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

IV. FUTURE CONDITIONS IV.A. Development of Future Year Traffic Forecasts In order to assess future roadway conditions, traffic projections were developed based on several sources: Growth in existing through or regional traffic traversing the City along State and County roadways including development projects outside the study area but that directly influence traffic patterns within the study area Traffic generated by future approved, planned or potential development activity. The approach to developing traffic forecasts for the City of Hyattsville is based on a traditional aggregate 4-step independent travel demand forecasting process as well as extracting forecasts from a regional travel demand model, such as the one maintained by the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments Transportation Planning Board and utilized by the Maryland State Highway Administration. This combined top down and bottoms up comprehensive approach assured accounting for all factors influencing future traffic volumes. Specifically, allowing assignment of new vehicle trips down to an intersection level to assess localized site development impacts including, but not limited, to parking supply and access points, changes in mode share, routing assignment (i.e. model does not assign mode or route) to allow for incremental analysis of constraints in network capacity through testing and engineering judgment. To be consistent with State and regional planning models, year 2030 is the horizon year for analysis purposes. For approved, planned and potential development-generated traffic, several steps were followed to prepare each site forecast including 1) trip generation, 2) modal choice, 3) trip distribution, and 4) trip assignment. Each of these steps is discussed in more detail below: Disclaimer: As this is a large-scale planning study, the traffic projections are estimated based on the most current information available for approved and potential development plans. It is anticipated that development programs may change as final land use, site plans, access points, financing, tenants, etc. are developed for each individual project. This study in no way replaces the need to perform a traffic impact analysis for each site, and it is recommended that specific mitigation needs for individual projects and detailed site access issues be addressed through a formal traffic impact study as each project moves through formal City and/ or County development review. However, the recommendations included in this report should be able to guide the City in identifying potential mitigation needs of future private development. Trip Generation Trip generation is the most critical aspect of assessing traffic impact. The objective of a trip generation analysis is to forecast the number of new trips that will begin or end at a proposed land use. A primary source for data on vehicular trip generation is the Trip Generation Handbook published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. The Handbook compiles data from numerous studies of trip rates at hundreds of specific types of land uses such as recreational, residential, commercial, office, institutional, and industrial throughout the country. Page 33

The data is sorted by various time periods such as morning and evening peak hour, and plotted against independent variables for specific land uses such as square feet of commercial space, number of office employees, number of dwelling units, etc. The data is presented in chart format with weighted averages, and, where enough data is available, in fitted curve linear regression equations. For this study, ITE rates were supplemented with local area trip rates as available from the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, Prince George s County Transportation Planning Division. Several site-specific factors can reduce the number of new personal vehicular trips generated by a new development or land use. These include the following: 1) the effect of pass-by traffic which includes personal vehicles already on the roadway network making a new stop at a proposed land use, and 2) the effect of internally captured trips composed of traffic originating and destined for different land uses within the same development that do not travel on the public roadway network. Internal trips are usually associated with larger mixed-use developments. An example of an internal trip would be a trip from an office building to a restaurant or from a hotel to an office building within the same development. Graphical illustrations of pass-by traffic and internal captured trips are shown in Figures 19 and 20. Page 34

Figure 19. Illustration of Pass-By Traffic Figure 20. Illustration of Internal Capture Traffic The effect of pass-by traffic is also quantified from data available in Trip Generation Handbook. For certain developments, primarily retail and service-oriented land uses, the traffic entering and exiting the site may be significantly different that the total number of new personal vehicle trips added to the roadway network. The difference between the total entering and exiting traffic and new vehicle trips - pass-by traffic can range from 20% to 60%, but averages around 34%. The variance is largely dependent on the specific type(s) of retail or service uses and size of the development. Information for internal capture trip rates for mixed-use developments can also be found in the Trip Generation Handbook. Again, the size and intensity of the development affect the interplay of uses within a site and thus the amount of trips captured internally. The suggested unconstrained capture rates for trip origins and destinations for each land use are balanced to calculate the adjusted site-specific rates. Mode Choice In selecting adjustments to projected new trips that will be made other than via private automobile, the availability of alternative modes of transportation such as walking and bicycle facilities, and public transportation, can effect mode choice decisions typically sensitive to travel time, travel cost, time of day, comfort, etc. Estimating mode choice can be performed on a larger scale level with mathematical models including Probability, Utility and Discrete Choice. Page 35

