Prepared By: Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc.

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

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan 2075 Broadway, Redwood City, CA

Evaluation of Alternatives

INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR PROBABLE CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION (SECTION (d))

Traffic generated by future approved, planned or potential development activity.

Revenues and expenditures increase based on the tax district increase due to increases in real estate assessments in CY 2016 compared to CY 2015.

Appendix H. Millennium Hollywood Project Trip Cap and Mitigation Triggers

LANDSIDE FACILITIES AIRLINE TERMINAL FACILITIES INVENTORY 5.0 INTRODUCTION C H A P T E R 1 CHAPTER 5

APPENDIX B - GLOSSARY FEBRUARY 2017

Town of Lexington Planning Board

COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION REVIEW THE WHARF PHASE 2 PUD

Contents i Contents Page 1 A New Transportation Plan Community Involvement Goals and Objectives... 11

Traffic Impact Study Requirements

ALBION FLATS DEVELOPMENT EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS

CRYSTAL CITY, POTOMAC YARD, AND PENTAGON CITY TAX INCREMENT FINANCING AREA

DDI s Can Move More Than Cars. Alex Ariniello. Presentation for the ITE Western District Annual Meeting. July, 2016 in Albuquerque, New Mexico

BAY MEADOWS II TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN

Northern Virginia Region Draft Needs Summary

BAY MEADOWS II TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN

Future Build Alternative Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service Analysis

VEHICLES MILES TRAVELED (VMT) TRAFFIC IMPACT METRIC

Guidelines for the Submission of a Transportation Study Level 2

Moffett Towers. Final Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan. Jay Paul Company. Prepared for: Prepared by:

DIVISION I TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES ENGINEERING STANDARDS

Rivers Edge Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Traffic Study

ATTACHMENT A. Detailed Study Scope. I-66 (Inside) Multi-modal Study Scope

NEED ECONOMIC TRANSPORTATION LOCATIONS EXAMPLE

Transportation and Utilities

VIII. LAND USE ISSUES

4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

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

UPTOWN TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

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

Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. City of Guelph

Clair-Maltby. Mobility Study Work Plan. Prepared by: BA Group. Transform. Connect. Community.

Grottoes. Transportation Plan. Transportation Planning Division. Virginia Department of Transportation

Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines. Town of Queen Creek

DDOT Guidelines for Comprehensive Transportation Review (CTR) Requirements District of Columbia, Department of Transportation

CITY OF DRAPER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY DESIGN GUIDELINES

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA

South Boston. Transportation Plan. Transportation Planning Division. Virginia Department of Transportation

November 8, RE: Harrah s Station Square Casino Transportation Analysis Detailed Traffic Impact Study Review. Dear Mr. Rowe:

GUIDE FOR THE PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES

CITY OF VALLEJO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT Analysis/Study GUIDELINES

WELCOME TO THE LONG BRIDGE PROJECT

TRAFFIC STUDY GUIDELINES

4.12 Public and Emergency Services

(DC2) SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PROVISION

BCEO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES

TRANSPORTATION MOBILITY PLAN GUIDELINES

TRANSPORTATION PROJECT REPORT DRAFT CONCEPTUAL ACCESS MODIFICATION PROPOSAL OCTOBER 2002

Woodburn Interchange Project Transportation Technical Report

City of Menifee. Public Works Department. Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines

Pentagon City PDSP Amendment. Site Plan #105 PenPlace

CHAPTER 8 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

APPENDIX C DRAFT MEMORANDUM. Oakland City Center Development (T12) Transportation Demand Management Program

TRANSPORTATION RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN AND COUNTY REGULATIONS VISION FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ROAD NETWORK SECTION 7

Executive Summary. Study Background

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2050

SECTION 5. Existing Conditions TRANSPORTATION NETWORK TRANSPORTATION

Schedule A. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan Summary Worksheets

The TIS is to be signed and sealed by a Florida Registered Professional Engineer.

From Policy to Reality

5.7 Traffic 5.7 TRAFFIC Affected Environment

City of Berkeley. Guidelines for Development of Traffic Impact Reports

CITY OF CLOVIS Traffic Impact Study Guidelines

STAFF REPORT. Project Description. Proposal. Snyderville Basin Planning Commission From:

Chapter Five: Transportation

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES

APPENDIX Methodology Letter of Understanding (MLOU) and Agency Correspondence

Fairfax Transportation Committee I-66 Multimodal Improvements Inside the Beltway. January 20, 2015

Article 16 Traffic Impact Analysis

CITY OF MARIANNA MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 936 Marianna, FL (850)

Alexandria City Council Arlington County Board Joint Work Session

PROJECT STUDY REPORT. Cal Poly Pomona Senior Project

Transit Service Guidelines

Appendix O Congestion Management Program REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY

