls for the widening of this current limited-access roadway to a six-lane section. Further, Dumfries Road is planned to have a six-lane section between Brentsville Road and Waterway Drive. North-South Trails TransAction 2040 calls for the construction of multiuse trails along VA 659 between VA 7 and Ryan Road, along Prince William Parkway between Nokesville Road and Dumfries Road, and along the Tri- County Parkway between Braddock Road and Sudley Road. Additionally, the Prince William Parkway widening referenced above includes the construction of a multiuse trail on the east side of the roadway in this segment. East-West Transit Extensions of VRE to Gainesville, Haymarket, and Fauquier County and Metrorail from Vienna to Centreville are included in the study recommendations. Expanding VRE platforms and park-and-ride capacity along the VRE Manassas Line at Broad Run, Manassas, Manassas Park, Burke Centre, Rolling Road, and Backlick Road are included. Transit along VA 28 The study recommends light rail transit linking Manassas with Dulles International Airport along VA 28. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3-5

58 Western Transportation Corridor In the Other Major Improvements section of the study, a Western Transportation Corridor is recommended linking I-95 in Virginia to I-270 in Maryland. Park-and-Ride Lots Additional park-and-ride lot capacities at VA 606, at VA 659, and at Russell Branch Parkway in Loudoun County are recommended. 3-6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

59 Figure 3.2 TransAction 2040 Relevant North-South Corridor Projects Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3-7

60 Department of Rail and Public Transportation Super NoVA Transit/TDM Vision Plan The Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation commissioned the Super NoVA Transit/TDM Vision Plan study to recommend future transit improvements to accommodate growth in the region to 2040, looking beyond traditional local, state, and regional boundaries. For purposes of the North-South Corridor study, the Circumferential Outside the Beltway travel shed most closely matches the corridor study area. Though many of the recommendations are oriented radially or east-west, there are important project recommendations within the North-South Corridor area that address transit needs within the CMP study area. Key projects in the Super NoVA study within the North-South Corridor area are as follows (and are presented in Figure 3.3): Manassas to Dulles Between Manassas and Dulles International Airport, a commuter-oriented regional bus service is recommended linking key origindestination pairs. Manassas to I-95 Utilizing the VA 294 (Prince William Parkway) corridor, commuter-oriented express bus service is recommended linking key origindestination pairs. South Riding to Lansdowne Envisioned as local all-day service, this new route would connect growing activity centers west of Dulles International Airport in Loudoun County with each other and with the terminus of the Silver Line at VA 772/Ryan Road. In the recommendations linking I-95 and Dulles International Airport with Manassas, the study references that potential future HOV lanes could be used to improve travel time. The study also recommends a light rail or bus rapid transit linkage between Manassas and the Dulles Corridor, but the recommended routing is east of VA 28 north of I-66 and is not considered to be within the North-South Corridor study area. This recommendation is not shown in Figure Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

61 Figure 3.3 Super NoVA Relevant North-South Corridor Projects Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3-9

62 3.2 LOCAL AND JURISDICTIONAL MULTIMODAL PLANS 2010 Revised Countywide Transportation Plan, Loudoun County The Countywide Transportation Plan addresses the spectrum of transportation modes, including roads, transit, bicycle and pedestrian, and air travel. The version of the plan reviewed for the North-South Corridor study is as amended through May 2, Goals and Strategies The plan includes one overarching broad goal Provide a safe, affordable, convenient, efficient, and environmentally sound multimodal transportation system to serve Loudoun County. The strategies supporting the goal describe the need to support vibrant communities and employment centers, protect the environment and the character and quality of life, respect the established policy areas within the county, cooperate with adjoining jurisdictions, and obtain the maximum available funding from various sources. Key Roadway Plans within the North-South Corridor Loudoun County plans for roadways in the North-South Corridor are, in some cases, beyond what is approved in the CLRP, either for roads on new alignments not listed in the CLRP or for capacity greater than what is in the approved regional plan. Because the plan envisions additional construction funding being available through various private and other sources, it is not fiscally constrained in the same way as the CLRP. Key roadway plans affecting the North-South Corridor are detailed below. Belmont Ridge Road (VA 659) This roadway begins at Riverside Parkway north of VA 7, and continues south to Evergreen Mills Road. The plan calls for this roadway to be an urban four-lane median separated roadway between VA 7 and Evergreen Mills Road, except the short concurrent segment with Northstar Boulevard between Croson Lane and where Belmont Ridge Road splits from Northstar Boulevard to the east. Northstar Boulevard This roadway link between U.S. 50 and Belmont Ridge Road is partially built and open through the Brambleton neighborhood from Winter Haven Drive to Belmont Ridge Road. Grading and other construction activities are taking place south of Winter Haven Drive but this segment of the roadway is not yet open. County plans call for the roadway to be completed as an urban six-lane median separated roadway for its entire length between U.S. 50 and Croson Lane. It would join the terminus of the Tri-County Parkway alignment at an intersection with U.S. 50, providing an opportunity for continuous north-south movement from this newly constructed roadway through to Belmont Ridge Road and VA Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

63 Gum Spring Road (VA 659)/Arcola Boulevard County plans call for this roadway to be a continuous urban four-lane median divided roadway from the Loudoun/Prince William County line to U.S. 50. North of U.S. 50, the road is to become Arcola Boulevard as an urban six-lane median divided roadway until it joins with VA 606 at the intersection of Loudoun County Parkway. Loudoun County Parkway The existing segment of this roadway begins just north of VA 7, and continues south to Evergreen Ridge Drive. County plans call for its completion southward to the point where it joins VA 606 as an urban six-lane median separated roadway. South of this point to U.S. 50, plans call for an urban eight-lane median separated roadway along the west side of Dulles International Airport. There is another existing segment of Loudoun County Parkway between U.S. 50 and Braddock Road that the County plan calls for an eventual urban six-lane median separated roadway. County plans call for its further extension from Braddock Road to the Prince William County line as a rural six-lane median separated facility. Key Transit and Other Mobility Option Elements within the North- South Corridor Loudoun County plans support mobility options and transit services within the North-South Corridor, as detailed below. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) TDM strategies make the most out of a fixed capacity transportation system by encouraging the use of transit modes and carpool formation, as well as shifting trips to nonpeak periods by working with employers or eliminating trips altogether by the use of technology such as telework. The County plan also supports the construction of park-and-ride facilities, HOV lanes, and bicycle and pedestrian trails as TDM strategies. Transit Most fixed, express, and commuter bus services recommended in the County plan are either to the east of the North-South Corridor or have a primarily radial, east-west orientation. Phase I transit expansion, predating the opening of the Dulles Corridor Metrorail stations in Loudoun County, calls for improved north-south transit connectivity generally between the future Metrorail station areas and other areas of the County via circulator routes. Phases II and III of transit expansion highlight the need to connect the new Metrorail stations at VA 606 and VA 772 with north-south routes called the Loudoun County Parkway Circulator and the Dulles South Circulator. New transit service along Belmont Ridge Road also is planned in Phase III. Park-and-Ride Lots Phase III transit expansion describes the need for an additional park-and-ride location at U.S. 50 and VA 606, at the Dulles Greenway and Belmont Ridge Road, and in Lansdowne near VA 7 and Belmont Ridge Road. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3-11

64 Key Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans within the North-South Corridor Loudoun County plans regarding bicycle and pedestrian facilities are contained within the Loudoun County Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility Master Plan, as referenced in the plan document. Key plans for north-south primary roads and connecting corridors within the North-South Corridor include: Loudoun County Parkway; Belmont Ridge Road; Gum Springs Road; and Old Ox Road. An off-road connection is planned along the ring route surrounding Dulles International Airport. An improved trail connection to the Loudoun County Parkway is planned, including ramps and a connector trail west across Broad Run. The Master Plan also supports a set of policies and guidelines for connecting and maintaining a network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Airport Access County policies regarding access to Dulles International Airport support interaction with the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority and other agencies regarding improvements to VA 606, VA 28, and U.S. 50. They further support intelligent transportation systems and multimodal networks connecting Dulles International Airport, and fixed guideway transit studies in the VA 606, VA 28, and U.S. 50 corridors. Prince William County 2008 Comprehensive Plan The Prince William County Comprehensive Plan contains a transportation chapter from which the key North-South Corridor plans and projects are found. In addition to roadway and thoroughfare elements, the plan includes TDM strategies, interchange locations, transit expansion, park-and-ride lots, and bicycle and pedestrian (nonmotorized) plans. The version of the transportation plan reviewed for the North-South Corridor study is as amended through February 2, Goals, Policies, and Action Strategies The plan includes one goal To create and sustain an environmentally friendly, multimodal transportation system that meets the demands for intra- and intercounty trips; is integrated closely with existing and planned development; and provides a network of safe, efficient, and accessible modes of travel. Each modal section of the plan includes policies and specific action strategies to support the policies and goal. The County s transportation policy is to ensure that the transportation network addresses safety, minimizes environmental conflicts, maximizes cost effectiveness, increases accessibility, is consistent with 3-12 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

65 land use plans to minimize travel demand, and provides sufficient capacity to meet demand. Key Policies and Strategies within the North-South Corridor Key modal strategies affecting the North-South Corridor are detailed below. Provide adequate roadway capacity (RD Policy 2): Provide improved intercounty connectivity to and from major airports (RD2.5); Provide improved intercounty connectivity to and regional activity centers (RD2.6); Promote access between major industrial areas within and outside of the County for freight transport (RD2.7); Provide grade separated intersections at intersections that do not adequately serve demand (RD2.9); and Design roadway improvements to accommodate the needs of future transit service expansion (RD2.11). Reduce traffic demand through transportation demand management (TDM) (RD Policy 3): Promote the use of high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes (RD3.2); and Promote strategies such as telecommuting, staggered shifts, and flexible work hours (RD3.6). Maximize operational performance by using transportation system management (RD Policy 4): Prepare corridor studies on stretches of roadway with poor levels of service (RD4.1); Promote enhanced traffic progression on major roadways by applying access management principles (RD4.6); and Investigate, evaluate, and employ new technologies that improve capacity and help move traffic at intersections (RD4.7). Plan for new and widened roadways to be sensitive to environmental features and cultural resources (RD Policy 5); and Work with regional, local, and private sector groups to identify funding for transportation improvements (RD Policy 6). Key Roadway and Trail Plans within the North-South Corridor Key roadway (thoroughfare) plans affecting the North-South Corridor are detailed below. Thoroughfare plans in Prince William County specify the facility Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3-13

66 type, right-of-way standard, number of lanes, and the class of bicycle and pedestrian trail to be included as part of the facility. Dumfries Road (VA 234) County plans call for this roadway to be a sixlane principal arterial between Brentsville Road and Jefferson Davis Highway (U.S. 1). It includes a 160-footwide right-of-way, and a Class I trail (10-footwide barrier-separated shared use path). Prince William Parkway (VA 234) Between I-66 and Brentsville Road, where the roadway name changes to Dumfries Road, adopted plans call for a six-lane principal arterial with a 160-foot right-of-way, and a Class I trail. Tri-County Parkway The County Comprehensive Plan refers to the VDOTapproved alignment of Tri-County Parkway as Route 234 Bypass North. Between I-66 and the Loudoun County line, this roadway is planned to be a four-lane principal arterial, have a 200-foot right-of-way and include a Class I trail. In the plan document, Tri-County Parkway refers to the extension of Godwin Drive in the City of Manassas north and west into Fairfax County and Bull Run Regional Park. Prince William Parkway (VA 294) Prince William Parkway follows an alignment north of Dumfries Road and parallels the North-South Corridor. It was previously referred to by VDOT as VA Between Hoadly Road and Caton Hill Road, it is planned as a six-lane principal arterial on a 156-foot right-of-way with a Class I trail. From Caton Hill Road to Jefferson Davis Highway, County plans call for a four-lane principal arterial on a 156-foot right-of-way with a Class I trail. Key Interchange Plans within the North-South Corridor Key planned interchanges affecting the North-South Corridor are listed below. Prince William Parkway (VA 234) and I-66 New ramps to the existing interchange are needed to allow connections to the to-be-constructed Tri- County Parkway. Prince William Parkway (VA 234) and Balls Ford Road An interchange will assist with industrial traffic in this area near I-66. Prince William Parkway (VA 234) and Sudley Manor Drive An interchange at this location will allow sufficient capacity for turning movements. Prince William Parkway (VA 234) and University Boulevard This interchange will support access to the Innovation development and will provide turning movement capacity. Prince William Parkway (VA 234) and Clover Hill Road An interchange at this location will assist with moving traffic in and out of the City of Manassas and the Manassas Regional Airport Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

67 Key Transit Plans within the North-South Corridor PRTC Bus Service The County plan supports expansion of the Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission (PRTC) commuter OmniRide service between Manassas and Dulles and between Gainesville/ Haymarket and Dulles, and local OmniLink service from Montclair to Woodbridge. Cross-county bus rapid transit linkages are planned along Prince William Parkway (VA 294) between Manassas and I-95/U.S. 1. Virginia Rail Express (VRE) County plans support the extension of the Manassas line, with new stations at Innovation, Gainesville, and Haymarket. Park-and-Ride Lots New park-and-ride lots are planned at the Gainesville and Innovation VRE stations, as well as on Cushing Road at the interchange of Prince William Parkway (VA 234) and I-66. Transitway Along the Tri-County Parkway segment north of the Prince William Parkway (VA 234)/I-66 interchange, a transitway is shown with a transit mode to be determined. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3-15

68 Figure 3.4 Loudoun and Prince William County Comprehensive Plans Relevant North-South Corridor Roadway Capacity Projects 3-16 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

69 3.3 DULLES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PLANS Several documents and plans have recorded the access needs of Dulles International Airport and how it can become better connected to the surrounding transportation network and the Washington region as a whole. For the North- South CMP, studies focusing on the airport s access to and from the surrounding transportation network along the North-South Corridor were investigated and summarized. Need for the Feasibility of New Northern, Southern, and/or Western Access to the Washington Dulles International Airport This study, commissioned by VDOT in 1997 for the Governor and General Assembly, presents several alternatives for potential future connections to the airport facilities and terminals. It recommends that a new, four-lane limited access facility connect from the North-South Corridor area (from the Loudoun County Parkway or from the Tri-County Parkway) be constructed as new western access to Dulles. It states that while this alternative provides the greatest benefit to regional travel, it also is the most expensive and that the southern connection also provides some mobility benefits at lower cost Washington-Baltimore Regional Air Cargo Study Conducted by the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board, this study examines changes in airport accessibility of freight between 2010 and At Dulles, it references the growth of traffic volumes surrounding the airport and examines how this non-airport-related travel will diminish the accessibility of freight goods to the airport. It recommends that airports in the Washington region, including Dulles, continue to incorporate the needs of air cargo access into their planning activities. Dulles Loop Implementation Plan This study dates to 2009 and was produced for the Dulles Loop Implementation Group (consisting of Fairfax and Loudoun Counties, Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, VDOT, and other local area stakeholders) in order to plan a future for the roadways surrounding Dulles International Airport namely VA 606, VA 28, and U.S. 50. The study points out that 80 percent of traffic using these loop roadways is not associated with travel to and from the airport, meaning that baseline traffic congestion on airport access roadways has a great impact of access to and from the airport facility itself. Improvements are recommended to each of the surrounding roadways, with a particular emphasis on VA 606 on the west side of Dulles. With U.S. 50 and VA 28 having funded plans for future capacity growth, it is the western edge of Dulles that requires the most attention for future investment to keep traffic flowing smoothly and provide adequate access to the airport and to the new Metrorail stations west of Dulles. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3-17

70 Washington Airports Task Force: Missing Links Report, Dulles Airport Access Study, and the Region s Future Hinges on Dulles The Washington Airports Task Force (WATF) is a private, nonprofit corporation dedicated to promoting the expansion and enhancement of aviation services for Virginia and the National Capital region. The organization produces occasional reports on the importance of Dulles Airport to the region and the need to provide adequate connectivity between the airport and the surrounding transportation network. WATF reports describe the projected growth in passenger and air cargo demand at Dulles Airport along with the future traffic conditions on roadways accessing Dulles. Their recent reports recommend that the Commonwealth and localities advance the recommendations made in the Dulles Loop Implementation Plan, and advocates the designation of the North-South Corridor, including a new connection from the Corridor to VA 606 and Dulles Airport. They also recommend construction of the Comprehensive Plan Alignment of Tri-County Parkway between Manassas and U.S. 50/Loudoun County Parkway which they refer to as the U.S. 29 bypass. Washington Dulles International Airport Cargo Area Study This 2010 report prepared for Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority by Ricondo & Associates provides a review of Dulles cargo profile and future demand, and assesses the expansion alternatives that will be necessary to accommodate future air cargo activity through The report discusses the importance of landside access in determining the future course of cargo handling infrastructure at the airport and the different logistical needs of belly cargo versus dedicated all-cargo deliveries Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

71 4.0 Transportation Alternatives Development 4.1 APPROACH TO DEVELOPING THE ALTERNATIVES The North-South Corridor issues and needs provide the basis for developing alternative strategies. The issues and needs were developed by reviewing existing plans for the Corridor and determining where existing plans do not fully address changes in corridor population and employment, travel patterns, and activity at Dulles International Airport. The issues and needs were vetted through a review process with the Steering Committee and Project Working Group (PWG) members. Key North-South Corridor Transportation System Gaps The comparison of existing plans to changes in demographics and changes in travel demand, travel patterns, and mode share from 2010 to 2040 confirms the issues and needs for the North-South Corridor transportation system. The North-South Corridor issues react directly to the North-South Corridor goals presented in Table 2.1. The needs identify focus areas for corridor multimodal transportation strategies to address. First among North-South Corridor issues is the need to provide adequate connectivity to Dulles International Airport and the surrounding areas. It is clear that in addition to the projected growth in air passenger and air cargo demand at the airport facility itself, there are significant numbers of new households and jobs in the vicinity of Dulles that will require greater access to multimodal transportation options in the future. Second, as presented in the demographic summary, the entire North-South Corridor is expected to see a rapidly growing population and job base by All of the new households and jobs will add to the demand for multimodal travel in the Corridor and the travel demand forecasting model demonstrates that a significant portion of the future travel demand will be in a north-south orientation. New travel demand for both passengers and goods movement, and intra- and inter-regional trips, will use local roads in the corridor area, resulting in impacts to communities and potential roadway safety issues. Third, a review of existing plans demonstrates that though there are plans to expand transit within the Corridor in key high-demand areas, these plans require a coordinated strategy to integrate them with the future travel needs of the Corridor. Reviewing the future projected volume and capacity of corridor roadways also demonstrates that multimodal travel, including buses and high- Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4-1

72 occupancy vehicles will face significant congestion along with other vehicles in the traffic stream, reducing the effectiveness of these modal options. Last, the North-South Corridor contains environmental and historical resources that must be protected for future generations. Corridor plans should to the maximum feasible extent avoid impacting cultural, historic, social, and other important community resources. Table 4.1 presents a summary of the overall corridor issues and needs. Table 4.1 North-South Corridor Issues and Needs North-South Corridor Issues Support regional economic growth by investing in multimodal access to the Dulles International Airport and the surrounding area Projected employment and population growth within the Corridor and the associated growing need for north-south travel movements Enhance multimodal options with transit and other more sustainable modes such as high-occupancy vehicles (HOV) and bicycle/pedestrian trails Protect environmental, community, and historical resources in any future plans for the Corridor North-South Corridor Needs Provide adequate multimodal capacity for people and freight movements connecting the Corridor and the Dulles International Airport area Reduce traffic congestion in the Corridor; provide adequate roadway capacity in the Corridor Provide transit connections in the Corridor; provide ways for HOVs to travel the Corridor; Provide trail connections Transportation infrastructure improvements to the Corridor should minimize the impact to these resources Alternative Considerations for the North-South Corridor To address the transportation issues and needs, the following considerations and questions were developed to assist in developing the North-South Corridor alternatives. North-South access to the major activity areas: What types of access are lacking to Dulles International Airport, the Dulles activity areas, and other activity areas? Where are the critical gaps? How can freight movement be best addressed? Planned transportation investments with the Corridor: Which planned projects in the Corridor (CLRP and other area plans) will improve north-south travel? Are there elements of corridor maintenance that are not addressed at current funding levels or insufficiently planned for the future? Are there ways in which the Corridor can be improved considering its design features, access, capacity, or corridor-wide consistency? 4-2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

73 Accommodate transit service and nonmotorized modes: What facility and service gaps exist in the transit network and in the bicycle/pedestrian network in the Corridor? What other modal facilities (e.g., HOV, HOT, dedicated on-road bus facilities) should be considered for north-south travel in the Corridor and where? Address environmental and safety considerations: What design and construction strategies can be employed to address environmental sustainability and user safety? Proposed alternative strategies to address these considerations are multimodal in nature, and are consistent with the study vision, goals, and objectives (as described in Table 2.1), as well as the study issues and needs (as described in Table 4.1). They include: Construction of additional roadway capacity; Changes to roadway capacity; Changes to roadway operations to accommodate high-occupancy vehicles and transit; Provision of expanded transit service; and Provision of other multimodal enhancements such as bicycle and pedestrian trails, park-and-ride lots, and transportation demand management programs. 4.2 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES Two alternatives were specified that address the needs identified for the Corridor as described in Section 4.1. Specific modal elements were proposed and vetted by the Steering Committee and the PWG, and their input was used to craft the set of proposed modal elements that were coded into TPB s regional travel demand forecasting model for analysis. Alternative 1 nearly conforms to the County roadway plans for the North-South Corridor, while adding new connectivity to Dulles International Airport to address this need. Alternative 2 considers a set of multimodal improvements in order to address the goals stated in the previous section, again along with providing new access to Dulles. Figure 4.1 presents a summary map of corridor segments comprising Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. Specific components of each alternative aligning with the number call-outs on the map are described in the following sections. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4-3

74 Figure 4.1 North-South Corridor - Corridor Segments Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

75 Transportation Alternative 1 Elements Alternative 1 addresses the issues and needs by improving access to the Dulles International Airport area; linking several planned roadway improvements within the North-South Corridor; and expanding bicycle and pedestrian trails throughout the Corridor. Overall, this alternative is nearly consistent with County plans for the study corridor roadways and the region s Constrained Long-Range Plan (CLRP), and adds a connection between the Corridor and the growth areas west of Dulles International Airport that was identified from the gap analysis. The exception to the County plan consistency is the Tri-County Parkway. The Loudoun County plan shows the Parkway as a six-lane facility, while the Prince William County plan shows it as a four-lane facility. As noted in #4 and #5 below, Alternative 1 tests a consistent four-lane facility from I-66 to U.S. 50. Corridor Segment Description 1. Maintaining VA 234 between I-95 and Country Club Drive as a six-lane facility as it exists today. 2. Expanding VA 234 to a six-lane facility along the current four-lane segment (Country Club Drive to Brentsville Road) in Prince William County. 3. Expanding VA 234 to a six-lane facility (between Brentsville Road and I-66). 4. Constructing the Tri-County Parkway as currently planned (four-lane facility between I-66 and VA 234). 5. Constructing the Tri-County Parkway as currently planned (four-lane facility between VA 234 and U.S. 50). 6. Expanding Northstar Boulevard to a six-lane facility north of U.S. 50 in Loudoun County. 7. Adding a western connection from the North-South Corridor to the Dulles International Airport area. 8. Maintaining Belmont Ridge Road as a four-lane facility north to VA 7. Corridor Modal Considerations Expanding the network of bicycle and pedestrian trails within the North- South Corridor that are included in adopted county comprehensive plans and as recommended in the TransAction 2040 study. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4-5