However, for the purposes of this study, the mode share for each approved, planned or potential development within the City is based on several factors: Existing and future parking supply. Examining the proposed West Hyattsville TOD reveals the potential for more than 7,750 new parking spaces. The ratios of parking for each land use are well in excess of both County zoning requirements and ITE/ ULI recommendations for urban, transit-oriented areas. Improvements to existing transit service no major upgrades to existing public transit service (e.g. Metrorail, Metrobus, etc.) such as extending coverage, increased frequency, etc. were noted, with the exception of long-term MARC commuter rail service enhancements. In addition, even though it will not have direct service within the City limits, the proposed Purple Line alignment is planned to service the University of Maryland and adjacent areas, which is situated immediately to the north of the City border. Programmed improvements to bicycle and pedestrian facilities such as the Rhode Island Avenue Trolley Trail, and sidewalk improvements such as along 38 th Avenue and Hamilton Street. In summary, the raw new vehicle trip rates for all land uses within ¼ mile of the Metro stations were adjusted for a 25% global pedestrian/bicycle (10%) and transit bus/rail (15%) discount. For developments outside of the ¼ mile radius, only a 10% bicycle, pedestrian and transit discount was applied. For retail land uses, to account for pass-by and internal capture factors, an additional 30% discount was applied to reduce the net traffic impact of future retail land uses. After all applicable discounts, City development projects are estimated to generate over 3,500 new AM and 4,500 new PM peak hour vehicle trips. This breaks out as follows: Total Potential Build-out for Hyattsville is approximately: 250,000 SF Retail 25% of total new traffic 525,000 SF Office 30% of total new traffic 6,000 Residential units 45% of total new traffic Four additional high development areas included in the regional travel demand model are located in adjacent municipalities and will contribute significantly to the growth in traffic using the State and County roadways that bisect the City: Fort Totten Developments, Washington D.C. Art Place (925 residential units, 175,000 SF cultural arts space and the Dakotas (675 residential units, 100,000 square feet of retail) Route 1 Corridor, College Park (University of Maryland East Campus, Jefferson Project) 2,000+ residential units, 750,000 square feet of retail including supermarkets, 200 room hotels and a 500-seat entertainment venue Page 36

Greenbelt Metro Transit Oriented Development 5,000+ residential units, 1,000,000+ square feet of office/ retail Mount Rainer Town Center 100 residential units and 25,000 square feet of commercial/ office In addition, two relatively small residential and retail developments at the northern part of the City, just outside the incorporated City limits, are identified and included in the development list. Although trips generated by these developments would not have an immediate impact on the local street network, through traffic will use major arterials such as US 1, and these developments are included in the SHA forecast, as well as MWCOG models. Brief description of these developments are as follows: Mosaic @ Turtle Creek is a 300-unit market rate apartment development and their Detailed Site Plan was approved by the Planning Board on October 30, 2008. Domain at College Park is located at the southwest intersection of Campus Drive and Mowatt Lane, east of Adelphi Road, and consists of 250 residential units and 5,000 10,000 square feet of retail. Trip generation for planned and potential development projects in the City or nearby the incorporated limits is summarized in Table 6. Page 37