CHAPTER 2 - TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL DEVELOPMENT

10.0 Congestion Management Process

APPENDIX A: Transportation Planning Rule

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

TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION 9-1

Updated Traffic Impact Analysis Regulations Administrative Guidelines

INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION REPORT

Transportation and Works Department The Regional Municipality of York Yonge Street Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 6Z1

Assessment of Current Status, Plans, and Preliminary Alternatives for High Capacity Transportation in the I-5 Corridor

The Folded Interchange: An Unconventional Design for the Reconstruction of Cloverleaf Interchanges

Safety and Operations Committee. Information Item IV-A. December 13, 2018

Essex Junction Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Study

City of Lake Forest SERRANO SUMMIT (IRWD SITE) Traffic Study. April 2010

Appendix O Level of Service Standard and Measurements

VTrans2040 Multimodal Transportation Plan Corridors of Statewide Significance Needs Assessment North-South Corridor

SOUTHWEST LRT (METRO GREEN LINE EXTENSION)

MEMORANDUM: INITIAL CONCEPTS SUMMARY

DISTRICT OF NORTH VANCOUVER GUIDELINES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS

SITE AREA AERIAL PHOTO

2017 TIGER DISCRETIONARY GRANT APPLICATION

3.12 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINE

Transcription:

Traffic Impact Analysis Monument View Arlington County, Virginia Prepared For: Gensler 2020 K Street, NW Suite 200 Washington DC 20006 Prepared By: Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc.

PREPARED BY: Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. 7001 Heritage Village Plaza Suite 220 Gainesville, VA 20155 Tel: 571.248.0992 Fax: 703.787.9905 ADDITIONAL OFFICES: 1140 Connecticut Avenue Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: 202.296.8625 Fax: 202.785.1276 3914 Centreville Road Suite 330 Chantilly, VA 20151 Tel: 703.787.9595 Fax: 703.787.9905 www.goroveslade.com This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of services, is intended for the specific purpose and client for which is was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization by Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc., shall be without liability to Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ii List of Tables ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ii Executive Summary --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- iii Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 Scope of Study ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Existing Conditions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 Site Area Transportation System Characteristics ---------------------------------------------------------- 4 Rail/Bus Transit ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 Pedestrian/Bicycle Network --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 Existing Roadway Network --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 Existing Traffic Volumes ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9 Existing Conditions Capacity Analysis --------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 Future Conditions without Development (2013) ----------------------------------------------------------- 13 Future Roadway Network -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13 Future Conditions without Development Traffic Volumes -------------------------------------------- 13 Background Developments in Long Term Future ------------------------------------------------------ 14 Future Conditions without Development Capacity Analysis------------------------------------------- 14 Future Conditions with Development (2013) --------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Site Access -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Site Generated Volumes ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Future Conditions with Development Traffic Volumes ------------------------------------------------ 19 Future Conditions with Development Capacity Analysis ---------------------------------------------- 22 Transportation Demand Management ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 25 Conclusions ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28 i

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Regional Map and Site Location... 2 Figure 2: Existing Transit Routes/Stations and Car-sharing Locations... 4 Figure 3: Existing Bikeways and Trails... 6 Figure 4: Existing (2010) Roadway Network... 8 Figure 5: Existing (2010) Traffic Volumes... 11 Figure 6: Existing (2010) Levels of Service... 12 Figure 7: Future without Development (2013) Traffic Volumes... 16 Figure 8: Future without Development (2013) Levels of Service... 17 Figure 9: Site Generated Traffic Volumes... 20 Figure 10: Future with Development (2013) Traffic Volumes... 21 Figure 11: Future with Development (2013) Levels of Service... 23 Figure 12: Future with Development (2013) Recommended Improvements... 24 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis (2010)... 9 Table 2: Background Development Trip Generation... 14 Table 3: Future Conditions without Development Intersection Capacity Analysis (2013)... 14 Table 4: Trip Generation for Proposed Land Use... 18 Table 5: Trip Generation Comparison... 18 Table 6: Future Conditions with Development Intersection Capacity Analysis (2013)... 22 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Existing Traffic Volumes & Count Sheets Appendix B: Level of Service Definitions Appendix C: Intersection Capacity Analysis Results Existing Condition Appendix D: Intersection Capacity Analysis Results Future Conditions without Development Appendix E: Intersection Capacity Analysis Results Future Conditions with Development ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following report presents the findings of a traffic impact analysis for the proposed Monument View office development in Arlington County, Virginia. The site is bound on the north by Old Jefferson Davis Highway, on the east by 6 th Street South, on the west by 10 th Street South, and on the south by South Ball Street. Three Metrorail Stations and the Pentagon Metrobus hub are located within the onemile radius area around the subject site. The previously approved traffic study reflected a development plan that called for a mix of residential and office uses. This study is an update to reflect the changes in the development plan, which will consist of approximately 443,299 square feet of office use to be complete by 2013. The analysis presented in this report supports the following major conclusions: The existing conditions capacity analyses show that the intersections within the study area are currently operating at acceptable levels of service. Based on historical data provided by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), Old Jefferson Davis Highway and other roadways surrounding the site are expected to experience minimal growth within the next few years, excluding any trips generated by local background developments. One local background development was considered in this study: the phase 1 buildout of Arlington County s Long Bridge Park. This development will generate approximately 2,545 vehicle trips per day after the first phase of construction is completed in 2011. Planned improvements as part of the County s Long Bridge Park construction project include the reconstruction of Old Jefferson Davis Highway within the vicinity of the site and the extension of 6 th Street South to connect with Old Jefferson Davis Highway as a T- intersection. The 2013 future conditions analyses reveal that the study intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service with and without the proposed Monument View site, other than the intersection of 12 th Street South and Army Navy Drive. The proposed development will have a minimal impact on its surrounding roadway network. After applying a 10% trip reduction to account for transit use, the proposed development will generate approximately 556 trips during the AM peak hour, 518 trips during the PM peak hour, and 3,779 average trips per day. The latest Monument View development plan shows a reduction in trips when compared to the previously approved plan. It is recommended to restripe the westbound approach at Old Jefferson Davis Highway and Army Navy Drive as shared left/thru and exclusive right turn lane. iii