76 Transportation Alternative 2 Elements Alternative 2 addresses the issues and needs by adding high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, and high-frequency transit from I-95 to the Dulles International Airport area. The HOV lanes will provide free travel for HOV 3+ users. The HOT lanes will accommodate non-hov travel through a toll for single-occupant, HOV 2 vehicles, and trucks during morning and evening travel periods. Alternative 2 also includes bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the Corridor. Throughout the Corridor, the roadway lane-miles remain the same as in Alternative 1, but the designated usage of the travel lanes within the Corridor differs from County plans and the CLRP by providing for peak-period highoccupancy vehicle lanes in segments of the Corridor from I-95 to the Dulles International Airport area. Expanded transit services within the Corridor also are provided in this alternative. Corridor Segment Description 1. Maintaining VA 234 between I-95 and Country Club Drive in Prince William County as a six-lane facility, while designating one existing lane in each direction as HOV during peak travel periods. 2. Expanding VA 234 to a six-lane facility along the current four-lane segment (Country Club Drive to Brentsville Road), including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during peak periods while maintaining existing access. 3. Expanding VA 234 to a six-lane facility between Brentsville Road and I-66, including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during the peak travel periods. 4. Including the Tri-County Parkway as currently planned (four-lane facility between I-66 and U.S. 50), this segment includes one HOV/HOT lane in each direction between I-66 and Sudley Road during peak travel periods. 5. Including the Tri-County Parkway as currently planned (four-lane facility between I-66 and U.S. 50), this segment designates all lanes between Sudley Road and U.S. 50 as HOV/HOT during peak travel periods. 6. Expanding Northstar Boulevard to a six-lane facility north of U.S. 50 in Loudoun County, including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during peak travel periods. 7. Adding a western connection from the North-South Corridor to the Dulles International Airport area, designating all lanes as HOV/HOT during peak travel periods. 8. Maintaining Belmont Ridge Road as a four-lane facility north to VA Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

77 Corridor Modal Considerations Adding new high-frequency express bus lines from Dale City to Manassas, Manassas to the Metrorail Silver Line terminal, and Metrorail Silver Line terminal to Lansdowne running every 15 minutes during peak travel periods and every 30 minutes in off-peak travel periods. Expanding network of bicycle and pedestrian trails within the Corridor shown on adopted county comprehensive plans and as recommended in the TransAction 2040 study. 4.3 APPROACH TO EVALUATING THE ALTERNATIVES A performance-based approach was developed to evaluate the alternatives. Table 4.2 illustrates the relationship of the project goals and objectives as defined in Section 2.2 of this report. For many of the measures included in Table 4.2, the regional travel demand forecasting model was used to compare transportation system performance of the 2040 baseline to each of the alternatives. Other measures rely on advancing policy statements that guide future activities in the Corridor. A summary of the evaluation approaches are noted below: Goal Support Economic Growth Performance measures are all quantified through outputs of the regional travel demand model testing process. Goal Maintain Existing Assets and Promote Safe Travel Performance measures are described through a discussion of policy or programmatic actions as well as tracking mechanisms to support this goal. Goal Support Multimodal Investment Performance measures are quantified for all modes except bicycle and pedestrian, where a description of the recommended corridor network and its linkages to activity centers and transit centers are noted. Goal Foster Environmental Stewardship An assessment of existing resources in the Corridor is presented along with priority project development and maintenance approaches to mitigate impacts. The transportation alternatives were evaluated using the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB) Version travel demand forecasting model, which represents the most current forecasting model and data available (refer to Appendix B). This represents the adopted model used for long-range planning and air quality conformity testing by the TPB. Performance measures from the travel demand forecasting model include various assessments of vehicle miles of travel (VMT), travel time, travel time savings, mode share, and household accessibility measures. Some performance measures do not rely on the travel demand forecasting model process and are described in a qualitative fashion. A detailed assessment of Alternatives 1 and 2 is provided in Appendix D. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4-7

78 Table 4.2 North-South Corridor: Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures Goal Objective Performance Measure Support Economic Growth Maintain Existing Assets and Promote Safe Travel Support Multimodal Investment Foster Environmental Stewardship Ensure adequate capacity and access to allow for projected growth in the Dulles area Reduce congestion and improve the level of service on existing roadways Improve the quality of connections between travel modes and activity centers for people and goods movement Provide for multiple modes of access and egress to activity centers and key transportation nodes Maintain transportation infrastructure conditions within the study corridor at a fair or better condition Reduce transportation-related fatalities and injuries Ensure that all miles of the corridor roadway conforms to access management standards Increase the number and quality of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the Corridor Provide integrated service, facilities, and transit connections for the Corridor Maximize the number of modes used within a single right-of-way Protect environmental and historical resources through sustainable planning methods Employ context sensitive design to respect historic, environmental, and community character Provide equitable transportation options to all communities in the study corridor VMT on corridor roadways by congestion level. Travel time to Dulles International Airport and other corridor activity centers. Household access to Dulles International Airport. VMT on corridor roadways by congestion level. Transit mode share. Travel time savings. VMT on corridor roadways by congestion level. Frequency of north-south-oriented transit routes serving each activity center and key transportation node (transit centers, Park-and-Rides, Metrorail, VRE). Provide a network of bicycle and pedestrian trail facilities connecting key centers of employment, commerce, service, and residential development. Transportation improvements in the Corridor should include repairing deficient pavements and rehabilitating structurally deficient bridges and culverts. Corridor investments should strive toward achieving VDOT s adopted goals. Design all improvements in the Corridor to maximize the ability of people and goods to travel safely. Ensure all principal arterial segments of the Corridor conform to VDOT Access Management Regulations. Endeavor to construct new facilities with limited access where feasible from an economic, community, and environmental standpoint, and where warranted by demand. Provide a network of bicycle and pedestrian trail facilities connecting key centers of employment, commerce, service, and residential development. Frequency of north-south-oriented transit routes serving each activity center and key transportation node (transit centers, Park-and-Rides, fixed guideway transit Metrorail/VRE). Provide a network of bicycle and pedestrian trail facilities connecting key centers of employment, commerce, service, and residential development. Geographic impact to environmental, cultural, and historic resources in the Corridor. Ensure consistency with physical setting along with scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental resources within the Corridor. Ensure minority and low-income areas of the Corridor are provided with multimodal transportation accessibility improvements. 4-8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

79 4.4 BASELINE ASSUMPTIONS FOR Forecast Socioeconomic Conditions As noted in Section 2.7, North-South Corridor population is forecast to grow 54 percent and employment is forecast to grow 117 percent from 2010 to Adjacent areas in Loudoun and Prince William Counties, including the area surrounding Dulles International Airport, are forecast to see growth of 24 to 168 percent for population, and 72 to 254 percent for employment. The growth in the Corridor and in neighboring areas of Loudoun and Prince William Counties outpaces percent forecast population and employment growth in Fairfax County by more than double through The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) Round 8.1 land use forecasts form the basis for the future demographic conditions in the Corridor and region Planned Baseline Transportation System The 2040 Baseline for the North-South Corridor study is based upon the adopted 2040 CLRP for the Metropolitan Washington region as described in Section 3.1. It is important to reiterate that clarifications to the CLRP were made in developing the 2040 Baseline. Most important among these is the assumption that Northstar Boulevard will be constructed as a four-lane facility, connecting the terminus of the Tri-County Parkway at U.S. 50 to Belmont Ridge Road at Croson Lane. This segment is in the CLRP as a project under study with right-ofway acquisition currently underway. For purposes of this study, this facility is assumed in the 2040 Baseline. It also should be noted that there is a difference between the CLRP and Loudoun County plans for the segment of Belmont Ridge Road between the Dulles Greenway and VA 7. Loudoun County plans states that Belmont Ridge Road will be designed as a four-lane facility for its entire length. The CLRP was approved with this segment as a six-lane facility. To remain consistent with the adopted CLRP, this segment is included in the 2040 Baseline as a six-lane facility. 4.5 CONCLUSIONS Summary of Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 Performance The key takeaways from the results of the Alternative 1 and 2 analysis are presented below, and summarized in Table 4.3. A detailed analysis of Alternative 1 and 2 is provided in Appendix D. Change in Travel Time to Dulles International Airport Travel time from the north end of the Corridor (VA 7, Ashburn) and the south end of the Corridor (I-95, Quantico/Dumfries area) to Dulles International Airport decreases in Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 compared Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4-9

80 to the Baseline. The percent reduction in travel time in the northbound and southbound direction are similar. For general purpose capacity, Alternative 1 shows slightly higher travel time savings in the morning peak period than Alternative 2. This is because Alternative 1 has more general purpose capacity than Alternative 2 (e.g., Alternative 2 converts a lane of general purpose capacity to HOV/HOT). The travel time savings for the HOV/HOT lanes compared to the Baseline general purpose lanes are significant to Dulles International Airport. Change in Travel Time to Innovation Center Travel time from the north end of the Corridor (VA 7, Ashburn) and the south end of the Corridor (I-95, Quantico/Dumfries area) to Innovation Center decreases in Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 compared to the Baseline. For general purpose capacity, Alternative 1 shows notably higher travel time savings in the morning peak period than Alternative 2. This is because Alternative 1 has more general purpose capacity than Alternative 2 (e.g., Alternative 2 converts a lane of general purpose capacity to HOV/HOT). This is particularly a notable difference in the VA 234 segment of the Corridor from I-95 to the Manassas area. The travel time savings for the HOV/HOT lanes compared to the Baseline general purpose lanes are significant to Innovation Center, with twice as great a percent savings for trips from the south end of the Corridor as from the north due to the continuous segments of HOV/HOT between I-95 and the Manassas area. Change in Number of Households in the North-South Corridor within 30 and 60 Minutes of Dulles International Airport (by Mode) Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 generally increase the number of households within 30 minutes and 60 minutes of Dulles compared to the Baseline. There is no change in the Alternative 1 transit system compared to the Baseline and, therefore, no change in household accessibility by transit. The increase in accessibility is greater in Alternative 2 across all modes, particularly HOV 2 and HOV 3+ where two to three times as many households have access within 30 and 60 minutes. More than 2,000 households have gained access to Dulles Airport within 60 minutes using transit. Total Congested VMT In all time periods, total VMT operating in congested conditions (over capacity) decreases relative to the Baseline. The reduction is more significant in Alternative 2, because total growth in VMT compared to the Baseline is less than Alternative Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

81 Change in Home-Based Work Mode Share For both corridor trip productions and attractions, the change in mode share is marginal in Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 compared to the Baseline. The most significant change occurs in Alternative 2, where new transit service increases transit mode share by 0.2 percent, while decreasing SOV mode share. North-South Corridor VMT Total corridor VMT increases in Alternative 1 and Alternative 2, a result of added multimodal capacity in the North-South Corridor attracting new trips and diverting trips from other parallel and adjacent facilities. However, HOV/HOT lanes and new transit services in Alternative 2 help to mitigate the growth in VMT somewhat (approximately one percent less than Alternative 1). Transit Markets Three promising transit markets emerge in the North-South Corridor, including the Silver Line transit market, the Manassas area transit market, and the I-95 Express Bus and VRE transit market (refer to Figure D.7 in Appendix D). Segments of the transit service that provide new access to the Metro Silver Line, connections through Manassas, and connections to the I-95 express buses and VRE are the top transit performers in Alternative 2. Alternative 2 provides a much more frequent schedule of transit departures to each of the identified transit markets. The frequency of transit service provided in Alternative 2 is not well-matched to the demand. The average peak period trip carries between seven and nine passengers per revenue hour, which is below generally accepted performance thresholds. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4-11

82 Table 4.3 Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 Summary Results North-South Corridor Goal and Performance Measure Alternative 1 versus Baseline Alternative 2 versus Baseline Support Economic Growth Travel Time to Dulles GP GP HOV/HOT Northbound from I-95-11% -10% -31% Southbound from VA 7-15% -10% -26% Travel Time to Innovation Center GP GP HOV/HOT Northbound from I-95-9% +2% -29% Southbound from VA 7-7% -5% -14% Households within 30 Minutes of Dulles International Airport (AM Peak) SOV +3,966 +5,531 HOV 2-1, HOV 3+ +3,647 +4,524 Transit 0 0 Households within 60 Minutes of Dulles International Airport (AM Peak) SOV +11, ,448 HOV 2 +11, ,847 HOV , ,459 Transit 0 +2,090 Congested VMT by Time of Day AM Peak Below Capacity +9.7% +7.6% AM Peak Over Capacity -12.1% -15.0% Off-Peak Below Capacity +4.4% +4.1% Off-Peak Over Capacity -4.0% -5.9% PM Peak Below Capacity +8.2% +6.6% PM Peak Over Capacity -8.5% -9.5% Support Multimodal Investment Home-Based Work Mode Share SOV +0.04% -0.19% HOV % +0.01% HOV % +0.00% Transit -0.01% +0.18% Change in Daily Corridor VMT Total North-South Corridor VMT +4.6% +3.6% SOV +4.6% +2.1% HOV % +4.9% HOV % +10.9% Commercial Vehicle +4.4% +3.8% 4-12 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

83 Implications for Development of the Recommended Alternative The development of the recommended alternative will use a combination of the observations from the analysis of Alternative 1 and Alternative 2, as well as the results of Steering Committee, PWG, and public comments. It is clear from the analysis that components of both alternatives help meet the objectives of the North-South Corridor, particularly reducing congestion. They also both significantly enhance accessibility to Dulles International Airport, Innovation Center, and other existing and emerging activity centers. Alternative 2 goes a step further and provides additional options to travelers that: Reduces travel time and eliminates congestion almost completely through the implementation of a HOV/HOT lane system; Provides an alternative to trips within the Corridor through a transit system serving activity centers as well as an alternative to trips leaving the Corridor through transit connections to the Silver Line, VRE, and Express Bus services; and, Establishes a consistent, convenient, and safe network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities linking to corridor activity centers, transit, and residential areas. Inclusion of these components in the recommended alternative will help the Corridor Master Plan better meet the goals identified for the North-South Corridor. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4-13

84

85 5.0 Recommended Alternative and Corridor Action Plan 5.1 SELECTION OF RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE ELEMENTS To develop all elements of the recommended alterative the PWG, Steering Committee, and project team organized the public comments received during the first and second round of public meetings into logical summary groups to account for the public response to Alternative 1, Alternative 2, and the draftrecommended alternative (also referenced as Alternative 3) presented at the second round of meetings (all meeting and comment summaries are included in Appendix A). The following set of key considerations were used to guide the development of the recommended alternative. Traffic diversion to parallel facilities in areas of the Corridor where HOV/HOT are proposed should be minimized. Alternative 2 includes two roadway segments (Tri-County Parkway between VA 234 and U.S. 50, and the Dulles access road) that were designed as exclusive HOV/HOT lanes during peak travel periods. The traffic modeling results demonstrated that up to 30 percent of travelers as compared to the Baseline chose to divert around these segments to other parallel and nearby facilities to complete their trips. This had the effect of overburdening adjacent facilities while the HOV/HOT lanes were not effectively utilized. Members of the PWG and Steering Committee recommended that both general purpose capacity and HOV/HOT applications should be included on these segments during peak travel periods. All corridor segments between Country Club Drive and the Dulles access road (including the access road) will include a single peak-period lane in each direction reserved for HOV/HOT travel. This preserves either one or two general purpose lanes along the Corridor in each direction during peak periods and allows travelers to choose either the more congested and slower general purpose lane(s) or the HOV/HOT facility at a faster travel time and less roadway congestion. There will be a continuous HOV facility from I-95 to the Dulles International Airport area in the final alternative, and the HOT lanes will begin just north of I-95 at Country Club Lane and continue northward to Dulles. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-1

86 New bus transit that show promising levels of performance should be included in the recommended alternative. The high-frequency (every 15 minutes during peak periods and every 30 minutes during off-peak periods) transit lines along the North-South Corridor carry ridership equivalent to 7 to 9 passengers per revenue hour. This means that for every hour that a bus operates, between 7 and 9 passengers board the bus. From an operational efficiency perspective, the proposed routes service levels were not consistent with the projected transit ridership. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metrobus Network Evaluation Study considered a route to marginally fail when it did not reach a threshold of 20 passengers per revenue hour in a suburban area. Though the transit routes did not perform to a minimum acceptable standard, some routes did provide improvements to passenger mobility in the Corridor. In the recommended alternative, the frequencies of the routes were matched to a standard more appropriate for the largely suburban setting of the Corridor and will operate every 30 minutes during peak periods and every 60 minutes during off-peak periods. Poor performing routes were eliminated or shortened to ensure productive levels of bus usage. Concern with additional truck and freight traffic accessing the Dulles area along Northstar Boulevard. During the first round of public meetings several comments were received that focused on the potential negative impact to the residents of the areas along Northstar Boulevard between Winter Haven Drive and Belmont Ridge Road as a result of additional freight-related access to the Dulles area. Concerns were organized into two topics: 1) a desire to keep Northstar Boulevard as a local arterial street; and 2) a desire to avoid Northstar Boulevard carrying large volumes of freight-carrying trucks destined for the Dulles International Airport area. In the recommended alternative, Northstar Boulevard will be designed with managed access between U.S. 50 and the selected location of the Dulles International Airport area connector roadway. North of that point, Northstar Boulevard will maintain its existing design character, much like Belmont Ridge Road north to VA 7. Trucks destined for the airport are likely to choose to use the managed access facility to access the Dulles area. The Commonwealth also could consider restricting the weight of trucks that are allowed to use local segments of Northstar Boulevard in this area. Roadway design conflicting with local land use plans. Prince William County expressed concern regarding access along VA 234 (Prince William Parkway and Dumfries Road) and the application 5-2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

87 HOV/HOT lanes in that area. To support the existing and forecast land use, Prince William County expressed a strong desire to maintain all existing access points along Dumfries Road. The County staff also expressed concern an HOV facility could possibly conflict with access points in the Corridor. Loudoun County expressed concern about adhering to the County comprehensive plan with specific focus on the Belmont Ridge Road area. The Loudoun County comprehensive plan calls for a four-lane facility on Belmont Ridge Road between Croson Lane and VA 7. The CLRP has an approved six-lane segment between the Dulles Greenway and VA 7. The recommended alternative proposes to maintain all existing access points along VA 234 between I-95 and Brentsville Road. The HOV/HOT lane will be configured in the left-most lane (or inner lane) throughout the Corridor to eliminate any potential conflicts with access points along Dumfries Road. The recommended alternative reflects the Loudoun County comprehensive plan design for Belmont Ridge Road. The Commonwealth and Loudoun County should work with the TPB to ensure consistency between the Loudoun County plan in future CLRP updates. Consistency with regional transit, travel demand management (TDM) activities, and park-and-ride lot consideration along the Corridor. DRPT emphasized the importance of park-and-ride facilities in the Corridor that could support carpool formation and potential transit use. DRPT also recommended that TDM strategies be incorporated into any long-range plan for transit and HOV expansion in the Corridor. TDM strategies should be designed to encourage the use of the HOV facility and the added transit services. DRPT also recommended that transit routes defined in the Super NoVA Transit/TDM Vision Plan be considered. In the recommended alternative, all proposed transit routes will access nearby park-and-ride facilities. Improvements to TDM programs focusing on the newly created HOV/HOT network as well as transit services will be made part of any the final recommendations. The recommended transit routes combine the routing recommendations in Super NoVA with the recommendation to utilize HOV facilities for transit travel time savings. The recommended alternative is a result of public comment and input from the PWG and the Project Steering Committee. The recommended alternative includes the roadway characteristics presented in Table 5.1 and the transit services included in Table 5.2. In Table 5.1, managed access is defined as a roadway segment with limited access points intended to maintain the free-flow Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-3

88 of traffic with minimal interruption by traffic signals and other access points such as driveways. Table 5.1 Recommended Alternative Roadway Segment Descriptions Segment Map Identifier Proposed Alternative Segment Description 1 Maintaining VA 234 between I-95 and Country Club Drive in Prince William County as a six-lane facility, while designating one existing lane in each direction as HOV during peak travel periods. 2 Expanding VA 234 to a six-lane facility along the current four-lane segment (Country Club Drive to Brentsville Road), including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during peak periods while maintaining existing access. 3 Expanding VA 234 to a six-lane facility between Brentsville Road and I-66, including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during the peak travel periods. 4 Including the Tri-County Parkway as currently planned (four-lane facility between I-66 and U.S. 50), this segment includes one HOV/HOT lane in each direction between I-66 and Sudley Road during peak travel periods. 5 Including the Tri-County Parkway as currently planned (four-lane facility between I-66 and U.S. 50), this segment includes one HOV/HOT lane between Sudley Road and U.S. 50 as HOV/HOT during peak travel periods. 6 Expanding Northstar Boulevard to a six-lane limited access facility north of U.S. 50 in Loudoun County, including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during peak travel periods. 7 Adding a four-lane western connection from the North-South Corridor to the Dulles International Airport area, including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during peak travel periods. Managed Access Segment (General Purpose lanes) No No Yes Yes Yes Yes between U.S. 50 and Dulles connector roadway Yes Managed Access Segment (HOV/HOT lanes) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes between U.S. 50 and Dulles connector roadway 8 Maintaining Belmont Ridge Road as a four-lane facility north to VA 7. No No HOV/HOT lanes) Yes Table 5.2 Recommended Alternative Transit Routes Frequency in Minutes Color (Refer to Figure 5.1) Destinations Peak (Morning and Evening) Off-Peak (Midday) Blue Manassas (I-66) to PRTC Transit Center (I-95) Red Manassas (I-66) to Silver Line (Ryan Road) 60 None Brown U.S. 50 to Silver Line (Ryan Road) Green Loudoun Hospital and Lansdowne to Silver Line (Ryan Road) Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

89 The following multimodal considerations also are included in the recommended alternative. A continuous multiuse trail will be constructed along the entire North-South Corridor, filling in any gaps in the existing planned trail system. This will provide bicycle and pedestrian connectivity between activity centers along the Corridor. Improvements should be made to TDM programs of PRTC, Loudoun Office of Transportation, and the Dulles Area Transportation Association s (DATA) focusing on the new HOV/HOT lane network and new transit routes to be added within the Corridor. The timing of these TDM improvements should be made alongside the creation of new facilities and routes, with sufficient time to market and promote them before they open or begin service. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-5