Table 6. City of Hyattsville Site Development Trip Generation 1. Development Proposed Use Variable (Units, SF) West Hyattsville Commons 1 2. Landy Property 3. EYA Development (Gateway Arts District) 4. University Town Center 5. WSSC RAW New AM Peak Vehicle Trip Ends RAW New PM Peak Vehicle Trip Ends Condos/Townhouses 1,084 Units 759 867 Apartments 316 Units 164 190 Office 230,000 SF 460 426 Retail 62,000 SF 116 744 Less 15% Transit Discount -225-334 Less 10% Pedestrian/Bicycle Discount -150-223 Less 10% Internal Capture -150-223 Less 30% Retail Pass By -35-223 Net External West Hyattsville Commons 940 1224 Apartments 1,216 Units 632 730 Retail 3,800 SF 22 46 Less 15% Transit Discount -98-116 Less 10% Pedestrian/Bicycle Discount -65-78 Less 10% Internal Capture -65-78 Less 30% Retail Pass By -7-14 Net External Landy Property 419 490 Retail 30,000 SF 76 360 Townhouses 200 Units 140 160 Apartments 250 Units 130 150 Less 10% Pedestrian/Bicycle Discount -35-67 Less 10% Internal Capture -35-67 Less 30% Pass By -23-108 Net External EYA Development 254 428 Supermarket 56,000 SF 201 672 Less 15% Transit Discount -30-101 Less 10% Pedestrian/Bicycle Discount -20-67 Less 10% Internal Capture -20-67 Less 30% Pass By -60-202 Net External University Town Center 70 235 Office 85,000 SF 170 157 Less 10% Transit Discount -17-16 Net External WSSC 153 142 6. Adelphi Residential Single Family Homes 26 Units 20 23 7. Nicholson Street ES Elementary School 700 Students 273 185 Apartments 2,675 Units 1391 1605 Office 206,000 SF 412 381 Retail 70,000 SF 125 840 8. Hotel 162 Rooms 105 130 Belcrest Center Mixed-use Less 15% Transit Discount -305- -443 Redevelopment Less 10% Pedestrian/Bicycle Discount -203- -296 Less 10% Internal Capture -203-296 Less 30% Retail Pass By -12-252 Net External Belcrest Center 1309 1669 9. Mosaic at Turtle Creek Apartments 300 Units 156 180 10. Dominion at College Park Apartments 250 Units 130 150 Retail 10,000 SF 40 120 GRAND TOTAL 3,742 4,846 1 - Based on development program as outlined in 2008 West Hyattsville Commons Traffic Impact Study Page 38

Trip Distribution and Route Assignment Estimating trip distribution and route assignment can be performed on a larger scale level with mathematical models such as the Gravity Model for trip distribution; or stochastic, equilibrium and incremental analysis for route assignment. For the purposes of this report, trip distribution and route assignment were performed by hand, using engineering judgment, extrapolation of historical traffic and origin-destination patterns, and extensive knowledge of the local roadway network. Additional data sources included: Existing conditions cordon line analysis State of the Commute Survey Report from the Metropolitan Washington DC Maryland Department of Planning s Journey to Work 2000 - Distribution of Inter-County Commuters inflow and outflow distribution percentages to determine Maryland/DC commute patterns. Maryland State Data Center s Census 2000 Commutation Data (release date March 5th, 2003) Trip distribution for each development was calculated separately for each land use within the site. Assignment of development-generated traffic through the study area roadway network was proportioned to multiple routes in order to maximize the use of the existing grid network, seek paths of shortest travel time, and minimize congestion. The projected traffic volumes for each development were entered into a separate Synchro file and merged to eliminate the need for additional hand calculations. New vehicle trips were assigned inbound and outbound via turn-by-turn assignment to existing or future parking garage/ access points. Overall, trip distribution for the City is shown below in Figure 21, development locations are shown in Figure 22, and detailed trip assignments for each development is included in Appendix F. The assumed global distribution of new vehicles trips in and out of the City is as follows: 15% to/ from the north via Adelphi Road 10% to/ from the north via US 1 10% to/ from the east via East-West Highway 15% to/ from the west via East-West Highway 15% to/ from the west via Ager Road 15% to/ from the south via Queens Chapel Road 5% to/ from the south via 38 th Avenue 10% to/ from the south via US 1 5% to/ from the south via US 1 Alternate Page 39

Figure 21. Global Trip Distribution City of Hyattsville Transportation Study Page 40

Figure 22. Development Locations City of Hyattsville Transportation Study Page 41