INTRODUCTION This report presents the findings of a traffic impact analysis for the proposed Monument View development in Arlington County, Virginia. The site is bound on the north by Old Jefferson Davis Highway, on the east by 6 th Street South, on the west by 10 th Street South, and on the south by South Ball Street. It is adjacent to the southern limits of Long Bridge Park, which is currently under construction. The proposed development will consist of approximately 443,299 SF of office use. The development is estimated to be complete by 2013. A regional map showing the location of the site is included in Figure 1. The following tasks were undertaken as part of this study: A scoping document was prepared and accepted by Arlington County staff on October 27, 2010. This document describes the scope and parameters used to prepare this study; Field reconnaissance in the vicinity of the site was performed to collect information related to existing traffic controls, roadway geometry, and traffic flow characteristics; Vehicle turning movement counts were conducted on October 19, 2010 and January 13, 2010 at the study intersections during the morning and afternoon peak periods; Future without development traffic conditions were projected based on inherent growth and background developments in the area; Proposed site traffic volumes were generated based on the methodology outlined in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) UTrip GenerationU, 8 th Edition publication; Future with development traffic conditions were projected based on regional growth, existing regional and site traffic patterns, and the proposed development plan; and Intersection capacity analyses were performed for the existing conditions (2010), future conditions without development (2013), and future conditions with development (2013) during the weekday peak hours at the intersections located within the study area. Sources of data for this study include Arlington County, Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), Gensler, Vika Inc., and the office files and field reconnaissance efforts of Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. 1

SITE Figure 1: Regional Map and Site Location Scope of Study The following intersections were identified for inclusion in this study: 1) 12 th Street South and Army Navy Drive; 2) 12 th Street South and Old Jefferson Davis Highway; 3) Old Jefferson Davis Highway and 10 th Street South; and 4) Old Jefferson Davis Highway and 6 th Street South (future). 2

This report presents the findings of analyses performed for the following conditions: Existing Conditions (2010): Considers existing traffic volumes and existing roadway configurations during the morning and afternoon peak hours; Future Conditions without Development (Future Background 2013): Considers future traffic conditions for the year 2013 with the background growth and approved development, but does not include volumes generated by the proposed Monument View development; and Future Conditions with Development (Total Future 2013): Considers future traffic conditions for the year 2013 (build-out year) with the background growth, approved development, and the proposed Monument View development. The results of the analysis and the traffic impacts associated with the proposed development plan are presented in the Conclusion section of this report. 3

EXISTING CONDITIONS Site Area Transportation System Characteristics The subject development is located at the northern end of Crystal City, and as such, it has access to numerous modes of transportation. It is near several major vehicular commuting corridors, including I-395, George Washington Memorial Parkway, Jefferson Davis Highway, Route 110, and Washington Boulevard, three Metrorail Stations, on-street bicycle lanes and shared use trails, a Virginia Railway Express (VRE) station, and Reagan National Airport. Though there are no bus routes that run directly adjacent the site along Old Jefferson Davis Highway, there is a Metrobus hub at the Pentagon Metrorail station, and bus routes traverse almost all roads throughout Pentagon City and Crystal City. Rail/Bus Transit The existing Zipcar car-sharing parking locations, bus routes, and currently planned DC Streetcar alignment in the vicinity of the site are shown in Figure 2. The proposed development is less than a 15 minute walk from the Crystal City and Pentagon City Metrorail Stations and Intermodal Bus Terminals (located adjacent to the Metrorail stations), and VRE station. According to the latest DC Streetcar alignment, Monument View is positioned to be approximately 500 feet from one planned station along 12 th Street South, located halfway between Old Jefferson Davis Highway and Crystal Drive. Figure 2: Existing Transit Routes/Stations and Car-sharing Locations 4