90 Figure 5.1 North-South Corridor Recommended Alternative Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

91 5.2 EVALUATION OF THE RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE The same set of performance measures were used to evaluate the recommended alternative and assess how it addresses the study goals and objectives. Measures identifying how the recommended alternative addresses support economic growth and support multimodal investment goals are quantified using TPB s regional travel demand model. Measures indicating policy or programmatic support of maintain existing assets and promote safe travel and foster environmental stewardship goals are presented through a summary of the recommended alternative actions. Implementation costs and corridor environmental and an economic impact assessment also is included in this section. Goal Support Economic Growth The North-South Corridor Alternative 3 supports economic growth in Northern Virginia through: Enhancing multimodal access and capacity to serve Dulles International Airport and the surrounding area; Enhancing multimodal access to other corridor activity centers, including Innovation Center in the Manassas area; Providing an option to use HOV or HOT lanes during the peak periods to avoid congestion and provide increased travel time reliability; and Mitigating traffic congestion, which leads to economic inefficiency associated with wasted time for passenger and commercial vehicle trips. The following performance measures indicate that components of Alternative 3 support access to the Dulles International Airport area and other activity centers, as well as reduce corridor delay. Overall, the performance of Alternative 3 across these three metrics exceeds performance of Alternative 1 and is consistent with performance of Alternative Travel Time to Dulles International Airport and Innovation Center This measure considers total AM peak travel time to Dulles International Airport and Innovation Center from different points in the North-South Corridor. Decreased travel times suggest overall improved access for travelers to these activity centers, including commercial vehicle trips. Tables 5.3 and 5.4 present the AM peak travel times, and Figures 5.2 and 5.3 present AM peak travel time savings. Results Summary For northbound general purpose lane trips in the North-South Corridor, from I-95 to Dulles, Alternative 3 saves five minutes compared to the Baseline (represents a five percent time savings). Most of the time savings in Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-7

92 Alternative 3 occur in the segment of the Corridor from U.S. 50 to Dulles International Airport along Northstar Boulevard and the new access road from Northstar Boulevard to Dulles International Airport area. For southbound general purpose lane trips in the North-South Corridor, from VA 7 to the Dulles International Airport area, Alternative 3 saves six minutes in travel time from the 2040 Baseline. Travel time to Innovation Center for general purpose lane traffic shows no change from the 2040 Baseline because general purpose lane capacity remains the same. The HOV/HOT facilities in Alternative 3 provides a significant improvement in morning travel times to both the Dulles International Airport area and Innovation Center area, particularly from the south end of the Corridor. Implication for the Results Overall, general purpose lane travel times in Alternative 3 improve marginally from the 2040 Baseline. Actual general purpose lane capacity along the length of the Corridor is identical to the 2040 Baseline, except for the addition of the western access road to Dulles International Airport area. Providing western access to the Dulles International Airport area will support continued economic development within the area. Alternative 3 improves roadway travel time significantly for HOV/HOT to the Dulles International Airport area and the Innovation Center area from both the south and north end of the North-South Corridor. The most critical facility for ensuring travel time savings to the Dulles International Airport area are improvements to Northstar Boulevard, the addition of a new access road to the Dulles area from the North-South Corridor, and the provision of HOV/HOT lanes. Table 5.3 AM Peak Travel Time to Dulles International Airport Direction Section Baseline GP Alt. 1 GP Alt. 2 GP Alternative Alt. 2 HOV/HOT Alt. 3 GP Alt 3. HOV/HOT Northbound I-95 to I I-66 to U.S a U.S. 50 to IAD Total Southbound VA 7 to IAD GP = General Purpose a In Alternative 2, the Tri-County Parkway segment from Sudley Road to U.S. 50 designates all lanes in the peak period as HOV/HOT. Therefore, general purpose (GP) travel times in Alternative 2 include a tolled segment. 5-8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

93 Table 5.4 AM Peak Travel Time to Innovation Center Direction Northbound Southbound Section I-95 to Innovation Center VA 7 to Innovation Center Baseline GP Alt. 1 GP Alt. 2 GP Alternative Alt. 2 HOV/HOT Alt. 3 GP Alt. 3 HOV/HOT a GP = General Purpose a In Alternative 2, the Tri-County Parkway segment from Sudley Road to U.S. 50 designates all lanes in the peak period as HOV/HOT. Therefore, general purpose (GP) travel times in Alternative 2 include a tolled segment. Figure 5.2 Morning Peak-Period Travel Time Savings to Dulles International Airport Travel time changes compared to Baseline (percent) 35% 33% 33% 31% 30% 29% 30% 30% 26% 25% 20% 15% 11% 10% 10% 5% 5% 0% Northbound (From I-95) Southbound (From VA 7) Alt. 1 GP Alt. 2 GP Alt. 2 HOV/HOT Alt. 3 GP Alt. 3 HOV/HOT Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-9

94 Figure 5.3 Morning Peak-Period Travel Time Savings to Innovation Center Travel time changes compared to Baseline (percent) 35% 30% 29% 28% 25% 20% 15% 14% 14% 10% 9% 5% 7% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% Northbound (From I-95) Southbound (From VA 7) Alt. 1 GP Alt. 2 GP Alt. 2 HOV/HOT Alt. 3 GP Alt. 3 HOV/HOT 2. Household Access to Dulles International Airport This measure compares the total number of households in Northern Virginia that are can access Dulles International Airport in the AM peak period (6:00 a.m.- 9:00 a.m.) within 30 minutes and 60 minutes. The results are segmented by various modes of travel to present how new general purpose capacity, HOV/HOT lane capacity, and transit service proposed in the North-South Corridor in the alternatives improve accessibility to the Dulles International Airport area. Improved access supports the economic competitiveness of the Dulles International Airport area while also providing better access for Northern Virginia residents to the job market at and around Dulles. Table 5.5, and Figures 5.4 and 5.5 present the results. Results Summary Alternative 3 adds general purpose capacity balanced with HOV/HOT capacity and transit service targeted to high demand market areas. As a result, the number of households accessible to Dulles International Airport within 30 and 60 minutes increases in Alternative 3 comparably to Alternative 1 and 2 for SOV, HOV 2, and HOV 3+. Households within 30 minutes of Dulles International Airport by transit do not change in Alternative 3 (the majority of less than 30-minute transit trips will be served by existing planned services included in the Baseline, e.g., Silver Line Metrorail). Within the 60-minute timeframe, Alternative 3 does show a significant increase over the 2040 Baseline (with a 43 percent increase compared to the Baseline, equivalent to an additional 8,000 households) Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

95 Implication for the Results Added general purpose capacity in Alternative 3 balanced with HOV/HOT lanes improves travel times in the North-South Corridor for all roadway users, resulting in an improvement in access to the Dulles International Airport area. The number of households within 60 minutes increases more significantly, as improvements in the Corridor between I-66 and Dulles International Airport provides much improved access for households in the Manassas area and the I-95 corridor. Due to the HOV/HOT lane system included in Alternative 3, accessibility for households completing HOV 2 and HOV 3+ trips increases more than SOV trips. The targeted transit system in Alternative 3 increases access for corridor households to Dulles International Airport more than Alternative 2, and significantly more than the Baseline. Table 5.5 Household Access to Dulles International Airport 30 Minutes (AM Peak) 60 Minutes (AM Peak) Alternative Alternative Mode Baseline Baseline SOV 28,304 32,270 33,835 32,824 63,401 75,183 77,849 82,560 HOV 2 35,731 34,710 36,275 36,275 63,401 75,183 87,248 87,248 HOV 3+ 35,731 39,378 40,255 40,255 70,558 83, , ,698 Transit 1,463 1,463 1,463 1,463 18,131 18,131 20,221 26,049 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-11

96 Figure 5.4 Change in Total Households within 30 Minutes of Dulles International Airport AM Peak Period 60% Change in Corridor Households with Access to Dulles Compared to Baseline 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% SOV HOV2 HOV3+ Transit Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Figure 5.5 Change in Total Households within 60 Minutes of Dulles International Airport AM Peak Period 60% Change in Corridor Households with Access to Dulles Compared to Baseline 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% SOV HOV2 HOV3+ Transit Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

97 3. Vehicle Miles of Travel on Corridor Roadways by Congestion Level The change in congested and uncongested vehicle miles of travel (VMT) is a measure of the total travel by motorized vehicles in the North-South Corridor and the reduction in traffic congestion. Congested conditions are represented where hourly vehicle volume is at or exceeding the hourly roadway capacity. A reduction in the share of VMT experiencing congested conditions indicates less time wasted in delay, which results in monetary savings for passenger and commercial trips. Table 5.6 and Figure 5.6 present these results. Results Summary Alternative 3 reduces total corridor VMT operating in over capacity conditions in the morning, evening, and off-peak travel periods. The reduction is most significant in the morning peak travel period (6:00 a.m.- 9:00 a.m.), with a 14 percent reduction. In Alternative 2, segments of the HOV/HOT configuration where all lanes are tolled caused traffic diversion to other parallel roadway facilities during the peak travel periods, thereby reducing corridor VMT. Alternative 3 addresses the diversion problem by a HOV/HOT one-lane configuration throughout the Corridor, allowing SOV users to travel without a toll. Total diversions from the Corridor are reduced by 40 percent in Alternative 3. The level and pattern of congestion reduction is overall consistent across the alternatives, with Alternative 3 slightly outperforming Alternatives 1 and 2. Implication for the Results Roadway capacity improvements that currently are planned in the Corridor and tested in both alternatives have a positive impact on congestion and, therefore, access to the Dulles International Airport area. Including HOV and HOT lanes during peak travel periods complements the planned capacity improvements and provides significant mobility improvements for HOV 3+ vehicles. Potential traffic diversions caused by the HOV/HOT configuration should be assessed as part of the final alternative recommendations. Table 5.6 Percent Change in Corridor VMT by Congestion Level (2040) Time of Day Alternative 1 vs. Baseline Alternative 2 vs. Baseline Alternative 3 vs. Baseline AM Peak Below Capacity 9.7% 7.6% 7.8% AM Peak Over Capacity -12.1% -15.0% -13.8% Off-Peak Below Capacity 4.4% 4.1% 4.1% Off-Peak Over Capacity -4.0% -5.9% -5.7% PM Peak Below Capacity 8.2% 6.6% 8.1% PM Peak Over Capacity -8.5% -9.5% -13.8% Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-13

98 Figure 5.6 Percent Change in Corridor VMT Compared to the Baseline % Change in VMT by Congestion Level Compared to Baseline (percentage) 10% 5% 0% -5% -10% -15% -20% Below Capacity Over Capacity Below Capacity Over Capacity Below Capacity Over Capacity Morning Peak Total VMT Evening Peak Total VMT Off Peak Total VMT Alternative 1 vs. Baseline Alternative 2 vs. Baseline Alternative 3 vs. Baseline Goal Support Multimodal Investment North-South Corridor Alternative 3 supports multimodal investment and expanded travel options in Northern Virginia through: Providing an alternative to local and community roads for intra- and interregional traffic, particularly commercial vehicles; Encouraging ridesharing and increasing travel time reliability through providing access to a system of HOV and HOT lanes; Enhancing travel choice through providing a bus transit system connecting to activity centers and regional transit facilities; Implementing a corridor bicycle and pedestrian system linking to activity centers and other regional trails; and Generating revenue for multimodal transportation investment through a HOT lane system. The following performance measures indicate that components of Alternative 3 support multimodal investment and travel in the North-South Corridor Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

99 1. North-South Corridor Mode Share This measure assesses the use of different travel modes as compared to the 2040 Baseline. Travel modes include SOV, HOV 2, HOV 3+, and public transportation. The degree to which the corridor alternatives are able to move more people in fewer vehicles helps to reduce congestion and improve emissions levels in the Corridor. In addition, improved accessibility to more corridor jobs and services via transit or bicycle and pedestrian facilities could help to reduce overall household travel costs. Table 5.7 presents the results. Results Summary The Alternative 3 transit system focuses service on three transit markets, including the Silver Line transit market, the Manassas area transit market, and the I-95 Express Bus and VRE transit market (refer to Figure 4.9). These transit markets attract an additional 500 daily home-based work transit trips in the Corridor. This translates to a shift in home-based work transit mode share from 6.2 percent in the Baseline to 6.3 percent in Alternative 3. There are marginal changes in the share of home-based work trips completed by carpool (HOV 2 or HOV 3+). These changes translate to an additional 260 HOV 2 and HOV 3+ person trips in the Corridor. Implication for the Results High-performing bus transit segments include Lansdowne to the Silver Line, U.S. 50 to the Silver Line, bus express service from Manassas to the Silver Line, and I-66 to I-95 for VRE and express bus access. Bicycle and pedestrian improvement in the Corridor are important modal components. While the details of nonmotorized trip making in the Corridor are not presented (as the regional travel demand model does not effectively portray these trips), corridor facilities focus on enhancing access to transit in the transit market areas, improving connections among existing bicycle facilities, and enhancing the overall safety of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. A description of these facilities and the critical connections they enable for nonmotorized trips are included in Table 5.8. Table 5.7 North-South Corridor Home-Based Work Mode Share Corridor Trip Productions and Attractions Person Trip Mode Share Base Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 SOV 76.8% 76.8% 76.6% 76.6% HOV 2 7.0% 7.1% 7.1% 7.0% HOV % 9.9% 10.0% 10.1% Transit 6.2% 6.2% 6.4% 6.3% Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-15

100 Table 5.8 North-South Corridor Bicycle and Pedestrian System Plan Document TransAction 2040 Prince William County Comprehensive Plan (2008) Loudoun County Comprehensive Plan (2010) North-South Corridor 10-Foot Class I Trail Proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements VA 659 between VA 7 and Ryan Road. Prince William Parkway between Nokesville Road and Dumfries Road. Tri-County Parkway between Braddock Road and Sudley Road. Prince William Parkway widening between I-66 and Brentsville Road includes the construction of a multiuse trail on the east side of the roadway. Dumfries Road (VA 234) widening between Brentsville Road and Jefferson Davis Highway (U.S. 1) includes a Class I trail (10-footwide barrier-separated shared use path). Prince William Parkway (VA 234) widening between I-66 and Brentsville Road includes a Class I trail. Tri-County Parkway between I-66 and the Loudoun County line includes a Class I trail. Prince William Parkway (VA 294) follows an alignment north of Dumfries Road and parallels the North-South Corridor. Between Hoadly Road to Jefferson Davis Highway, plans include a Class I trail. Loudoun County Parkway. Belmont Ridge Road. Gum Springs Road. Old Ox Road. Off-road trail planned along the ring route surrounding Dulles International Airport. Trail connection to the Loudoun County Parkway, including ramps and a connector trail west across Broad Run. VA 7 to I-95 (46.5 miles). Activity Centers, Transit, and Existing Trails Connections In combination, these trails cover significant portions of the North- South Corridor alignment, providing access: Across VA 267 and to the Ryan Road Silver Line Station; Along the entire Prince William Parkway corridor from the parkand-ride lot at I-66 to Dumfries Road; and Along a 4.7-mile segment of the Tri-County Parkway. These trails connect the entire segment of the North-South Corridor from I-95 to I-66 and along the Tri- County Pkwy to the Loudoun County line. In combination, they provide a connection between the VA 234-I-95 Commuter park-and-ride lot, to the Manassas area, and to the park-andride lot at I-66 and VA 234. Trails on Belmont Ridge Road and Loudoun County Parkway. Provide connections across the Dulles Greenway and to the W&OD trail. Trails on Old Ox Road and along the Dulles Ring Road provides access to the Silver Line station at Old Ox Road and VA 267. Additional segments not identified in TransAction 2040 or the local comprehensive plans are filled in to create a seamless bicycle and pedestrian network along the North- South Corridor Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

101 2. North-South Corridor VMT by Vehicle Type This measures assess the change in total corridor VMT and VMT by vehicle type. The shift of passenger VMT from SOV to any HOV mode indicates an increase in average vehicle occupancy in the Corridor (e.g., moving more people in fewer vehicles). New transit service in Alternative 3 also supports a reduction in corridor VMT. Figure 5.7 presents the results. Results Summary Total corridor VMT increases in Alternative 3 by 3.9 percent. This increase compared to the 2040 Baseline. Alternative 3 does improve the diversion issues occurring in Alternative 2. The share of HOV (24.4 percent total) in Alternative 3, is a 0.7 percent increase from the 2040 Baseline. Total commercial vehicle VMT in the Corridor increases in Alternative 3 compared to the 2040 Baseline. Implication for the Results An increased share of corridor VMT is in carpools in Alternative 3 as a result of the HOV lane system. This helps mitigate growth in SOV VMT as a result of new corridor capacity compared to the 2040 Baseline. Commercial vehicle VMT increases as a result of diversion from other facilities. This increase does not consider the impact of potential significant growth in air cargo at Dulles International Airport. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-17

102 Figure 5.7 North-South Corridor VMT by Vehicle Type 10,000,000 Total Daily N-S Corridor VMT 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000, % 17.3% 17.3% 17.4% 9.0% 9.0% 9.6% 9.6% 14.7% 14.7% 14.9% 14.8% 59.0% 59.0% 58.2% 58.3% Commerical Vehicles HOV 3+ HOV 2 SOV 1,000,000 0 Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt Frequency of North-South-Oriented Transit Routes Serving Activity Centers Three transit markets emerge in the North-South Corridor, including the Silver Line transit market, the Manassas area transit market, and the I-95 Express Bus and VRE transit market (refer to Figure 4.9). Segments of the transit service that provide new access to the Metro Silver Line, connections through Manassas, and connections to the I-95 express buses and VRE are the top transit performers in Alternative 3. New routes in Alternative 3 serve these transit markets at the peak and off-peak frequencies presented in Table 5.9. Frequency is segmented by all bus service accessing the transit center and only North-South Corridor bus service accessing the transit center. Alternative 3 reconfigures bus service to focus primarily on high demand markets within the Corridor as compared to Alternative 2. Compared to the 2040 Baseline, Alternative 3 significantly increases North-South Corridor bus service from next to nothing to a competitive suburban level of service Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

103 Table 5.9 Transit Service Frequency Peak Period Transit Market Direction Baseline and Alternative 1 Frequency (# of buses) All Services North- South Only Alternative 2 Frequency (# of buses) All Services North- South Only Alternative 3 Frequency (# of buses) All Services Metro Silver Line Station (Ryan Road) I-66 and VA 234 Park-and-Ride PRTC Transit Center Note: The peak period is 7 hours (6-9 AM, 3-7 PM). North- South Only The high-frequency service proposed in Alternative 2 resulted in transit lines along the North-South Corridor carrying ridership equivalent to 7 to 9 passengers per revenue hour. The rationalization of bus service in the corridor compared in Alternative 3 results in more productive transit service. The Alternative 3 service reduces total revenue miles and therefore service costs, while maintaining a similar or slightly higher passengers per revenue hour. Goal Maintain Existing Assets and Promote Safe Travel The North-South Corridor CMP will meet the objectives with this goal by applying existing policies to all existing and proposed transportation facilities in the Corridor. Objective Maintain transportation infrastructure conditions within the study corridor at a fair or better condition. The 2012 VDOT State of the Pavement report indicates that 67.4 percent of Northern Virginia district primary roadways are of sufficient quality, lower than the statewide goal of 82 percent. This figure means that 67.4 percent of all lane miles in the district are at a fair or better condition based on a set of pavement condition indexes. As the vital existing north-south roadway in the study area is in the primary system (VA 234), this figure is a proxy for overall pavement quality in the Corridor. Within the counties of the North-South Corridor, Loudoun County approaches the statewide goal at 79.1 percent of lane miles in a fair or better condition and the figure for Prince William County is 76.5 percent. VA 234, the only existing primary segment of the North-South Corridor, is in relatively good quality condition based on the 2012 report. There is a short segment of northbound lanes in poor condition (approximately between Hoadly Road and Cobb Road), but the remainder of the roadway between I-66 and I-95 is in good or excellent condition. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-19

104 The secondary system includes the VA 659 segment of the Corridor. This system within Loudoun County achieves a 41.7 percent sufficient rating. However, many of the secondary roadways in Loudoun County already have programmed improvements in the CLRP which will bring them to a sufficient or better condition over time. Structurally deficient bridges and culverts within the Northern Virginia region shown in the 2012 State of the Structures and Bridges report were found to have decreased from 69 facilities to 57, a 17 percent reduction in one year. While some of the reduction was due to the transfer of assets from VDOT to MWAA, the district achieves a very low deficiency of 2.8 percent overall. This exceeds the statewide goal of 8 percent, resulting in a very good asset condition for these facilities in the Corridor. There are only three structurally deficient structures in the North-South Corridor study area and none of these are on the main northsouth corridor roadways. The Commonwealth should ensure that transportation improvements in the Corridor include repairing deficient pavements and rehabilitating structurally deficient bridges and culverts. Corridor investments should strive toward achieving VDOT s adopted goals of at least 82 percent nondeficient pavements and 92 percent nondeficient structures. This measure should be tracked over time using existing VDOT processes. The Commonwealth also should use existing data provided to DRPT from PRTC and Loudoun County Transit to track the useful life remaining on rolling stock assets (buses and support vehicles), and program sufficient capital support to maintain transit fleets in a state of good repair. Objective Reduce transportation-related fatalities and injuries. The Virginia Strategic Highway Safety Plan identifies the following areas to reduce the number of injuries and deaths related to motor vehicle travel within the Commonwealth: Raise public awareness and develop a safer driving culture; Focus on young drivers, aggressive drivers, impaired drivers, and seat belt use through legislation, education, enforcement, and adjudication; Improve intersection safety for all users in congested areas; Keep drivers on the roadway and minimize consequences if they depart; Incorporate transportation safety planning into all levels of government; and Improve traffic records system to be more accurate and up to date. Recent safety road shows in September 2011 provided further recommendations specific to the Northern Virginia area in the areas of distracted driving, pedestrian/bicycle/motorcycle safety, and immigrant populations Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

105 Within the North-South Corridor, the Commonwealth should continue to monitor the incidence of crashes, injuries, and fatalities; use this data to identify specific highway segments and intersections of higher crash incidence; and finally recommend targeted safety improvements at these locations. Further, all newly designed and constructed roadway segments and facilities in the Corridor should include the most current safety design and operations features. Improving roadway segments in the Corridor from rural in nature to one of a higher design type has been shown to improve safety with fewer vehicles departing the roadway and moderating speed variances. State agencies and jurisdictions within the Corridor should use available resources to educate the public and promote a safer environment for all users of the transportation system. Objective Ensure that all miles of the corridor roadway conforms to access management standards. VDOT Access Management Regulations for Principal Arterials lays out the Commonwealth standards for all primary roadways. The Commonwealth should ensure that the design of all arterial roadway segments in the North- South Corridor (including along VA 234 between Brentsville Road and I-95, and along VA 659 between Croson Lane and VA 7) meet the most current access management standards when the facilities are improved. For limited access segments (including the Dulles access roadway, VA 234 between Brentsville Road and I-66, and Tri-County Parkway), the Commonwealth should ensure that their design does not compromise the limited access nature of the facilities and provide access points to and from the facility only at key designated intersections and interchanges. The Commonwealth should work with local communities, landowners, and stakeholders in order to avoid the tendency to add points of access for convenience, while compromising the quality of travel in the Corridor. Goal Foster Environmental Stewardship The North-South Corridor CMP will meet the objectives of this goal through a consistent project development process that utilizes best practice sustainable planning, design, construction, and maintenance practices. VDOT advocates environmentally responsible and sustainable design through their stormwater management regulations and best management practices (BMPs). In addition, VDOT partners with the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute to research innovative approaches to increase energy efficiency in the ground transportation sector and explore technologies, methods, and policies that will minimize the impacts on Virginia ecosystems associated with ground transportation. VDOT has put in place stormwater regulations to inhibit the deterioration of watersheds, wetlands, and other environmentally sensitive areas surrounding transportation infrastructure development. The regulations institute a program focusing on a goal of maintaining both water quantity and quality postdevelopment runoff characteristics to, as nearly as practicable, equal or better Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-21