To account for growth of regional traffic as well as external developments, ADT forecasts for State roadways such as US 1, MD 410, MD 500, and MD 208 were obtained from the Maryland State Highway Administration Travel Forecasting Division and are summarized below in Table 7. Table 7. Summary of State Route Traffic Forecasts Roadway Location Existing ADT 2030 ADT Annual % Growth MD 208 Bridge No. 16033 17,000 24,625 1.7% MD 410 At Toledo Terrace 25,000 38,400 2.2% MD 500 West of MD 410 33,000 41,700 1.1% US 1 north of US 1 Alt 25,000 39,125 2.3% Total future year 2030 AM Peak Hour and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes are shown in Figures 23 and 24. Page 42

City of Hyattsville Transportation Study July 2010 Figure 23. Future AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Page 43

City of Hyattsville Transportation Study July 2010 Figure 24. Future PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Page 44

IV.B. Future Year Capacity Analysis The Synchro models developed for existing conditions were updated for the future years by inputting the projected traffic volumes for all site development trips as well as growth in regional traffic on State roadways. A capacity analysis was performed for the City s build-out year AM and PM peak hours using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology at all of the study intersections. A no improvement condition was assumed, meaning that the projected traffic volumes from both individual development projects, as well as growth in existing regional through traffic volumes, were assigned to the existing roadway network without any improvements to the roadway system excluding the SHA programmed improvements at East- West Highway and Queens Chapel Road. Under this scenario, nearly half of the study intersections are projected to perform below adequate levels of service. Ten (10) signalized intersections are projected to operate at a level of service E or F in at least one peak hour, and approaches at 17 stop-controlled intersections are projected to operate at a level of service E or F in at least one peak hour. Table 8 and Figures 25 and 26 summarize the future unimproved level of service, and Appendix G includes the capacity analysis worksheets. Table 8. Intersection Capacity Analyses Future Unimproved Condition Traffic Level of Delay Intersection Name V/C Ratio Control Service (sec/veh) Stop Ager Rd and Nicholson St F (F) -- -- Stop Ager Rd and Lancer Dr F (F) -- -- Signal Ager Rd and Hamilton St A (B) 0.39 (0.84) 6.8 (16.4) Signal MD 500 (Queens Chapel Rd) and Ager Rd A (A) 0.77 (0.76) 6.8 (9.5) Stop Nicholson St and 31st Ave A (A) -- -- Stop 31st Ave and Lancer Dr A (A) -- -- Signal MD 500 (Queens Chapel Road) and Hamilton St D (E) 0.84 (1.00) 37.1 (57.5) Stop MD 500 (Queens Chapel Road) and Lancer Dr F (F) -- -- Stop MD 500 (Queens Chapel Rd) and Longfellow Rd F (F) -- -- Signal MD 208 (Hamilton St) and 38th Ave/38th St C (C) 0.54 (0.78) 20.8 (24.7) Stop Hamilton St and 40th Pl/39th Ave/Magruder Park * -- -- Stop Jefferson St and 40th Ave A (A) -- -- Stop Jefferson St and 42nd Ave B (B) -- -- Stop Longfellow St and 39th Ave A (A) -- -- Stop Longfellow St and 40th Ave A (A) -- -- Stop Longfellow St and 42nd Ave B (A) -- -- Signal MD 500 (Queens Chapel Rd) and Queensbury Rd D (F) 0.80 (1.47) 37.2 (143.9) Stop Queensbury Rd and 41st Ave B (D) -- -- Stop Queensbury Rd and 42nd Ave B (E) -- -- Signal US 1 (Baltimore Ave) and Queensbury Rd B (C) 0.70 (0.95) 13.8 (32.5) Stop Oliver St and 41st Ave A (A) -- -- Stop Nicholson St and 40th Ave A (A) -- -- Stop Nicholson St and 42nd Ave B (A) -- -- Signal Toledo Rd and Belcrest Rd B (F) 0.56 (1.76) 13.0 (126.3) Signal Adelphi Road and Toledo Road B (C) 0.71 (0.77) 17.3 (23.6) Page 45