Pedestrian/Bicycle Network Pentagon City and Crystal City both feature extensive bicycle lanes, on-street bicycle routes, shareduse trails, and sidewalk networks that provide the region with a high degree of connectivity. The existing sidewalk and bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the site are illustrated in Figure 3. Additionally, the comprehensive bicycle sharing program launched in 2010, Capital Bikeshare, contains several stations near the future Monument View site. In total it has 1,100 bikes at 114 stations around the Arlington County and Washington DC region and is the largest program of its kind in the United States. The built environment immediately surrounding the site is in the process of transitioning into an accessible transportation network. Sidewalks are absent along the section of Old Jefferson Davis Highway north of the site, and along 6 th Street South. However, these roadways are currently being reconstructed by Arlington County as part of the Long Bridge Park construction project to feature pedestrian and bicycle accommodations. These improvements are scheduled to be finished by summer of 2011. Additionally, the Long Bridge Park project will include the construction of an esplanade adjacent to the existing CSX/VRE railroad tracks. This pathway will serve as a gateway for bicyclists and pedestrians seeking to travel to and from the park, and neighboring Monument View, to Crystal Drive and Mount Vernon Trail in the south. Moreover, the esplanade will extend along the entire southern border of Long Bridge Park and provide access to the County s future recreation facility on the northern portion of the park. 5

Figure 3: Existing Bikeways and Trails 6

Existing Roadway Network A description of the major roadways linked to the site is presented below. It should be noted the roadways described herein refer to the existing intersections within the immediate vicinity of the site. The existing roadway network including the lane configuration and traffic control can be found in Figure 4. Old Jefferson Davis Highway is a two-lane undivided roadway that extends from Boundary Channel Drive in the north to 12 th Street South in the south and carries mainly local traffic. Access to I-395 is via Boundary Channel Drive. Old Jefferson Davis Highway is currently being reconstructed as part of the Long Bridge Park construction project. Army Navy Drive is a four-lane divided collector that ends at 12 th Street South. The roadway s alignment runs parallel to Interstate 395 and links Crystal City and Pentagon City. 12 th Street South is a four-lane undivided east-west roadway that acts as the northern border for Crystal City. It is the continuation of Crystal Drive and terminates at South Eads Street, west of Jefferson Davis Highway (US 1). It has connections to South Clark Street/Old Jefferson Davis Highway and Army Navy Drive. 10 th Street South is a two-lane local road that borders the southern edge of the subject property. 6 th Street South is a two-lane local road that borders the northern edge of the subject property. Currently, 6 th Street South ends when it bends to the left and continues southwest as South Clark Street. In the future, it will be extended to Old Jefferson Davis Highway. 7

Existing Traffic Volumes In order to determine the weekday peak hour turning movement traffic volumes, traffic counts were conducted on October 19, 2010 and January 13, 2010. Analysis of the existing traffic data determined the following peak hours: AM Peak Hour: PM Peak Hour: 7:45 AM to 8:45 AM 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM The existing balanced peak hour traffic volumes for the intersections contained within the study area are shown in Figure 5. The existing turning movement counts are included in the Technical Appendix. It should be noted that the 184 dwelling unit residential development, North Tract Lofts, which is adjacent to the southeast corner of the site, was completed on May 3, 2010 and assumed to be fully occupied. Existing Conditions Capacity Analysis Intersection capacity analyses were performed for the existing conditions at the study area intersections during the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours. Synchro version 7.0 was used to analyze the study intersections with results are based on the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. The critical gap calculated by the HCM/Synchro methodology is excessive for stop-controlled intersections. Spot checks from other projects, especially those projects located in an urban grid system, suggest that the gap criteria for the stop-controlled minor street should be reduced from the default values assigned by Synchro, in order to be more consistent with delay results exhibited in the field conditions. Hence, a 10% reduction was applied to the critical gap for the minor-street approaches and to the left turn movements on the major-street approaches at the study area s unsignalized intersections. The results of the intersection capacity analyses are presented in Table 1, and are expressed in level of service (LOS) and delay (seconds per vehicle). Figure 6 illustrates the results graphically. The detailed results of the capacity analysis are included in the Technical Appendix. Table 1: Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis (2010) Name of Intersection 12 th Street South and Army Navy Drive AM PM LOS Delay (s) LOS Delay (s) (Unsignalized) Eastbound Left Turn A 1.3 A 2.9 12 th Street South and Old Jefferson Davis Highway Westbound Left Turn A 0.0 A 0.2 Northbound Approach C 16.2 C 15.6 Southbound Approach F 76.2 E 35.9 (Signalized) Overall Intersection B 12.0 B 14.8 Eastbound Approach B 11.9 B 10.1 Westbound Approach B 10.1 B 14.9 Southbound Approach B 17.9 B 18.7 9