106 pre-development runoff characteristics. Following these regulations most often results in constructing BMPs alongside the transportation facility development and using roadway materials that minimize potential impacts. BMPs can range from landscaping treatments and retention basins to manufactured structural BMPs; all of which have the intention of reducing the development s impact on the environment. Section 5.5 of the report includes an inventory of the historic, community, and environmental resources within a 500-foot buffer of the North-South Corridor study alignment. This section addresses both objectives: 1) protecting environmental and historic resources through sustainable planning methods; and 2) employing context sensitive design to respect historic, environmental, and community character. The intent of this work is to support the recognition of these elements as part of the planning and design process, as well as maintenance practices. This inventory is the first step of a more detailed environmental and historic assessment that will be completed as part of subsequent phases of the project development process, including National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) assessments. Objective Providing equitable transportation options to all communities in the study corridor. With regard to providing equitable transportation options to communities in the study corridor, Alternative 3 specifically responds to concerns on the implementation of HOT lanes and transit in the Corridor as proposed in Alternative 2. Instead of designating all lanes in the peak periods as HOT/HOV lanes on the Sudley Road to U.S. 50 segment of the Tri-County Parkway, and the entire length of the western access road to Dulles International Airport, Alternative 3 only designates one lane in each direction. High-frequency transit service in Alternative 3 serves targeted populations where transit demand is most significant, including Lansdowne to Silver Line, U.S. 50 to Silver Line, and I-95 to I-66. These services access employment centers in the Corridor as well as effectively connect to eastwest transit service. According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the Corridor passes through 15 block groups with a percent minority that is higher than the respective county as a whole. Information regarding poverty status is not available at the block group level, but the Corridor passes through six census tracts that have a higher percent of individuals below the poverty line than the county as a whole. An analysis was conducted using GIS, which combined the current location of minority and low-income populations (those below the poverty threshold) with the future accessibility of households to Washington Dulles International Airport. Census areas analyzed were those with a minority or low-income population 10 percent or more above the countywide average. The result is an 5-22 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

107 estimate of how many minority and low-income persons would gain accessibility to Dulles via the HOV network in each alternative, and the results are shown in Table 5.10 below. Table 5.10 Accessibility of Minority and Low-Income Populations to Dulles Airport Via the HOV Network Population Category Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Minority population within 60 minutes 107, , , ,584 Change from Baseline in minority population accessibility to Dulles N/A +17% +37% +36% Low-income population within 60 minutes 10,138 13,065 17,756 17,460 Change from Baseline in low-income population accessibility to Dulles N/A +29% +75% +72% Summary of Recommended Alternative Performance The key takeaways from the results of the recommended alternative analysis are presented below. Table 5.11 presents a summary of quantified measures addressing support economic growth and support multimodal investment goals. Change in Travel Time to Dulles International Airport Travel time from the north end of the Corridor (VA 7, Ashburn) and the south end of the Corridor (I-95, Quantico/Dumfries area) to Dulles International Airport decreases in Alternative 3 compared to the Baseline. The percent reduction in travel time in the northbound and southbound direction are similar. The west access road to the Dulles International Airport area is the most significant time saving facility. For general purpose capacity, Alternative 3 shows slightly less travel time savings for general purpose lane users in the section from I-66 to Dulles International Airport than Alternative 2 due to the difference between the HOT lane configuration (all lanes tolled in Alternative 2, one-lane tolled in Alternative 3). The travel time savings for the HOV/HOT lanes in Alternative 3 compared to the Baseline general purpose lanes are significant to Dulles International Airport. Change in Travel Time to Innovation Center Travel time from the north end of the Corridor (VA 7, Ashburn) and the south end of the Corridor (I-95, Quantico/Dumfries area) to Innovation Center remains about the same for general purpose lane users in Alternative 3 compared to the Baseline. There is no net change in general purpose lane capacity on these segments in Alternative 3 compared to the Baseline. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-23

108 The travel time savings for the HOV/HOT lanes compared to the Baseline general purpose lanes are significant to Innovation Center, with twice as large a percent savings for trips from the south end of the Corridor. Change in Number of Households in the North-South Corridor within 30 and 60 Minutes of Dulles International Airport (by Mode) Alternative 3 increases the number of households within 30 minutes and 60 minutes of Dulles International Airport compared to the Baseline. The increase in accessibility is greatest in Alternative 3 across all modes (except SOV compared to Alternative2), particularly HOV 2 and HOV 3+ where two to three times as many households have access within 30 and 60 minutes. Total Congested VMT In all time periods, total VMT operating in congested conditions (over capacity) decreases relative to the Baseline. The reduction in Alternative 3 is slightly less than Alternative 2, as a result of more total corridor VMT (e.g., less diversions from the Corridor because of different HOT lane configuration). Change in Home-Based Work Mode Share For both corridor trip productions and attractions, the change in mode share is overall marginal in Alternative 3 compared to the Baseline. The most significant change occurs for HOV 3+ trips, where a consistent and free lane for the length of the Corridor results in significant travel time savings, leading to a 0.8 percent share increase. North-South Corridor VMT Total corridor VMT increases in Alternative 3, a result of added multimodal capacity in the North-South Corridor attracting new trips and diverting trips from other facilities. However, HOV/HOT lanes and new transit services in Alternative 3 help to mitigate the growth in VMT somewhat (essentially 0.7 percent less than Alternative 1). VMT is slightly higher in the Corridor than Alternative 2. This is explained by less diversions due to the Alternative 3 HOV/HOT lane configuration. This outcome is recommended to Alternative 2, as VMT was diverting to local facilities to avoid North-South Corridor proposed tolled segments Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

109 To address the goals that rely on policy statements, the Corridor Master Plan for the North-South Corridor should recognize the following set of action steps: Organize a consensus-based, cross-jurisdictional planning, design, and policy process that supports maintaining existing transportation assets and promoting safe travel; Utilize tracking mechanisms and performance reporting to ensure goals for maintaining assets and enhancing corridor safety are addressed; Include in all steps of the project development process a priority consideration for all transportation facility impact on communities, historic resources, and environmental resources; and Implement corridor design approaches that utilize cost-effective design, construction, and maintenance approaches to mitigate the Corridor s impact on communities, historic resources, and environmental resources. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-25

110 Table 5.11 Economic Growth and Multimodal Investment Measures Goal and Performance Measure Support Economic Growth Alternative 1 versus Baseline Alternative 2 versus Baseline Alternative 3 versus Baseline Travel Time to Dulles GP GP HOV/HOT GP HOV/HOT Northbound from I-95-11% -10% -31% -5% -30% Southbound from VA 7-15% -10% -26% -6% -26% Travel Time to Innovation Center GP GP HOV/HOT GP HOV/HOT Northbound from I-95-9% +2% -29% +1% -28% Southbound from VA 7-7% -5% -14% +1% -14% Households within 30 minutes of Dulles International Airport (AM Peak) SOV +3,966 +5,531 +4,520 HOV 2-1, HOV 3+ +3,647 +4,524 +4,524 Transit Households within 60 minutes of Dulles International Airport (AM Peak) SOV +11, , ,159 HOV 2 +11, , ,847 HOV , , ,140 Transit 0 +2,090 +7,918 Congested VMT by Time of Day AM Peak Below Capacity +9.7% +7.6% +7.8% AM Peak Over Capacity -12.1% -15.0% -13.8% Off-Peak Below Capacity +4.4% +4.1% +4.1% Off-Peak Over Capacity -4.0% -5.9% -5.7% PM Peak Below Capacity +8.2% +6.6% +8.1% PM Peak Over Capacity -8.5% -9.5% -13.8% Support Multimodal Investment Home-Based Work Mode Share SOV +0.04% -0.19% -0.15% HOV % +0.01% -0.03% HOV % +0.00% +0.08% Transit -0.01% +0.18% +0.10% Change in Daily Corridor VMT Total North-South Corridor VMT +4.6% +3.6% +3.9% SOV +4.6% +2.1% +2.6% HOV % +4.9% +4.9% HOV % +10.9% +10.7% Commercial Vehicle +4.4% +3.8% +4.3% 5-26 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

111 5.3 IMPLEMENTATION COSTS The currently approved CLRP covers a period of 2012 to 2040 and was approved on July 20, The North-South Corridor assumes the 2040 CLRP as a baseline for analyzing any changes beyond what is in the approved list of funded projects for The cost reflected in Table 5.12 represent high-level estimates that reply on existing cost estimates (from the CLRP) and the most recent VDOT cost guidelines for a 2017 construction year. The planning-level cost estimates were developed by roadway segment and for the transit system elements. Cost could vary based on the actual design and construction process. Key projects in the 2040 CLRP for the North-South Corridor are as follows (refer to Figure 3.1): Tri-County Parkway Costs to construct Tri-County Parkway are not included in the CMP, as they are part of the Baseline. Only the costs associated with the HOV/HOT implementation are included for the CMP. Northstar Boulevard Northstar Boulevard is assumed in the Baseline transportation network to be constructed by 2040 between U.S. 50 and VA 659 (Belmont Ridge Road) due to ongoing VDOT studies and right-ofway designations by Loudoun County, but costs to construct the remaining segment of Northstar Boulevard are included as part of the CMP. VA 659 (Belmont Ridge Road) Costs for improving Belmont Ridge Road reflect construction of a four-lane section as specified in Alternative 2. Trail along VA 234 A multiuse (pedestrian and bicycle) trail is planned along VA 234 (Dumfries Road) from south of Manassas to the Montclair area of Prince William County in 2015; the CMP reflects the cost of the missing segments. Recommended alternative probable implementation costs beyond what is already included in the CLRP are presented in Table All detailed assumptions and sources used to generate these probable cost estimates are included in Appendix C. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-27

112 Table 5.12 Proposed Recommended Alternative Opinion of Probable Cost Segment Segment Limits Corridor Roadway Segment Descriptions CLRP Costs (2017 Dollars) Total Costs (2017 Dollars) 1 (2 miles) VA 234: I-95 to Country Club Drive (Maintain existing, convert one lane in each direction to HOV) 2 (12 miles) 3 (8.5 miles) 4 (3.9 miles) 5 (6.6 miles) 6 (4.5 miles) 7 (2.5 miles) VA 234: Country Club Drive to Brentsville Road Widen four to six lanes, one lane in each direction as peak-period HOV/HOT), includes interchange at VA 234 and Brentsville Road VA 234: Brentsville Road to I-66 Widen four to six lanes, one lane in each direction as peak-period HOV/HOT, includes interchange at VA 234 and VA 28 (Nokesville Road) Tri-County Parkway (planned): I-66 to VA 234 (Sudley Road) (CLRP) Includes interchange at I-66, one lane in each direction as peak-period HOV/HOT Tri-County Parkway (planned): VA 234 (Sudley Road) to U.S. 50 (CLRP) Includes interchange at U.S. 50, one lane in each direction as peak-period HOV/HOT Northstar Boulevard: U.S. 50 to Croson Lane New six-lane facility with one lane in each direction as peak-period HOV/HOT, includes interchange at North-South Corridor and Segment 7 New western connection: North-South Corridor to Old Ox Road New four-lane facility with one lane in each direction as peak-period HOV/HOT, Includes interchange at Old Ox Road $152,000,000 $125,000,000 $244,000,000 $2,200,000 $3,730,000 $168,000,000 $196,000,000 8 (6.5 miles) Belmont Ridge Road: Croson Lane to VA 7 (CLRP widening project) $207,000,000 North-South Corridor Roadway Subtotal $451,000,000 $646,930,000 Corridor Modal Considerations Planning-Level Cost Estimate Segment Limits (2017 Dollars) Multiuse (Pedestrian and Bicycle) Path Entire Corridor $38,000,000 Express Bus Service Woodbridge VRE and PRTC Transit Center to Manassas $6,000,000 Express Bus Service Lansdowne to Metro Silver Ryan Road $4,000,000 Express Bus Service Arcola (U.S. 50 Park-and-Ride) to Metro Silver Ryan Road $4,000,000 Commuter Bus Service Manassas to Silver Ryan Road $5,000,000 Bus Storage and Maintenance Facility (All Lines) $20,000,000 North-South Corridor Modal Considerations Subtotal $77,000,000 North-South Corridor Recommended Alternative (Roadway + Modal Considerations) North-South Corridor Recommended Alternative Total $1,174,930, Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

113 Some general notes regarding the cost estimates presented in Table 5.12 and the location of these details within Appendix C are noted below. Planning-level opinion of probable costs were prepared using Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Mobility Planning Division Statewide Planning-Level Cost Estimates costs were projected to 2017 using two percent inflation (see Appendix C, Reference 2). VDOT planning-level construction costs include roadway, interchange, and additional bridge costs. Construction costs include 20 percent for contingency and preliminary engineering (see Appendix C, Reference 2). Project costs for the Tri-County Parkway were sourced from the CLRP and the Tri-County Parkway Location Study Capital Cost Estimate and Methodology Technical Report, Table 3.2: Project Summary Costs, The West TWO CBA, March 2005 (see Appendix C, Reference 4) Right-of-way and utility costs were estimated as a percentage of the construction cost estimate. Percentages were provided by VDOT and are based on the prevalent land use adjacent to the improvement (see Appendix C, Reference 2). To account for HOV/HOT lane operations, a cost for tolling infrastructure per mile was developed (see Appendix C, Reference 1). To account for effects of managed lanes on interchanges, 20 percent was added to interchange costs in the recommended alternative (see Appendix C, Reference 1). A 10-foot multiuse path along the entire corridor was included to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians (see Appendix C, Reference 1 and Reference 3) Transit service costs included capital costs (25-year fleet and maintenance facility) and a 25-year operations cost (see Appendix C, Reference 1 and Reference 5). 5.4 ECONOMIC IMPACT AND ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY OF THE RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE Economic Impact The economic impact of the North-South Corridor recommended alternative is divided into four primary components for consideration. This represents a highlevel evaluation of potential costs and benefits of the recommended alternative that should be refined as more detailed information regarding corridor Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-29

114 implementation, land use change, and economic growth in the Corridor become available. Implementation Cost The additional cost of the recommended alternative when compared with the Baseline (2040 CLRP) is estimated at $ million measured in 2017 dollars. This total includes $ million for roadway segments and $39.0 million for transit capital and operations as documented in Table Accessibility Benefits As discussed throughout this report, the completion of the North-South Corridor under the recommended alternative proposal produces substantial accessibility benefits. As illustrated in Table 5.5, the additional roadway capacity plus the addition of HOV/HOT facilities will mean that approximately 40,000 more households will have access to Dulles International Airport within a 60-minute period in the peak periods than in the Baseline. The benefit each individual household assigns to this additional access will relate to how regularly each household utilizes the airport as well as any captured changes in property value. For illustrative purposes, if it is assumed that the average household values this additional accessibility at $1,000/year, this would translate into a benefit of $40.0 million per year that would accrue to these households. Travel Time Savings The recommended alternative produces a significant reduction in total travel time to all destinations within the study region. When fully built out, the project is expected to result in $3.9 million in annual travel time savings for passenger vehicles within the study area compared to the base case. As shown in Figure 5.8, total reduction in travel time from the evening peak is more than double the reduction from the morning peak. Improved travel time reliability due to lower overall congestion as well as the availability of HOV/HOT lanes is another benefit of the project that is expected to be particularly valuable for timesensitive airport-related traffic. The travel time savings estimate does not include any related reductions in congestion on alternative routes outside the study area such as the I-495 Capital Beltway Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

115 Figure 5.8 Breakdown of Travel Time Savings by Time of Day 21% 54% Morning Mid Day Evening 25% Freight Benefits Improved freight access and freight efficiency represents another major category of benefits that would accrue from the North-South Corridor s completion. As discussed in Section 2.7, Dulles International Airport is the principal air cargo hub for the Metropolitan Washington Region and its cargo tonnage is poised to grow at an even faster rate than passenger traffic. Air cargo is extremely highvalue freight. In 2009, the air cargo handled by Dulles Airport had a value of more than $13.4 billion equivalent to over $40,000 per ton. 5 Reducing landside delay for trucks handling air cargo will result in substantial savings to shippers and consumers and increase the attractiveness of Dulles International Airport as a cargo hub. Dulles current operational cost for cargo handling is 35 percent lower than JFK airport. 6 Landside improvements will be key to maintaining Dulles cost advantage with its competitors and its ability to attract discretionary cargo to the region. The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority s 2009 Economic Impact Study estimated that the direct employment impacts of freight forwarding and handling in the region supports 1,178 jobs and over $88 million in wages in the Freight Transportation Arrangement sector in the metropolitan statistical area as a whole, including 242 jobs with $31.4 million in wages in Fairfax County, and 607 jobs accounting for $36.8 million in wages in Loudoun County. The growth Economic Impact Study Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, The Louis Berger Group, Inc _-_02_TECH_REPORT_FINAL_10_20_2010.pdf. 6 Dulles Update: The Year in Review, and the Outlook Ahead, Christopher U. Browne Vice President and Airport Manager, Washington Dulles International Airport Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-31

116 of freight activity in the region, driven by Dulles International Airport as well as nearby industrial parks can be expected to lead to proportional gains in direct and indirect employment. Assuming that the current relationship between air cargo tonnage and employment holds true to 2030, the additional 567,000 tons of cargo that is projected in Figure 2.10 would lead to an additional 2,070 jobs and $155 million in annual wages in the year Environmental Inventory This section includes an inventory of the historic and environmental resources within a 500-foot buffer of the North-South Corridor study alignment. The purpose of this section is to provide a physical inventory of historic and environmental elements within the predefined buffer. This information can be used to recognize and catalog the environmental and historic features within the buffer. It is important to note that a detailed environmental and historic assessment will be completed as part of the subsequent phases of the project development process and will be conducted in a fashion that is consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). ArcGIS software was used in to conduct this assessment, as well as on-line mapping applications and database searches of various Virginia state agencies. Available spatial data from Loudoun and Prince William Counties, VDOT, Virginia, ESRI, and state agencies was overlain with the study area. The ArcGIS Select by Location tool was used to identify environmental, social, and land use features within the study area, which were then exported to a database file for analysis. Natural/Physical Resources The project corridor traverses approximately six large stream systems, including several tributaries of the Goose Creek/Beaverdam Reservoir system, northern Broad Run in Loudoun County, Bull Run, Lick Branch/Little Bull Run, southern Broad Run in Prince William County, and the Occoquan River/Lake Jackson. All of these systems are within 100-year floodplains and RPAs. Several of these systems have associated riparian wetlands in addition to the various emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested wetlands interspersed throughout the Corridor. Goose Creek also is designated by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) as a state scenic river. The Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VaFWIS) was used to perform countywide searches of endangered and threatened animal species that may be present within the study area. The bald eagle, a Federal species of concern, has been confirmed in both counties. However, the Center for Conservation Biology s Bald Eagle Nest Locator shows that no bald eagle nests are present within 660 feet of the study area. In Prince William County, two Federally listed endangered species were identified: the Atlantic sturgeon and the dwarf wedgemussel. One species, the brook floater, is state listed as endangered, although its presence in Loudoun 5-32 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

117 County is unconfirmed. Bull Run and Broad Run are listed as predicted habitat for this species. Additionally, eight state-listed threatened species were identified as having potential habitat in both counties, including Bull Run, Little Bull Run, Broad Run, Catoctin Creek, Goose Creek, Little River, Dawkins Branch, and various unnamed tributaries. The Occoquan River is listed as a stream used by anadromous fish for spawning. In the event that right-of-way acquisition is proposed anywhere along the Corridor, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, conducted according to American Society for Testing and Materials standards, would be recommended. Figure 5.9 through Figure 5.12 present maps by corridor segment displaying these critical natural features of the North-South Corridor study area. Social/Land Use Resources Public schools identified within the study area include: Arcola Elementary School, Woodbine Preschool, John F. Pattie Senior Elementary, and Washington- Reid Elementary. Four places of worship have been identified within the study area, including Montclair Tabernacle, the Virginia Korean SDA Church, Community Baptist Church, and First Mount Zion Baptist Church, all located along VA 234. No airports are located directly within the 500-foot study area. However, the proposed alignment passes to the west of Washington-Dulles International Airport. An additional four-lane road is proposed that would enhance access to the airport from the west. The Manassas Regional Airport also is adjacent to the project area south of VA 28. No libraries, police stations, fire and rescue stations, or hospitals were identified within the study area. No Agricultural/Forestal districts were identified within the study area. However, Prince William County has designated a large portion of the county as the Rural Crescent, which is intended to limit development in rural and agricultural areas. Zoning within the Rural Crescent allows agricultural, open space, forestry and low-density residential land uses, as well as occasional smallscale convenience retail or community facilities. The corridor passes through the Rural Crescent between the Prince William County boundary and I-66. The following types of resources are protected under Section 4(f): public parks, recreational areas, water bodies used for recreation, nationally designated scenic rivers, wildlife preserves, publicly owned trails, community centers, public school grounds with recreational facilities, and cultural resources that are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The proposed alignment passes to the west of Manassas National Battlefield Park and along the north edge of Prince William Forest National Park in Loudoun County. The Brambleton Regional Park and Golf Course intersects the study area near North Star Boulevard. Five local parks, including Anne Moncure Wall Park, Ashland Community Courts, Brittany Park, Catharpin Park, and the Independent Hill ball fields, are located within the study area. No state parks were identified in the study area. Public schools with recreational components Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-33