Signal Adelphi Road at Belcrest Road B (E) 0.73 (1.01) 19.9 (59.3) Signal Adelphi Road and Wells Parkway A (B) 0.71 (0.84) 8.4 (10.9) Stop 40th Place and Crittenden Street A (B) -- -- Stop Adelphi Road and Stanford Street F (F) -- -- Signal US 1 Alt @ Decatur Street A (A) 0.41 (0.43) 8.1 (5.6) Stop Stanford Street @ Wells Blvd A (A) -- -- Stop Hamilton Street @ 37th Place D (F) -- -- Stop MD 410 @ Editors Park Drive E (F) -- -- Stop Nicholson St @ Jamestown St A (A) -- -- Stop Hamilton St @ 31st Avenue D (F) -- -- Signal US 1 at Oglethorpe B (A) 0.54 (0.62) 11.3 (4.0) Signal US 1 at Jefferson Street B (B) 0.70 (0.70) 10.2 (11.4) Signal US 1 at Madison Street A (A) 0.62 (0.66) 10.0 (5.5) Signal US 1 at US 1 Alt/ Hamilton St D (E) 0.88 (1.08) 43.8 (65.8) Signal US 1 at MD 410 F (F) 1.20 (1.38) 118.5 (153.8) Stop US 1 Alt at Armentrout C (F) 0.48 (2.20) 23.9 (>500) Signal US 1 at Armentrout C (B) 0.83 (0.78) 23.0 (17.1) Signal US 1 at Gallatin Street A (A) 0.39 (0.40) 0.3 (3.6) Signal US 1 at Farragut Street B (A) 0.41 (0.45) 14.0 (3.3) Signal US 1 at 42nd Place B (B) 0.76 (0.69) 15.4 (12.7) Signal Adelphi Road at Campus Drive E (F) 0.90 (0.93) 71.0 (74.9) Signal MD 410 at Belcrest D (E) 0.78 (0.99) 35.3 (77.0) Signal MD 410 at Toledo Terrace C (E) 0.73 (1.62) 24.8 (66.0) Signal MD 410 at MD 500/ Adelphi F (F) 1.14 (1.44) 83.9 (138.4) Stop MD 500 at Jefferson F (F) -- -- Stop MD 500 at Madison Street F (F) -- -- Stop MD 500 at Manorwood Dr F (F) -- -- Stop MD 500 at Nicholson St F (F) -- -- Stop MD 500 at Oglethorpe St F (F) -- -- Stop MD 500 at Oliver Street F (F) -- -- Stop MD 500 at Powhatan Road C (D) -- -- Stop MD 500 at Quintana Street C (E) -- -- Page 46

Figure 25. Future Unimproved Level of Service AM Peak Hour Page 47

Figure 26. Future Unimproved Level of Service PM Peak Hour Page 48

IV.C. Development of Improvement Alternatives The goal of the Transportation Plan is to develop recommendations, which support the City in planning infrastructure and capital improvement projects, as well as provide short- and long-term strategies that: reduce congestion enhance mobility & safety for all modes improve inter-modal connections minimize impact on residential streets The emphasis on developing improvement alternatives focuses on creating an integrated, comprehensive, multimodal transportation system. Initial concepts considered other modes including: Safety improvements for pedestrians (signal timing, curb and median extensions) Bicycle connections (bicycle lanes, trails, cycle tracks) Enhancements in transit service and access to transit (e.g. bus shelters, new or expanded service) Management of Transportation Demand including parking management The identification of improvement to roadways to mitigate the impact of traffic from proposed developments focused primarily on management of the existing transportation system, also known as Transportation System Management (TSM). TSM strategies seek to maximize the use of the existing roadway network to improve operations rather than providing additional capacity such as additional lanes. These strategies include the following: alternative routes in the grid network, extensions of existing roadways to complete missing portions of the grid network balancing one-way vs. two-way flows to improve access and manage cut-through traffic traffic control upgrades/ new signals, optimizing signal timing and phasing, restricting parking during peak hours to add through or turn lanes, revising lane assignments and/ or pavement markings, extending or improving speed change lanes such as auxiliary acceleration and deceleration lanes and turn lanes. In addition, consideration to construction costs was paramount; give current fiscally constrained State, County and City capital budgets. All roadway improvement concepts were modeled in Synchro and tested for predicted operational benefits. Page 49