Name of Intersection Old Jefferson Davis Highway and 10 th Street South AM PM LOS Delay (s) LOS Delay (s) (Unsignalized) Westbound Approach B 10.9 B 13.1 Southbound Left Turn A 0.7 A 0.4 According to Arlington County, it is desirable to achieve a level of service (LOS) D or better for each approach to an intersection. The results presented in Table 1 show that all intersections within the study area currently operate at acceptable levels of service during the existing conditions except for the southbound approach at the intersection of 12 th Street South and Army Navy Drive. 10

FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT (2013) Future Roadway Network With the development of the Long Bridge Park, the County is rebuilding Old Jefferson Davis Highway to feature pedestrian and bicycle accommodations. The project will extend 6 th Street South to Old Jefferson Davis Highway. Additionally, the Long Bridge Park project will include the construction of an esplanade adjacent to the existing CSX/VRE railroad tracks. This pathway will serve as a gateway for bicyclists and pedestrians seeking to travel to and from the park, and neighboring Monument View, to Crystal Drive and Mount Vernon Trail in the south. Future Conditions without Development Traffic Volumes The construction of the proposed Monument View development is anticipated to be complete in 2013. The future traffic volumes were projected by increasing the existing traffic volumes to the build-out year using an inherent growth rate based on the historical traffic growth provided by VDOT, which revealed a decrease in the daily traffic on Old Jefferson Davis Highway in the past few years. However, to be conservative and consistent with other studies performed in the area, an inherent growth rate of 1 percent per year over a three-year period, totaling 3.03% growth of the existing volumes, was applied on major roadways and movements to account for regional growth within the development area not accounted for by the development described below. In addition to the regional inherent growth, one background development was taken into consideration: Long Bridge Park phase 1, consisting of a 72,120 square foot community recreation center and two soccer fields. The planned public festival space was assumed to be a rare use during a typical morning or afternoon peak hour, and therefore was not considered in the traffic study. The construction of the outdoor portion of Long Bridge Park, anticipated to be complete in the summer of 2011, will include the reconstruction of 2,750 feet of Old Jefferson Davis Highway and 6 th Street South. As part of this project, 6 th Street South will be extended to Old Jefferson Davis Highway creating a new T-intersection. Therefore, some of the existing traffic currently accessing 10 th Street South would then use 6 th Street South. Thus, 10% of the Old Jefferson Davis Highway traffic approaching from south and 25% approaching from north, previously accessing 10 th Street South, were rerouted to the future Old Jefferson Davis Highway and 6 th Street South intersection. The trip generation for the background development is presented in Table 2. The trips generated by other developments were distributed based on the existing traffic pattern and other studies performed in the area. These trips were added to the existing volumes and inherent growth to estimate the future without development traffic volumes, as illustrated in Figure 7. 13

Table 2: Background Development Trip Generation Long Bridge Park Land Use ITE Code Size ------ W e e k d a y ------ AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Recreational Community Center 495 72,120 SF 72 45 117 39 66 105 2,402 Recreation (Soccer Complex) 488 2 Fields 2 1 3 29 13 42 143 Total Long Bridge Park Trips 74 46 120 68 79 147 2,545 Background Developments in Long Term Future Penn Place site is under review of Arlington County and VDOT for approval. The site is proposed to include approximately 1,809,000 square feet of office space and 300 hotel rooms. The Pen Place site is bounded by Army Navy Drive to the north, S. Fern Street to the west, and S. Eads Street to the east. The site is anticipated to be built by 2020. Three Metropolitan Park is located south of 12 th Street South, west of Elm Street and east of South Fern Street. It is anticipated to be built by 2015 and will contain 411 dwelling units of high rise apartments and 16,345 square foot of retail space. As part of these two proposed developments, 12 th Street South will be extended between South Fern Street and South Eads Street with two-way operation. It will be built in phases with the southern half section built as part of the Three Metropolitan Park development and the northern half section by the Penn Place development. Also, 12 th Street South will ultimately include dedicated transit lanes as part of the Crystal City/Potomac Yard Transit Improvements Project in Arlington County. Future Conditions without Development Capacity Analysis Intersection capacity analyses were performed to determine the operational levels of service of the studied intersections for the future conditions without development. The results are summarized in Table 3 and illustrated in Figure 8. The detailed analyses worksheets are provided in the Technical Appendix. Table 3: Future Conditions without Development Intersection Capacity Analysis (2013) Name of Intersection 12 th Street South and Army Navy Drive AM PM LOS Delay (s) LOS Delay (s) (Unsignalized) Eastbound Left Turn A 1.3 A 2.7 12 th Street South and Old Jefferson Davis Highway Westbound Left Turn A 0.0 A 0.2 Northbound Approach C 16.8 C 16.2 Southbound Approach F 111.1 E 47.4 (Signalized) Overall Intersection B 12.5 B 14.8 Eastbound Approach B 12.6 A 9.7 Westbound Approach B 10.2 B 14.9 Southbound Approach B 18.0 B 18.6 14