118 within the study area include Pattie Elementary and Arcola Elementary. Lake Jackson, located west of the study area south of Brentsville Road, is used for aquatic recreational activities. The proposed alignment would traverse the Occoquan River downstream of the lake. The Lake Jackson Dam is potentially historic, although it has not been evaluated for eligibility for the NRHP. The proposed alignment crosses the Washington and Old Dominion Trail, a recreational trail as well as an eligible historic resource, in one location between VA 7 and VA 267. Various other local trails intersect the study area throughout the Corridor. The Virginia Outdoors Foundation owns property at the northwest quadrant of Belmont Ridge Road and VA 267, presumably to preserve views of Goose Creek. There currently are no nationally designated scenic rivers in Virginia. All architectural or archaeological resources that are determined to be eligible for the NRHP also would be protected under Section 4(f). The corridor passes through several NRHP-listed historic districts. There are also architectural and archaeological resources within the study area that are listed, eligible, or unevaluated. The Department of Historic Resources (DHR), the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for the State of Virginia, maintains an on-line database of architectural and archaeological resources that may be eligible for the NRHP. The analysis focused on those architectural and archaeological features that are listed on the NRHP, eligible for the NRHP, or potentially eligible. The corridor passes through at least five historic districts, including several districts related to Manassas Battlefield, the Chopawamsic Recreation Demonstration Area, Prince William Forest Park, and Lake Jackson. Other resources that are eligible for the NRHP within the study area include: The Washington and Old Dominion Trail; Bloom Hill Farm on Lucasville Road; Cannon Branch Fort and Wakeman Site within the Kettle Run Battlefield; Monroe Family Cemetery, adjacent to I-66; An unnamed site in Loudoun County, just north of the Prince William County boundary; An unnamed cemetery in Prince William County, between VA 28 and I-66; The Dean Site #2, south of U.S. 50; The McCarren House, 3200 Sanders Lane; and Unnamed cemetery on Belmont Ridge Road. This list does not include resources within the study area that have not yet been evaluated for eligibility for NRHP listing. Ultimately, all architectural and archaeological features within the study area must eventually be surveyed by a SHPO-approved agent to determine the presence and eligibility of unevaluated or unrecorded features Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

119 Figure 5.9 Corridor Environmental and Social Features VA 7 to U.S. 50 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-35

120 Figure 5.10 Corridor Environmental and Social Features U.S. 50 to I-66/Manassas Area 5-36 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

121 Figure 5.11 Corridor Environmental and Social Features I-66/Manassas Area to Independent Hill Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-37

122 Figure 5.12 Corridor Environmental and Social Features Independent Hill to I Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

123 5.5 IMPLEMENTATION ACTION PLAN The implementation action plan for the North-South Corridor study represents a summary of potential actions items that should be addressed based upon the stated objective of the CMP process and the associated goals of this planning effort. These steps are outlined below as a guide to facilitating and managing the implementation of the corridor master plan, and cover the areas of policy, planning, preliminary engineering, and project financing. Continue to follow stated policies of the Commonwealth transportation agencies as they apply to the Corridor, and identify and support regional leaders and stakeholders outside government who can assist in corridor implementation. VDOT provides regular reports on pavement, bridge, and culvert conditions statewide. DRPT tracks the conditions of transit assets, including rolling stock and maintenance facilities throughout the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth should utilize existing conditions reports in order to recommend where there may be additional funding needs to maintain the assets in the Corridor in good condition. Stated policies in the areas of safety and access management also should continue to be followed to meet the goals of the CMP. Business and industry groups, transit advocates, bicycle and pedestrian advocates, and other local and modal stakeholders are critical participants in marshaling public support for corridor improvements, as well as encouraging elected leaders to support and pledge funding to implement the CMP recommendations. The Commonwealth should continue to engage with these groups, so that they are well-supported in advocating the Commonwealth s vision for the Corridor and the need to make improvements. Ensure continuity of all state, regional, and local comprehensive plans with the recommended alternative elements. Establish a tracking process to monitor the process made on all elements of the North South Corridor Study that support the stated study goals. Work with VDOT, MWAA, DRPT, Prince William County, and Loudoun County to ensure that the long-range plans align with the North-South Corridor transportation recommendations which in many cases mirror existing plans. There are, however, some important areas where the CMP and county plans are not precisely aligned. The Commonwealth should continue to work with localities in the Corridor, regional transportation agencies, and state agencies to align their future plans for study area transportation facilities. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-39

124 Transit route recommendations align closely with the recommendations contained in the DRPT Super NoVA study for routes between Manassas and I-95, and between U.S. 50 and VA 7. This study recommends that expanded bus transit routes utilize the HOV facilities to be constructed in the North- South Corridor, to realize the maximum amount of time savings possible. The Super NoVA study recommended somewhat different routes in the identified transit market areas, but at the same time mentioned that the use of potential future HOV facilities would improve transit travel times. Recommendations contained in this CMP are not intended to replace those of the SuperNoVA study; the intent is to maximize the transit use of HOV facilities that were not envisioned in SuperNoVA. Nearer the date of route implementation, the Commonwealth should study the effect of any HOV lanes implemented in the North-South Corridor and potentially revise the recommended routing of transit in the Corridor to take advantage of these lanes while maintaining access to key activity centers and transit hubs. Three of the transit recommendations (I-95/VRE to Manassas, U.S. 50/Arcola to Ryan Road Metrorail, and Lansdowne to Ryan Road Metrorail) fit well within the existing structures and plans of Loudoun County Transit and PRTC. The recommendation between Manassas and Ryan Road Metrorail spans the Loudoun County/Prince William County boundary and, therefore, does not fit neatly into the service areas of existing agencies. The Commonwealth should work with the localities to develop a plan, governance structure, and cost allocation strategy for this multijurisdictional route. As the timing of the HOV/HOT lane network implementation becomes clearer, the Commonwealth should identify funding to implement the transportation demand management improvements noted in this study. Multimodal travel benefits of the CMP corridor recommendations will be maximized by ensuring that corridor residents and businesses are fully informed about new transit options and carpool formation along the Corridor is encouraged. Ensure continuity with all project-level planning and preliminary engineering. As the study recommendations progress through the development process, project design and potentially purpose can change based on revised needs, environmental assessments, or project funding sources. As segments of the North South corridor move though the project development process, OIPI should be provided the opportunity to monitor and track major projects to ensure continuity with the overall project goals and elements of the North South corridor design. The Tri-County Parkway, representing the segment of the North-South Corridor between I-66 and U.S. 50, already has undergone a NEPA process, including the release of a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS). The Commonwealth should continue to advance this project and bring the 5-40 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

125 environmental process to conclusion by completing the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) and issuing a formal record of decision. VDOT has initiated an environmental assessment study for the Dulles Air Cargo, Passenger, and Metro Access Highway. The study area includes the area north of U.S. 50 and west of Dulles Airport, and encompasses study recommendations for Northstar Boulevard and the new access to Dulles Airport roadway. The Commonwealth should bring this study to conclusion using the North-South Corridor CMP as guidance. Should either the no-build alternative or the U.S. 50/VA 606 alternative be selected as the recommended outcome, there will be a remaining segment of Northstar Boulevard that will require further environmental study, design, and a financing and implementation plan in order to fully implement these recommendations. The U.S. 50/VA 606 alternative may meet the needs identified in this CMP for improved access to Dulles Airport, but its selection would affect the recommendations for the corridor segments north of where the new roadway meets VA 606, including those for Belmont Ridge Road. At the conclusion of the environmental assessment, the Commonwealth should revise the North-South CMP recommendations to reflect north-south travel movements and multimodal connections from VA 606 to VA 7. Areas where roadway widening is recommended beyond what currently is constructed include segments of Belmont Ridge Road, Northstar Boulevard, and VA 234 between I-66 and Country Club Drive. Environmental processes for these roadway widening projects should begin, in segments or in total, and brought to completion using the North-South Corridor CMP as guidance. The Commonwealth should take steps to preserve corridor rightof-way throughout the North-South Corridor as needed for potential future transportation improvements. The Commonwealth should ensure that any future studies and projects are added to the regional CLRP so that their eligibility for Federal funding is preserved. Develop a design and operations strategy for the HOV/HOT lanes, including their potential revenue generating capacity, and use this to assess a capital financing strategy to implement the corridor recommendations. The peak-period HOV/HOT lanes recommended in this study are unconventional in the type of facility they operate in (a mix of limited access and local access depending on the corridor segment) and their peak-only designation limits the extent to which they can be physically separated from the main lane traffic stream. Though they offer significant time savings for corridor travelers in the modeling, implementation details are critical in order for the facility to offer in actuality the projected travel benefits. Prince William County s stated concerns about the operation of the facility, including its effect on local access would be addressed through additional studies and preliminary engineering on the HOV facilities. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-41

126 Single occupant, HOV 2, trucks, and commercial vehicles travelers in the HOV/HOT facility during peak periods are expected to pay a toll in order to access the lanes and gain travel time benefits. Revenues generated from these travelers choosing the HOT facility over general purpose travel lane(s) could either generate ongoing revenues for the Commonwealth, or perhaps be used as a future revenue stream that could be bonded against to generate capital in the near term to construct the facility. A Phase 1 traffic and revenue analysis of these lanes should be conducted by the Commonwealth s Office of Transportation Public Private Parternships in order to demonstrate the future revenue potential and potential attractiveness of these revenue streams to private investors in an innovative financing arrangement. Total daily forecast 2040 traffic volumes (HOV/HOT lanes plus general purpose lane) along the North-South Corridor are presented in Figure Figure 5.12 indicates that travel demand is highest along the Corridor just west of I-95, from Lake Jackson to I-66, and from U.S. 50 to the Dulles Connector Road. This study presents planning-level cost estimates as well as estimates of the potential economic benefit of the corridor improvements. Revenues from the Commonwealth of Virginia general fund or other taxes and fees are likely to be a major component of any roadway and transit improvements within the Corridor. In addition, the Corridor s projected time savings in the HOV/HOT lanes present an opportunity to capture an ongoing revenue stream from toll-paying users. As discussed earlier, this revenue stream may be an attractive component to private investors seeking a return on capital. Further, with many of the study recommendations focused on Washington Dulles International Airport, there are potential airport user fees that could be generated to provide funds for improved ground-based airport access. The Commonwealth should complete a financing strategy using these and possibly other innovative components, and use the revenues identified to pledge toward corridor recommendation implementation Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

127 Figure 5.13 North-South Corridor Recommended Alternative Daily Volumes 2040 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5-43

128 Coordinate land-side access investments with air-side investments of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority and potential air freight users at Washington Dulles International Airport. Visions for Dulles Airport to become a major hub for air freight include expansions at the airport itself to handle additional aircraft movements, land access to the airport and adjacent facilities via the roadway network, and intermodal facilities to support the growth of additional air freight and its transfer from aircraft to land vehicles. There will be opportunities to integrate the timing of these investments for maximum economic effect, such that the roadway facilities and the aircraft facilities develop in tandem and optimize the capacity increases for all modes. The Commonwealth should continue to work closely with MWAA to ensure that multimodal investments affecting air freight and access are properly coordinated from a funding and timing standpoint. The Commonwealth, at an early stage of developing the financing strategy for the Corridor, should reach out to potential freight users of the new segments of the HOV/HOT lanes to ensure their attractiveness to shippers and customers. This will assist the identification of a tolling strategy that maintains the value of travel time savings to the shippers for air freight destined to or from Dulles, and ensure that these new facilities serve their intended purpose of transporting high-value cargo along with other users Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

129 Appendix A. Public Information Comment Summary A.1 ROUND 1 PUBLIC COMMENT OVERVIEW Comments from the public were solicited directly upon advertisement of the December 18 and 19, 2012 public meetings described in Section 1.3 of the report. Comments received through January 2, 2013 are summarized below. These comments on Alternatives 1 and 2 were used to help formulate the proposed final alternative presented at the January 8, 2013 meeting. The public provided written comments by , by U.S. mail, and by completing feedback forms provided at the meetings. Section E.2 describes the comments received, grouped thematically. The study team received 447 comments from individuals, and most of the comments referenced more than one thematic area. As a result, the number in parentheses represents the number of similar comments received. Many comments covered multiple categories and are counted more than once. A.2 ROUND 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS Multimodal Components Extend Metro to Haymarket (3) Bicycle/pedestrian pathways are nice but not critical (3) HOV not needed for a corridor with so little HOV travel (2) Light rail options should be included (2) Transit will be highway based, needs uncongested roads to work (2) Extend VRE to Winchester and to Haymarket (2) New buses are ok but they get stuck in the same traffic (1) Bus lanes are not important (1) Low density means corridor is unlikely to be multimodal (1) Need to consider location of bicycle trails and access points to provide better access to neighborhoods along Dumfries Road (1) Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A-1

130 Appendix Right-of-Way Protection Secure rights of way for limited access Northstar and Dulles access to improve regional mobility and ensure global competitiveness (38) Need to protect rights of way (purchase land) for the corridor now (31) Need for the North-South Corridor The North-South Corridor and Bi-County (Tri-County) Parkway are essential for growing north-south movements and freight (150) Limited transportation funds should focus on east-west movements instead of North-South Corridor (102) Concerns about designation of the corridor or data does not support the need for the corridor (86) Other facilities (VA 28, I-95, VA 267, Loudoun County Parkway, Gum Spring Road) can handle freight and other movements instead of the North-South Corridor (22) Transit investments should be prioritized over road building (13) Increasing cargo access to Dulles is important for regional growth (6) Investments should focus on maintenance not new roads (4) New freight capacity is not needed (3) Support for other north-south roads besides VA 28 (2) More effective economic development strategies than hundreds of millions in new roadways west of Dulles (1) U.S. 15 should be widened in Loudoun (1) Investment in Tysons Corner is more important than the North-South Corridor (1) Environmental and Community Effects Concern about the public involvement and/or study process, including timing of meetings and comment period during holiday season and amount of advance notice provided for the meetings (121) Increasing freight at Dulles will negatively impact the local community by increasing traffic, noise and air pollution from trucks (89) Do not support limited access highways through residential areas of Loudoun County, would reduce access needed for residents to schools and neighborhoods (13) New roadways create sprawl and add traffic (9) A-2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

131 Appendix Corridor would negatively affect Manassas National Battlefield Park (5) Environmental impact generally (4) Need to control growth (3) Widening Dumfries Road will create noise (2) Corridor would positively affect Manassas National Battlefield Park by removing traffic from the park (2) New roads will not change the amount of development already planned by local jurisdictions (1) Better north-south highway capacity will reduce the need for people to use local streets (1) Character and Capacity of the Corridor Corridor needs to be limited access (12) Support for HOT concept (9) 6 lanes of capacity not needed in the corridor (8) Do something/anything to make traffic and travel better in the corridor (7) Lanes should be free, no tolls (5) Dumfries Road needs to maintain existing access points (3) Northstar should be limited access south of Shreveport Drive to U.S. 50 (1) 6 lanes of capacity are needed in the corridor (1) Widening is needed along VA 234 and Belmont Ridge Road (1) Industrial roads should stay in industrial areas (1) Purcell Road needs to remain rural in nature (1) Corridor should include interchanges to separate traffic at key intersections (3) Northstar and Belmont Ridge Road should not have limited access (1) Include better signage pointing people toward Dulles (1) VA 234 at I-95 interchange needs more capacity, already congested today (1) Corridor Location and Alignment Support for connection to Dulles Airport from corridor (117) Corridor needs to consider crossing the Potomac River (12) Oppose Outer Beltway (10) Oppose building Tri-County Parkway (2) Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A-3

132 Appendix Support for the Comprehensive Plan Alignment of Tri-County Parkway Consider other routings of the corridor besides Belmont Ridge Road and Northstar Boulevard (1) Airport connection should go beyond VA 606 and provide direct access to the airport (1) Oppose building Battlefield Bypass (1) A.3 ROUND 2 PUBLIC COMMENT OVERVIEW At the January 8, 2013 meeting and continuing to January 18, 2013, comments were received focusing on the proposed final alternative. The public provided written comments by , by U.S. mail, and by completing feedback forms provided at the meetings. Section E.4 describes the comments received, grouped thematically in the same fashion as Round 1. The study team received 320 comments from individuals, and some of the comments referenced more than one thematic area. As a result, the number in parentheses represents the number of similar comments received. Many comments covered multiple categories and are counted more than once. The majority of Round 2 comments (339 in total) were preprinted postcards supporting the project indicating the name and address of the commenter. Starred comments (*) are from a several page letter from the Brambleton Group that was directed toward the Improving Access to Dulles Airport Environmental Assessment but has relevance for the North-South Corridor. A.4 ROUND 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS Need for the North-South Corridor The North-South Corridor and Bi-County (Tri-County) Parkway are essential for the growing north-south movements and freight (339) Emphasis should be on east-west congestion relief, not north-south. The population will be travelling east to Fairfax and DC, not south to Dumfries and Manassas (1) Build the road (1) Needed for congestion relief and cargo access from Dulles to Route 66 and Route 95 (1) Critical corridor to advance future mobility and economic development. Need to move forward ASAP (1) A-4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

133 Appendix Character and Capacity of the Corridor There were no comments received in Round 2 in this category. Multimodal Components Multimodal corridor still considers only automobiles and a road as a method of transportation (2) Extend VRE to Sudley Manor Road and Gainesville, even to Haymarket (1) Need more bus service in western Prince William County (1) Favor expansion of mass transit and alternatives that do not require a new road (1) Bring Metro Orange Line to Haymarket (1) Corridor Location and Alignment Northstar Blvd and Belmont Ridge Rd. should not be a limited access highway (1) Northstar Blvd. should not expand beyond four lanes in each direction (1) Increasing freight and passenger traffic on Northstar Blvd. will endanger children living in the neighborhood (1) Build the highway on Evergreen Mills Road instead of Northstar Blvd (1) Consider moving corridor further west into more rural areas (1) Corridor needs to consider coordinating with Maryland plan for Point of Rocks Potomac River crossing (1) Needs to link to MD-200 (1) Need to extend North-South highway across Potomac River and link to MD interstates (2) Airport should be better linked to Montgomery County, Maryland (1) Oppose routing that includes a connection from Route 50 (beginning at the intersection of Route 50 and the proposed Bi-County Parkway), leading north (along the propose route of Northstar Blvd.), then turning east (at about Evergreen Mills Road) and paralleling the environmentally sensitive Broad Run, then leading over the right-of-way for Loudoun County Parkway, over Route 606, and into the western tip of Dulles Airport (*) Alternative routing, such as the alternative route located south of Route 50, take advantage of existing right-of-way and roadway and could improve connections throughout this corridor that could provide additional access to the back side of Dulles Airport (*) Extend Bi-County Parkway to Route 50 (*) Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A-5

134 Appendix Fully support Alternative 1. Concerned how new High Occupancy Vehicle and High Occupancy Toll lanes throughout the corridor, which are not mentioned and/or included in the Prince William County Comprehensive Plan, would function on Route 234 between I-95 and Brentsville Road and how the facility would affect existing and future access to the corridor (1) Grade separated interchanges at Brentsville Road, University Boulevard, Sudley Manor Drive, and Balls Ford Road on Route 234 Bypass between Brentsville Road and I-66 will be necessary to have the corridor function as a true limited access highway (1) Do not like either of the recommended alternatives (2) Section from I-66 to Route 50 is a road to nowhere that will only benefit developers along its route, not the citizens (1) There is no need to connect Route 50 and 66 (1) Prefer Alternative 1 (3) Prefer both Alternatives (1) Right-of-Way Protection Cost of acquiring any right-of-way for Dulles Access Highway (running eastwest along Broad Run floodplain) in addition to costs of multiple, gradeseparated interchanges and bridge structures necessary to effectuate the road as contemplated are excessive (*) Per the recent amendment to the Virginia Constitution, right-of-way acquisition must be consensual and not by eminent domain and such rightof-way acquisition is not acceptable to residents and owners of Brambleton (*) Environmental and Community Effects Concern that public involvement and/or study process was rushed though during the holidays (1) Plan will adversely affect many existing neighborhoods along the planned route, including splitting communities (1) Plan will negatively affect property values along proposed route (1) Roadway will bring more traffic to already congested I-95 at Triangle (1) Road will compromise and in some cases completely eliminate jobs that have been long planned in Dulles South (*) Routing will devastate plans for a possible community college in Loudoun County (*) A-6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

135 Appendix Environmental impacts are diverse and devastating along this portion of the Broad Run floodplain; alternative routing along Route 50 and Loudoun County Parkway would cost less and have less environmental impact (*) Public meetings should have included a representative who was familiar with the area. Materials did not show exact details (1) Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A-7

136

137 Appendix B. Travel Demand Forecasting Model Validation The travel demand model used in this project is the National Capital Transportation Planning Board s (TPB) Version This model was recently used in the Air Quality Conformity Determination of the 2012 Financially Constrained Long Rang Transportation Plan (CLRP) and FY Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), reflecting the latest planning assumptions at the beginning of this corridor study. Two major inputs to the model include: (1) the transportation network that represents the 2012 CLRP and FY TIP (2) land use -- MWCOG Round 8.1 Cooperative Forecasts. The Version is a sophisticated, conventional trip-based travel demand model with six major steps: Demographic models with market stratifications by four household income groups, four household size groups, and four vehicle availability groups Trip generation models for five personal trip purposes, a commercial vehicle trip purpose, and two truck trip types Trip distribution model with doubly-constrained gravity model formulation with a composite impedance of transit and highway travel times Mode choice model with nested logit structure for five trip purposes and two time periods Time of day model with four time periods AM peak, midday, PM peak, and night time/early morning Traffic assignment with six user classes and equilibrium assignment methodology The regionally adopted travel demand forecasting model for air quality conformity includes two special features to address special issues of transportation in the region: 1. The transit constraint that constrains Metrorail ridership into the core, and 2. HOV-3+ skims substitution. The transit constraint feature allows only a predetermined level of Metrorail ridership into the core (the 2020 level), and if the model calculates a higher level of demand, these excess trips are shifted directly to the single-occupancy vehicle mode. This feature is designed to represent the Metrorail-related capacity constraint in the core area and to produce a conservative output in terms of air quality and shows a worst case scenario in terms of roadway congestion. It is Cambridge Systematics, Inc. B-1

138 Appendix acknowledged, though, that the actual behavior of Metrorail riders when faced with congested conditions in the Metrorail system may be different than assumed by the transit constraint feature. Travelers who would prefer Metrorail might shift the time of day of their commutes or seek out commuter rail, commuter bus, local bus, carpool, or TDM alternatives, in addition to some choosing to drive instead. It is, therefore, a recommended practice to turn the Metrorail capacity constraint feature off when performing planning studies. This has been done in this study, however, it is important to understand that in doing so, the forecast Metrorail ridership might not be achieved without improvements to the carrying capacity of the Metrorail system. The HOV-3+ skims substitution feature is specifically formulated to model the planned HOT lanes in Northern Virginia. The operational requirements of a HOT lane stipulate that a certain prevailing speed on the HOT facility should be maintained with adjusting the tolls in real time. In addition, HOV3+ service levels will be not affected by the HOT operation. To achieve these operational objectives, the TPB Version 2.3 model employs a two-run procedure, with the base run to develop HOV3+ skims and the final run to simulate the HOT operation. In the North-South Corridor study, these two special features were treated as follows: The HOV skims were calculated using the same highway network as the non-hov skims; The assignment of HOV trips was done with all other trips for the specified time periods; and The transit constraint on the trips destined to the D.C. Core was not included. The Version regional model is calibrated and validated at the regional level. For project planning studies it is good practice to validate the model for the specific study area of interest. For this study a validation effort was performed to ensure that the model would yield reasonable results for the study area. Validation is the application of the calibrated model for a base year and then the comparison of the results against the observed data. For this study, year 2007 was the base year. The observed data was the 2007/2008 Household Travel Survey (HTS) data and traffic count data collected by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG). As part of model validation for the North-South Corridor study, the highway network was checked and refined, including improvements on the network coding. Overall the Version 2.3 model produced reasonable results in the study corridor. The results were within acceptable tolerance levels. The following figures summarize the results of the validation. Figure B.1 shows the year 2007 HBW trip distribution for trips that are produced in the study area. Figure B.2 shows the year 2007 HBW trip distribution for trip B-2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