Name of Intersection Old Jefferson Davis Highway and 10 th Street South AM PM LOS Delay (s) LOS Delay (s) (Unsignalized) Westbound Approach B 11.5 B 14.0 Old Jefferson Davis Highway and 6 th Street South Southbound Left Turn A 0.4 A 0.2 (Unsignalized) Westbound Approach B 10.7 B 11.0 Southbound Left Turn A 0.2 A 0.1 According to Arlington County, it is desirable to achieve a level of service (LOS) D or better for each approach to an intersection. The results presented in Table 3 show that all intersections within the study area operate at acceptable levels of service during the future without development conditions except for the southbound approach at the intersection of 12 th Street South and Army Navy Drive. 15

FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH DEVELOPMENT (2013) Site Access The site is bound on the north by Old Jefferson Davis Highway, on the east by 6 th Street South, on the west by 10 th Street South, and on the south by South Ball Street. Three Metrorail Stations and the Pentagon Metrobus hub are located within the one-mile radius area around the subject site. There will be driveways to both 6 th Street South and South Ball Street providing access to the proposed site. However, the driveway along 6 th Street South will be used by all site traffic, whereas the South Ball Street driveway will be used exclusively for deliveries accessing the building s loading dock area. Site Generated Volumes The site was previously approved as a mixed-use development to consist of 342,000 square foot of office and 342 dwelling units of apartment. The updated development plan currently calls for 443,299 square feet of office use. In order to calculate the appropriate trip generation for the Monument View development, ITE s Trip Generation, 8th Edition was used to determine the trips into and out of the study site during the morning and afternoon peak hours. To account for the close proximity of three Metrorail stations and the Pentagon Station Metrobus hub, a 10% reduction was applied to the site trips as shown in Table 4. Table 5 shows a comparison between current development plan and previously approved development plan. Table 4: Trip Generation for Proposed Land Use Proposed Plan Land Use ITE Code Size ------ W e e k d a y ------ AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Office 710 443.3 ksf 544 74 618 98 478 576 4,199 Transit and other TDM reduction (10%) -54-7 -62-10 -48-58 -420 Total Site Trips (With Reduction) 490 67 556 88 430 518 3,779 The proposed development will generate approximately 556 trips during the weekday morning peak hour, 518 trips during the weekday afternoon peak hour, and 3,779 weekday daily trips. Table 5: Trip Generation Comparison ------ W e e k d a y ------ Land Use ITE Code Size Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Approved Plan Apartments 220 342.0 DU 34 137 171 134 72 206 2,197 Transit and other TDM Reduction 30% -10-41 -51-40 -22-62 -659 General Office 710 350.0 ksf 450 61 511 80 391 471 3,501 Transit and other TDM Reduction 10% -45-6 -51-8 -39-47 -350 Total with Reductions 429 151 580 166 402 568 4,689 Proposed Plan 490 67 556 88 430 518 3,779 Difference in Trips 61-84 -24-78 28-50 -910 18

With the current development plan there are 24 fewer weekday morning peak hour trips, 50 fewer weekday afternoon peak hour trips, and 910 fewer daily trips than with the previously approved plan. Future Conditions with Development Traffic Volumes The distribution of site trips was based on existing volumes and anticipated traffic patterns. The inbound and outbound trips calculated for the morning and afternoon peak hours were routed in the roadway network to the site based on the location of the proposed site and the existing traffic data. The site traffic assignment for the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours is illustrated in Figure 9. The proposed development site trips were added to the future without development volumes in order to establish the future with development 2013 traffic volumes as shown in Figure 10. 19

Future Conditions with Development Capacity Analysis Intersection capacity analyses were performed to determine the operational levels of service of the study intersections for the future conditions with development. The results are summarized in Table 6 and illustrated in Figure 11. The detailed analyses worksheets are provided in the Technical Appendix. Table 6: Future Conditions with Development Intersection Capacity Analysis (2013) Name of Intersection 12 th Street South and Army Navy Drive AM PM LOS Delay (s) LOS Delay (s) (Unsignalized) Eastbound Left Turn A 1.2 A 2.7 Westbound Left Turn A 0.0 A 0.2 Northbound Approach C 17.9 C 17.9 Southbound Approach F 256.6 F 88.2 Mitigation: Eastbound Left Turn A 1.2 A 2.7 restripe WB Approach to shared left/thru Westbound Left Turn A 0.0 A 0.1 and exclusive right turn lane Northbound Approach C 18.3 C 18.4 12 th Street South and Old Jefferson Davis Highway Southbound Approach F 174.6 D 26.5 (Signalized) Overall Intersection B 14.4 B 15.7 Old Jefferson Davis Highway and 10 th Street South Eastbound Approach B 15.5 B 11.0 Westbound Approach B 11.0 B 14.8 Southbound Approach B 18.2 C 20.4 (Unsignalized) Westbound Approach B 13.8 C 18.8 Old Jefferson Davis Highway and 6 th Street South Southbound Left Turn A 0.4 A 0.1 (Unsignalized) Westbound Approach C 19.9 D 28.4 Southbound Left Turn A 7.3 A 2.6 In the future with development condition, each intersection would operate at acceptable levels of service except for the southbound approach at the intersection of 12 th Street South and Army Navy Drive. If the westbound approach at this intersection is striped as a one shared left/thru and one exclusive right turn lane, the intersection will operate at acceptable LOS during PM peak hour. During the AM peak hour the intersection will operate at unacceptable LOS. A signal is not recommended at this intersection due to its proximity to the signalized intersection of 12 th Street South and Old Jefferson Davis Highway. Also, Route 1 is elevated above the area between these two intersections which prohibits other geometric improvement considerations, such as the construction of roundabout at this intersection. Once 12 th Street South is extended beyond South Eads Street, it is expected that many of the southbound left turning vehicles will be rerouted to 12 th Street South eastbound thru movement and improve the operating conditions at this intersection. This recommended mitigation is illustrated in Figure 12. 22

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT A Transportation Management Plan (TMP) has many components that are tailored to accommodate a given facility with the goal being the reduction of automobile trips by encouraging alternative forms of transportation. Management measures taken by Monument View can be monitored and adjusted as needed to continually create opportunities to reduce the amount of traffic generated by the site. The developer agrees to develop and implement a Transportation Management Plan in order to achieve the desired results of the Arlington County Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. The developer agrees to obtain the approval of the County Manager or his designee for such plan before the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the building. The Transportation Management Plan shall include a schedule and details of implementation and continued operation of the elements in the plan. The unique location of the site next to the I-395 interchange and within one mile of three Metrorail Stations, as well as a major transit junction for Metrorail and Metrobus at the Pentagon, allows for a TMP that can include, but not be limited to, the following: The following TMP strategies are determined for the site: Participation and Funding: a. Maintain an active, ongoing relationship with Arlington Transportation Partners (ATP), or successor entity, at no cost to the developer, on behalf of the property management company. b. Designate a member(s) of building management as Property Transportation Coordinator(s) to be a primary point of contact with the county and undertake the responsibility for coordinating and completing all TMP obligations. The applicant and /or building management will provide, and keep current, the name and contact information of the PTC to ACCS. The Property Transportation Coordinator shall be appropriately trained, to the satisfaction of ACCS, to provide rideshare, transit, and other information provided by Arlington County intended to assist with transportation to and from the site. c. In addition to supporting the ongoing activities of the Property Transportation Coordinator and other commitments of this TMP, contribute $0.034 per square foot of office development per year for ten (10) years to the Arlington County Commuter Services (ACCS) to sustain direct and indirect on-site and off-site services in support of TMP activities. Payment on this commitment will begin as a condition of issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the first tenant in the completed building. Subsequent payments will be made annually. Facilities and Improvements: a. Provide in each building, information displays, the number/content/design/location of which shall be approved by ACCS/ATP, to provide transportation-related information to residents 25