139 Appendix ends that are attracted to the study area. Similarly, Figure B.3 and B.4 shows trip distributions for all trip productions and attractions, respectively. There was a reasonable match in the number and distribution of the trips leaving the study area. For the HBW attracted trip ends, the model estimates were four percent higher than the observed data. For the HBW production trip ends, the model estimates were eighteen percent higher. For all production trip ends, the model estimates were four percent higher than the observed data. For all attraction trip ends, the model estimates were eight percent higher than the observed data. Figure B.1 Year 2007 HBW Production Trip Distribution for the Study Area 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Estimated Observed Figure B.2 Year 2007 HBW Attraction Trip Distribution for the Study Area 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Estimated Observed Cambridge Systematics, Inc. B-3

140 Appendix Figure B.3 Year 2007 Production Trip Distribution for All Trips in the Study Area 600, , , , , ,000 0 Estimated Observed Figure B.4 Year 2007 Attraction Trip Distribution for All Trips for the Study Area 600, , , , , ,000 0 Estimated Observed B-4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

141 Appendix These charts show that there is a reasonable match in the distribution of the trips leaving the study corridor, with Fairfax County being the major destination, and that there is also a reasonable match in the distribution of the trips coming to the study corridor, with the majority of trips coming from Prince William and Fairfax Counties. Figures B.5 and B.6 show the transit mode share results as compared to the observed data by districts for HBW production and attraction trips. Similarly, Figures B.7 and B.8 show the transit mode share results as compared to the observed data by districts for all production and attraction trips. Again as seen previously, there was a reasonable match in the transit mode share for the study area. Of all the trip purposes, HBW trips have the highest transit mode share for each district. For the HBW produced and attracted trips, the transit mode share estimates were about three percent (2.89%) higher than the observed data. For all production and attraction trips, the transit share estimates were about three percent (3.12%) higher than the observed. Figure B.5 Year 2007 HBW Trip Production Transit Mode Share 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Estimated Observed Cambridge Systematics, Inc. B-5

142 Appendix Figure B.6 Year 2007 HBW Trip Attraction Transit Mode Share 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Estimated Observed Figure B.7 Year 2007 All Trip Purposes Trip Production Transit Mode Share 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Estimated Observed B-6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

143 Appendix Figure B.8 Year 2007 All Trip Purposes Trip Attraction Transit Mode Share 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Estimated Observed Estimated traffic volumes were compared with traffic count data in the study area. This comparison was conducted for all counts in the study area and select cutlines that represent major movements in the study area. Table B.1 shows percentage deviations of estimated volumes from observed volumes for the locations where there were traffic counts for the base year Figure B.9 shows the locations of the select cutlines (based on the travel demand model roadway network links). Table B.2 shows the comparison of estimated volumes versus observed volumes by cutlines in the study area. Major findings after the initial model validation are as follows: Overall, model simulation results match the observed data in the study area for 2007 well, with an under-estimation of nearly 6%; The base year model performs better for higher functional facilities such as freeways and major arterials, with a slight over-estimation (less than 10%); and The model s performance at cutlines in the study corridor is generally acceptable, with some variations cutlines on both ends of the corridor outperform those in the middle for those measuring east-west movements and there appears to be some under-simulation for the north-south movements as demonstrated by I-66 and I-95 cutlines. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. B-7

144 Appendix Table B.1 Percentage Deviation of Estimated Volumes from Observed Volumes by Facility Type and Time of Day (Based on link counts) Time of Day Facility Type AM MD PM NT Daily Freeway 8.0% 11.6% 16.9% -6.6% 2.4% Major Arterial 12.4% 6.3% 3.3% 2.7% 8.7% Minor Arterial -16.3% -21.6% -28.4% -30.6% -23.1% Collector -21.9% -31.2% -34.5% -38.9% -32.6% Expressway -28.5% -41.7% -2.3% -45.3% -29.2% Total -1.3% -6.5% -9.2% -13.0% -5.9% Table B.2 Estimated Volumes versus Observed Volumes by Cutlines in the Study Area (Based on link counts) ID Cutlines Observed Estimated Delta % Deviation 1 East Boundary North of US , ,625 1, % 2 East Boundary Between US-50 and I , ,383 27, % 3 East Boundary Between I-66 and SR , ,520 17, % 4 East Boundary South of SR , ,567 (34,679) -11.8% 5 West Boundary North of US , ,605 8, % 6 West Boundary Between US-50 and I , ,115 45, % 7 West Boundary Between I-66 and SR ,176 54,810 (8,366) -13.2% 8 West Boundary South of SR , ,213 25, % 9 I-66 61,154 46,711 (14,443) -23.6% 10 I ,000 91,376 (23,624) -20.5% B-8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

145 Appendix Figure B.9 Definition of Cutlines in the North-South Corridor Cambridge Systematics, Inc. B-9

146

147 Appendix C. Recommended Alternative Component Cost Methodology Report C.1 REFERENCE 1 DESCRIPTION OF ASSUMPTIONS 1. Planning-level opinion of probable costs were prepared using Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Mobility Planning Division Statewide Planning-Level Cost Estimates costs were projected to 2017 using two percent inflation (see Reference 2). 2. VDOT planning-level construction costs include roadway, interchange, and additional bridge costs. Construction costs include 20 percent for contingency and preliminary engineering (see Reference 2). 3. Right-of-way and utility costs were estimated as a percentage of the construction cost estimate. Percentages were provided by VDOT and are based on the prevalent land use adjacent to the improvement (see Reference 2). 4. A planning-level cost estimate for the Tri-County Parkway was obtained from the 2005 Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Tri-County Parkway (see Reference 4). The project price was projected to 2017 dollars using two percent inflation. 5. To account for HOV/HOT access, a cost for tolling infrastructure per mile was developed (included in Reference 1). 6. To account for effects of managed lanes on interchanges in Alternative 2, 20 percent was added to interchange costs in Alternative A 10-foot multiuse path along the entire corridor was included to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians (see description below and Reference 3). 8. Transit service costs included capital costs (25-year fleet and maintenance facility) and a 25-year operations cost (see description below and Reference 5). Cambridge Systematics, Inc. C-1

148 Appendix Roadway Segments Segment 1 Road/Limits: VA 234 (I-95 to Country Club Drive) Final Alternative Description: Maintaining VA 234 between I-95 and Country Club Drive in Prince William County as a six-lane facility, while designating one existing lane in each direction as HOV during peak travel periods. Existing Conditions: Six lanes Cost Assumptions: Negligible costs in the segment due to lack of roadway improvements. Relevant Planned Projects: None Primary Cost Source: None Final Alternative Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): Negligible Segment 2 Road/Limits: VA 234 (Country Club Drive to Brentsville Road) Final Alternative Description: Expanding VA 234 to a six-lane facility along the current four-lane segment (Country Club Drive to Brentsville Road), including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during peak periods while maintaining existing access. Existing Conditions: Four lanes in a six-lane ROW Cost Assumptions: Cost reflects widening road from four-lane divided to six-lane divided; Assumed one-third of low estimate for roadway reconstruction due to recently completed roadway improvements; No ROW acquisition; New Interchange at VA 234 and Brentsville Road; Bridge Reconstruction over Lake Jackson; and Urban, nonmanaged access HOV/HOT configuration (see below). Relevant Planned Projects: CLRP Widen from two to four lanes in a six-lane ROW (completed) Primary Cost Source: VDOT planning-level costs Final Alternative Construction Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): $152 million C-2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

149 Appendix Segment 3 Road/Limits: VA 234 (Brentsville Road to I-66) Final Alternative Description: Expanding VA 234 to a six-lane facility between Brentsville Road and I-66, including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during the peak travel periods. Existing Conditions: Four-lane divided roadway in a six-lane ROW Cost Assumptions: Cost reflects widening road from four-lane divided to six-lane divided; Assumed one-third of low estimate for roadway reconstruction due to recently completed roadway improvements; No ROW acquisition; Bridge over VRE tracks; Modified interchange at Nokesville Road (VA 28); and Urban, nonmanaged access HOV/HOT configuration (see below). Relevant Planned Projects: CLRP Widen from two to four lanes in a six-lane ROW (completed) Primary Cost Source: VDOT planning-level costs Final Alternative Construction Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): $125 million Segments 4 and 5 Road/Limits: Tri-County Parkway (I-66 to U.S. 50) Final Alternative Description: Including the Tri-County Parkway as currently planned (four-lane facility between I-66 and U.S. 50), this segment includes one HOV/HOT lane in each direction between I-66 and Sudley Road during peak travel periods. Existing Conditions: None Cost Assumptions: Used cost estimate included in 2005 DEIS (2012 dollars extrapolated to 2017) for the West Two CBA; Includes Contingency and PE; Includes interchanges at I-66 and U.S. 50; and Rural Managed Access HOV/HOT configuration (see below). Relevant Planned Projects: Tri-County Parkway DEIS Primary Cost Source: Tri-County Parkway DEIS Capital Cost Estimate Methodology Technical Report (see Reference 5) Cambridge Systematics, Inc. C-3

150 Appendix Final Alternative Construction Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): $156 million Final Alternative Right-of-Way and Utilities Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): $88 million Notes: The cost estimate that was used was prepared for the 2005 DEIS. Updates to this estimate may be prepared in preparation of the documentation for a Record of Decision. Segment 6 Road/Limits: North Star Boulevard (U.S. 50 to Croson Lane) Final Alternative Description: Expanding Northstar Boulevard to a six-lane limited-access facility north of U.S. 50 in Loudoun County, including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during peak travel periods. Existing Conditions: U.S. 50 to Evergreen Mills Incomplete roadway; Evergreen Mills to Croson Lane Assumed constructed four-lane divided Cost Assumptions: Roadway Cost Reflects; New Urban six-lane divided roadway from U.S. 50 to Evergreen Mills Road; Widening from four-lane divided to six-lane divided from Evergreen Mills to Croson Lane; ROW acquisition was included for new roadway portion; Includes new interchange at North-South Corridor and Western Airport Access; Includes 1 stream Broad Run; and Urban, nonmanaged access HOV/HOT configuration (see below). Relevant Planned Projects: Loudoun County Plan Expand Northstar Boulevard from four- to six-lane divided highway (long term) from VA 659 to Braddock Road Primary Cost Source: VDOT planning-level costs Final Alternative Construction Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): $163 million Final Alternative Right-of-Way and Utilities Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): $5 million Segment 7 Road/Limits: New Western Airport Access (N/S Corridor to VA 606) Final Alternative Description: Adding a four-lane western connection from the North-South Corridor to Dulles Airport, including one HOV/HOT lane in each direction during peak travel periods. C-4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

151 Appendix Existing Conditions: None Cost Assumptions: Assumed New Urban four-lane divided roadway; Included ROW acquisition; and Included interchange at Route 606. Relevant Planned Projects: Assessment Primary Cost Source: VDOT planning-level costs Improving Access to Dulles Environmental Final Alternative Construction Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): $132 million Notes: Assumed alignment generally follows Alternative 2 of the Improving Access to Dulles Airport Environmental Assessment currently in progress. Cost estimates for this project have not yet been released. Segment 8 Road/Limits: Belmont Ridge Road (Croson Lane to VA 7) Final Alternative Description: Maintaining Belmont Ridge Road as a four-lane facility north to VA 7. Existing Conditions: Two-lane undivided Cost Assumptions: Assumed reconstructed urban four-lane divided cross-section due to alignment; Includes modified interchange at the Dulles Greenway; and Included limited ROW acquisition. Relevant Planned Projects: CLRP: Route 659/Route 7 Interchange $63 million; Loudoun County Plan Croson Lane to VA 267: four-lane divided Primary Cost Source: VDOT planning-level costs Final Alternative Construction Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): $162 million Final Alternative Right-of-Way and Utilities Cost (2017 Millions of Dollars): $45 million Notes: The cost of the interchange at Belmont Ridge Road (VA 659) and VA 7 was not included in the cost estimate for this segment due to that it currently is funded for construction. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. C-5

152 Appendix HOV/HOT Assumptions: In order to prepare an estimate for the cost associated with HOV/HOT operations within the North-South Corridor, it was necessary to develop infrastructure assumptions. Two different configurations were developed to account for sections with managed access and those without. For Urban Arterial Segments involving HOT (Segments 2-3, 6, 8) (See Reference 6): Structure points per mile: 3 Cantilevers per mile: 6 Assume 6 cantilevered structures/foundation per mile (structure every one-third of a mile to ensure enforcement). Placed in median where possible (cantilevered) or on outside where median placement not plausible. In the area surrounding signalized intersections, tolling infrastructure would not be present (see diagram below). Total Cost per mile for tolling infrastructure: $773,000 For Rural (Limited Access) Segments involving single-lane HOT (Segments 4, 5, 7) Structure points per mile: 2 Cantilevers per mile: 4 Assume 2 Cantilever structures/foundations every one-half of a mile (four cantilever structures per mile). Placed in open median covering one direction of travel (only one lane in each direction needs to be covered). Total Cost per mile for tolling infrastructure: $565,000 Primary Infrastructure Cost Sources: I-66 Active Traffic Management; and I-64 Alternatives Development Memo. Notes: For Segment 1, costs to convert one lane in each direction for peak periods to HOV were assumed to be negligible; Twenty percent was added to all interchanges that would involve HOV/HOT operations; Cost of fiber also was incorporated to develop overall cost; and C-6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

153 Appendix These assumptions are for cost estimating purposes only and represent one possible configuration for HOV/HOT tolling. This does not represent a commitment or a recommendation to build the system in this manner. Multimodal Considerations New Bus Routes (see Reference 7) Express Bus Service (30-minute peak headways and 60-minute off-peak headways): Woodbridge VRE and PRTC Transit Center to Manassas; Lansdowne Silver Ryan Road; Arcola (U.S. 50 Park-and-Ride) to Metro Silver Ryan Road; Commuter Bus (60-minute peak headways); and Manassas to Silver Ryan Road. Primary Cost Source: I-66 Tier I EIS Transit Service Costs Cost Assumptions: Based on proposed frequencies, route distances, and operating speed, a number of vehicles was estimated. Fleet costs and operations cost were based on these assumptions. One maintenance and storage facility would be shared among the three lines. Twenty-five-year operations ( ). Final Alternative Costs (2017 Millions of Dollars): $77 million Bicycle/Pedestrian Cost Assumption: Ten-foot multiuse path for entire corridor Primary Cost Source: VDOT Bike Planning Costs (See Reference 4) Final Alternative Costs (2017 Millions of Dollars): $38 million Cambridge Systematics, Inc. C-7

154 Appendix C.2 REFERENCE 2 VDOT PLANNING-LEVEL COSTS Source: Transportation and Mobility Planning Division, Statewide Planning Level Cost Estimates (Costs Reflected as of January, 2009) C-8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

155 Appendix Cambridge Systematics, Inc. C-9

156 Appendix C.3 REFERENCE 3 VDOT BIKE PLANNING-LEVEL COSTS Example Planning-level Cost Estimates for Bicycle Accommodations September 2011 Bicycle Lane (4' wide lane on left and right sides) Base Cost Per Mile: $435,100 Wide Curb Lane (2' additional pavement on left and right sides) Base Cost Per Mile: $217,600 Paved Shoulder (4' wide shoulder on left and right sides) Base Cost Per Mile: $376,600 Shared Use Path (10' wide paved asphalt path) Base Cost Per Mile: $719,100 Sign Panel Cost per Square Foot: $34.50 Sign Post 4x4 wood or U-channel Cost per Lineal Foot: $9.40 Sample Sign with Post Bicycle Diamond with Share the Road: $300 Thermoplastic Pavement Cost per Lineal Foot: $1.30 C-10 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

157 Appendix C.4 REFERENCE 4 TRI-COUNTY PARKWAY LOCATION STUDY Source: Tri-County Parkway Location Study Capital Cost Estimate and Methodology Technical Report, Table 3.2: Project Summary Costs, The West TWO CBA, March Cambridge Systematics, Inc. C-11

158 Appendix C.5 REFERENCE 5 NORTH-SOUTH CORRIDOR TRANSIT SERVICE C-12 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

159 Appendix D. Alternative 1 and 2 Evaluation Summary Findings D.1 PURPOSE OF THIS APPENDIX Alternatives 1 and 2 were developed in order to address the goals and objectives of the project. Information on how they addressed the goals and objectives is included in Section 5.0 within the description of the recommended alternative. The comparison of Alternatives 1 and 2 to the Baseline and each other informed key findings of the study and were used to craft the recommended alternative recommendations. This appendix summarizes the detailed findings of Alternatives 1 and 2. Summary findings and conclusions remain in the report in Section 4.0. The goals, objectives, and performance measures referenced in this appendix can be found in Table D.1, which is the same as Table 4.2 in the report. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. D-1

160 Appendix Table D.1 North-South Corridor: Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures Goal Objective Performance Measure Support Economic Growth Maintain Existing Assets and Promote Safe Travel Ensure adequate capacity and access to allow for projected growth in the Dulles area Reduce congestion and improve the level of service on existing roadways Improve the quality of connections between travel modes and activity centers for people and goods movement Provide for multiple modes of access and egress to activity centers and key transportation nodes Maintain transportation infrastructure conditions within the study corridor at a fair or better condition Reduce transportation-related fatalities and injuries Ensure that all miles of the corridor roadway conforms to access management standards VMT on corridor roadways by congestion level. Travel time to Dulles International Airport and other corridor activity centers. Household access to Dulles International Airport. VMT on corridor roadways by congestion level. Transit mode share. Travel time savings. VMT on corridor roadways by congestion level. Frequency of north-south-oriented transit routes serving each activity center and key transportation node (transit centers, Park-and-Rides, Metrorail, VRE). Provide a network of bicycle and pedestrian trail facilities connecting key centers of employment, commerce, service, and residential development. Transportation improvements in the Corridor should include repairing deficient pavements and rehabilitating structurally deficient bridges and culverts. Corridor investments should strive toward achieving VDOT s adopted goals. Design all improvements in the Corridor to maximize the ability of people and goods to travel safely. Ensure all principal arterial segments of the Corridor conform to VDOT Access Management Regulations. Endeavor to construct new facilities with limited access where feasible from an economic, community, and environmental standpoint, and where warranted by demand. Support Multimodal Investment Foster Environmental Stewardship Increase the number and quality of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the Corridor Provide integrated service, facilities, and transit connections for the Corridor Maximize the number of modes used within a single right-of-way Protect environmental and historical resources through sustainable planning methods Employ context sensitive design to respect historic, environmental, and community character Provide equitable transportation options to all communities in the study corridor Provide a network of bicycle and pedestrian trail facilities connecting key centers of employment, commerce, service, and residential development. Frequency of north-south-oriented transit routes serving each activity center and key transportation node (transit centers, Park-and-Rides, fixed guideway transit Metrorail/VRE). Provide a network of bicycle and pedestrian trail facilities connecting key centers of employment, commerce, service, and residential development. Geographic impact to environmental, cultural, and historic resources in the Corridor. Ensure consistency with physical setting along with scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental resources within the Corridor. Ensure minority and low-income areas of the Corridor are provided with multimodal transportation accessibility improvements. D-2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

161 Appendix D.2 ALTERNATIVE 1 AND 2 EVALUATION SUMMARY FINDINGS The performance measures that were generated for each of the initial alternatives are presented to help assess how Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 address the goals and objectives. The following section arrays each goal with the associated performance measure and summarizes the results and implications as they relate to the goal. The evaluation methods in this section rely on the quantitative assessment using the regional travel model. Two goals included in Table D.1 rely on the development of policy statements and a qualitative assessment of existing corridor conditions. As part of the assessment of the third and final alternative, policy statements that support the maintenance of existing assets and the promotion of safe travel within the Corridor are identified. Also as part of the assessment of the third and final alternative, policy statements addressing the environmental stewardship goal and a description of potential environmental impacts are presented. Goal Support Economic Growth North-South Corridor Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 support economic growth in Northern Virginia through: Enhancing multimodal access and capacity to serve Dulles International Airport and the surrounding area; Enhancing multimodal access to other corridor activity centers, including Innovation Center in the Manassas area; Providing an option to use HOV or HOT lanes to support increased travel time reliability; and Mitigating traffic congestion, which leads to wasted time for passenger and commercial vehicle trips. Dulles International Airport represents the largest economic center in northern Virginia and in the Commonwealth. Improving the access to the airport and all other key activity centers in the Corridor is a central consideration in this study. The following three performance measures indicate that components of Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 support access to the Dulles International Airport area and other activity centers, as well as reduce corridor delay. 1. Travel Time to Dulles International Airport and Innovation Center This measure considers total AM peak travel time to Dulles International Airport and Innovation Center from different points in the North-South Corridor. Decreased travel times suggest overall improved access for commuters to these activity centers as well as other trip purposes, including commercial vehicle Cambridge Systematics, Inc. D-3

162 Appendix trips. Tables D.2 and D.3 present the AM peak travel times, and Figures D.1 and D.2 present AM peak travel time savings. Results Summary For northbound trips in the North-South Corridor, from I-95 to Dulles, Alternatives 1 and 2 save 9 to 10 minutes (10-11 percent). In Alternative 2, HOV/HOT lanes save a total of 26 minutes (31 percent). Most of the savings occur in the part of the Corridor from U.S. 50 to Dulles Airport along Northstar Boulevard and the new access road from Northstar Boulevard to Dulles. For southbound trips in the North-South Corridor, from VA 7 to Dulles, the Alternatives save seven to eight minutes (29-30 percent). Travel time to Innovation Center shows minor changes (less than 5-minute reduction) in both alternatives, except for northbound Alternative 2 HOV/ HOT which experience an 11-minute travel time reduction (29 percent). The introduction of HOV/HOT facilities in Alternative 2 provides a significant improvement in morning travel times to both the Dulles International Airport area and Innovation Center area, particularly from the south end of the Corridor. Travel time savings for users of general purpose lanes in Alternative 2 are the same or slightly less than savings in Alternative 1. Implication for the Results Providing western access to Dulles International Airport will support continued economic development within the Dulles area, including benefits to time-sensitive freight destined to and from the airport. Both alternatives improve roadway travel time to Dulles International Airport area and the Innovation Center area from both the south and north end of the North-South Corridor. The most critical facility for ensuring travel time savings to Dulles International Airport are improvements to Northstar Boulevard and the addition of a new access road to Dulles from the North-South Corridor, and the provision of HOV/HOT lanes in Alternative 2. New capacity on VA 234 results in some travel time savings to Innovation Center for trips from the I-95 corridor and elsewhere in Prince William County, with a significant savings in Alternative 2 for HOV/HOT trips. D-4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