and visitors. b. Provide in each building lobby a means to call a taxi. c. During construction, maintain or coordinate relocation of any existing bus stops. d. Comply with requirements of Site Plan conditions to provide bus stop improvements. e. Bus stops and shelters within 50 feet of the property shall be maintained free of snow, ice, trash, and debris. A 6-foot wide path, clear of snow and ice, to the main entrance of the building(s) shall be maintained to bus stops. f. Comply with requirements of Site Plan conditions to provide bicycle parking/storage facilities, van access to the garage, showers and lockers, and construction worker parking. Bicycle clothing lockers will be a minimum size of 12 wide, 18 deep, and 36 high, and shall be available for use on a 24 hour basis in office buildings. Parking Management Plan: a. Comply with requirement of Site Plan conditions to develop a parking management plan that includes: taxi passenger loading and unloading; accessible paratransit pick-up, drop-off, handicapped access, and passenger waiting area; loading zones for short-term deliveries; bus stops; car sharing locations; and on- and off-street parking for employees and visitors. Depict, as part of the parking management plan, an area parking plan encompassing all block faces around the site. The plan will also note any restrictions as to times that various activities (such as deliveries and parking) are permitted in the respective spaces. Restrictions for on-street loading will be included in the parking management plan. b. Provide reserved spaces for tenant employee carpoolers and vanpoolers that are conveniently located with respect to the elevators serving the building. c. Provide registered tenant employee vanpools with free parking. Oversee program to provide tenant employee carpools (with three or more occupants) with a parking subsidy equal to onethird the single-occupant vehicle monthly parking rate, and two-person carpool equal to twothirds the single-occupant vehicle monthly parking rate. Promotions, Services and Policies: a. Encourage corporate membership in a car-sharing plan for office tenants and their employees. b. Promote the formation of Employer Transportation Benefit Programs with each tenant. c. Provide SmarTrip cards plus $60.00 Metro far media per person, for free, to each on-site employee, distributed no later than the employee s first day fo work at the building. Encourage tenants to provide a sustainable commute benefit program, such as pre-tax employee contributions. d. Provide website hotlinks to CommuterPage.com under a Transportation Information heading from the developer and property manager s websites regarding this development. 26

e. Reference the Pentagon City and Crystal City Metro Stations in promotional materials and advertisements. f. Distribute transit services information and promotional materials provided by Arlington County, four (4) times per year to persons employed at the site. Information regarding transit routes, schedules, fares, etc. shall be distributed to all tenant and owner employees and shall be displayed in common work areas. g. Participate in Ozone Action Days and other regionally sponsored clean air, transit, and traffic mitigation promotions by posting notice of such promotions in locations within the buildings. Performance and Monitoring: a. Upon approval of the TMP by the County, the developer agrees to implement all elements of the plan with assistance when appropriate by agencies of the County. b. During the first year of startup of the TMP and on an annual basis thereafter, the Applicant will submit an annual letter to the County Manager describing the TDM related activities of the site. c. Conduct a transportation performance monitoring study at two years and five years after the issuance of first Certificate of Occupancy and provide a report summarizing findings to the County. The County will specify the scope of the study. The study may include average vehicle occupancy, daily vehicle-trips to and from the site, and parking availability by time of day for the site and pedestrian traffic. Such report may include an all-day count of sitegenerated vehicle traffic and a voluntary mode-split survey. The building owner and/or operator will assist and encourage tenant s employee participation in mode split surveys that may be of an on-line, email variety. 27

CONCLUSIONS The following report presents the findings of a traffic impact analysis for the proposed Monument View office development in Arlington County, Virginia. The site is bound on the north by Old Jefferson Davis Highway, on the east by 6 th Street South, on the west by 10 th Street South, and on the south by South Ball Street. Three Metrorail Stations and the Pentagon Metrobus hub are located within the onemile radius area around the subject site. The previously approved traffic study reflected a development plan that called for a mix of residential and office uses. This study is an update to reflect the changes in the development plan, which will consist of approximately 443,299 square feet of office use to be complete by 2013. The analysis presented in this report supports the following major conclusions: The existing conditions capacity analyses show that the intersections within the study area are currently operating at acceptable levels of service. Based on historical data provided by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), Old Jefferson Davis Highway and other roadways surrounding the site are expected to experience minimal growth within the next few years, excluding any trips generated by local background developments. One local background development was considered in this study: the phase 1 buildout of Arlington County s Long Bridge Park. This development will generate approximately 2,545 vehicle trips per day after the first phase of construction is completed in 2011. Planned improvements as part of the County s Long Bridge Park construction project include the reconstruction of Old Jefferson Davis Highway within the vicinity of the site and the extension of 6 th Street South to connect with Old Jefferson Davis Highway as a T- intersection. The 2013 future conditions analyses reveal that the study intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service with and without the proposed Monument View site, other than the intersection of 12 th Street South and Army Navy Drive. The proposed development will have a minimal impact on its surrounding roadway network. After applying a 10% trip reduction to account for transit use, the proposed development will generate approximately 556 trips during the AM peak hour, 518 trips during the PM peak hour, and 3,779 average trips per day. The latest Monument View development plan shows a reduction in trips when compared to the previously approved plan. It is recommended to restripe the westbound approach at Old Jefferson Davis Highway and Army Navy Drive as shared left/thru and exclusive right turn lane. 28