163 Appendix Table D.2 AM Peak Travel Time to Dulles International Airport Direction Section Baseline GP Alternative 1 GP Alternative 2 GP Alternative 2 HOV/HOT Northbound I-95 to I I-66 to U.S a 22 U.S. 50 to IAD Total Southbound VA 7 to IAD GP = General Purpose a In Alternative 2, the Tri-County Parkway segment from Sudley Road to U.S. 50 designates all lanes in the peak period as HOV/HOT. Therefore, general purpose (GP) travel times in Alternative 2 include a tolled segment. Table D.3 AM Peak Travel Time to Innovation Center Direction Section Baseline GP Alternative 1 GP Alternative 2 GP Alternative 2 HOV/ HOT Northbound Southbound I-95 to Innovation Center VA 7 to Innovation Center a 34 GP = General Purpose a In Alternative 2, the Tri-County Parkway segment from Sudley Road to U.S. 50 designates all lanes in the peak period as HOV/HOT. Therefore, general purpose (GP) travel times in Alternative 2 include a tolled segment. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. D-5

164 Appendix Figure D.1 Morning Peak-Period Travel Time Savings to Dulles International Airport Travel Time Savings Compared to Baseline (percent) 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 33% 31% 29% 30% 11% 10% Northbound (From I-95) Southbound (From VA 7) Alt. 1 Alt. 2 GP Alt. 2 HOT Figure D.2 Morning Peak-Period Travel Time Savings to Innovation Center Travel Time Savings Compared to Baseline (percent) 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 29% 14% 9% 7% 5% 0% Northbound (From I-95) Southbound (From VA 7) Alt. 1 GP Alt. 2 GP Alt. 2 HOV/HOT D-6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

165 Appendix 2. Household Access to Dulles International Airport This measure compares the total number of households in Northern Virginia that are able to access Dulles International Airport in the morning peak period (6:00 a.m.-9:00 a.m.) within 30 minutes and 60 minutes. The results are segmented by different modes to help present how new general purpose capacity, HOV/HOT lane capacity, and transit service proposed in the North- South Corridor in Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 improves accessibility to Dulles International Airport. Improved access supports the economic competitiveness of Dulles International Airport while also providing better access for Northern Virginia residents to the job market at and around Dulles. Table D.4 and Figures D.3 and D.4 present the results. Results Summary Alternative 1 adds general purpose capacity in the Corridor, resulting in improved peak-period travel times. Within 30 minutes, the number of households accessible to Dulles International Airport increases 14 percent for SOV trips and 10 percent for HOV trips. Within 60 minutes, the number of households accessible to Dulles International Airport increases 18 percent across all modes. There is no change in transit mobility in Alternative 1. Alternative 2 adds general purpose capacity balanced with HOV/HOT capacity and transit. As a result, the number of households accessible to Dulles International Airport within 30 and 60 minutes increases more significantly than Alternative 1 (a 13 to 20 percent increase within 30 minutes, and a 23 to 56 percent increase within 60 minutes). Households within 30 minutes of Dulles International Airport by transit do not change in Alternative 2 (the majority of less than 30-minute transit trips will be served by existing planned services included in the Baseline, e.g., Silver Line Metrorail). Within 60 minutes, Alternative 2 shows a 12 percent increase (equivalent to an additional 2,100 households) with access to Dulles International Airport via transit. Implication for the Results Added general purpose capacity in Alternative 1 improves travel times in the North-South Corridor resulting in improvement in access to Dulles International Airport. The number of households within 60 minutes increases more significantly, as improvements in the Corridor between I-66 and Dulles International Airport provide improved access for households in the Manassas area and the I-95 corridor. Due to the HOV/HOT lane system included in Alternative 2, accessibility for households completing HOV 2 and HOV 3+ trips increases more than SOV trips. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. D-7

166 Appendix Table D.4 Household Access to Dulles International Airport 30 Minutes 60 Minutes Mode Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 SOV 28,304 32,270 33,835 63,401 75,183 77,849 HOV 2 35,731 34,710 36,275 63,401 75,183 87,248 HOV 3+ 35,731 39,378 40,255 70,558 83, ,017 Transit 1,463 1,463 1,463 18,131 18,131 20,221 Figure D.3 Total Households within 30 Minutes of Dulles International Airport AM Peak Period Total Households 120, ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 SOV HOV2 HOV3+ Transit Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 D-8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

167 Appendix Figure D.4 Total Households within 60 Minutes of Dulles International Airport AM Peak Period Total Households 120, ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 SOV HOV2 HOV3+ Transit Baseline Alt. 1 Alt Vehicle Miles of Travel on Corridor Roadways by Congestion Level The change in congested and uncongested vehicle miles of travel (VMT) is a metric of the total travel by motorized vehicles in the North-South Corridor and the reduction in traffic congestion. Congested conditions are represented by the volume to capacity ratio where hourly vehicle volume is at or exceeding the hourly roadway capacity. A reduction in the share of VMT experiencing congested conditions indicates less time wasted in delay, which results in monetary savings for passenger and commercial trips. Table D.5 and Figure D.5 present these results. Results Summary Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 reduce total corridor VMT operating in over capacity conditions in the morning, evening, and off-peak travel periods. The reduction is most significant in the morning peak travel period (6:00 a.m.-9:00 a.m.), with a 12 percent reduction in Alternative 1, and a 15 percent reduction in Alternative 2. In Alternative 1, all vehicle trip types (single-occupant, carpool, and commercial) experience similar reductions in the amount of travel experiencing over capacity conditions. In Alternative 2, the inclusion of highoccupancy toll lanes that are free for HOV 3+ and tolled for all other users, shows an 18 to 20 percent reduction for HOV 3+ vehicles in overcapacity conditions for the morning and evening periods. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. D-9

168 Appendix For all other users, the HOV/HOT lane configuration in Alternative 2 performs nearly the same in reducing congestion as the general purpose capacity added in Alternative 1. Segments of the HOV/HOT configuration cause traffic diversion to other parallel roadway facilities during the peak travel periods. The level and pattern of congestion reduction is overall consistent across the alternatives, with Alternative 2 slightly outperforming Alternative 1. Implication for the Results Roadway capacity improvements that currently are planned in the Corridor and tested in both alternatives have a positive impact on congestion and, therefore, access to the Dulles International Airport area. Including HOV and HOT lanes during peak travel periods complements the planned capacity improvements and provides significant mobility improvements for HOV 3+ vehicles. Potential traffic diversions caused by the HOV/HOT configuration should be assessed as part of the final alternative recommendations. Table D.5 Percent Change in Corridor VMT by Congestion Level 2040 Time of Day Alternative 1 versus Baseline Alternative 2 versus Baseline AM Peak Below Capacity 9.7% 7.6% AM Peak Over Capacity -12.1% -15.0% Off-Peak Below Capacity 4.4% 4.1% Off-Peak Over Capacity -4.0% -5.9% PM Peak Below Capacity 8.2% 6.6% PM Peak Over Capacity -8.5% -9.5% D-10 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

169 Appendix Figure D.5 Percent Change in Corridor VMT Compared to the Baseline 2040 Change in VMT by Congestion Level Compared to Baseline (percentage) 15% 10% 5% 0% -5% -10% -15% -20% Below Capacity Over Capacity Below Capacity Over Capacity Below Capacity Over Capacity Morning Peak Total VMT Evening Peak Total VMT Off Peak Total VMT Alternative 1 vs. Baseline Alternative 2 vs. Baseline Goal Support Multimodal Investment A key element of the CMP process is to address multimodal travel and increase the opportunity for multiple travel modes to be used within the study corridor. Based on the modal elements included in Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 provide the opportunity to assess the benefits of modal expansion and investment within the Corridor. The multimodal elements included in the alternatives address expanded travel options in Northern Virginia through: Encouraging ridesharing and increasing travel time reliability through providing access to a system of HOV and HOT lanes; Enhancing travel choice through providing a bus transit system connecting to activity centers and regional transit facilities; Implementing a corridor bicycle and pedestrian system linking to activity centers and other regional trails; and Generating revenue for multimodal transportation investment through a HOT lane system. The following performance measures provide an assessment of various modal configurations included in Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. The alternatives were designed to provide contrasting approaches to address travel and congestion in the Corridor. Alternative 2 includes increased multimodal opportunities, Cambridge Systematics, Inc. D-11

170 Appendix including expanded bus transit and HOV options as compared to the 2040 Baseline and Alternative North-South Corridor Mode Share This measure assesses the use of different travel modes as compared to the 2040 Baseline. The travel modes include SOV, HOV 2, HOV 3+, and bus transit service. The degree to which the corridor alternatives are able to move more people with fewer vehicles will help to reduce congestion and improve vehicle emission levels. In addition, improved accessibility to jobs and services using transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities, may help to reduce overall household travel costs. Table D.6 presents the results. Results Summary Three promising transit markets emerge, including the Silver Line transit market, the Manassas area transit market, and the I-95 Express Bus and VRE transit market (refer to Figure D.7). However, these transit markets only attract an additional 1,000 daily homebased work transit trips in the Corridor. This translates to a shift in homebased work transit mode share from 6.2 percent in the Baseline and Alternative 1, to 6.4 percent in Alternative 2. There are marginal changes in the share of home-based work trips completed by carpool (HOV 2 or HOV 3+). Implication for the Results High-performing bus transit segments include Lansdowne to the Silver Line, U.S. 50 to the Silver Line, bus express service from Manassas to the Silver Line, and I-66 to I-95 for VRE and express bus access. Bicycle and pedestrian improvement in the Corridor are important modal components. While the details of nonmotorized trip making in the Corridor are not presented here (as the regional travel demand model does not effectively portray these trips), corridor facilities should focus on enhancing access to transit in the transit market areas, improving connections among existing bike facilities, and enhancing the overall safety of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Table D.6 North-South Corridor Home-Based Work Mode Share Corridor Trip Productions and Attractions Person Trip Mode Share Base Alternative 1 Alternative 2 SOV 76.8% 76.8% 76.6% HOV 2 7.0% 7.1% 7.1% HOV % 9.9% 10.0% Transit 6.2% 6.2% 6.4% D-12 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

171 Appendix 2. North-South Corridor VMT by Vehicle Type This measures assesses the change in total corridor VMT and VMT by vehicle type. The shift of passenger VMT from SOV to any HOV mode indicates an increase in average vehicle occupancy in the Corridor (e.g., moving more people in fewer vehicles). New transit service in Alternative 2 also supports a reduction in corridor VMT. Figure D.6 presents the results. Results Summary Total corridor VMT increases in Alternative 1 by 4.6 percent and in Alternative 2 by 3.6 percent. The 1 percent difference between the two alternatives is a result of SOV trips shifting to HOV and transit. The share of HOV (24.5 percent total) in Alternative 2, is a 0.8 percent increase from Alternative 1 and the Baseline. While commercial VMT share remains constant, total commercial vehicle VMT in the Corridor increases in Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 compared to the Baseline (4.0 percent increase in Alternative 1, 3.0 percent increase in Alternative 2). Implication for the Results An increased share of corridor VMT is in carpools in Alternative 2 as a result of new HOV lanes. This helps mitigate growth in VMT as a result of new corridor capacity compared to the Baseline. Commercial vehicle VMT increases as a result of diversion from other facilities. This increase does not consider the impact of potential significant growth in air cargo at Dulles International Airport. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. D-13

172 Appendix Figure D.6 North-South Corridor VMT by Vehicle Type 10,000,000 9,000,000 8,000, % 17.3% 17.3% Commerical Vehicles Total Daily N-S Corridor VMT 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000, % 9.0% 9.6% 14.7% 14.7% 14.9% 59.0% 59.0% 58.2% HOV 3+ HOV 2 SOV 1,000,000 - Baseline Alt. 1 Alt Frequency of North-South-Oriented Transit Routes Serving Activity Centers Three promising transit markets emerge in the North-South Corridor, including the Silver Line transit market, the Manassas area transit market, and the I-95 Express Bus and VRE transit market (refer to Figure D.7). Segments of the transit service that provide new access to the Metro Silver Line, connections through Manassas, and connections to the I-95 express buses and VRE are the top transit performers in Alternative 2. New routes in Alternative 2 serve these transit markets at the peak and off-peak frequencies presented in Table D.7. From the baseline of no north-south-oriented transit routes serving the Silver Line and Manassas (I-66 and VA 234 Park-and- Ride) transit markets, Alternative 2 provides a much more frequent schedule of transit departures to each of the identified transit markets. D-14 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

173 Appendix Table D.7 Transit Service Frequency Peak Period Transit Market Direction Metro Silver Line Station (Ryan Road) I-66 and VA 234 Parkand-Ride Baseline Frequency All Service North- South Only Alternative 1 Frequency Alternative 2 Frequency All Service North- South Only All Service North- South Only PRTC Transit Center Figure D.7 North-South Corridor Transit Markets Cambridge Systematics, Inc. D-15

Chapter 1: The 2035 Virginia Surface Transportation Plan 1. Challenges & Opportunities 2 VTrans2035: The Precursor 2 The VSTP and VTrans2035 2

Chapter 1: The 2035 Virginia Surface Transportation Plan 1. Challenges & Opportunities 2 VTrans2035: The Precursor 2 The VSTP and VTrans2035 2 November 2010 Table of Contents Executive Summary See Summary Map Chapter 1: The 2035 Virginia Surface Transportation Plan 1 Challenges & Opportunities 2 VTrans2035: The Precursor 2 The VSTP and VTrans2035

More information

TransAction Plan Draft for Public Comment Spring/Summer 2017

TransAction Plan Draft for Public Comment Spring/Summer 2017 Transportation Action Plan for Northern Virginia TransAction Plan Draft for Public Comment Spring/Summer 2017 Comments are invited on this TransAction Plan, and associated TransAction Plan Project List.

More information

HB2 Implementation Policy Guide

HB2 Implementation Policy Guide report HB2 Implementation Policy Guide prepared for Commonwealth Transportation Board date March 18, 2015 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction... 9 1.1 HB2 Legislation Requirements... 10 House Bill 1887...

More information

HB2 Implementation Policy Guide

HB2 Implementation Policy Guide report HB2 Implementation Policy Guide prepared for Commonwealth Transportation Board date August 1, 2015 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction... 1 1.1 HB2 Legislation Requirements... 1 1.2 Roles and Responsibilities...

More information

Loudoun County Chamber of Commerce

Loudoun County Chamber of Commerce Loudoun County Chamber of Commerce INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT The Loudoun County Chamber supports managed, thoughtful growth in the county. This includes support for well-planned commercial growth and development

More information

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION/ GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION/ GOALS AND OBJECTIVES CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION/ GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 1.1: INTRODUCTION ABOUT THE FREDERICKSBURG AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (FAMPO) Established in 1992, the Fredericksburg Area Metropolitan Planning

More information

Presentation to DATA on VTrans 2040 / HB2. October 21, 2015

Presentation to DATA on VTrans 2040 / HB2. October 21, 2015 Presentation to DATA on VTrans 2040 / HB2 October 21, 2015 Life Cycle of a Candidate Project How it s planned. How it s scored. How it s funded. 2 How it s planned. VTrans2040 VTRANS 2040 serves two functions,

More information

Regional Bus Rapid Transit

Regional Bus Rapid Transit Regional Bus Rapid Transit Efforts Board Transportation Committee October 20, 2009 There are a Variety of Regional Bus Rapid Transit Study Efforts They include: NVTA s TransAction 2030 Plan Transportation

More information

Fairfax County Countywide Transit Network Study

Fairfax County Countywide Transit Network Study Fairfax County Countywide Transit Network Study Proposed High Quality Transit Network Concept Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Travel Forecasting Subcommittee September 20, 2013 1 Presentation

More information

Transform 66 Multimodal Project: Prioritization Process and Evaluation Criteria Approved March 3, 2016

Transform 66 Multimodal Project: Prioritization Process and Evaluation Criteria Approved March 3, 2016 Transform 66 Multimodal Project: Prioritization Process and Evaluation Criteria Approved March 3, 2016 The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for the Transform 66: Inside the Beltway Project directs NVTC to

More information

Management. VA SITE Annual Meeting June 27, 2013 Jay Styles Performance and Strategic t Planning Manager, Business Transformation Office

Management. VA SITE Annual Meeting June 27, 2013 Jay Styles Performance and Strategic t Planning Manager, Business Transformation Office VDOT and MAP-21 Performance Management VA SITE Annual Meeting June 27, 2013 Jay Styles Performance and Strategic t Planning Manager, Business Transformation Office Overview Map-21- How is VDOT Preparing?

More information

I-66 Corridor Improvements Outside the Capital Beltway in Northern Virginia, USA

I-66 Corridor Improvements Outside the Capital Beltway in Northern Virginia, USA 15th International Conference on Managed Lanes I-66 Corridor Improvements Outside the Capital Beltway in Northern Virginia, USA Case Study for Funding of Transit Service and Transportation Demand Management

More information

PPTA Project Pipeline

PPTA Project Pipeline PPTA Project Pipeline Commonwealth of Virginia May 2012 Opening Remarks The Commonwealth of Virginia was developed in the 17 th century as a risky, but ultimately highly successful business venture between

More information

The Policies section will also provide guidance and short range policies in order to accomplish the goals and objectives.

The Policies section will also provide guidance and short range policies in order to accomplish the goals and objectives. 4 Goals & Objectives INTRODUCTION The 2015-2040 MTP preserves and promotes the quality of life and economic prosperity of the MAB by providing a transportation system consistent with the regional goals.

More information

PRTC Strategic Plan Recommendations

PRTC Strategic Plan Recommendations PRTC Strategic Plan s September 2017 Strategic Plan Overview Phase I Potential Funding Alternatives Strategies for establishing alternative funding sources Draft report submitted to PRTC in November 2016

More information

ARLINGTON COUNTY TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN

ARLINGTON COUNTY TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN p EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Report Prepared by: ARLINGTON COUNTY TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN The Arlington County Transit Development Plan (TDP) is an effort to evaluate and assess the performance, connectivity,

More information

MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION AND PERFORMANCE

MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION AND PERFORMANCE 12 MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION AND PERFORMANCE The FAST Act continues the legislation authorized under MAP-21, which created a data-driven, performance-based multimodal program to address the many challenges

More information

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE 2030 MOBILITY PLAN STUDY UPDATE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES PREPARED FOR: CITY OF JACKSONVILLE

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE 2030 MOBILITY PLAN STUDY UPDATE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES PREPARED FOR: CITY OF JACKSONVILLE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE 2030 MOBILITY PLAN STUDY UPDATE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES 3.20.2017 PREPARED FOR: CITY OF JACKSONVILLE 55 Railroad Row White River Junction, VT 05001 802.295.4999

More information

Sustainability. Sustainability Principles. 1. Framework. Spokane Transit s definition of Sustainability is:

Sustainability. Sustainability Principles. 1. Framework. Spokane Transit s definition of Sustainability is: Sustainability Spokane Transit s definition of Sustainability is: Sustainability at Spokane Transit is about providing services in ways that optimize our ability to meet the needs of present and future

More information

MEMORANDUM EXAMPLES FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES NEXT STEPS. Item 3 Long-Range Plan Task Force May 17, 2017

MEMORANDUM EXAMPLES FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES NEXT STEPS. Item 3 Long-Range Plan Task Force May 17, 2017 Item 3 Long-Range Plan Task Force May 17, 2017 MEMORANDUM TO: TPB Long-Range Plan Task Force FROM: Kanti Srikanth, TPB Staff Director SUBJECT: Sample list of improvement initiatives for illustrative purposes

More information

2040 Transportation Policy Plan Conversion to Performance Based Planning Basis. 25 th Annual CTS Transportation Research Conference May 21, 2014

2040 Transportation Policy Plan Conversion to Performance Based Planning Basis. 25 th Annual CTS Transportation Research Conference May 21, 2014 2040 Transportation Policy Plan Conversion to Performance Based Planning Basis 25 th Annual CTS Transportation Research Conference May 21, 2014 1 About the plan Long-range transportation plan for the Twin

More information

ITEM 9 Action October 18, 2017

ITEM 9 Action October 18, 2017 ITEM 9 Action October 18, 2017 Approval of the Air Quality Conformity Analysis of the VDOT and MDOT Off-Cycle Amendment to the 2016 CLRP and Approval of the 2016 Off-Cycle Amendment Staff Recommendation:

More information

VDOT ASSESSMENT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL DULLES AIR CARGO, PASSENGER METRO ACCESS HIGHWAY

VDOT ASSESSMENT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL DULLES AIR CARGO, PASSENGER METRO ACCESS HIGHWAY LOUDOUN COUNTY PROJECT NUMBER: R000-053-032, P101; UPC NO. 103929 FEDERAL PROJECT NUMBER: STP-5A01(454) VDOT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION & VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

More information

Route 670 Connector Road

Route 670 Connector Road SMART SCALE Application Route 670 Connector Road Status: Scored ID: F2-0000001167-R02 General Point of Contact Information Point of Contact Name Bart Point of Contact Phone (434) 985-1486 Point of Contact

More information

TCATS October 12-Michigan Works 5:30-7pm. NATS October 19-Niles District Library 6-7:30pm

TCATS October 12-Michigan Works 5:30-7pm. NATS October 19-Niles District Library 6-7:30pm Goal Development Workshop TCATS October 12- Works 5:30-7pm NATS October 19-Niles District Library 6-7:30pm SAFETEA-LU Goals 2035 TwinCATS Goals 2030 TwinCATS Goals 1. Support the economic vitality of the

More information

TPB Scenario Study Task Force: Proposal for Development and Analysis of Two New Scenarios

TPB Scenario Study Task Force: Proposal for Development and Analysis of Two New Scenarios ITEM 15 TPB Scenario Study Task Force: Proposal for Development and Analysis of Two New Scenarios February 20, 2008 Proposal for Two New Scenarios o At its January 16, 2008 meeting, the Scenario Study

More information

HB2 Implementation Policy Guide

HB2 Implementation Policy Guide report HB2 Implementation Policy Guide prepared for Commonwealth Transportation Board date August 1, 2015 6.0 Appendix A: Safety Measures Table 6.1 Safety Factor Measures Summary ID Measure Name Weight

More information

Scope of Work. Project Approach and Understanding. Task 1: Study Initiation and Administration

Scope of Work. Project Approach and Understanding. Task 1: Study Initiation and Administration Scope of Work Route 116/Hinesburg Growth Center Corridor Study Town of Hinesburg and CCRPC Project Approach and Understanding Route 116 through Hinesburg had seen substantial changes in the past 15 years,

More information

Project Overview. A Collaborative Effort

Project Overview. A Collaborative Effort Project Overview A Collaborative Effort DRPT and FRA are working closely with CSX, which owns and operates the corridor, as well as with passenger operators Amtrak and Virginia Railway Express (VRE), the

More information

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/ Section 106 Public Meeting Proposed Alternatives. December 14, 2017

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/ Section 106 Public Meeting Proposed Alternatives. December 14, 2017 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/ Section 106 Public Meeting Proposed Alternatives December 14, 2017 Today s Agenda Project Overview Project Schedule Purpose and Need Concept Screening Process Level

More information

Long Bridge Project. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Revised Purpose and Need

Long Bridge Project. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Revised Purpose and Need Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Revised Purpose and Need June 23, 2017 1.0 What is the Proposed Action? The consists of potential improvements to the Long Bridge and related railroad infrastructure

More information

This page intentionally left blank.

This page intentionally left blank. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This page intentionally left blank. SATOMORROW MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The City of San Antonio is anticipated to experience tremendous growth resulting

More information

National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board

National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board Evaluating Alternative Scenarios for a Network of Variably Priced Highway Lanes in the Metropolitan Washington Region Final Report February, 2008 FUNDED

More information

APPENDIX H: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL VALIDATION AND ANALYSIS

APPENDIX H: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL VALIDATION AND ANALYSIS APPENDIX H: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL VALIDATION AND ANALYSIS Travel demand models (TDM) simulate current travel conditions and forecast future travel patterns and conditions based on planned system improvements

More information

MOBILITY, ACCESSIBIILTY, AND CONNECTIVITY

MOBILITY, ACCESSIBIILTY, AND CONNECTIVITY Virginia s Long-Range Multimodal Transportation Plan 2007-2035 MOBILITY, ACCESSIBIILTY, AND CONNECTIVITY Prepared for: Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment October 2009 Prepared by: KFH Group,

More information

THE REGION S PLAN POLICY FRAMEWORK. August 2015

THE REGION S PLAN POLICY FRAMEWORK. August 2015 THE REGION S PLAN POLICY FRAMEWORK August 2015 2 What is The Policy Framework? Cover photo credit: Sinan Sinharoy for Atlanta BeltLine, Inc. Atlanta is one of the world s most dynamic metropolitan areas,

More information

Rapid City Area Metropolitan Planning Organization OPERATIONS PLAN

Rapid City Area Metropolitan Planning Organization OPERATIONS PLAN Rapid City Area Metropolitan Planning Organization OPERATIONS PLAN Prepared for the Rapid City Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Endorsed by the Executive Policy Committee of the Rapid City Area

More information

Purpose of the Countywide Transportation Plan SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Purpose of the Countywide Transportation Plan SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY > 12 Purpose of the Countywide Transportation Plan SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 13 SAN FRANCISCO S MULTIMODAL transportation network is crucial to San Francisco s status as a major regional

More information

AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE EVALUATION GUIDANCE

AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE EVALUATION GUIDANCE AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE EVALUATION GUIDANCE The following guidance provides additional details regarding the process followed by PSRC to evaluate projects for potential air quality benefits. As

More information

FAIRFAX COUNTY PARK-AND-RIDE DEMAND ESTIMATION STUDY

FAIRFAX COUNTY PARK-AND-RIDE DEMAND ESTIMATION STUDY FAIRFAX COUNTY PARK-AND-RIDE DEMAND ESTIMATION STUDY Michael Demmon GIS Spatial Analyst Fairfax County, DOT Fairfax, VA Scudder Wagg Planner Michael Baker Jr, Inc. Richmond, VA Additional support from:

More information

To provide an update on the progress of the Peel Goods Movement Task Force and Peel Goods Movement Strategic Plan.

To provide an update on the progress of the Peel Goods Movement Task Force and Peel Goods Movement Strategic Plan. 8.4-1 REPORT Meeting Date: 2014-06-26 Regional Council For Information DATE: June 17, 2014 REPORT TITLE: PEEL GOODS MOVEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE 2014 FROM: Dan Labrecque, Commissioner of Public Works

More information

Phase 1 Status Report to the General Assembly PREFACE

Phase 1 Status Report to the General Assembly PREFACE PREFACE The Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) was directed by the 2002 General Assembly through passage of House Bill (HB) 771 to develop a statewide multimodal longrange transportation plan with

More information

CRTPA Regional Mobility Plan Attachment 1 Agenda Item 4E Page 1 of 11

CRTPA Regional Mobility Plan Attachment 1 Agenda Item 4E Page 1 of 11 CRTPA Regional Mobility Plan Attachment 1 Page 1 of 11 INTRODUCTION Everyone wants to have the ability to move around the city, county, region, country and world in the way that they see fit, when they

More information

1RUWKZHVW#:LFKLWD 0DMRU#,QYHVWPHQW#6WXG\

1RUWKZHVW#:LFKLWD 0DMRU#,QYHVWPHQW#6WXG\ 1RUWKZHVW#:LFKLWD 0DMRU#,QYHVWPHQW#6WXG\ Executive Summary 3UHSDUHGýIRUã 3UHSDUHGýE\ã.DQVDVý'HSDUWPHQWýRI 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ,QýDVVRFLDWLRQýZLWKã (DUWKý7HFKý,QFï EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction This Northwest

More information

URBAN CENTER COMMUNITY ROLE COUNCIL ROLE ALL COMMUNITIES URBAN CENTER

URBAN CENTER COMMUNITY ROLE COUNCIL ROLE ALL COMMUNITIES URBAN CENTER Orderly and Efficient Land Use Align land use, development patterns, and infrastructure to make the best use of public and private investment. Plan for forecasted population and household growth at average

More information

BOSTON REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

BOSTON REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION PLANNING ORGANIZATIO BOSTON REGION MPO NMETROPOLITAN BOSTON REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Stephanie Pollack, MassDOT Secretary and CEO and MPO Chair Karl H. Quackenbush, Executive Director,

More information

Regional Transportation Studies Regional Council

Regional Transportation Studies Regional Council Pima Association of Governments 1 E. Broadway, Tucson, Arizona Santa Rita Conference Room Regional Transportation Studies Regional Council September 28, 2017 I-11 Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement

More information

Appendix S. Monitoring Performance. Monitoring Performance. Appendix Contents

Appendix S. Monitoring Performance. Monitoring Performance. Appendix Contents Appendix S Monitoring Performance Appendix Contents Monitoring Performance Monitoring Performance San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan builds upon and combines elements from the SANDAG 2050 Regional Transportation

More information

1.1.1.b. Agencies share best practices as they integrate COMPASS facilitates

1.1.1.b. Agencies share best practices as they integrate COMPASS facilitates Transportation Goals 1.1 Enhance the system to improve accessibility and connectivity to jobs, schools, and services; allow the efficient movement of people and goods; and ensure the reliability of travel

More information

Business Plan for FY14 FY15

Business Plan for FY14 FY15 Business Plan for FY14 FY15 Commissioner s Message May 2013 The Executive Team and I are pleased to present the new Business Plan for FY 2014-15. This plan builds on the key priorities to deliver our mission:

More information

LAND USE POLICIES BY COMMUNITY DESIGNATION

LAND USE POLICIES BY COMMUNITY DESIGNATION 137 2040 138 Land Use Policies by Community Designation As discussed earlier in Thrive MSP 2040, the Council assigns a community designation to each city and township. This designation indicates the overall

More information

Appendix D: Functional Classification Criteria and Characteristics, and MnDOT Access Guidance

Appendix D: Functional Classification Criteria and Characteristics, and MnDOT Access Guidance APPENDICES Appendix D: Functional Classification Criteria and Characteristics, and MnDOT Access Guidance D.1 Functional classification identifies the role a highway or street plays in the transportation

More information

TEXAS MEXICO TRANSPORTATION BORDER MASTER PLAN UPDATE

TEXAS MEXICO TRANSPORTATION BORDER MASTER PLAN UPDATE TEXAS MEXICO TRANSPORTATION BORDER MASTER PLAN UPDATE Border Trade Advisory Committee Footer Text Date Background Information: May 31, 2017 Previous border master plans (2013 / 2014) Primarily focused

More information

TRANSPORTATION 101 Today and Tomorrow. Moving People and Goods

TRANSPORTATION 101 Today and Tomorrow. Moving People and Goods TRANSPORTATION 101 Today and Tomorrow Moving People and Goods What is the Transportation Commission? An independent, seven-member body of citizens appointed by the Governor for six-year terms and representing

More information

Section 5: Performance-Based Planning

Section 5: Performance-Based Planning Section 5: Performance-Based Planning Mapping the Future: The Southwestern PA Plan establishes a performance-based foundation for regional transportation investment decisions consistent with MAP-21 1 guidance.

More information

NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BOARD

NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BOARD NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BOARD September 18, 2013 District Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration AGENDA Vision History & Background Study Area Purpose & Need

More information

Memorandum. FROM: Jim Ortbal Rosalynn Hughey Barry Ng TO: HONORABLE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL. DATE: June 16, 2017

Memorandum. FROM: Jim Ortbal Rosalynn Hughey Barry Ng TO: HONORABLE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL. DATE: June 16, 2017 CITY OF SANjOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION POLICY UPDATE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW - LOS TO VMT Memorandum FROM: Jim Ortbal Rosalynn Hughey Barry Ng

More information

NATMEC June 30, 2014 Anita Vandervalk, PE, PMP

NATMEC June 30, 2014 Anita Vandervalk, PE, PMP NATMEC June 30, 2014 Anita Vandervalk, PE, PMP Agenda 1. Florida s MPM Program 2. Research Efforts and Progress 3. Source Book 4. Transitioning to Real Time Data 5. Next Steps Importance of Mobility Providing

More information

TRAFFIC ANALYSES TO SUPPORT NEPA STUDIES

TRAFFIC ANALYSES TO SUPPORT NEPA STUDIES VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION NEPA PROGRAM LOCATION STUDIES TRAFFIC ANALYSES TO SUPPORT NEPA STUDIES CONSULTANT RESOURCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT Issued on: November 18, 2016 Last

More information

Tri-Cities Transportation Study Area Congestion Management System Operations Plan

Tri-Cities Transportation Study Area Congestion Management System Operations Plan Tri-Cities Transportation Study Area Congestion Management System Operations Plan Executive Summary This report is update to the report developed in 1997. Federal regulations require that a Congestion

More information

AGENDA ITEM #13: MAP-21/FAST ACT SAFETY PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND TARGETS Keith Nichols, HRTPO

AGENDA ITEM #13: MAP-21/FAST ACT SAFETY PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND TARGETS Keith Nichols, HRTPO AGENDA ITEM #13: MAP-21/FAST ACT SAFETY PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND TARGETS Keith Nichols, HRTPO Recent federal surface transportation legislation established that States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations

More information

Tier 1 Recommendations October 30, 2017

Tier 1 Recommendations October 30, 2017 Tier 1 Recommendations October 30, 2017 Page Left Intentionally Blank Bristol District B.2 B.9 Need Tier 1 District Needs Need Description Within the Bristol MPO, the I-81 interchanges in Abingdon have

More information

Technical Memorandum MULTIMODAL NEEDS. Prepared for: Oklahoma Department of Transportation. Prepared by:

Technical Memorandum MULTIMODAL NEEDS. Prepared for: Oklahoma Department of Transportation. Prepared by: Technical Memorandum MULTIMODAL NEEDS Prepared for: Oklahoma Department of Transportation Prepared by: May 2015 Technical Memorandum The Technical Memos were written to document early research for the

More information

2 Purpose and Need. 2.1 Study Area. I-81 Corridor Improvement Study Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement

2 Purpose and Need. 2.1 Study Area. I-81 Corridor Improvement Study Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 2 Purpose and Need 2.1 Study Area Interstate 81 (I-81) is relied upon for local and regional travel and interstate travel in the eastern United States. It extends 855 miles from Tennessee to New York at

More information

Strategic Plan Charlottesville-Albemarle MPO May 25, 2016

Strategic Plan Charlottesville-Albemarle MPO May 25, 2016 Strategic Plan Charlottesville-Albemarle MPO May 25, 2016 Introduction In Fiscal Year 2016, the Charlottesville-Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization (CA-MPO) adopted its first Strategic Plan, setting

More information

Director of Transportation Planning

Director of Transportation Planning Director of Transportation Planning The Lehigh Valley Planning Commission (LVPC) is seeking a candidate for Director of Transportation Planning to lead a team developing and managing the implementation

More information

Chapter 2 Performance Measures

Chapter 2 Performance Measures Transportation Decision-making Principles of Project Evaluation and Programming Chapter 2 Performance Measures K. C. Sinha and S. Labi Purdue University School of Civil Engineering 1 Performance Measures

More information

FERRY COUNTY COUNTY-WIDE PLANNING POLICIES

FERRY COUNTY COUNTY-WIDE PLANNING POLICIES FERRY COUNTY COUNTY-WIDE PLANNING POLICIES This memorandum of understanding lays out the framework upon which the comprehensive planning process for Ferry County and the City of Republic will be built.

More information

Chapter 6: Regional Transportation

Chapter 6: Regional Transportation Chapter 6: Regional Transportation Continued growth and development throughout the region magnifies the significance of connections to surrounding counties as economic and social interactions continue

More information

Functional Classification Comprehensive Guide. Prepared by

Functional Classification Comprehensive Guide. Prepared by Functional Classification Comprehensive Guide Prepared by June 6, 2014 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT The intent of this document is to provide a comprehensive guide to Virginia Department of Transportation

More information

1.1 Purpose of the Project

1.1 Purpose of the Project Chapter 1 Purpose and Need for East Link Project 1.1 Purpose of the Project The purpose of the East Link Project is to expand the Sound Transit Link light rail system from Seattle to Mercer Island, Bellevue

More information

EXHIBIT A. TRANSIT AND MULTIMODAL DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT CONTINUING SERVICES SCOPE OF SERVICES FM No

EXHIBIT A. TRANSIT AND MULTIMODAL DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT CONTINUING SERVICES SCOPE OF SERVICES FM No EXHIBIT A TRANSIT AND MULTIMODAL DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT CONTINUING SERVICES SCOPE OF SERVICES FM No. 429768-4-12-01 This Exhibit forms an integral part of the Agreement between the DEPARTMENT and, the CONSULTANT,

More information

3.2. Transportation Management Plan

3.2. Transportation Management Plan 3.2 Transportation Management Plan August 2016 From: Lal, Tarsem (FHWA) [mailto:tarsem.lal@dot.gov] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2016 11:41 AM To: Allahdoust, Fatemeh (VDOT) Cc: Bill Lecos; Bondurant, Carol

More information

AMPO Annual Conference Session: Performance (Part 1) October 18, 2017 Savannah, GA

AMPO Annual Conference Session: Performance (Part 1) October 18, 2017 Savannah, GA AMPO Annual Conference Session: Performance (Part 1) October 18, 2017 Savannah, GA Introduction: North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority NJTPA Congestion Management Process Study Goals Analysis

More information

SOUTHEAST FLORIDA REGIONAL COMPACT CLIMATE CHANGE. Sustainable Communities & Transportation Planning

SOUTHEAST FLORIDA REGIONAL COMPACT CLIMATE CHANGE. Sustainable Communities & Transportation Planning SOUTHEAST FLORIDA REGIONAL COMPACT CLIMATE CHANGE Draft Regional Climate Action Plan Sustainable Communities & Transportation Planning SP-1 Develop criteria in collaboration with municipal and county planning

More information

I-70 East ROD 1: Phase 1 (Central 70 Project) Air Quality Conformity Technical Report

I-70 East ROD 1: Phase 1 (Central 70 Project) Air Quality Conformity Technical Report I-70 East ROD 1: Air Quality Conformity Technical Report January 2017 I-70 East ROD 1: Air Quality Conformity Technical Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1 PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT... 1 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...

More information

The Indian Nations Council of Governments (INCOG) 2035 Plan: Roadways Element

The Indian Nations Council of Governments (INCOG) 2035 Plan: Roadways Element Roadways The Indian Nations Council of Governments (INCOG) The Indian Nations Council of Governments is the designated regional planning organization for the Tulsa Transportation Management Area (TMA).

More information

SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY

SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. : 15 DIVISION: Sustainable Streets BRIEF DESCRIPTION: SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY Adopting the 2017 Transportation Sector Climate Action Strategy,

More information

Draft Environmental Assessment Terminal B/C Redevelopment, Secure National Hall, and Related Improvements

Draft Environmental Assessment Terminal B/C Redevelopment, Secure National Hall, and Related Improvements JUNE 2016 RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT Draft Environmental Assessment Terminal B/C Redevelopment, Secure National Hall, and Related Improvements PREPARED BY: Ricondo & Associates, Inc. IN

More information

Florida Department of TRANSPORTATION Florida Transportation Plan (FTP) and Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) Strategic Plan Updates

Florida Department of TRANSPORTATION Florida Transportation Plan (FTP) and Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) Strategic Plan Updates Florida Department of TRANSPORTATION Florida Transportation Plan (FTP) and Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) Strategic Plan Updates Jim Wood Director, Office of Policy Planning Overview The FTP and the

More information

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDIES

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDIES January 28, 2009 POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDIES Related to Highway Occupancy Permits Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Bureau of Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering

More information

APPENDIX B. Public Works and Development Engineering Services Division Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies

APPENDIX B. Public Works and Development Engineering Services Division Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies APPENDIX B Public Works and Development Engineering Services Division Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies Revised December 7, 2010 via Resolution # 100991 Reformatted March 18, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS

More information

DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS 1290 BROADWAY, SUITE 100 DENVER, CO

DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS 1290 BROADWAY, SUITE 100 DENVER, CO DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS 1290 BROADWAY, SUITE 100 DENVER, CO 80203 WWW.DRCOG.ORG Preparation of this report has been financed in part through grants from the U.S. Department of Transportation,

More information

HORIZON 2030: Plan Projects November 2005

HORIZON 2030: Plan Projects November 2005 Horizon PROJECTS 2030 Projects 10-1 10-2 The Horizon 2030 Project Information section is comprised of individual project information in alphabetical order by project name. The information provided for

More information

National Capital Region Congestion Report

National Capital Region Congestion Report NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BOARD National Capital Region Congestion Report 2nd Quarter 2014 Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments 777 North Capitol Street, N.E., Suite 300,

More information

Appendix. B RTP Checklist REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY

Appendix. B RTP Checklist REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY Appendix B RTP Checklist REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY Regional Transportation Plan Checklist (Revised February 2010) (To be completed electronically in Microsoft Word format

More information

Transit Service Guidelines

Transit Service Guidelines G R E AT E R VA N CO U V E R T R A N S P O RTAT I O N A U T H O R I T Y Transit Service Guidelines PUBLIC SUMMARY REPORT JUNE 2004 Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority TRANSIT SERVICE GUIDELINES

More information

Institute of Transportation Engineers Inc.

Institute of Transportation Engineers Inc. August 20 th, 2016 Gregory G. Nadeau Administrator, Federal Highway Administration US Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 RE: Docket No. FHWA-2013-0054 Dear Administrator

More information

Elements of a Complete Streets Policy Effective 2018

Elements of a Complete Streets Policy Effective 2018 1152 15 th Street NW, Suite 450 www.smartgrowthamerica.org/completestreets Washington, DC 20005 202-207-3355 Elements of a Complete Streets Policy Effective 2018 The National Complete Streets Coalition

More information

Working with Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas

Working with Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas Working with Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas September 2006 Presented by the Florida Department of Transportation Working with Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas Volume 1, September

More information

New Jersey Pilot Study

New Jersey Pilot Study New Jersey Pilot Study Testing Potential MAP-21 System Performance Measures for Two Corridors Executive Summary October 2014 ABOUT THE NJTPA THE NJTPA IS THE FEDERALLY AUTHORIZED Metropolitan Planning

More information

Central Phoenix Transportation Framework Study

Central Phoenix Transportation Framework Study Central Phoenix Transportation Framework Study Study Area 2013, All Rights Reserved. 1 Agenda Introductions Work Products Feedback on previous products Draft products for Planning Partner review SR-30

More information

Re: Mobility Plan 2035 FEIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis

Re: Mobility Plan 2035 FEIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis Sirius Environmental Claire Bowin, Senior City Planner City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning 200 North Spring Street, Room 272 Los Angeles, California 90012 Dear Claire: Re: Mobility Plan 2035

More information

USDOT PERFORMANCE BASED PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING (PBPP)

USDOT PERFORMANCE BASED PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING (PBPP) USDOT PERFORMANCE BASED PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING (PBPP) Eric Randall TPB Transportation Engineer Jane Posey TPB Transportation Engineer MWAQC TAC February 14, 2017 Agenda Item 4 Performance Based Planning

More information

EVALUATING AND COMMUNICATING MODEL RESULTS: GUIDEBOOK FOR PLANNERS

EVALUATING AND COMMUNICATING MODEL RESULTS: GUIDEBOOK FOR PLANNERS EVALUATING AND COMMUNICATING MODEL RESULTS: GUIDEBOOK FOR PLANNERS Requested by: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Standing Committee on Planning Prepared by:

More information

FY Unified Planning Work Program. Kalamazoo Area Transportation Study 5220 Lovers Lane, Suite 110 Portage, MI (269)

FY Unified Planning Work Program. Kalamazoo Area Transportation Study 5220 Lovers Lane, Suite 110 Portage, MI (269) FY 2018 FY Unified Planning Work Program Kalamazoo Area Transportation Study 5220 Lovers Lane, Suite 110 Portage, MI 49002 (269) 343-0766 www.katsmpo.org [This page intentionally left blank.] FY 2018 Unified

More information

AN ASSESSMENT OF REGIONAL INITIATIVES FOR THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION - DRAFT

AN ASSESSMENT OF REGIONAL INITIATIVES FOR THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION - DRAFT AN ASSESSMENT OF REGIONAL INITIATIVES FOR THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION - DRAFT Technical Report on Phase II of the TPB Long-Range Plan Task Force December 2017 AN ASSESSMENT OF REGIONAL INITIATIVES FOR

More information

Future System Planning (ST4)

Future System Planning (ST4) Future System Planning (ST4) Subarea All Primary Mode Policies and Programs Facility Type Length Version Draft ST3 Plan Date Last Modified March 28, 2016 PROJECT AREA AND REPRESENTATIVE ALIGNMENT SHORT

More information

Greater Newcastle Transport Plan

Greater Newcastle Transport Plan Greater Newcastle Transport Plan Engineers Australia submission 16 February 2018 11 National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 Tel: 02 6270 6555 Email: publicaffairs@engineersaustralia.org.au www.engineersaustralia.org.au

More information

To provide an update on the progress of the Peel Goods Movement Task Force and the Peel Goods Movement Strategic Plan.

To provide an update on the progress of the Peel Goods Movement Task Force and the Peel Goods Movement Strategic Plan. 9.2-1 REPORT Meeting Date: 2015-11-26 Regional Council For Information DATE: November 10, 2015 REPORT TITLE: REGION OF PEEL GOODS MOVEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN - 2015 STATUS UPDATE FROM: Dan Labrecque, Commissioner

More information